Nov 28 2009

Rock Stars

Published by under Cultural Passport Assigments

fans

I have heard many say that exhibitions centered on contemporary idols are only meaningful for the fans of those idols. “Who Shot Rock and Roll” is considered to be one of such exhibitions. Since I somewhat agree with the saying stated above, I was choosing to see the Metropolitan Museum’s collection of renaissances paintings rather than “Who Shot Rock and Roll”. However, Alina’s enthusiasm about the exhibition in her blog post aroused my curiosity. Therefore, I decided to visit the Brooklyn museum with a friend who is equally clueless about rock music in an effort to test out the rumor that only people who appreciate Rock and Roll will appreciate the exhibition that revolve around rock stars.

In complete honesty, I have to admit that as I walked past the first few photographs that show the seas of fans at various concerts, I felt nothing but confusion. “What about these performers can initiate such passion in so many people?” Not only the sheer number of the fans, but their emotional expressions (some of the faces shown are near tears) also show the rock stars’ god-like status.

As I saw more pictures in the exhibition, I began to have a grasp on the source of the fans’ fascination about their idols. While the faces of the legends in rock music (I assume they are legends because of the fact that they are on display and the familiar ring of their names) shown still meant nothing more than the faces of some musicians in history to me, I could feel their air of nonchalant about societal norm as well as their passion about their music and their messages that could be one factor of the attraction they emit.

In conclusion, I didn’t need to know about Rock and Roll to enjoy the exhibition. I actually think the exhibition is a good place for a person to start exploring the world of Rock and Roll. It certainly inspired me to start listening to Rock.

5 responses so far




5 Responses to “Rock Stars”

  1.   Aon 12 Dec 2009 at 4:15 am

    I agree with Zerxis’s second comment, that it must be hard to truly appreciate the music and the idols without have some sort of familiarity with Rock n Roll.

  2.   Nathaly Martinezon 09 Dec 2009 at 11:46 pm

    I am not really into rock that much. I think that interest in a subject however, does not determine whether you like a painting or not. They are independent of each other, i have loved paintings that were based on subjects that I really did not care for.

  3.   Alina Pavlovaon 09 Dec 2009 at 12:50 pm

    im sorry if i hyped up the exhibition too much for you.
    but i agree with your point that you dont need to be an avid rock fan to enjoy the exhibition. i think its important to let yourself go out of that mindset that “i dont even listen/like rock,” and just see what is in front of you. appreciate each picture for what it is – a picture, and look at the artists’ emotions.
    i think the exhibition had a lot to do with history. the people photographed revolutionized music (and gave way to changes in other genres, not just rock), so i think it is important to know about them.

  4.   Zerxis Presson 08 Dec 2009 at 1:55 pm

    It would be hard for some one who dislikes or doesn’t know much about Rock music to be fascinate by the picture of a singer he does not care too much about.

  5.   Zerxis Presson 08 Dec 2009 at 1:53 pm

    While exhibitions such as “Who Shot Rock and Roll” might not be only meaningful to the fans of the Rock artists, I would say they would appeal most to the fans, and could be appreciated the most by them.