Rock band called instruments of destruction
![rock band called instruments of destruction rock band called instruments of destruction](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/14/48/63/14486312bf61412916f52d91100b50e7--thrash-metal-band-photos.jpg)
Consider the piano, a destructivists favourite. Some instruments more than others remain potent cultural symbols. One could also see the destruction of musical instruments as a rebellion against the material nature of society.
![rock band called instruments of destruction rock band called instruments of destruction](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/16/04/d5/1604d539dfe52fb7d27fd00073736d5c.jpg)
There is also perhaps an element of ‘commodity fetishism” involved within this argument, a consequence of, as Marxists would argue, a material and commodity based society. This ‘prosthetic” argument echoes what McLuhan (1967) would term as a technological extension, the idea that a musical instrument could be a sensory extension of the human body or an extension of ‘the human perceptual apparatus”. Presumably this is due, in part, to the closeness of the physical relationship between a musician and their instrument, a consequence of the hours of practice shared. Yaseen (2007) suggests that: ‘it is not uncommon for musicians to consider their instruments as being an extension of their bodies”. Generally speaking good quality musical instruments are expensive items and an economic argument against its destruction is often employed: “I”ve been saving all my life for a guitar a tenth of that price, and there you are smashing it up on stage…” Townshend in Miles (1967) recounts an audience member saying.įor musicians this remains a difficult topic. There are plenty of reasons why the destruction of a musical instrument would appear abhorrent to many people. Townshend in Miles (1967) recalls some audience members being disgusted that he was destroying such expensive musical instruments, whilst others would come to gigs expecting and looking forward to it. These are all examples of acts of destruction that are etched into the consciousness of contemporary popular music.Īcts that involve the outright destruction of musical instruments receive mixed responses.
![rock band called instruments of destruction rock band called instruments of destruction](https://metalbandz.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Megadeth-e1539849853749.png)
The photograph of Paul Simonon about to smash his bass guitar on the cover of The Clash”s London”s Burning. The sacrificial spectacle of Jimi Hendrix transforming his guitar into a flaming sonic mace at the 1967 Monterey Pop Festival. The image of Pete Townshend swinging his guitar over his head to come down crashing onto the stage in an ‘auto-destructive” climax to The Who”s My Generation. Here I aim to explore the history and theory behind some of these destructive acts, look at how they relate to wider cultural, political and social issues in society and the impact they have had on subsequent musical genres and ideas, whilst drawing some of my own conclusions from my investigations in support of my argument. The physical act of destruction in music, whether it is the immediate outright destruction of a musical instrument, or its more prolonged misuse that ultimately results in its destruction, is a legitimate, creative and often progressive form of artistic expression. “Behind matter, Within matter, the creative spirit is hidden” – Wassily Kandinsky, 1909 “If art reflects life, it does so with special mirrors.” – Bertolt Brecht, 1939