LETTERS

LETTERS

To the Editor:

John Sinclair’s article was, to say the least, an interesting history of rock and roll in Detroit, of which the MC5 could probably be considered the vanguard. The transition of the MC5 from a derelict street band to a killer high energy group was a major accomplishment for Sinclair, though he didn’t do it alone. The 5’s musical talent progressed, as their total sound approached cosmic levels. However, the differences in background and perspectives between Sinclair and the 5 eventually culminated in their split.

Sinclair’s article was ironically followed by one on the Rolling Stones, who’ve had somewhat similar problems as the MC5. Whenever you mix music with politics, you must eventually make a choice as to which will reign. The Stones had to make this choice, as did Dylan and the Jefferson Airplane. The MC5 chose music over White Panther goals as a means of reaching more people with their program, though it meant divorcing former support. This does not mean that they’ll ignore politics in the future, but merely that it will be secondary to the music. Like Jon Landau, I personally feel that music is bigger than politics, and more than just a medium for the latter.

This unfortunately was the end of an era, and as much as many people lament its passing, you can’t live in the past-you’ve got to look to the future. The 5 apparently felt they’d reached a peak musically, and had to change or die. Their new sound seems much more refined, though it lacks the impact of earlier days. They’ve turned down the amps some, and descended to audience clapping sessions, which were never necessary for energy before. So be it; the MC5 are “Back in the USA” today, though who can say where they’ll be tomorrow?

Sincerely,

John Clarry