new thread
Even the front guy's hair which is the shortest in this band is longer than most dudes currently wear it and a LOT longer than the Beatles wore it 50 years ago! ;-)
DIIV - Doused (Live On Letterman)
Dec. 13, 2012
You knew it had to be an old video since Letterman retired last year.
Steven Colbert replaced Letterman.
Of course when the Beatles were on Tv it was in the Ed Sullivan
theater where Letterman did his show (and Colbert does his show.)
Here is the same band and the frontman's hair is much longer and to my knowledge the only Beatle that had hair this long was John Lennon right before they disbanded, but then he went shorter while George let his grow to shoulder length.
DIIV - Doused @ Field Day Festival, Victoria Park, London, June 7, 2015
I admit never hearing of these guys but my fond memories were mostly of the 80s when long hair ruled the day.At least in the metal scene ;) Cheers
Mârk
Mârk
I meant to post a link but it didn't work so I try again :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6GATH1n6vQ
Stop living in the past and just because you have long hair does not mean you should conform to accepted societal norms.
Some info on DIIV
All I was trying to accomplish was to show a contrast from what you were showing to what I knew from a younger age.Musically both bands are totally different but frankly I relate to the 80s scene more than to what is being pushed currently.In my opinion I liked the older days and the hair bands just ruled!Cheers
Mârk
Those days are long gone my friend and if you think that was the end of the long hair band era well.. wait and see what is about to unfold! ;-)
My response to that is I'll believe it when I see it.Anything is possible but I hardly think today's crowd will embrace that era of music like when I lived through it.Cheers
Mârk
It's not about embracing bands playing that style, but bands embracing long hair again which was what my original post was about and that is definitely occurring a lot more now.
if you're one to embrace metal bands then there is Metallica, but long haired is something they have not been in about 20 years or so. at least a couple of members have been shorn for over 20 years and I'm not a fan, but hair length has nothing to do with it. never liked them.
The metal scene was not just about the music but also the image they presented which obviously included longhair!In my view I was into both aspects so it was the perfect combination:)Now I know many of these older bands still perform today but as you stated the hair is long gone.I know as long as the music sounds the same it shouldn't matter but in a way it does because that image is lost.As for Metallica I lost interest in that group after the Master of Puppets album.After the death of Cliff the band changed too much for my liking.Regarding current bands, and if longhair is really making a comeback, the style of music really doesn't suit my taste in my opinion but kudos if they have the hair! Cheers
Mârk
Let's see, love of `80s "hair" metal, obviously old enough to have been in high school at some point during the 1980s.
anything like Jeff Spicoli much?
Fast Times at Ridgemont High (2/10) Movie CLIP - Spicoli Meets Mr. Hand (1982) HD
Their style is considered Post punk
you should investigate the various post punk scenes from the late 1970s and early 1980s to see the origins of the scene.
Hi(gh)!
Better watch these ones: Spin Doctors live on TV in 1993!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
yes, but that was 1993 and those locks are long gone.
This is what he looks like today.
This band has some great-looking long hair, Tim, no doubt about it!
But there is one thing that you don't seem to understand about history: it is not necessarily the literal exact length of someone's hair that mattered over 50 years ago; but rather, the fact that in the context of the times (the 1960s), the average men's hair-length for the NORM, the Beatles were absolutely SHOCKING to look at... That hair length (worn by all 4 of The Beatles) -- even though it doesn't look very impressively "long" to us nowadays -- was truly a big social risk to wear it that way back then.
Nobody, and I do mean NO BODY, dared to wear their hair as long as guys are willing to wear their hair nowadays; but this is all thanks to people who were willing to take that risk of being heavily criticized back then (like, for sure, big thanks to The Beatles as an excellent example).
I'm 62 years old, so trust me when I say: I lived through The Beatles' arrival on the shores of America! My own father, for example, was completely SHOCKED and DISGUSTED whenever he saw even a picture of The Beatles -- and no Beatle's music was ever allowed in our house while I was growing up!!! No, I'm not kidding. That's how many of my parent's generation viewed the "evils" of long hair on men at that time... it took quite a long while for some of the older folks to "get over it" (my dad never did, for example, even until the day he died in 1976, which was well over 10 years after The Beatles first came to America).
It's never all about anyone's literal exact hair length that matters; but exactly when, how, and where long hair has first been presented to someone. A socially isolated young man in a religiously conservative Middle Eastern country, for example, even in modern-day times like today, might find that his first time ever visiting MLHH would be totally SHOCKING to look at, especially if he's never actually seen in real-life a male with long hair... it's all relative, Tim. So, please don't understate what The Beatles accomplished towards the social progress and improved acceptance of long hair on men back in the 1960s, if you weren't even born until many years later!!
Thanks,
Ken in San Francisco
I'm 61 years old and would concur on this.
I would also mention that before the Beatles there was another
man who endeavored to have long hair, David Jones (you know him as David Bowie.)
But yes, considering how short the Beatles hair was, it was very controversial at the time. And it would remain so for many years.
The Beatles inspired me to grow my hair long, and, as they say,
the rest is history.
Not denying the context, but I have the impression that if a band does not have butt length hair the guys here(not you) will dismiss them and not even listen to their music. at least one person on this board has given me that impression.
in some people's minds if it is not "metal length"(I don't now who started this idea) it's not long enough.
Wrong. There are a number of great artists that I enjoy who don't have long hair. I'd love to see them have long hair but, ultimately it is their choice.
Do you know how to read?
I stated "in some people's minds" which implies not everyone.
