Feature Article:
The Post-Woodstock Protest Era
By Corey Highberg, 2019
The Post Woodstock Protest Era
This article’s research is on the fandom of Woodstock. The festival of 1969 created an iconic point in history. For some time, people continued to love and admire this expression of counterculture. As anniversaries passed, attempts to honor the festival grew in intensity, until a final climax occurred in 1999. That year, the events warped the reverence of the original festival bringing violence, arson, sexual assault, and destruction of property. This was driven by the collective memory that surrounded Woodstock and was the result of manufacturing nostalgia to force a desired outcome. In trying to improve the festival, the organizers ruined many of the facets that made it great. During Woodstock 99, the political climate was much calmer for civil liberty movements, war, and assassinations. America was experiencing a moment of fiscal prosperity and music was growing more aggressive. Metal/rap hybrids covered the spectrum of popularity in stark contrast to the peacetime movements of the acid rock that was played while the country was embroiled in Vietnam. The inability to create phenomenon akin to the original event is produced by the structures and evolutions of genre, the manipulation of nostalgia by commercial entities, and the hostile impulses provoked by a generation embroiled in rage. The outcome was the end of a peace festival, and the birth of a new type of violent peace protest to the world stage. The death of the Woodstock festival is a key to understanding how and why we use music to captivate attention and associate meaning towards impactful messages.
Fandom has its evolutions in American culture. The stark engine of capitalism and free market lead to the creation of a new type of listener well into the 19th century. This phenomenon of the music lover, not our typical example of devotee, was molded by the efforts of sensationalism and popularism. Beatlemania is a great example of a new type of fan in the modern era. Before that, though, in a pronounced illustration from the 1800’s, the famous promoter P.T. Barnum, known for his work in the circus, became the new face of advertisement for a renowned opera singer, Jenny Lind[1]. The public hysteria generated by the commercialization of an opera at this level showed the power of the free market, and how a motivated team could capture an immense cash crop of enthusiastic listeners. The conditions of connectivity to the audience were largely circumvented by the psychological effects associated with following the crowd. What they heard was less important of what they herd to. This was not to be fandoms final form, and as other music promoters discovered, performances could still make a meaningful connection with its audience through its medium. Much of the driving force behind this new obsessive attitude towards music and the stars that it created was the personal connection developed as a result of this new emerging American marketplace. As Cavicchi writes, “When the star system unmoored performers from localities and exaggerated stars’ professional skills in the 1940’s, music lovers sought to understand stars as authentic people with whom they had an intimate bond.”[2] In many ways, the concept of fandom can be seen as a tool of the institutions that promote music to control its audiences, and by contrast, it can be viewed as the inevitable reaction to a source of inspiration that motivates communities to act in common purpose. When driven by humanity efforts, community, and social well-being, this force is one that results in peaceful harmony. Alternatively, when driven by personal gain, commercial enterprise, and individual greed, the result can be disastrous and violent. This is exactly the scenario that came to be in the case of Woodstock 69’ in contrast to Woodstock 99’.
Woodstock 99’ was in the late summer, on a decommissioned airfield (Griffiss Air Force Base) in New York. The site was heavily fortified with a large stone wall to prevent people from entering without tickets or contraband. Prices were inflated and the weather was unusually hot. Over the course of 3 days, 100-degree temperatures were normal, and it was a long walk between stages. The composition of the late 90’s was a mixture of grunge, metal, rap, punk, and pop. Many of the headlining acts were a new genre of counter-culture music called rap-metal. Both types could be considered outcast, but together, they were excessively unusual, as both styles did not have audiences that co-mingled. In Brooklyn, New York, the elements of what we know as hip hop began, “born of the disempowered young people… and the defiance of police and state repression.”[3]. Heavy Metal, on the other hand, continued to evolve and splinter since its inception in the late 70’s as a product of the sixties counter-culture fusion with the U.S. middle and upper classes. By the emergence of grunge in the 90’s, Heavy Metal had rebellious identities that depended on the idea that they were offensive to the powers that be.[4] These two fandoms created a volatile mix, as it was born of outcasts. They were alienated from each other and fused to make something even more fringe. As Steven Hyden writes, “Hip-hop and metal have always been the easiest genres to demonize. So naturally, the melding of these genres made nu metal acts especially susceptible to being scapegoated.”[5] Bands like Limp Bizkit, Rage Against the Machine, Kid Rock, Insane Clown Posse, and Red Hot Chili Peppers were some of the groups that either fit this category exclusively or had elements that crossed into the genre in some way or another.
There is a complex set of evolutions that occurred between Woodstock 69’ and Woodstock 99’. Each component on its own can be explained through economic and social change. As a larger picture though, it is hard to ignore the concept that during a time of public outrage at government policy, an immense and effective movement of protest made change in the way Americans viewed their national identity. Thirty years later, that same moment in time would be eulogized in a completely destructive and offensive way, so much so, that American identity would hesitate before allowing youth culture to speak about political change effectively through music festivals in the future. Was this an organic process, set in motion by forces that could not possibly be fathomed unless viewed in hindsight? Or, was this the reaction of controlling entities; gatekeepers that recognized when their way of life was threatened and knew that eventually they would need to react in order to preserve their version of American prosperity? Was fandom being used as a tool to redirect the energies of youth culture, or did we, as a society, walk our own path to this end with social and economic policy that affected class dynamics into the violence that eventually erupted in Woodstock 99’?
Fandom describes the characteristics of activity surrounding the admiration of a person, group or genre of music. We remember Woodstock 69’ instead of Woodstock 99’ in a similar way to how we remember the Beatles versus the Backstreet Boys. Both groups had a profound effect on their audiences, but we remember the former, while the latter fades into obscurity. One compelling reason is because fandom, while it can speak to cultural significance of an era, movement, or timeframe, often does not have relevance to the content of which it is the subject of. The meaning and impact music can make on a crowd is not necessarily associated with the character of its product. Fandom can create the illusion of importance, but its real goal is to gather followers and secure value. Just because everyone likes it has little to do with its benefit to society. As Cavicchi writes, “Music loving was an especially visible example, or symptom, of America’s new marketplace of unparalleled opportunity, and to others was a place of sensationalism and irrational impulses, shifting and sometimes confusing roles, and the manipulation of anonymous masses for profit.”[6]
Speaking of irrational impulses…we need to talk about Fred Durst. For as much as we could look at what the ingredients of this melting pot was, it is hard to examine the explosion without looking at his statements and actions during the Limp Bizkit set.
There is an iconic instance in Woodstock 69’s day 4, Monday August 18th, after the rain, as people were rising up out of the mud when Jimmy Hendrix plays the national anthem. The crowd looked on in amazement. Mel Lawrence, director of operations, commented about the occasion; “We were at the most peaceful place on the planet at that time, and he (Jimi Hendrix) hooked us up with the brutality of Vietnam.”[7] This contrasting moment can be found at Woodstock 99’ with the performance of Limp Bizkit. This is when the boiling point tipped over. While fires didn’t break out till later in the festival, the violence and sexual assault characteristic of the atmosphere reached a peak. Brian Hiatt, of Sonicnet, a publication covering the festival describes the events:
“I watched the Limp Bizkit set,” Hiatt said. “Fred Durst, in not a great moment of judgment, basically told the crowd to tear shit up, which they did, and ripped pieces off a sound tower and were surfing on them. I then went to the medical tent and saw weeping kids who had been injured in the mosh pit and talked to medical staff who were just overwhelmed with kids injured in some of the craziest mosh pits ever. They had kids going in the medical tent telling the doctors, ‘They need to stop the show, this is the scariest thing I’ve ever seen.’”[8]
Woodstock 99’ is largely forgotten. When researching this festival, the first article I encountered was titled “19 Worst Things About Woodstock 99’.”[9], (2014), and “Did Woodstock ’99 Kill Rock?”[10] (2019). A two-hour documentary about Woodstock 69’ celebrating its success and impact on the era was released in 2019. After Woodstock 69’, there was a Woodstock 79’, 89’ and 94’, all celebrated to varying degrees of success. After Woodstock 99’, there has been no additional attempts. A Woodstock 2019 was planned and then abandoned due to logistical issues. Using a giant gathering of young people interested in changing the world through peaceful protest and music was recognized, (and still is) seen as a historic moment in the fabric of meaningful demonstration in America. It changed policy, public perception, and affected decisions that would shape our nation. The momentum in to continually challenge government policy towards class, poverty and social mobility would continue to build and grow with new genres of music, and new young people to champion their messages. Leading up to Woodstock 99’, the phenomenon of grunge set an interesting stage for the events to come. While grunge had arguably died prior to Woodstock 99’, its mark on Woodstock 94’ is notable for a very distinct reason. As Catherine Strong writes, “What was most at stake for artists such as Nirvana and Soundgarden as they became successful was their ‘symbolic capitol’, something that can give its possessor an advantage over those who do not possess it… in a field such as this, where symbolic capitol was gained through opposition to corporate and commercial success, artists are in danger of losing their symbolic capitol if they start becoming successful…”[11]. The collective memory associated with the fandom of Woodstock 69’ was a powerful voice against the government policies that it protested. Those entities would later go on to use this collective memory to destroy its power, by celebrating its success in anniversary festivals. The discovery for grunge music: fandom that protested commercial achievement and became commercially successful doing so killed it in less than 5 years. Thus, the making of a commercially successful Woodstock effectively destroyed its future.
Woodstock 99’ is a moment when nostalgia set the stage for a musical venture whose primary purpose was to capitalize on the success of its former fandom. The memory of times past was the fuel that drove the economic potential, and the gatekeepers promoting were blind to the nature of the enthusiasms that they were attempting to exploit. In Rolling Stones article about the things that made Woodstock 99’ fail[12], many of the items spoken about dealt with the blatant focus on capitalism and the mockery by many performers of its presence. One band threw hundred-dollar bills into the audience just to watch people riot. Water was price gouged in 100-degree weather. There was a misguided sense of misogyny, with people shouting for women to “show your tits!”, and then afterwards saw themselves exploited online with websites showing thousands of pictures of exposed women without their consent. Ticket pricing extreme, and so was the heat. The real tragedy of this event: music festivals were discredited as methods to protest government oppression. Max Yasgur, the dairy farmer in Bethel, New York who allowed the Woodstock festival of 69’ to happen on his property was asked to speak on the third day. He said, “You people have proven something to the world… you have proven that half a million young people can have three days of peace and music and nothing but three days of peace and music, and God bless you for it!”[13]. Woodstock 99’ condemned this whole notion, for by the end, you would hear a different type of announcement. Woodstock 99’ declared to the world, “Please, there are people hurt out there. They are your brothers and sisters. They are under the towers. Please, help the medical team get them out of there. We can’t continue the show until we get these dear people out of there. We have a really serious situation out there,”.[14] In response to these pleas, the crowd set the place on fire and started looting. Brian Hyatt would later go on to acknowledge, “Some of the same kids who said, “fuck it” and burned it all down no doubt said the same and pulled the lever for an obvious con man 17 years later.”[15] In reference to the 2019 political climate and turmoil associated with the American executive administration.
Woodstock 99’ is an important lens to our path today. It is valuable to recognize that fandom does not always speak specifically to the topic which it is born of, but more often speaks to the message delivered by the people who are enamored by it. This violent festival showed the path of American culture to come much the same way as Woodstock 69’ did. Just because the picture is not as rosy as the other, even more reason to take a closer look. There is no greater teacher then failure and tragedy, and no bigger tale of woe could be told about the death of rock and roll, and the music festival as the platform for peace, love, and happiness on Earth.
-CHH, Dec 2019