It is the wont of older generations to
denigrate the musical tastes of those who come after. Music and fashions
change, but is it really always to the worse? It seems unreasonable to think
that a whole generation has suddenly gone tone deaf. Yet, this seems to be the
argument we elders often put forward. I’ve often thought about this and am
always self-conscious about keeping my ears and mind open to new music and
trends.
In December in Tokyo I spent a couple of
days with my friend and cohort Naoko. She actively despairs about the state of
the current music scene, to the extent that she would contemplate moving out of
the country. It is true that much of Japanese pop is calculatedly commercial
pap that is being produced and promoted by professional marketers whose main
motivation certainly is not to create innovative or touching music. The
extremely popular girl group AKB48
appears to be Naoko’s principal hate object (ironically, Naoko who is a dress
designer and maker, once produced outfits for the troupe). The girl group’s
musical merits are negligible, but that’s beyond the point: their sales pitch
focuses on the visual effect of a large group of pretty young women in short
skirts hopping around a stage in a more or less synchronized manner. AKB48 is a
product, which is proven by the fact that there now are regional franchises of
the brand in other cities, such as Osaka. (Perhaps I’m biased, but to me the
similarly marketed boy bands in Japan are even more horrible.)
In an attempt to console Naoko, I kept
telling her that it’s not worth leaving Japan because of the proliferation of
bad commercial music. She would just be faced with the same phenomenon wherever
she went. After all, who is more popular amongst teenage girls in the States
than Justin Bieber? At least in Japan the image of such groups appears to be
somewhat less vulgarly sexual than, say, that of Miley Cyrus and other girls barely
out of their teens on this continent. (This point, I have to confess, I am not
making confidently. It may only reflect the Lolita complex of so many Japanese
males: the eroticism of innocence.) Similarly, young women in Japan don’t seem
to feel the same need to prove their toughness as their counterparts in the
West, but rather use their feminine assets to get their way. (The photos in
this blog demonstrate the point. I took them during a student festival at Kyoto
University in November. The performers are elite students from the highly
prestigious institution of higher education.)
Commercial music has always been around, of
course, and maybe it is that the production companies have got a stronger hold
of what is being created and marketed. Naoko and I grew up at a very special
time in history when an extraordinary amount of new original music was blowing
our collective minds. This music was part of a counterculture revolution and we
came to be defined by it. We are too young to have observed the British
Invasion when The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, The Kinks and The Animals,
and many others, broke new ground on their versions of rock ’n’ roll and rhythm
‘n’ blues. Somewhat sadly, we also missed the height of the hippie scene and
never experienced the summer of love first hand. But we grew up with bands like
Pink Floyd, King Crimson and Deep Purple, with a psychedelic need to include a
colour in their names, as well as other highly innovative enterprises, such as
Led Zeppelin, Cream and Jethro Tull (and the fantastic Finnish band Wigwam). We identified with the music and the
music was a major—if not the
major—part of the identity of our entire generation. In my own case, although I
loved all of those bands, my primary identity was defined by modern jazz.
Then everything changed. Disco became
popular and someone invented the drum machine to ensure an unwavering beat
would keep the dancers moving under the disco ball. Audiences grew weary of lengthy
suites with multiple parts, changing tempos and elaborate guitar and Moog
solos. This dumbing down coincided with an overall change in culture and
politics: young people became less critical of the society, wholeheartedly
embraced capitalism, and never let their hair grow. And it’s been downhill ever
since, many in my age group would argue.
I refuse to believe that the proportion of
musically talented people in the population suddenly dropped so dramatically. I
have another explanation. The share of people who truly are serious about
music—whether as creators or as listeners—is relatively low and remains more or
less constant over time. Still relatively recently, say in the late-19th
century, “serious” music was the preoccupation of elites. There were no
recordings and most people would not be inclined to go to concerts (or to afford
it); for them, music was mostly entertainment provided by fiddlers and other
jolly fellows in taverns and dances. The cream of the society would go to
concerts and be confronted not only by lofty music, but by a social scene in
which to be seen and to mingle with other wealthy people. There, too, the music
was entertainment and audiences would often be shocked by the more adventurous
composers (my friend Vesa who is a leading music critic in Finland recently
published an excellent essay making a parallel between Verdi and Wagner, and
the Stones and The Beatles). My guess is that most of the people attending
concerts in Vienna or in Paris would not have a particularly high ability to
absorb the finer points of the music they heard. That was not the primary
purpose for many to go to the concerts.
The rise of popular music and recordings in
the 20th century led to a change. Jazz spread around the world from
its origins in New Orleans and the US South. Although many of the early star
players were virtuosos on their instruments (whether they could read music or
not), jazz was not particularly sophisticated or high-brow. Although people
like Duke Ellington started to write advanced arrangements for larger
orchestras early on, it was easy listening and easy dancing qualities that
tended to dominate. One of the tests of a good drummer was whether he would be
able to keep dancers on the parquet during a drum solo – Gene Krupa’s
reputation was partly based on this ability. The be-bop revolution of the
second half of the 1940s was a reaction to the prevalence of the simplistic
styles in jazz. Innovators, such as Charlie Parker, Thelonius Monk, Bud Powell,
Dizzy Gillespie, Charlie Mingus and Kenny Clarke, put the emphasis on complex
harmonies and advanced improvisation creating music that was impossible for
most of the old guard to emulate. Be-bop was the music of musicians and, needless
to say, never appealed to mainstream audiences.
In the next two decades or so, jazz evolved
further, often towards an ever freer and more experimental direction. People
like Ornette Coleman and Eric Dolphy stretched the definition of harmony in
music. Arguably, the most important of all was John Coltrane whose own
evolution from a hard bop saxophonist to a deeply spiritual musician pushed the
frontiers of jazz and music in general ever further from the commercial
mainstream. In fact, some writers have suggested that Coltrane killed jazz in
the 1960s by taking it so far out of reach from the average listener. I don’t
believe this to be a fair accusation, but it does resonate with my main point,
that is: the majority of people have always wanted music to be easy
entertainment for them.
Until around World War II it was difficult
to draw a line between jazz and popular music. Jazz was popular music. Even after the be-bop revolution popular
crooners like Frank Sinatra continued their own style of jazz or swing. Rock
‘n’ roll was born from the roots of swing and the rhythm ‘n’ blues music of the
black population in the US. Chuck Berry, Little Richard and others built upon a
foundation that had been there for a long time, while the white guys—Bill
Haley, Elvis and others—brought in elements of country ‘n’ western making the
mix more palatable to white audiences. The Brits further modified the music.
The rise of rock-based pop coincided with a massive social change in the United
States and Western Europe, which emphasized youth culture. The opposition to
the Vietnam War, brutal suppression of protests on American university
campuses, the civil rights movement, Black consciousness, Prague Spring and its
crushing, psychedelia, the Summer of Love all were aspects of the era, which
allowed creative musicians to develop their craft and push the envelope ever
farther. Many jazz musicians also were in on the trend. Herbie Hancock and,
perhaps the greatest creative chameleon ever, Miles Davis, made genre-busting
music performing in venues like the Fillmore. In 1968, the sax and flute man, Charles
Lloyd, played the Newport Pop Festival attended by some 140,000 people.
That moment in history would seem to have
been an anomaly, when often complex, experimental music became the mainstream.
Still, it is likely that the generation was not exceptionally talented
musically. Rather, I would argue it was the zeitgeist
that allowed innovative music to assume such a central role in mass culture.
Perhaps all these social changes, questioning of the norms set by the
establishment, opened up young people’s minds and allowed them to embrace the
music without prejudice. Alas, the moment did not last.
That is not to say that there is no good
music being produced today—on the contrary. It just often gets drowned in the
commercial drone of mindless entertainment. Jazz is alive and well; and even in
the commercial mainstream much of high quality good music is being made. Although
the ‘soul’ music of BeyoncĂ© and Rihanna is not the soul of James Brown or Sam
& Dave, it is still good and professionally made music. Globalization has
enriched music by adding to the mix from other cultures: Africa, Asia, Latin
America and the Caribbean. Even in Japan, there are new artists – check out Ikimono-Gakari or Hajime Chitose, to name a
couple – creating fresh and interesting pop with a distinct flavour. Many of
the older generation—in the East and the West—also continue to evolve with the
times, while keeping their own personality. Last December in Tokyo my friend
Timo and I listened to a powerful performance by the legendary Japanese blues
man Fusanosuke Kondo at a sold-out
club.
More worrying to me is the trend that young
people today are not willing to pay for music. Free downloading cuts directly
into the income of musicians and composers – and especially those who are
outside of the mainstream and can’t compensate by volume for the lost revenue.
Online music services like Spotify and Pandora have not yet managed to work out
a business plan that would allow them to thrive while compensating the artists
fairly. In Japan, unlike in the West, still 60 percent of music sales are as
CDs. But that’s another story. Where I live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, the live
music scene is bustling. A few months ago when Vesa was visiting we went to one
of the clubs in the neighbourhood to catch some new bands. The ones we listened
to were quite good and original, with skilful players. Still nobody stretched
out with a long fiery guitar solo. It was a pity.
No comments:
Post a Comment