“The new generation of bands, they’re all nice boys,” chirps a boutique hotel owner (“Just Call Our Band the Model Guests,” David Brown, New York Times, 11/25/07).  Articles such as this appear from time to time–obviously based heavily on press releases from the hotel industry—trumpeting the end of hotel-trashing behavior.  For you see, the guys from Led Zeppelin and the Who need walkers to get around these days, and the new generation of “rock stars” are more interested in gyms and spas and high-speed internet access.

As the article/press release says, these days one is, “. . . unlikely to encounter many bands with larger-than-life personas.”  Which makes me wonder why anyone would give a rat’s ass about them.  The function of rock stars in society is cathartic: to live the lives of speed and excess that the rest of us can Tvwind_2 only dream of—and that includes, obviously, throwing TVs from hotel windows.  Of such behavior, a drummer from an obscure band with the hateful name of the Editors even goes so far as to say, “It’s not. . .respectful,” causing both John Bonham and Keith Moon to roll over and vomit (or dry-heave at least!) in their graves.

The purpose of such articles is twofold: 1. to promote the false worship of American-Idol-type stars, manufactured by the record companies because they are easier to control than actual, talented musicians, who inevitably carry the requisite baggage of inner demons to be exorcised; and 2. to sound the death knell of quirky old hotels with actual character, together with the ascendancy of sterile, soulless boutique hotels.

To the later point, the article contains the requisite predictions of the death of the Chelsea (which it calls a “party palace” and a “sleaze-rock emporium”), together with—something new—a bit of gloating over the fact that one of their own damned and demented breed, BD Hotels, has seized control of the revered counterculture Mecca. 

Regrettable as that is, however, BD has not quite managed to snuff out our legendary life-force as yet, and so the real rock stars–albeit perhaps without major label support–will continue to make the pilgrimage to the Chelsea for as long as they can still slip in undetected.  Though the new flat screens don’t have quite the POP! of the old tube TVs, they will still provide quite a spectacle when they come crashing down onto the newly gentrified 23rd Street.

And as for all those fancy-schmancy new boutique hotels: the fixtures will become old in time, and perhaps even develop some character; and because the lure of sex, drugs, and Rock and Roll will forever remain strong, with the power to corrupt even studio-manufactured lip sync-ers and air guitarists, the fine art of hotel trashing will rise Phoenix-like from the ashes of its own too-hastily predicted demise.  To this day our illustrious proprietor Stanley Bard will tell you that Sid Vicious was a nice boy too. — Ed Hamilton

Posted in ,

9 responses to “DEATH OF A SLEAZE-ROCK EMPORIUM”

  1.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    Each time I visit this blog, the articles get more and more bizarre. At one time the writing was well done. Now, each post is more incoherent and poorly written than the last. Dont let your anger get in the way of your writing Ed.

    Like

  2. jdm Avatar
    jdm

    i could not disagree more, i love this blog and the writing.

    Like

  3. The Ghosts Avatar
    The Ghosts

    Great post. Please ignore the criticism of the BD plants. Yes, these rock stars are corporate enntities and products, brands, they are not the cathartic, soul-wrenching, live to the limits outlaws of the golden age who created great and seminal music, much of it at the Chelsea Hotel.

    Like

  4. anonymous Avatar
    anonymous

    I just love your writing Ed. The first poster is obviously a creativity smasher. It’s funny that your most recent post is about how dull the current crop of rock stars are as just last night I watched Bob Gruen’s excellent documentary about the NY Dolls called “All Dolled Up” and it struck a cord with me how that kind of energy is gone or just paley imitated. Nothing seems to be done these days without a branding and styling….there is still great music out there but if it’s the real deal it rarely gets heard.
    The Chelsea is the real deal, thank you for helping to prevent it’s history from being erased.

    Like

  5. userlame Avatar
    userlame

    i genuinely love this blog, but the point of this post is really dumb. I can say from personal experience that waking up in a pool of vomit does not make a musician any more creative. It makes them anecdotal. But when you sit there listening to their music and grasping at what makes it so brilliant, rest assured that it is not because they throw televisions from hotel windows.
    Besides, it has already been done before and therefore isn’t creative. How can anyone top Keith Moon anyway? They would have to detonate a nuclear device.
    Anyway, some musicians (NOW and THEN) are creative people. Don’t short change them.

    Like

  6.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    You don’t get it, userlame. It wasn’t about throwing televisions from windows. It was about the music more than it was about branding. It was about testing the limits as artists are supposed to do.

    Like

  7. jdm Avatar
    jdm

    the tv thrown from the window is symbolic of the attitudes of some of the greatest musicians.

    Like

  8. userlame Avatar
    userlame

    I’m only taking issue with the notion that talented musicians must act like asshole fucktards to keep their artistic credibility. Maybe throwing a television out a window is an act of creativity and subversion. But then its just anecdotal and has no cultural impact.
    But see a group like Radiohead self-publishing their own album—this is an act of true creativity and subversion. Now you could argue that Radiohead didn’t make as much money as they could have, but you have to put some value on not having to deal with record executives. I’m sure you could draw some analogy to BD Hotels with this.
    Anyway, rock n’ roll ain’t dead.

    Like

  9. emily xyz Avatar

    “The purpose of such articles is twofold: 1. to promote the false worship of American-Idol-type stars, manufactured by the record companies because they are easier to control than actual, talented musicians, who inevitably carry the requisite baggage of inner demons to be exorcised; and 2. to sound the death knell of quirky old hotels with actual character, together with the ascendancy of sterile, soulless boutique hotels.” — And I would add to that a 3rd: to control people in general. The fewer incidents of un-socialized behavior that can be pointed to in the culture, the fewer excuses any of us have to carry on, EVER, under any circumstance, which suits the suits just fine (they take out all their unsocialized behavior on the wife and kids, after all, not some hotel’s TV!).
    Having said that, I don’t think that acting out is a measure of artistic talent or credibility, either. Mostly it was just the end result of too much drugs. Now, is that necessarily a bad thing, there’s a question.

    Like

Leave a comment