Were the synth/post-punk bands of them early eighties 'detached'...

As a side question, could I ask whether the stuff that reads to us now as "soulless" or whatever read differently to the sound's devotees at the time? Sure, now, a lot of that synthy stuff is used to point out the "syntheticness" of its era and culture, but I mean, without getting all gummed up in authorial intent, how did this stuff register then? Surely people weren't sitting around going, "Hey, man. Dig how fake and insincere this sounds!"

(x-post)

Also, neither of them were a "dumb band".

I was more into the "New Brutalist" movement at the time myself. ;~)

Right, but I wonder how much of that was detachment as in solipsism, etc., and how much of it was a kind of naive futurist inclination, sort of like what I get sometimes out of Detroit techno. As in: man, technology's overtaking human interaction, we're all getting drawn into giant technocracies, becoming closer and closer to cyborgs... and it's completely rad.

And, that's where I think alot of the nu-80s bands (your electroclash, etc) get it comepletely wrong. They take the "detatchedness" from those bands, separate it from everything else that made it important, and make it into a fashion pose. "ugh, I'm sooooooo detatched." I don't know - I could be completely wrong, because like I said before, I wasn't really old enough to see these bands live, and I'm relying on what few live performances I have seen (like the stuff on Urgh!) and what I've heard from my CDs. So, yea.
Also, X-post with like a thousand other people.

And third among the great creative sensibilities is Camp: the sensibility of failed seriousness, of the theatricalization of experience. Camp refuses both the harmonies of traditional seriousness, and the risks of fully identifying with extreme states of feeling.

And my fave new wave bands SOUND like they mean it. But I think Electric Six SOUNDS like they mean it, so maybe I'm just nuts.

http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/music/other_stories/documents/03038059.asp

With "Pavement Cracks," the closest thing on Bare to a tune that takes the approach of current hitmaker producers, Lennox sings husky and
winsome, like Beyoncé Knowles as interpreted by Neil Tennant of the Pet Shop Boys. And no one — not Springsteen or Turner, not Dion,
and certainly not Beyoncé Knowles — sounds like her in "Oh God (Prayer)," a track on which she draws her contralto down to an almost
disembodied pianissimo as, supported by a delicate, singular flutter of electronic keyboard, she cries — whimpers, really — for a helping hand
as if on bended knee. That is soul, and as soul she sings it.

And my fave new wave bands SOUND like they mean it.

I used to say stuff like this on ILM until I was roundly ridiculed for it. And rightly so, because: no, I don't know what the difference is. For example, I would class Bryan Ferry as a singer who is trying to act "detached," but I think that other people would heartily disagree. And when Chuck initially mentioned Spandau Ballet, there was some head-scratching, because most people would classify them as a nu-soul band who is trying to come off as sophisticated but earnest. Gary Numan is supposed to be 'detached,' but he sounds pretty damned involved to me. Flock of Seagulls seem totally earnest to me.

I just think this difference is totally illusory, completely in the eye of the beholder. People talk about what a soulful performer Van Morrisson is (and I'm a fan) when most of the time he's clearly not that interested in performing. I think what there is is not really 'earnest' or 'detached,' but 'energetic' or 'restrained.'

>>And, that's where I think alot of the nu-80s bands (your electroclash, etc) get it comepletely wrong. They take the "detatchedness" from those bands, separate it from everything else that made it important, and make it into a fashion pose. "ugh, I'm sooooooo detatched<<

That actually sounds sort of true, but weird thing is, this is EXACTLY what I used to think '80s Brit technopop new wave haircut bands were doing to DISCO -- taking its supposed detachedness, drawing circles around, saying lookit me I'm so detached, etc. (Plus not singing anywhere near as good.) I'm way less sure of that now (except when, like New Order take a great riff from "Into the Groove" or "Let the Music Play" and sound TOTALLY ALIVE until the dead-as-a-doorknob vocals dribble in.) But anyway. I wonder whether 15 years from now somebody will be saying that X music is reducing Elecroclash (which I agree, mostly sucks) to a parody of its own detachedness...

Jeane, Dead or Alive were SO much gayer than Spandau Ballet, are you kidding? (And also, at their best, the most convicingly disco Brit haircut band of them all, probably. For whatever that might be worth.)

Chuck, I said SB were the gayest band *I've ever heard*. (I haven't heard everything! I believe there are gayer bands out there, I just haven't heard them yet. Um, do I want to?)

One day an older student took me aside and explained that Depeche Mode played "fake music," utterly devoid of meaning or emotion. To demonstrate the power of "real music," he invited me to sit quietly while he played a tape of "Dust in the Wind."

For many years after that, I actively sought out music that seemed especially "fake." If it involved styling mousse and sequencers, I bought it. Not every record I bought was great (Sigue Sigue Sputnik were a particular disappointment), but at least none of them sounded remotely like Kansas.

And it reminded me of another one: my sister-in-law who I've been friends with since college loved (loves?) the Smiths and has since high school. One day last year or so I'm at her house and the Smiths are on the stereo. Her dad is there and starts raggin on Morissey, just picking on him in a teasing way, joking about his voice and his fey demeanor, and all of a sudden out of the blue she turns to him and bursts into tears (she's 28) and says, "Dad, Morrissey got me through a lot of really tough times!"

She was completely serious, and she connected to Morrissey on such a deep emotional level. How can one possibly say he's 'detached' as a singer or performer? Although, I probably would because I was thinking of Morissey when I saw this thread! What an asshole am I!

This is interesting for me because I'm wondering -- I'm not really positive, now that I think about it! -- if this means something for me in turn. I don't think it does in that I don't care about the intent so much as the results and if I like them, pretty much what Chuck was saying. I figure you can be a good actor and bore me easily and a crap actor and be pretty compelling.

-- Ess (ecclestonsa...), July 31st, 2003.

Good call. The detachment heard in some (not all) early 80's technopop was a naive futurism, often inspired by the new synth textures the bands were just beginning to discover.

As has been pointed out, most of the pop around this time with synths was glamorous and passionate rather than detached (eg, Soft Cell, ABC).

Psychological detachment also existed however, in the music of the likes of Gary Numan, early 80's Kraftwerk, DAF and John Foxx (for example). This was superficially of the kind that Ess points out, but I believe that, underneath, it bespoke a personal sense of alienation that was still extremely passionate, but hid the passion under a flat exterior as a kind of defence, from where it occasionally erupted as a deeply romantic and heartfelt human sentiment, or, less purely, as violent anti-machine paranoia.

The roots of what's happening now can be found in Grace Jones' stylised detachment, and, especially, in the movie Liquid Sky - terrible though this movie was, it's a blueprint for a certain attitude amongst many musicians.

i) What is "postpunk"? I've always understood the term to refer to guitar rock that evolved primarily from a punk rock influence base rather than more classic roots - in a narrow sense to refer to early British stuff like Joy Division, early Wire, early PiL; in a broader sense to include American hardcore, no wave, and indie rock and British indie. I never thought of Duran Duran or Soft Cell or Depeche Mode (!) as postpunk per se. Why are they postpunk rather than post-disco or post-Kraftwerk or maybe post-Abba or something? And if they are postpunk, is something like Roxette in the postpunk tradition too? What about, say, Madonna? She seems like at least as good a reference/comparison point for Duran Duran as Second Edition.

ii) I do not agree that that particular time and place is "such the whipping boy to this day" if that means that it is unique in the level of criticism it receives. I don't think, for example, that I've ever read a critical word about A Flock of Seagulls on this board (while some of the biggest guitar pop singles bands from the 70s and 80s like Styx or Kiss or Bon Jovi - or Kansas - get beaten up all the time. One would be hard pressed to find a favourable word about Eric Clapton, esp post-Layla). It's not revered in every circle but I don't see that it enjoys less critical favour than prog or hair metal or adult contemporary or AOR or a number of other genres.

iii) EC, that is a good story - ironically, a lot of people treat AOR the same way. My Dylan-loving popular music prof in the past term used almost the exact same words to describe Rush.

[applause]

I think colin is otm with this - and a lot of it, i don't think, is even naive.

I do see the detatched feeling/mannerisms/attitude in a lot of 80s synth stuff, but it usually makes me think its covering up something else, it sort of exposes some type of vulnerability or something. Somehow that makes a lot of the more cheesy stuff a little bit more endearing somehow. Take Kraftwerk. I know they aren't particularly a synthpop band (I mean, they are but you know) but I think they really have the *detatched* attitude down (I sort of think we need to pin down what we think this *detatchedness* is though), but so much of their music is really touching and beautiful, even while its cold and synthetic. Of course its only in the listener's perception - I've no idea what Gary Numan or OMD or any of them were actually thinking, but I think what I feel is just as important was what they were REALLY feeling.

Hmmm, that said, I think a problem is that we're talking about a zillion bands here.

(This statement can approach banality if I'm not too careful, since most good music does something like this.)

this thread reminds me of something i wrote about dmx krew way back in 2000 (little did i know what an onslaught of 80's revisionism awaited me in the future), but i can't remember how full of shit i was or even if i made sense and i can no longer read the village voice with the browser i use so who knows. but i can provide a link. i do remember thinking that a lot of 80's synth stuff was a great reflection of the fear people felt about the future and technology. as it turns out, they were right to be afraid.

Why? And more importantly, how?

Especially a band like Soft Cell, whose over-the-top lyrics are delivered in a theatrical way that is both sincere and detached--the very essence of camp.

There must exist a G3irbot somewhere who would argue that.