The Rise of Electronic Music: From Electro to Trance

Music evolves dramatically every couple of decades.  What is popular now was only developing fifteen years ago, and what was popular then was only developing fifteen years before that.  However, the change from one music genre to the next is often met with resilience.

Take for example the 1910 United States jazz movement.  Despite producing wonderful music during that day and age, the musicians were scorned by many affluent members of society.  Their music was called “dirty” and “demeaning”.  Retrospectively, we know this is not true.  Jazz music represents music and soul intertwined.  Its restless sound is meant to get you up and moving.  Jazz music is beautiful and was essential in the founding of both reggae and rock and roll.

Now let’s examine rock and roll.  When you think about this genre, you do not just think about the music but the culture that goes along with it.  Rock and roll music focused on issues with cars, dating, clothing, school, and eventually sex.  By examining these issues, rock and roll became a defining aspect of a generation.  The youth during this age defined themselves by the music, and for the most part this change was met with disapproval by their parents.  But ultimately, the music won out and became the backbone of many genres today.

Now where are we today?  The 80s was known as the era of big haired hard rock, with groups such as Metallica, Motley Crue, and Poison.  Even though hard rock dominated there were other styles made their own presence, such as hip hop, pop, and a little bit of techno.  In the 90s, grunge bands took the spotlight, including Nirvana, Alice in Chains, and Guns ‘n Roses.  However, there was much diversity during this time period.  Rap music was led by Tupac, creating a West versus East coast music divide.  Teen pop was led by Backstreet Boys, NSYNC, Hanson, and the Spice Girls.  However, the first decade of the new millennium was met with change.  This era was led by pop, hip pop, rap, and alternative rock.  But once again, where are we today?  Surprisingly rock and pop are taking a backseat to music genre that is only getting bigger and bigger, electronic music.

The electronic music of today is much different than that of the 80s and even 90s.  Electronic music has transformed from computer noises to a wide variety of diverse subgenres.  From the bass heavy wobbling drops of dubstep, to the melodic and hypnotizing progression of trance, to the energetic and random sounds of electro, and to the dance-inspiring beats of house, electronic music has evolved, diversified, and is catching motion.

Yet similar to the music genres before it, electronic music’s presence is met with much controversy.  To begin with the “raver” scene attributed with electronic music is frowned upon by many.  This youth subculture is a unique breed of its own and is hard very difficult to describe, however, one of their core beliefs is PLUR:  Peace, Love, Unity, and Respect.  While they seem like a benign group, the public shuns them for their appearance and their drug use.  In fact, the drug use in the raver scene is much different than past musical decades.  Cocaine, heroin, and marijuana have all been the drugs of choice for various music genres, but for electronic music hallucinogens have been where it’s at.  At raves—hour long concerts where multiple DJs play sets—many of the fans take LSD, ecstasy (MDMA), 2C-B, or a combination of those hallucinogens.  These drugs have been reported to heighten the musical experience and bring one another closer.  Yet, the general public believes that this is just an excuse for druggies to destroy their bodies and life.  By focusing on tragedies, the media and government have been able to impede the growing electronic scene.

The biggest blow to the electronic music scene—at least in America—was the death of Sasha Rodriguez.  Sasha was a 15 year old girl who died at the 2010 Electric Daisy Carnival from an ecstasy overdose.  The parents blamed the raver community, and in an effort to dismantle electronic music in Southern California various media sources made Sasha Rodriguez seem like the victim of the culture.  While I do not want to talk badly of the dead, after being in the electronic music scene for the last three years I can confidently say that she is not a victim of the culture.  While I am making a few generalizations from the hundreds of ravers I know personally and the hundreds of thousands of people I see at raves, from her pictures Sasha looked like an average raver—meaning that she has been to various shows and taken ecstasy at the vast majority of them.  The fact that her parents did not know about her going to EDC—even though she snuck out with her cousins—is more of a sign of bad parenting than it is in a problem with the music culture.  However, I do not want this blog piece to be an attack on anyone.  I just want to point out that the growth of electronic music has met resistance from both the media and older generations.

Another major incident was the 2011 Kaskade riot.  The United States DJ Kaskade, posted on his Facebook and Twitter that he was going to play a free show out on the streets of Los Angeles.  The massive amount of people that saw this update caused Hollywood and Sunset to be shut down.  Unfortunately, Kaskade did not have the proper permits to do so, and it caused a massive mess.  He was unable to play, and some of the fans who waited for hours got extremely rowdy.  Eventually things escalated and officers used beanbags to disperse the crowd.  In response, some of the fans burned a cop car.  The media focused on this event, saying how out of control our youth is.  But really, there were over 10,000 people on the street that day waiting to hear Kaskade.  To generalize that entire group by the actions of a few is ridiculous.  Regardless, it only gave Los Angeles and its people more of a reason to think of electronic music as a destructive culture than as a type of music. 

Los Angeles responded to Sasha’s death and the Kaskade riot by prohibiting all electronic music festivals in the Los Angeles area.  Even though rock concerts can be held in the Los Angeles Sports Arena, anything electronic related have been wrongly prohibited.  Because of this EDC has moved to Las Vegas and Beyond Wonderland and Nocturnal have moved to San Bernardino.  Essentially, electronic music is being shunned from Los Angeles.  But why?

There are a few reasons, and I think these reasons are the reasons why new music is commonly met with disapproval.  The first is the inability to respect why music evolves.  As I have said before, music changes.  It does not getter better or worse--although some may say that some periods were worse than others.  Rather, music finds new ways of speaking to us.  This can be through heartfelt lyrics, emotional screaming, or even pounding beats.  Music evolves because musicians find new ways of controlling the audience.  While not every dubstep song is magnificent, to bash on the entire genre is essentially saying, “Dubstep sucks because I hate extremely energetic music”.  Worse yet are the people who cannot justify why they dislike a genre, which often translates to, “I hate trance music because I do not understand it”.

I realize that this post has had a lot of twists and turns but ultimately what I am trying to say is that the hatred toward electronic music is being misdirected.  I understand that some people may not like the culture attributed with the music--whether that be for justified or unjustified reasons—but to dismiss electronic music as a whole and ban performances in Los Angeles, one of the biggest metropolitans in the United States, is wrong on so many levels.  Electronic music is only getting bigger and bigger.  Eventually, it will be so large that the general public cannot easily ignore it.  So what I suggest is that you listen to it and learn what the genre is all about.  Yeah, you may not understand the first trance song you listen to.  You still may not understand the meaning of electro house after hearing a radio show or two.  But eventually you will understand what the music represents.  You may still not enjoy the music, but at least you will understand the meaning behind it.  Ultimately what you will discover is that the music is not as demonic as the media puts it out to be.  Music is changing whether the media, parents, or Los Angeles wants it to, and their attempts to destroy the movement are misguided and misunderstood.  We must learn from the past and embrace this evolution.

Exposing America

After a recent ruling, United States Supreme Court Justices may soon find themselves with their pants down.

Last Monday, the United States Supreme Court ruled that jails do not violate privacy rights by routinely strip-searching anyone for any offense, however minor, even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband. By a 5-4 vote and splitting along conservative-liberal ideologies, the high court ruled that privacy rights involving the searches were outweighed by jail’s security concerns about a suspect hiding drugs, weapons, or other contraband. While this decision may seem to have good intentions, it only highlights the incompetence of law enforcement and gives officials an excess of power.

The justices reached this decision based on Florence v. County of Burlington, No. 10-945. In 2005, Albert W. Florence was in the passenger seat of his BMW when a state trooper pulled over his wife for speeding. Records incorrectly showed that there was an outstanding warrant for Mr. Florence’s arrest due to an unpaid fine. Mr. Florence was held and strip-searched for a week in jails in Burlington and Essex Counties. Mr. Florence recalled that he had to stand naked in front of a guard who would require him to move intimate parts of his body and told him to, “Squat and cough. Spread your cheeks.” Mr. Florence explained that it felt more like a humiliating process than a necessary process.

The Court’s conservative wing based their decision on the importance of providing heightened measures of safety for jail personal. This opinion was held by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy who represented the court’s conservative decision. Justice Kennedy cited examples of where detainees were able to sneak in contraband, including a person arrested for disorderly conduct in Washington State. This individual managed to hide a lighter, tobacco, tattoo needles, and other prohibited items in his rectal cavity. Justice Kennedy stressed the importance of catching individuals such as the Washington State arrestee because they pose a threat to both jail personal and other inmates.

Yet the first concern of many is that this violates the Fourth Amendment which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. Justice Stephen G. Breyer argued that the Fourth Amendment should be understood to bar strip searches of people arrested for minor offenses not involving drugs or violence, unless officials had reasonable suspicion. The fact that they committed a minor offense is not reason in of itself to warrant reasonable suspicion and these individuals have the right of privacy as guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

The conservative wing of the Court acknowledged that concern, but ultimately argued that this ruling will not only protect the jail society but the public at large. This decision will impact the privacy rights of nearly 14 million jailed Americans per year, to which Justice Kennedy responded that this added measure may help them identify the most devious and dangerous criminals. To back his claim, Justice Kennedy brought up that the bomber Timothy McVeigh was first arrested for driving without a license plate and that one of the terrorists involved in the September 11 attacks was stopped and ticketed for speeding just two days before hijacking Flight 93.

However, this just illuminates the United States government’s incompetence. First of all, it is extremely hard to believe that through an invasive strip-search we may have identified and prevented Timothy McVeigh or one of the September 11 terrorists. The Supreme Court’s decision of using strip searches to identify the most dangerous of criminals is their way of saying that law enforcement cannot differentiate the good guys from the bad guys. To believe that they will catch the most devious criminals is preposterous; at most they will catch a few people here and there with contraband, but at the cost of millions of people’s right of privacy.

What is even more worrisome is that this new power can easily be abused by law officials. Justice Breyer cited examples where people were subjected to visual strip search for humiliation purposes only. These dangerous individuals were arrested and strip searched for offenses such as driving with a noisy muffler, failing to use a turn signal, and riding a bicycle without an audible bell. In one case a nun was strip-searched after an arrest for trespassing during an antiwar demonstration.

Ultimately, this ruling protects the jail population and the general public far less than the conservative Justices claim and comes at the cost of our right of privacy. Acknowledging some of the Supreme Court’s recent rulings, I fear that the rights belonging to us will only become more and more threatened. I believe that the Justices need to remember the words of Benjamin Franklin, “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.”