Something that bothers me. [about "Emo"]

atrophiedXlungs · Post by **atrophiedXlungs** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:08 am

This is going to be a rant / essay, so I really hope it will be educational for at least some of the people reading. But it will be kinda long, so bear with me (or not). This piece is entitled:

The Continual Misappropriation of the Term "Emo."

Pre-emo history

Our story starts way back in 1979, in Washington DC. I could go back earlier than that, to the mid-60's, when punk rock started out with kids playing in garage bands, but DC in '79 is a good place to start, I believe. So in '79, a lot of punk bands in the DC area were playing very melodic punk...basically, they either were pop-punk bands...or the difference was simply semantics. A Reggae / Jazz Fusion band named Soul Brains took notice of this, and for some reason or another (possibly as a result of listening to proto-hardcore bands from the UK like the Wire) they decided to form the band Bad Brains, and in December of 1979, the "Pay to Cum" 7" was released.

That 7" changed the soundscape of punk forever, creating hardcore punk...but back then, the same as now, nobody actually wastes an extra syllable with the word "punk." Actually, it may not have been the first...because in truth, hardcore basically was created almost simultaneously in many places, independently of one another. This shows through in modern hardcore, with the emphasis on identifying bands based on where they are from, and the continual emphasis on "the scene."

Emocore, and the emergence of emo

Anyhow, fast-forwarding a few years, through the emergence of crossover / thrash, we now arrive at 1985. That was when the band called Rites of Spring formed in DC, from a few ex-members of hardcore bands (including Minor Threat). That's not to imply that Rites of Spring wasn't a hardcore band: they were, but their style wasn't just the heavier, faster, simpler form of punk rock known as "hardcore." And thus, "emotive hardcore" was born (which was then shortened to simply "emocore"). Despite what many believe, the difference between emocore and hardcore wasn't mainly along the lines of lyrical content (though that differed in some respects): it was musical. Emocore incorporated more melodies into their music; and dynamics became more important. Emocore really wasn't emo, though...emocore was a derivative form of post-hardcore, usually with more introspective lyrics than the former. An important band in this style was The Hated, because they can be thought to be the godfathers of emo.

Another year passed. It's 1986, now. The Hated broke up, and a band named Moss Icon starts...Moss Icon can be called the first emo band. The melodies within their songs become even more intracate, and dynamics became a primary focus, with loud screaming over two distorted guitars playing full-bore changing to quiet talking without any background noise within a second. Naturally, other emo bands form both in DC, and around the country.

Emo derivatives and Gravity records

In 1991, a band named Heroin formed in San Diego, playing emo with a faster, more abrasive sound. Some people choose to call their brand of emo "hardcore emo" but as emo's already a subgenre of hardcore, I think it's somewhat redundant. So instead, let's call them "proto-screamo." A label, known as Gravity records, put out records by them and many other proto-screamo / screamo bands(as there isn't truly an exact line, and the difference gets pretty muddled when discussing some bands). The important idea to note here, is that screamo is basically a version of emo, where the frontman / woman spends a majority of their time screaming (as opposed to simply yelling or growling lyrics, like many hardcore bands). Screamo doesn't always have to be less melodic than emo, but it often is.

Another type of emo that came about in the mid-90's was Emo-violence. The name started as a joke by the band In/Humanity, but I personally feel it's a good way to describe the extremely chaotic screamo bands, whose sound often verges on grindcore.

Oh em gee, I luv Taking Back Sunday el oh el zee

Now that I believe I've thouroughly covered what is emo, it's now time to talk about what is not emo, and why the term is often misappropriated. Here, two bands would be appropriate to name: Christie Front Drive and Sunny Day Real Estate. Neither of these bands are emo. Both of them play post-emo indie rock, which is often mis-characterized as emo. The Get Up Kids, the Promise Ring, Mineral, etc, are all post-emo bands. Another musical subgenre that is often mistaken for emo is post-hardcore, especially the recent post-hardcore revival bands like Thursday or Taking Back Sunday. Even less intelligent people will call pop-punk bands such as Yellowcard emo, or "nü-metalcore (and I use that term with all the derision and hatred I can muster)" bands like Atreyu or Poison the Well emo.

Conclusion

In conclusion to this sprawling piece, I would like to tell every self-proclaimed "emo kid" who wears black-rimmed rectangular glasses and has nautical stars tattooed on their elbows, to shut the hell up.

...If anyone read all of that and wants to ask questions, please do so.

Qyot27 · Post by **Qyot27** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:02 am

Wow. That helps out a lot. I'd noticed those tendencies in the past ten years or so of supposed "emo" music, but calling it post-emo makes a crapload more sense. I wasn't really aware of that term (I can blame allmusic for that; they're correct on a lot of things, but way too general on others, including this). Thanks.

I get pissed off when someone starts calling genres that are this distinctly seperated one-and-the-same, although I usually get ticked more if they're doing it to Goth Rock and/or Industrial.

nailz · Post by **nailz** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:28 am

oo, you think you can clearly outline the guidelines for a genere of music! Do metal next, DO METAL!

badmartialarts · Post by **badmartialarts** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:43 am

Defining metal is easy. Just listen to Dream Evil - "Made of Metal" or Dream Evil - "The Book Of Heavy Metal" and you'll get it.

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:55 am

badmartialarts wrote:Defining metal is easy. Just listen to Dream Evil - "Made of Metal" or Dream Evil - "The Book Of Heavy Metal" and you'll get it.

ouch

im so fucking metal and so is my wife...

badmartialarts · Post by **badmartialarts** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 9:01 am

I AM HIS WIFE

Brsrk · Post by **Brsrk** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 9:22 am

SHUT UP! (i need to get this cd, I have book of heavy metal, but not evilized...)

Anyways, metal is hard to describe, IMO...

Kai Stromler · Post by **Kai Stromler** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 9:32 am

People, people, let's stop bickering about whether genres can be concretely defined by one person or not. There's something fundamentally much more important here.

As many people have suspected for a long time, it has become official: even emo bands want to punch emo kids in the mouth.

--K

Farlo · Post by **Farlo** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 9:44 am

and that makes the sig

atrophiedXlungs · Post by **atrophiedXlungs** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:17 pm

Qyot27 wrote:Wow. That helps out a lot. I'd noticed those tendencies in the past ten years or so of supposed "emo" music, but calling it post-emo makes a crapload more sense. I wasn't really aware of that term (I can blame allmusic for that; they're correct on a lot of things, but way too general on others, including this). Thanks.

I get pissed off when someone starts calling genres that are this distinctly seperated one-and-the-same, although I usually get ticked more if they're doing it to Goth Rock and/or Industrial.

Well, it's certainly not allmusic's fault alone; emo being mis-characterized as such is really the fault of many, many people.

And as to the gothic rock / industrial confusion...I know many people who feel the same way.