Is the alternative nation dead?

Now that Lollapalooza has rolled through town and moved on to more profitable pastures, some interesting discussion has been sparked about whether or not alternative music is dead in the water.

This assertion that alternative music is washed up seems to have been inspired by the fact that the alternative nation’s banner, Lollapalooza, has been overrun by metalheads and non-alternative acts such as Metallica, Soundgarden, the Ramones and uh…. Waylon Jennings.

With this year’s Lollapalooza, critics claim our annual traveling Woodstock has officially been overrun by the money machine.

Thus, with the apparent demise of the true purpose and message of Lollapalooza, so passeth on the alternative nation. Ashes to ashes…

So, exactly when did alternative music go mainstream? Was it the emergence of The Dot, 107.5? Was it this year’s Lollapalooza? Was it the emergence of Horde and ENITas alternatives to alternative music’s best known celebration? Or soon after MTV began playing “Smells Like Teen Spirit?”

Or perhaps none of the above. After all, by the time the term ‘alternative’ began permeating our culture, alternative music was already a mainstream marketing phenomenon.

Music executives scoured Seattle, the capital of the alternative nation, in search of the next Nirvana.

This search gave us everything from the truly great (Pearl Jam, Alice in Chains) to the mediocre (Screaming Trees) to the just plain annoying (Hole).

Other acts with that “Seattle” sound hit it big, acts like Smashing Pumpkins that for the most part were ignored by mainstream music and radio until the emergence of Nirvana.

Then came the so-called imitators. Stone Temple Pilots received much of the initial backlash of this “attempt to cash in on the Seattle sound.” Our current whipping boy is Bush. STP, however, is now cool because Scott Weiland does heroin.

So when exactly did alternative go mainstream? What the hell is ‘alternative music’ anyway?

In terms of sound and style, I doubt it can be defined. Try nailing down what an ‘alternative song’ sounds like.

Is it Paul Westerberg or Tori Amos? P.J. Harvey or Ministry? The Beastie Boys or Marilyn Manson and the completely unnecessary remake of the Eurythmics’ “Sweet Dreams?” Filter or, god forbid, Alanis Morrissette?

Let’s face it. Alternative music cannot be defined by style or sound, as it covers a wide spectrum of influences and expression.

So we cannot define alternative music by ear. Can we define it by our pocketbook? Hell no. It’s the best-selling crap out there.

Alternative music can’t mean music that has not gone mainstream, because much of what is considered alternative music is mainstream music.

And if bands that sell millions of albums are still considered alternative, what do we call acts like De La Soul and Ani DiFranco? Really alternative? Alternate alternatives?

And just how does the return of David Lee Roth as the lead singer of Van Halen fit into all this?

If alternative music is truly about stuff that currently is not mainstream, then do you know what alternative music is? It’s a Paula Abdul-Debbie Gibson doubleheader with a special guest appearance by Levert.

The dictionary’s term for alternative is: “that which may be chosen in place of something else.”

Which means pretty much anything is alternative. In all honesty, what alternative music is is pretty much undefinable. And perhaps that’s the way it should be.

Do we really need to define which musical acts are worthy of being ‘cool?’

Shouldn’t our response to artists be based on the art, and not on the image attached to the artist? Isn’t this what the ‘alternative’ movement was all about in the first place; forsaking image for art?

Hating Hootie and the Blowfish because you don’t like their music is an expression of free thought.

However, hating Hootie because everyone else hates Hootie fights against the entire idea of individuality, a concept many alterna-rockers claim to embrace.

The irony is thick.

Do we unnecessarily dismiss a musical act for not being ‘alternative’ enough? Ask former rock rebels Metallica and Soundgarden, who have lost their street credibility because they committed the mortal sin of being popular.

As a society, we must label and organize and categorize things in order to establish some sense of order within our reality.

But, by maintaining that order do we needlessly limit our ability to look outside the realms of normalized thought patterns and break through into a more creative environment?

What is alternative? What is liberal?What is conservative? What is young or old? Success or failure? Good or bad? Moral or immoral?

The answer to all these questions depend heavily upon perception, which undoubtedly will vary from person to person. As it should be.

When we bind ourselves to these terms, what doors are we leaving unopened? A band we may have enjoyed listening to… A politician we may have supported… Food we would have eaten… A person who could have become a friend…

Labels are necessary for order. But maybe what we need is a little chaos in our lives.

Not enough to cause a riot or get anybody hurt, but just enough to keep all of us from making stupid assumptions about the world of infinite possibilities that surrounds us.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I think I’ll go listen to a little alternative music to rev up my rebellious juices of youth…

“Wake me up, before you go-go…”

Tim Davis is a senior in theater studies from Carlisle.