It’s time for music to get politicized and accurately reflect our generation
It is rare for musicians to successfully straddle the line between mainstream appeal and forthright political activism, but it has happened in the past, and rising artists must begin engaging again with the issues that affect us all.
By Ralph Allen on Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008 - 1,177 words.
Zach de la Rocha, of Rage Against the Machine
I spend a lot of my time thinking about the position of politicized music in what has become an extremely commercial and competitive market, the unfortunate yet inevitable fate of any art form that has a mass appeal. I like to think that in today’s political climate a greater number of rising musicians will take interest in some of the issues affecting our society, and our culture will more accurately reflect our generation.
As well as the commercialized nature of the industry, a major problem inhibiting the progression of popular politicized music is the unprecedented generic diversity of contemporary music. This is in many ways a brilliant development but makes it even harder for music from the underground to gain any kind of limelight. When punk found itself in vogue, the musical preference of the generation was not nearly as factionalized as today’s and this combination of accessible music with a relatable and politicized overtone was enough to create a movement.
Likewise, when Nirvana headed a youth movement grounded in hopelessly-conditioned apathy, the overriding sentiment was enough to unite a huge number of people. A minority of grunge bands were explicitly political yet the movement reflected a large proportion of the generation’s lack of ambition and was therefore extremely important in an indirectly political way. It brought into the limelight certain sidelined members of society and highlighted a widespread and unaddressed disaffection. Establishing identity is an enormously important step on the way to generational unity.
It is an unchangeable reality that success in music is impossible without mass appeal, which can be naively reduced to certain formulaic techniques applied to songwriting, but it is in fact an amalgam of many contributory factors. Packaged pop more often than not is the product of expertly calculated marketing techniques, always with the demographic in mind, always with designs to expand that demographic. If you were to rank the factors in terms of importance, lyrical intent would trail very far behind.
Politically-minded music is exactly the same in terms of certain factors being intrinsic to success, there is just a massive shift in terms of the hierarchy of importance. Catchiness will still top the list, and image still has a fairly big part to play, but timing is of monumental importance and the success is massively more dependent on the talent of the individual. Musicians these days, the ones who are identifies as political, rarely get it right. It takes a very rare psychological make up to be able to juggle the necessary pop element with a clear and, most importantly, effective political intention.
The tradition of social protest in music stretches back for decades and I won’t dwell on the obvious and outdated as their relevance has been mostly lost to time. One of the most recent examples and the band that most affected me is Rage Against the Machine. I grew pretty obsessed as a young adolescent, learned all the songs on guitar (as best I could) and even picked up some Chomsky book from the local library (not that I understood much of it). It still took me years after this initial obsession to really appreciate where they were coming from and more importantly to be able to objectively analyze their success relative to their political stance. They are quite a phenomenon — an overtly politicized and extremely vitriolic/anti-establishment group reaching that level of global success is relatively unheard of.
So RATM have been undeniably successful in musical terms but I wonder if they were ever satisfied with their success in political matters. I saw them at Reading earlier this year and Zack de la Rocha, their lead singer, was on about putting Blair/Bush on trial and how the government is afraid of our potential. I appreciate the sentiment but it held no weight for me in that context. OK, so it is still better than nothing if even a handful of people leave the gig feeling empowered and have a newfound energy for political activism but I think that the overwhelming majority identify solely with the anger, not the cause. With Rage I think it is brilliant that you can easily look into the causes they support and that their lyrics promote awareness of various important issues but it is incredibly hard to establish a balance between pro-active preaching and passivity. Rage though are not a very relevant example as they are the product of a very rare combination of factors, which defy most of what I have said previously.
Hip-hop is one of the best examples and certainly the most contemporary of an underground musical movement becoming a dominant force within the industry. Although its political importance is often addressed I think it is hugely understated. Nearly all genres can be equally categorized into various segments — innovative, political, pop, progressive etc. The most popular in every case is of course the pop category and the explicitly political group is always comparatively minute. The difference with hip-hop is that every category is extremely enlightening on a socio-political level. Artists like Immortal Technique and Non-Phixion alight on themes that are apparent in the music of far more successful acts like Jay-Z and 50 Cent, just far more explicitly.
What is readily dismissed by the narrow-minded as simply materialistic sentiment is in fact a very revealing insight into the culture from which most hip hop is born. Although this has become commercialized and by its very success extracted from its context, it underpins very real and severe social problems within the U.S. Though just because this is the case doesn’t mean anybody will take notice. Once again the dominant commercial proportion of the genre overpowers the efforts of the artists inclined towards progression and movement. But this can be overcome in a rapidly changing political climate and there can be a shift from the current spectrum where the divisions of popular/political become more blurred and audiences become more interested in what artists have to say, not just how they say it.
The optimist in me pins my hopes on a cultural revolution following the cyclical patterns of the past. We are surely set up to be one of the most politicized generations for a long time in the face of the monumental and unavoidable issues we face. Let’s just hope that apathy will loosen its hold and we can breathe life and unity into a fractured culture. All art needs to be reclaimed from commercial interests, which dictate its course and suffocate its artistic freedom. Generic boundaries need to be overcome and politicized sentiment needs to become a prevalent aspect of the mainstream. The only way people will start to listen is if there is something worth listening to, which is both accessible and relatable. This can lead to the rebirth of the tradition of social protest in music and it can once again be seen as culturally important and once again provide us with identity.
Ralph is currently singer in The Civics, a Bristol-based band. You can listen at their Myspace page.
(+3 rating, 3 votes)
Loading ...21 Comments
Leave a Reply
Articles by this author
-
Axing BBC 6 Music will scupper chances of budding musicians
Persistence is an integral aspect of success and the frustration of a seemingly impenetrable industry leads too many potentially brilliant musicians to abandon their course. Without radio stations and showcases like 6 Music, fewer will hold onto that drive and determination to be heard, and music’s art will suffer. If the only viable course becomes strictly mainstream, music’s development will not only become regressive, but will lose credibility and become debased further as an art form. I dread the day when CDs are stocked solely by supermarkets and truly great bands are left with nothing with which to establish a career
-
Music can change the mood, not the mindset
Musicians can make a big difference, but can’t expect to inspire political movement, at least not in this country. I hope that more politically motivated bands join the fray, as it does ultimately dismay me that music has become so generally devoid of political meaning, and the advent of an exciting cultural movement could well be imminent. But for now, for most of us, to whatever extent we are the heroes of our own narrative, music serves only as the soundtrack to our development.
-
Give youth services more money and it will benefit society and the economy
If youth work is properly invested in now, the ultimate cost to the economy would be minimal but the benefits to our society would be immeasurable
-
Superfluous Luxuries: How science was put in the service of greed
The metaphorical conception of oil as the earth’s blood is only too accurate; we are bleeding it dry and the life-force we have invested far too much in will soon give up on us. Nature will have her revenge, she is already displaying her destructive potential, flexing her muscles, and we need look no further than our temperate little island to see the effects (in terms of unprecedented weather patterns and consistent meteorological anomalies)
-
Volunteering is the way out of post-graduation blues
In these troubled economic times I was finding it difficult to find a graduate job, but when I started volunteering I found a job not long after that was fulfilling and rewarding. I now recommend volunteering to everyone.
-
It's time for music to get politicized and accurately reflect our generation
It is rare for musicians to successfully straddle the line between mainstream appeal and forthright political activism, but it has happened in the past, and rising artists must begin engaging again with the issues that affect us all.
-
The perils of 21st century activism
Despite my illusions, the student population is one full of apathy and posturing when it comes to activism. We need movements that have a long-term strategy, otherwise it's a pointless exercise.
Yo Ralph, this piece is wicked… I love this term “generic diversity” — I'm gonna steal that, it's really insightful even if I'm taking it to mean something you didn't intend, although it might be what you intended…. Thoroughly agree with your take on the whole music industry; I think it's all about how much dissent they can allow without it becoming dangerous. The music corporations want to tap into dissent because its a massive potential market (witness the Che t-shirts etc.) but it's all very safe: Look at Coldplay's “political activism” — it's just Chris Martin running around with bracelets on, because Make Trade Fair, though a very important cause, is so unspecific so Martin doesn't actually have to upset people.
To be honest Radiohead are guilty of this too. They have a lot of Free Tibet stuff at their shows, which is a politically correct cause (though worthy). But where is the Free Palestine stuff, the banners, etc. It doesn't come up because that would actually offend people and not fit in with the political correctness of British and especially US discourse.
My dad wrote about this when he was commissioned by Damon Albarn to create some art (with Banksy) for some Xmas light show… It's quite a revealing op-ed he wrote in the Guardian, from the standpoint of an artist, and shows why dissent is tolerated before it gets too specific or offensive (i.e. actually treads on toes)… RATM have completely taken on activism seriously and aren't afraid to speak out, but as you say they are a rarity, most groups just play it safe, because they don't want their sales to get hurt….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2003/dec...
p.s. this type of corporate backing for dissent is also conceptualized as “repressive tolerance” i.e. the dissent is tolerated so it can be neutered by the corporations and emptied of it's meaning.. Main example of this is Che Guevara t-shirt being worn, when not many people know the CIA helped kill him and their own government was seen as the destroying of Latin America… But the same is true of using Bob Dylan tunes on Starbucks adverts, the message is completely lost and it is the “ambience” the “fad” that is being harnessed. I think artists have to fight against this too. I suppose if they make their work explicit enough they won't be able to perverted by corporations in 50 years, though
Yeah I remember Pete's article, had that Banksy piece with Jesus with the shoppin bags, quite funny as I recall, the thought of grannies and children being offended by anything that wan't holly or santa-absurd. That the one?
Yeah I agree with the Radiohead comment and i do think Thom Yorke is very aware of marketing his activism though he is a great example of promoting without preaching and I'm sure his work for the Big Ask and other projects has had a really positive impact if only amongst his fanbase. I think that he's aware of the potential influence his position grants him but also very acutely aware of the ease with which a musician can fall into the Chris Martin/Bono trap, and god forbid we get another Bono, though the resemblence in Martin is becoming uncanny.
For me, an in-between of Radiohead's abstraction and Rage's explicitness, as well as a calculated balance between preaching/promotion/integrity and credibility is essential in successfully conveying the message. Although I am against preaching sometimes people need direction and it's up to the artist to get this across without ramming it down throats and by trying to lead by example. And not to be so fuckin self righteous about it all. You're never going to taken seriously.
Can you define your generation, please?
Also, what is the name of your band? Is it an example of what you speak of?
All my punk record stores are closed here in D.C.
yeah i agree about the balance between preaching and integrity and promotion… my point is quite simple: it's about the choice of issues. some issues are safe — global warming, free tibet … others actually might put you at a disadvantage: palestine, the war in iraq…. it's not only musicians: if you look at the mainstream media and academia, the journalists and academics that make sure they don't upset people on important topics are usually the most successful… just read the op-ed pages of the new york times on any day…
second that, can you post the myspace of your group Ralph? I will put it at the bottom…
Are you talking about CD Game Exchanges, Tomas? The recent shuttering of those stores is a tragedy for the city.
I was going to bring the point up about what our generation is. But someone already did it.
Speaking from the Heartland, I can say that for many young people, politics is unimportant. Or, alternatively, their politics might not reflect the politics of the people who post on the Comment Factory.
Furthermore, independent or non-mainstream artists are not always “artists inclined towards progression and movement.” Take for instance the ''Prussian Blue,'' two tow headed sisters who sing songs about how great white people are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Blue_(Ame...)
I know this is an extreme example, but don't discount the influence of apolitical people born between 1980 and 1990. They have feelings too. They might not want to listen to excellent music about rallying around the family with a pocket full of shells. ''Fuck you I won't do what you tell me'' for them might be ''Thank you, sir, may I have another.” While it might seem like young people are liberal by default, remember that while 2/3 of the youth vote went to Obama, 1/3 went to McCain. To accurately reflect America's young conservatives, should there also be unprogressive independent music? What about Lynrd Skynrd?
Also, let's remind ourselves that we as ''a generation'' are English speaking Anglos or Americans. Music that accurately reflects young people's opinions in Russia, where Putin's Kremlin and erstwhile high gas prices have caused a new eruption of nationalist furor, might be a very different thing than it is for us. Or what about music for Iranian youth? Or Indonesian? Or Chinese?
My band is called Civics-but it's kinda on the shelf for a bit due to Bristol's shite music scene so i'm getting a lot of new music together and preparing to remigrate to London. http://www.myspace.com/civicband.
I would describe my generation tenuously as 16-25 year olds with similar cultural experiences. It is pretty hard for musicians to successfully transgress cultural boundaries as their experience can be completely unrelatable, as you've pointed out. This does happen on occasion though, like with Depeche Mode in Russia or Kraftwork's success here. I do think though that in face of global crises there will be a more universal sentiment than there's been for a very long time.
Are you saying that conservatives are apolitical? I agree that most young people are not very interested in politics but I believe this is changing. A political inclination does not have to be some inherent psychological leaning, it can be brought out or catalysed by environment and experience. And wherever your ideology leads you on the political spectrum, there will be music to reflect those ideals. Can't restrict freedom of speech, and I don't think I could ever get through to people who listen to music about white supremecy, but there are more than enough liberal minded people out there-too many to reach.
I don't know much about Lynrd Skynrd i'm afraid.
Music is great dude, I just posted it under your article too…. BBC say they bigged you up, that's mega
That makes sense. Yes, I would say I think most conversative youth listen to relatively apolitical music, unless their white supremecists, which, as much as I hate to admit this distinction, transcends the ''conservative'' label somewhat.
The bigger issue I think is making sure politically aware music, of any stripe, is actually good. I know I might get fired from the factory (along with thousands of other Americans) for saying this, but I'd say that Hail to the Thief is actually a relatively weak Radiohead album compared to In Rainbows or OK Computer. Don't get me wrong though, I think Bush is a bag of shit.
Lynrd Skynrd's song ''Sweet Home Alabama'' is a quite popular but is full of references to Southern racism.
“In Birmingham they love the Governor/We all did what we could do''
This line refers to Governor George Wallace, half-assassinated Democratic presidential candidate and the most prominent segregationist of his time.
“I hope Neil Young will remember/Southern Man don't need him around anyhow”
Hating on Neil Young is bullshit because Neil Young rules. This is a reference to Young's song ''Southern Man,'' wherein he sings about how fucked up the American South was at the time. Happily, though, the American South is marginally less fucked up than it was when Young penned the song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huLklsj_5HI
On a somewhat related note, fuck President Andrew Johnson for pulling U.S. occupying forces out of the surrendered and conquered Confederacy. If he hadn't done that, then maybe Reconstruction wouldn't still be going on and the Mississippi Delta wouldn't be so third world.
I apologize if none of this ire against the South makes no sense to you sitting happily in England. Aside from Morrissey bashing Cromwell, I can't think of a similar reference to your alls Civil War. For Americans though, it is still very much possible for me to enter into an argument with someone over the Civil War and who was right.
The Civil has other names, including the War of Northern Agression, even though the South struck Federal forces first at Fort Sumter, killing a horse. Southern apologists deny that chattle slavery was a dehumanizing institution, believing, rather, that slaves were more like unusually personable home appliances who couldn't handle the freedom the North imposed. Nevermind that the Federal Government was just enforcing the fucking Constitution for human beings who happened to be black.
Of course, the North had its own industrial abuses of workers going on. Abuses by industry, however, are not against the unconstitutional.
In conclusion: Yankees rule, Rebs drool.
dizard hail to the thief was just a title, the album was not political at all… unless where you end (and I begin),,, was talking about Bush and THE WORLD…
''the album was not political at all''
You are out of your limey little mind, Matt.
Tight article, bro! I think RATM was the best band of the 1990’s – or most important, at least – because they were the only really successful band that said anything worthwhile. What was it the geezer from RATM said: “Good music makes you wanna grab a chick and dance, Great music makes you wanna flip cars over and set them on fire. I make great music.” Or something to that effect, so I can’t think of better artist around at the moment than Immortal Technique, who you mention. It’s like he says: “If your message ain’t shit, fuck the records you sold. ‘Cos if you go platinum, it’s got nothing to do with luck/ It just means a million people are as stupid as fuck.”
Thanks to the other dude for clarifying that Skynyrd line about the governor – I never knew what that meant. But I always thought that their hating on Neil Young was due to his whiny, girl voice and the song “Alabama” on Harvest, where he said: “Alabama you got the weight on your shoulders that’s breaking your back/ Your Cadillac has got a wheel in the ditch and a wheel on the track…”which is supreme hate in itself.
Furthermore, Hail to the Thief was slightly political on the first two tracks and generally shit. And I heard that horse that the South iced at Sumter was a Klan horse, who sold-out, and it a revenge hit. Incidentally, some of you may be interested to know that there are allegations that Mr. Ed was also a Klan horse.
Neil Young is actually Canadian. True fact.
I am going to write a 3,000 word article about why Talking Heads is better than a billion Zach de la Rochas.
Fuck protesting. I don't know why I'm saying this here, but fuck protesting things. Especially the war. In my view: Good for you, you don't like capitalism or the venal, rapacious murder it encourages and condones in the name of freedom. Way to put the pieces together.
I did protest the war in D.C. in '02, though. I was 17. For me, living in D.C., political action was just a train ride away. It was fun and I'm glad I participated in it.
But here's the reason war protesting is a bullshit endeavor. I'm not going to say that global protests against the war didn't have an effect on America's perception of itself. They did. Seeing half a million people or whatever it was converge on London and other cities was impressive. The hard work and dedication people put into these demonstrations helped establish the political narrative in this country of worrying about how the rest of the world saw us. The Democrats tried to make this an issue in '04, but failed.
Back to the big protests: Of course, it was also a little depressing and frustrating and embarassing. I felt like my country was about to open a giant can of evil badness that would be impossible to close. I also felt my life threatened. Living in D.C. at a time when the T.V. was saying things like ''when, not if'' for the likelihood of a terrorist attack. From the perspective of a high school student with an interest in International Relations, I had a hunch that this endeavor would become an epic clusterfuck. I also didn't want to get killed in a terrorist attack spurred by this tragic misadventure. So far, the old 202 has been lucky. Let's hope the streak lasts.
But let me get to why protesting is stupid. Or at least a problem I have with it. When I was walking down Pennsylvania Avenue in the Fall of '02, some guy with a megaphone rallied the crowd with chants of ''From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free.” That sentiment is all well and good.
But I didn't know squat about what he was screaming about. Of course, I had some idea that it was about Palestine. Why was I chanting, though, was because other people were chanting.
I'm too tired to actually finish this argument. Lynrd Skynrd sucks. Also, Neil Young doesn't have any more of a ''whiny, girl voice'' than the esteemed Mr. Yorke himself, whose music and personage are so dear to us. While I appreciate your appreciation of my explanation of sweet home Alabama, Mr. Pearson, I will also cordially suggest to you that you eat a bag of dicks.
Go Redskins. Hail to Victory.
Fuck protesting? Rosa Parks, Jerry Adams, the list is endless. Protesting is the manner in which dissenters express their views. Without portest there is no visible reaction to the crap that goes on. Without protest there is no critical assessment of events. Without protest there is nothing. Your writing is a form of protest, and logically here you're protesting against protesting. Without being faecetious though, that was you that didn't know about Palestine, that was you that shouted along with others, maybe it meant something to others. Forget the euphoria, keep your head.
interesting.
so, beyond Neil Young and the South, what Ralph said about RATM, that basically their rage was bigger than their message, or that when de la Rocha talks about Bush Blair he “appreciates the sentiment” speaks to the role of music or culture in political discourse.
Musicians aren't academics or experts or policy makers when they write their songs and play them in front of massive crowds. They are catalysts, and synthesizers of emotion and time.
Their rage, their precise lyrics, their chords, capture moments and sentiments that no one else can, like poets and excellent writers.
It would be nice to think that the lyrics of up and coming music might be politicized, and popularized, but it's popularity will rest on upon the overarching sentiments of the fans…Yorke was big because he tapped into something universal in his songs, as did RATM, as did punk in the day. Think about Odetta, the folk singer who died recently and through her life influence Dylan, etc.
What is next who knows? Are we in a cultural period different from previous one's that have driven an upsurge in new music, both in form and content? Ralph?
Eating a bag of dicks is the greatest insult of all, you will pay for this, Dizard… I'm not entirely sure what I wrote to ellicit such a fiesty and crushing response, but your impressive insulting skills are likely a defence mechanism; the result of a childhood trauma. I cross referenced your CommentFactory photo with YouTube videos and found this:
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=3vFQaiX7M8U
The victim, a spitting image for a younger you….
However, I do have to agree with you on the suckiness of Skynrd, and whiny girlishness of Thom Yorke also — even though Radiohead are probably my favourite band of all time, and Mr. Young would have to rate in the Top 20. I look forward to your article on Talkng Heads.
File footage of your grandfather, Pearson: http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=hlYCVpPo1WQ&featu...
Also, it totally depends on what you're protesting. There are people in America who protest abortion or demonstrate(d) in favor of the war. Protest is not always a progressive thing. Sometimes, its purpose is nothing short of regressive. The hive-mind, however, is a powerful thing. Did you guys hear about how Black Friday, the start of the Christmas shopping season, began with the bloody trampling of a temporary Wal Mart employee in Long Island? Sure, the mob wasn't political, but it was a mob. Mobs warrant wariness, is all I'm trying to say. Remember all those protests in the twentieth century whose participants decried the influence of Jews and Bolsheviks? Nazi rallys were like protests against modernity, if nothing else.
I think we are in a cultural period different to previous ones. Certainly in terms of this debate, i.e. the role of politics in music/ art. When you, Ralph, speak of a “fractured culture”, might we not also speak, less dramatically, of a niche culture? This is certainly a recent phenomenon. The record labels know that the art must sell. It must be marketable. So the art instantly becomes a commodity. Thus I dont think we can speak seriosuly about reclaiming art from commercial interests. Nor do I think this is a bad thing. And nor does the commercialisation of music exclude its politicisation. Look at Jarvis Cocker, for example. Popular & Political.
I think this debate started about 73 years ago with Walter Benjamin's “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” Benjamin optimistically looked forward to the politicisation of art. The way in which art could now be mechanically reproduced over and over meant it no longer existed in an elite, aristocratic, Romantic space, but was opened up to mass audiences, to democratic and potentially politicised spaces.
I share this optimism. I think music is the perfect art form to work in these politicised spaces. We must remember that most of teh msuic we're talking about (rock/ folk/ punk/ reggae/ hip hop/ r&b/ pop) is a fairly recent art form. It has developed expodentially in teh last 60 years really. And its roots are in various folk forms and blues- it has its traditoins in dispossession and discontent.
A final thought: doenst political apathy basically involve maintaining the status quo, thus making it an accidental conservative politics?
Yep, Max I agree, to be convey a successful political message the art in question has to be popular as the message alone is not nearly enough. Look at the Clash, arguably one of the most successful political bands of all time-their message, which is fairly explicit, lurks behind what are essentially pop songs, and people won't sing a long if it ain't a good song, but once you get an entire stadium to echo your sentiment, even if it goes over their heads, then you know you're gettin somewhere.
As has been pointed out, lyrical content of a song is very unimportant-I've been writing songs for years and still hear a song that i've heard hundreds of times and suddenly gauge its meaning, half the time you can't even make out what musicians are saying. we 've already seen the misinterpretation of sweethome alabama. Bands ike at the drive in, system of a down, the clash and radiohead are unintelligeble for the most part but i believe the message of a song can be conveyed without the listener understanding the lyrics. As Tomas said it's all about capturing a sentiment with an essential combination of factors- of which lyrics plays a relatively small part.
what is more important is making clear what you stand for-I think yorke does this very well without pushing it on people too much, and it allows fans to look into these causes and is a positive influence. Radiohead are seen to be political but the vast majority of Yorke's lyrics are introspective or indicative of more universal sentiment. I always remember a description of Cobain saying that in one scream of “yeah” he managed to sum up the frustrations of his generation and I think that holds a lot of truth. Primarily the music has to be relatable and this will boil down to emotion rather than specific lyrics. I think and I hope that that's why politicized music will have more success in the near future because there is emerging a much larger universal sentiment of dissatisfaction, frustration and distrust in our leaders and where we're headed. Although many are still stuck in their old ways and still take all these commodities for granted, people with an emerging political consciousness are growing up into a world filled with doomsday headlines and monumentally disastrous events.
I agree that musicians can act to catalyse a movement, but they can also instigate one and culture's role in the years ahead has an important part to play, I at least need to believe that.