Talk:Dashboard Confessional

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page needs to be cleaned up.

Contents 1 DC?! Anyone Actually Like TheM Here? 2 poster children of emo 3 Dashboard Confessional not emo 4 emo 5 DBCLive/DBCFans Link 6 The emo genre

[edit] DC?! Anyone Actually Like TheM Here?

For one, they rock, literally...i would class them as indie yet so many class them as emo. So what, if you read*sighs* eminem's lyrics some are emotional yet you class him hiphop not emo?! Ok, i'm very confused aout this, come back soon x -Vindicated, I am selfish, I am Wrong I am right I swear i'm right. Swear I knew it all along...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.13.19.69 (talk • contribs).

[edit] poster children of emo

If it's the consensus among editors that DC is not an emo band, then I accept that. However, one issue that was touched on, but not resolved, in the below debate, is that DC are very widely perceived as an emo band, even if that perception is incorrect. As encyclopaedians, wouldn't it be simply irresponsible to entirely disregard that? Perhaps the first sentence could be reworded to: "Dashboard Confessional is an American acoustic/electric guitar driven indie rock band (often mistakenly labeled as emo) ..." Or, maybe, there could be a short section in the article about the distinction, and why they aren't really emo? It just seems silly to ignore that DC are extremely widely perceived to be emo. A google search for "dashboard confessional emo" yields 489,000 results, for "dashboard confessional indie" 421,000. Thatcrazycommie 02:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan to me... :) Go ahead. --HarryCane 15:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Right. I just wanted to make sure there were no objections. I'll try to get around to writing a short section, but, to be honest, I don't really know what makes music officially "emo" or not, so it won't be very good. Hopefully someone who does can clean it up.Thatcrazycommie 04:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Eyeliner and lyrics about slitting wrists, if you go by common conception... :) --HarryCane 11:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I must agree with that crazy commie. Definitions are simply what people agree a words means and people have decided that DC is an Emo band. This may be a misnomer considering the history of emo but to say that they are not emo is to disagree with the majority consensus about the definition of emo. For many people emo is defined as “what dashboard confessional sounds like.” As the majority of people believe that it seems silly and against wikipedia standards to fight calling DC emo. You may argue that wikipedia is a place for facts not for putative knowledge but definitions are by their nature determined by what most people think. Perhaps the problem is the newly arisen def. of emo not this article? Beckboyanch 07:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't disagree with this. I think it can be mentioned that Dashboard is widely consider emo, but then it must be mentioned that they are in fact not an emo band (just as the emo article does). And to be honest, "definitions are by their nature determined by what most people think" is a little bogus, don't you think? I mean, if the majority of the population of the earth thought that 0.999... does not equal 1, that would certainly not suspend the mathematical law. And this is where it gets religious: If the majority of the population of the earth thought that the existence of mankind started with homo sapiens Adam and Eve, that does not suspend (scientificly proven) evolutionary theories. Also, as I already pointed out, if you go by what most people think, emo music is defined by the use of "eyeliner and lyrics about slitting wrists", both of which are not very prevalent in Dashboard Confessional's self presentation. --HarryCane 11:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

While you are a hundred percent right about facts definitions are different. A definition is what people agree a word means, it is what the majority have decided a word means. The majority of people have decided that the word emo includes DC and therefore DC is emo. This may represent a significant divulgence from previous usage, it may confuse, but because people agree that something (Y) is x then Y is x because now x means what Y is regardless of what x used to mean. Popular usage determines definition and within popular usage DC is emo therefore DC is emo. If the definition expressed in wikipedia or elsewhere does not include DC as emo then it must e changed. However this is more a question of the philosophy of words than relevant to the article should this discussion should end within the confines of this talk page.Beckboyanch 02:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Their sound is very emo-ish ... Even so, that's far from making them an "emo" band. And in any case, why should it matter? They are a simply good band. What does it matter, then, to real fans what genre they're in? I agree wholeheartedly that just because the masses are typically in favor of one idea or another, that doesn't make it true. For instance, macroevolution is gaining increasing popularity and is being taught in "schools" throughout this country, despite the fact that "neither the biochemical nor replicative pathways have been described" and "many scientists think that they could not have arisen by any naturalistic means." Furthermore, "contrary to the expectations of evolutionary theory, the fossil record is replete with complex transitions and new designs whereas simple transitions (intermediates) are rare." And even if one was to take a less literal stance on passages like Genesis 1 and 2 and accept, or at least give plausibility to, the evolutionary theory, the duality of man's existence is certainly the most unique observable phenomena in our galaxy, and should therefore hinder any logical person from straying from theism to naturalism. If all creatures are striving towards perfection (and it does seem that they are), then eventually they would have to reach a metaphysical state of existence--no food or shelter would be required, and why worry about offspring since only the substantial is subject to the laws of duration? However, no organism--this at least to me seems to be the case--could arrive on its own, or by any natural means, in that nonsubstantial, metaphysical realm of existence. Indeed, it would require divine intervention ... Already, it seems, man has some sense of duality to his existence, but not much. This seems to me the most logical explanation behind what we'd called the "spiritual." Our spirits are that part of us who exist partially in that realm. Our bodies are subject to the laws of duration, but our spirits (that metaphysical part of us) are not, so even once our bodies have given away, still our spirits would remain, and it seems that at this point the whole sum of our existence would tranfer to that metaphysical, nonsubstantial, heavenly realm. This is the primary logic behind Life after death, and it has been (and still is) perplexing man since that spirit was first bestowed to him by his Maker ...

[edit] Dashboard Confessional not emo

If the above statement is true, why are they so often credited as the poster child of emo? I swear I have heard this hundreds of times. ~ Joe—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.227.11.130 (talk • contribs) .

Couldn't this whole argument be solved with the assertion of a line into the article saying something like "Although there is some disagreement among their fans, Dashboard Confessional is often credited as being the poster child of emo" with some citation? Mshatzer 02:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Things like Rites of Spring and Embrace are emo. Dashboard confessional are just an emotional band.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.167.192.17 (talk • contribs) .

Simply look at Wiki's emo article for a perfectly clear reasoning as to why this is so. Dashboard would fit more properly into acoustic (for earlier releases) or pop rock/alternative for later releases. There are no trace elements of emo in Dashboard Confessional's sound, nor is there any distinct emo influence on Chris Carabba's music. Therefore, listing DC as falling under the genre "emo" is a falsity.

I fail to see the point of a discussion if no elements of the discussion are going to be taken into consideration with the article. There is no evidence to show that Dashboard Confessional is an emo band, yet there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. It seems only logical that "rock" or "acoustic" should be limited to the genres of this band.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.29.11.181 (talk • contribs) .

The emo article clearly states that Dashboard Confessional is an emo band (section "Third wave"). So, I don't get your point. --HarryCane 14:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Read further in depth as to what they article says. It's including Dashboard in a list of bands that are labeled as part of the "third wave" of emo bands that do not actually belong there. The point is valid; acoustic and rock describe Dashboard's sound far more accurately than "emo" possibly could.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.29.11.181 (talk • contribs) .

No, it does not. It says that the term and genre "emo" shifted with the third wave, to include bands that have a similar sound to that of Jimmy Eat World. However, it does not say that these bands are not to be considered emo bands. See, just like in most other genres, there was an evolution of sorts. What most people don't realize is that not every emo band has to sound exactly like the roots of their genre. Not every emo band has to be a rip-off of Sunny Day Real Estate (just like every pop music artist doesn't have to sound like Frank Sinatra). Maybe that analogy is not too perfect, but you get the picture.

Also, since A Mark, a Mission, a Brand, a Scar, Dashboard Confessional has moved past just being an acoustic band. --HarryCane 11:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

When "evolution" occurs in music genres, it creates a new subgenre. In order for a band to be part of a genre, they also must share characteristics that are common with it. The point of the matter is that Dashboard Confessional holds none of the "roots" of the genre of emo. Calling Dashboard "emo" is a cultural phenomenon, not a matter of facts. No more than four or five years ago, we would be debating whether Dashboard Confessional was a "pop punk" band, with the ramifications of that being whether there was such a thing. This is similar to the "jazz vs. smooth jazz" debate, and whether or not smooth jazz can even be labeled a form of jazz due to its lack of improvisation (a staple of all forms of jazz). Emo is emotionally charged hardcore punk, to say that it is anything else (as ridiculous as the label itself is) is a bastardization of both the history of the genre and the bands that pioneered the sound. Dashboard holds no similarities whatsoever to early emo or emocore bands. There is no influence in the sound. Even Chris Carabba's prior band, Further Seems Forever, had little influence from the genre itself until after Chris left the band, to which their sound took a distinctively more "heavy" approach.

Also, in the emo article, it mentions that by the time Jimmy Eat World became popular, they had removed almost all of their emo influences, meaning that they were no longer an emo band. It continues by stating that they were still labeled as emo (a false assumption on part of the public), and that Dashboard Confessional is a band with a similar sound. If one band is not emo, then how can a band with a similar sound be emo?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.29.11.181 (talk • contribs) .

I must say, I agree 100% with you on this. I think the term "emo" is applied way too haphazardly to contemporary bands these days, and has therefore received a very negative connotation (it has become more of an insult than an appropriate description of genre). However, with the general public still applying the term to Jimmy Eat World even after their change of style, I would say the genre itself changed with the band, as they were considered the last active emo band. It has undoubtedly become a completely different genre, bearing close to no similarity to its roots, but it's still called "emo" (although it should in fact be a sub-genre of emo at best). I think the emo article should maybe be split, to distinguish the two forms of emo, because in my eyes, Dashboard Confessional's (i.e. Brand New's, Taking Back Sunday's, etc.) "neo-emo" has become (albeit thanks to incorrect labelling in the first place) more than just a false classification, but a new sub-genre of emo. --HarryCane 17:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not agree with the idea of a genre changing and still retaining the same label. To me, that indicates a creation of a new subgenre or genre altogether. Take for example, the genres of Industrial and Power Electronics/Powernoise/Noise. While the latter most certainly has roots in the first, they are not one in the same and therefore do not adopt the same name. I think that it is incredibly misleading to imply that Dashboard and their ilk are part of the genre of emo, especially given the vast difference in their sound compared to actual emo bands. Also, I have to bring up that the use of the word today is the result of cultural or societal ignorance. It doesn't represent fact. What the majority says shouldn't automatically be stated as fact, especially if the assumptions of the majority are based off of a lack of knowledge. Splitting the emo article should be just one step, although I probably wouldn't have a problem with the used of "emo" to describe these bands if it was emphasized that they are "third wave emo" (as much as I detest that term). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.29.11.181 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] emo

i totally agree about the emo thing people nowadays classify way too much music as emo some people even say simple plan and green day are emo. i can see how they would classify bands like hawthorne heights, taking back sundy etc. as emo but they should be clasified as "mainstreamo"—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burger king (talk • contribs) .

Ha..I call those bands "wannabemo." But I agree too. I hate the misconceptions and mislabelling about 'emo.' It's so irritating, but I'm sure any attempts to edit Wikipedia to more accurately describe "emo" would be reverted by the masses who are misinfomred about what emo is. WikiFew 06:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd say give it a try. :) --HarryCane 09:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DBCLive/DBCFans Link

I remember adding a link to DBCLive previously, which is (was) a website that fans could go to in order to download their live performances through FTP. That site seems to be down, but has a replacement site of DBCFans.com, created by one of the hosts of DBCLive. The site is well known by the band, and in fact, has been used as a reference for the band, when they were looking for particular material from a particular live appearance. Why is it improper to have a link for this website? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drego5 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] The emo genre

Seriously, emo does not have to mention slitting wrists. It has other topics like being unnoticed by girls and rejected (for you to notice) and a sad end to something (currents). I also think DC to be emo, because of the acoustic guitar/emotional vocals combination in some of their songs, and not indie, because other indie bands (maritime, the dismemberment plan, travis etc) are not nearly as emotional as them, and so dc don't fit in with the indie rock genre. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.47.168.41 (talk) 11:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

For the one millionth time: the term emo music does not come from an emotional way to sing, or emotional lyrics. Hell, Kelly Clarkson and P!nk have emotional songs, are they emo? Emo is a subgenre of hardcore punk that was predominant in the '90s. --HarryCane 13:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)