Decon, Post #1 is mine. That’s where I “started out by saying….”

I foolishly responded to your chickenshit rant as though it were possible to talk to you, but you took offense to that, so I chose an alternate approach. Suspecting that you didn’t have much to say, I chose colorful language to convey that impression. I am not surprised that this displeased you. But you still haven’t said much.

And you did not start out saying anything like “American country was musically much more interesting, and better, before corporate monopolies took over.” I agree with that statement, but would say the same for nearly every genre of music. Many people prefer Cream to Creed, Gershwin to Genesis, and Haggard to whomever, so what’s your point?

It seems to me that your point is that “the media monopoly has succeeded in forming that audience to its specifications”. It’s a respectable point, lacking only a respectable pontification.

I believe you’ve got the cart somewhat before the horse, though it is surely interdependant.

When the Dixie Chicks were taken off the air, was it a market decision or a corporate decision? They remained popular, so I’d say the latter.

What I started off saying was that the American country was musically much more interesting, and better, before corporate monopolies took over. Do you disagree? (I think that it is true politically, too.) Even now there’s an undeveloped potential in country music, though no one claims that it is very prominent.

I didn’t want to overstate my case, as I said. The chauvinism was always there, along with a lot of other stuff, and to a high degree the media monopoly has succeeded in forming that audience to its specifications. I just was trying to counterbalance what I now can see was the imbecile dogmatism of your post.

In response to me you wrote “… the point of much of what you said too…”. Well no, John, the point you are and were making is not the point I was making. In fact my ‘point’ is quite the opposite of your ‘point’. So if you disagree with anyone, you disagree with yourself.

The Tom Turners of the world—who like to listen to Toby Keith’s jingoistic crap—predate the radio and music monopoly on which you wish to blame their attitude.

Eventually control of media markets produces an audience more or less in the industry’s image.

I don’t want to make any exaggerated claims, but your rant was way too much.

Among other things, it partly debunks the cliche that jazz came from the poorest of the poor. Muskogee had a black middle class which could support some musicians.

http://www.georgetown.edu/crossroads/dis/00foley.html

Foley, Hugh W., Jr. “Jazz from Muskogee, Oklahoma: Eastern Oklahoma as a Hearth of Musical Culture.” Department of English, Oklahoma State University, May, 2000.

“This study determines why this relatively small town of Muskogee produced more jazz musicians per capita than any other town of its size in the U.S. in the 20th century…”

I assume the caveat “of its size..” is meant to head off the cries of “What about New Orleans”.

To a total layman it appears an odd sort of thesis to emetrge from an English department.

Christian’s long solos can be disorienting because you hear proto-bebop in some places and proto-C&W in others.

Country music is seriously anti-government, and generally pro-military; that’s part of its roots (look at the Scottish music that’s one of its major ancestors), and an accurate reflection of most rural whites’ views. Anti-government/pro-military does not map neatly on to conservative.

That said, several songs that get pop radio airplay and are not conservative:
“Don’t Laugh at Me” (Mark Wills)
“Song of the South” (Alabama)
“The Little Man” (Alan Jackson)
“Concrete Angel” (Martina McBride)
“Independence Day” (Martina McBride)
“It’s a Family Tradition” (Hank Williams Jr)

And two that don’t get much radio play, but are by popular artists.
“Weed with Willie” (Toby Keith)
“Red Ragtop” (Tim McGraw)

That’s the way I heard Haggard tell the story.