MOTOWN 1972 -- a UK perspective

[jsmith]

UK music mags only really extolled the virtues of Motown music from around 1962 to around 1968 ... they otherwise catered for the mainstream; the latest pop / rock sensation & how great they were. But in 1972, some of the older employees / writers for these mags got to felling nostalgic for the music of the 60's. However, when they came to wax lyrical, it was about no longer having the equivalent of new product from acts of the stature of the Beatles, Stones & Dylan. BUT one of their writers decided he'd write a piece from a different starting point ... he wasn't too keen on where Motown were in 1972 though ...
BTW, the UK clubs / venues he mentions are those that had moved on from Motown / soul to the 'latest new thing' as comparted to those that had stayed with soul ...

[WaitingWatchingLookingForAChance]

Interesting point of view expressed here, but it also shows an amazing abundance of ignorance on at least one point: the writer lobs extra-sour grapes at Motown for packaging its artists in "silly clothes" and making them do "puppet-like dance routines". Did it somehow escape his awareness that Motown weren't doing anything that every other record company had been doing before? Was the writer unaware that for Blacks to get even a fraction of a centimeter of acceptance from Whites that they had to be able to cloak themselves in the same upwardly mobile attire as their hope-for White audience- and do it 10 times better?

Before, and during Motown's early days, Blacks simply didn't have the luxury of presenting themselves in any other way BUT the image of acceptability that Whites had been hammering into America's psyche for centuries. And the whole thing about chasing The American Dream as if it were some kind of sin against being Black is nothing but ridiculous and again, showing tremendous ignorance by attempting to shoehorn every individual Black person into one mind set. A lot of us wanted that fairytale dream- and still do.

Nice and interesting article, but really misguided.

[lucky2012]

Interesting point of view expressed here, but it also shows an amazing abundance of ignorance on at least one point: the writer lobs extra-sour grapes at Motown for packaging its artists in "silly clothes" and making them do "puppet-like dance routines". Did it somehow escape his awareness that Motown weren't doing anything that every other record company had been doing before? Was the writer unaware that for Blacks to get even a fraction of a centimeter of acceptance from Whites that they had to be able to cloak themselves in the same upwardly mobile attire as their hope-for White audience- and do it 10 times better?

Before, and during Motown's early days, Blacks simply didn't have the luxury of presenting themselves in any other way BUT the image of acceptability that Whites had been hammering into America's psyche for centuries. And the whole thing about chasing The American Dream as if it were some kind of sin against being Black is nothing but ridiculous and again, showing tremendous ignorance by attempting to shoehorn every individual Black person into one mind set. A lot of us wanted that fairytale dream- and still do.

Nice and interesting article, but really misguided.

Agree. Well said WaitingWatching. Interesting read, with good intentions but misguided.

[Levi Stubbs Tears]

I completely agree with the writer's paragraph about 'presentation' and much of what else he says.