In a sense, any rock music is revolutionary. By its very beat and sound it has always instinctively rejects restrictions and celebrates freedom and sexuality. At first, this music was not taken seriously by anyone. It was thought that this is another fashion that will soon disappear, as it was the case with charleston, boogie-woogie and twist. But this music very fast “won” the world. In the development of the music of the late 1960s trends towards an increase of its role in society, characteristic for the 1960s, manifested especially evidently: from another means of entertainment rock music through rock 'n' roll became a counterculture phenomenon. With this music the hippie movement in the United States, the youth revolution in Europe are linked. Music has become inextricably linked with the public opposition to the Vietnam War.
Modern world cultural situation is characterized by certain features that distinguish it from any other cultural experience. Being the result of previous historical cultural traditions, having absorbed their features, modern culture has specific properties that give it originality and uniqueness.
The study of rock 'n' roll culture allow not only to expand the idea of the leading trends in contemporary culture, but also to trace how modern culture interacts directly with the economic, political, psychological, ethical, aesthetic and other processes. Rock culture has absorbed many of the leading European cultural traditions, becoming a kind of declaration of existential experience of several generations of people.
One of the core conflicts of culture of rock 'n' roll is a conflict of non-conformism and conciliation. It is characterized by fluctuations between the protest and the desire to get closer to popular culture, to join it. However, nonconformist and countercultural aspirations in most cases remain incomplete. In addition, rock culture is inherent in the pursuit of domination in the modern cultural space, a totality that excludes all other forms of cultural declaration. This demonstrates the properties inherent in any modern subcultural formations of extremist nature (Zhang, 2013).
It should be noted that the term “counter-culture” in scientific and humanitarian practice is used, first, to refer to the socio-cultural attitudes, opposing the principles prevailing in a particular culture. In this sense, the term “counter-culture” is used to describe how the replacement of culture of one type by another took place.
The objective of any counter-culture can be described as an attempt “to stop the discussion” under the old rules, to show the failure of the dominant attitudes. Any counter-culture, even if it does not take as a result the dominant position, seeks to create a new universal dictionary, to use the new terms in cultural interaction, draw new channels of cultural communication and, as a result, to create a new man and new social reality. However, this is rarely possible: official culture, as a rule, has a much greater potential for sustainability than the counterculture, based on an extensive system of social coercion. Even when the counterculture finally triumphed, replacing a competitor, the latter still continues to exist in the form of tangible and always invisibly present subcultural systems, continued to have a huge impact on the subsequent development (Maxwell, 2014).
In the second, narrower meaning, the word “counter-culture” is used, when it comes to youth performances that erupted in many Western countries in the late 60-ies of the last century. The protest, reflecting the critical attitude of youth to modern culture, rejecting it as a “culture of the fathers”, initiated the formation of the youth movement and the intelligentsia, their association in the special communities. The movement soon gained both supporters and opponents. In describing the rebellious youth, American sociologists suggested the term “counter-culture”. It united in a single whole different spiritual trends against the dominant culture and isolated in it a certain set of alternative rules of official structures (Maxwell, 2014).
Namely in the narrow sense of the word “counterculture” culture of rock 'n' roll and rock culture in general can be called counterculture. Rock culture par excellence, is woven into the fabric of postwar European culture linked to such important social issues as democratization and mass, as the relationship between the different generations with respect to the perception of cultural heritage.
Subcultural trends are largely due to the desire of every culture, which has the status of official, to fill all compartments of life, to become universal and total. Any harmonization always produced an alternative. Traditionally, the problem of cultural studies of subcultures is considered within the framework of socialization and reflects the complex process of integrating cultural values of different sectors of society. Joining the leading cultural standard of the era, the entry in the dominant cultural values, identifying self with the large-scale cultural complex are very complex processes, often painful for individuals and for groups. This feeds subcultures that are more conducive to the gradual evolutionary and peaceful transformation rather than revolutionary and drastic shifts of some cultural landmarks on the other. Cultural creative impulses coming from the subcultures are integrated into the mainstream of the leading trends of the era, acting as a kind of variation, even very bright, common cultural panorama. The foundation for the diversity on individual autonomous subcultural “compartments” largely depends on the trunk, leading cultural trends.
The culture of rock 'n' roll is closely connected with the youth subculture, but not identical to it. Rock culture originated as a part of the youth movement of the US and the UK. Initially it belonged only to the youth subculture. But in the process of rock culture development, a number its adherents included people of different age groups, from children to adults. A successful part of the adherents of rock culture - skilled, spirited and gifted minority - socially stuck in the role of the pioneers of the “new” music. The other part, which belonged to the middle class, had professional experience, having been disappointed in the values of the “underground”, relatively easy came back in the “good society”. But the majority of belonging to the rock culture turned anyone to unnecessary victims of increasing deviation (Kallen, 2012). Thus, at the end of 60s rock culture has gone beyond merely a youth audience.
The fact what is rock culture, what are the causes of its origin, what can be considered as causes of its formation, the place which rock culture occupies in the modern world, is explained by several points of view. A variety of opinions expressed on this subject can be divided into two diametrically opposed positions: the supporters and opponents of the rock culture.
1. Positive evaluation of rock culture. It is characteristic primarily for its first “idols” (D.Lennon, McCartney, R.Starr, P.Taushend, D.Harrison), belonging to the “hippie generation”. Adherents of rock culture of that era believed that the rock culture, and in particular, rock music, will create a new generation of people who are not subordinate to the values of the establishment. They had hoped that an era of universal love will come. Rock music will help change people's minds, make them good and happy, and brilliant illumination will lead to happiness. According to them, rock culture will create a generation of free and creative people (Kallen, 2012).
Rock culture was positively evaluated not only by its adepts, but also by some scientists (Marcuse, Reych, etc.). So, Herbert Marcuse, based on Freud, argued that modern society is based on the principle of rationality, on the primacy of the need. The only way to get rid of the shackles of social dependence - is immersing people in their own “biological dimension”, where the vital needs are formed. Thus it will be possible to revolutionize the sensuality and deeply suppressed instincts. Namely activation of the “vital-biological” layers of consciousness is promoted by rock culture (through the adoption of “principle of joy” and “principle of pleasure”) (Zhang, 2013).
Gradually the enthusiastic and positive attitude to the rock culture gave way to more restrained pragmatic approach: rock culture began to be treated as one of the niches of relaxation, very useful in social and adaptive sense.
2. Negative assessment of rock culture.
a) Rock culture makes people stupid. T.Adorno believed that rock music contributes to total befuddlement, provokes consumer consciousness (Zhang, 2013).
b) Against the rock culture arguments of psycho-somatic nature has been argued. For example, it was believed that the rock culture (in particular, some of its constituents - rock music, drugs) makes the person controlled, manipulated, prone to suggestion. Even special study groups were created sought to prove by experimental empirical way that rock music has had a negative impact on the physical condition of the person (of Zhang, 2013).
In this context it is interesting to trace the point of contact between religion and rock culture. Thus, in the earliest forms of rock 'n' roll elements of the “gospel” (spiritual music of African-Americans) are clearly observable. The first rock singers, brought up according to the canons of Christianity, in their speeches tried to resolve the traditional conflict of the carnal and the spiritual. However, already Beatles declaratively refused both the Christian and any particular religious ideology. The situation began to change dramatically in the mid-60s, when in an environment of rock culture devotees it became clearly manifest attention to religious problems, especially to various esoteric experiences. “Consumers” of rock culture often develops a certain behavior pattern. It creates a contradictory image of “rock 'n' roll man”: on the one hand, the rock fans tend to intellectual development - reading philosophical and religious literature, mastering the skills of playing musical instruments. On the other hand, they often formed hypertrophied need for unlimited freedom, which often leads to manifestations of anti-social behavior.
Today, rock culture, which grew from the culture of rock 'n' roll, spread throughout the world and has become international. It is a very complex phenomenon, consisting of different components. The rock culture was influenced by many of the values dominants of contemporary culture. Therefore, it is extremely important to investigate the rock culture namely in the context of major trends in contemporary cultural development.
Works Cited
Kallen, Stuart A. The History of Rock and Roll (The Music Library). Lucent Books; 1 edition, 2012. Print.
Maxwell, Grant. How Does It Feel?: Elvis Presley, The Beatles, Bob Dylan, and the Philosophy of Rock and Roll. Persistent Press, 2014. Print.
Zhang, Yonghong. Analysis of the Rock and Roll Phenomenon in USA. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2013, Vol. 3 No. 12, pp. 57-61. Print.
