Sunday, June 3, 2007
Friday, June 1, 2007
Dancehall
Many of the ideas about hip-hop we discussed in class can be applied to Dancehall. The genre features even more 'booty' fetishisation than most rap videos I've seen both lyrically and in its visual representations. Dancehall artists often release songs that have a corresponding dance. These dances are then featured in the artists music video through the use of dancers who preform the moves and lyrics related to the dace. Dancehall is all about frenetic dance energy and primarily dances reflect the energy of the music visually. Dancehall competitions serve as a way for audieces to have a dialogue with Dancehall artists as prominent Dancehall artists respond to the latest dance crazes. A good example is of this kind of video is Mr. Vegas – Hot Wuk
that features many Dancehall dancers performing the sexually provocative Hot Wuk dance in which women mimic sex on stage. All of the major Dancehall dances are performed solely by women. Dancehall has been criticised for being misogynistic in the past. However the sexual content of the music comes from all angles through prominent Female Dancehall artists sexually explicit lyrics. and dancers that sexualise themselves on stage. Dancehall music however widens the representation of women from those normally seen in other black-urban genres like hip-hop and R&b videos to include bigger women and more emphasise on natural looking bodies.
that features many Dancehall dancers performing the sexually provocative Hot Wuk dance in which women mimic sex on stage. All of the major Dancehall dances are performed solely by women. Dancehall has been criticised for being misogynistic in the past. However the sexual content of the music comes from all angles through prominent Female Dancehall artists sexually explicit lyrics. and dancers that sexualise themselves on stage. Dancehall music however widens the representation of women from those normally seen in other black-urban genres like hip-hop and R&b videos to include bigger women and more emphasise on natural looking bodies.
An Old Wooden Ship
To define my beloved Desperate Housewives as a typical sitcom, drama or procedural show is completely inaccurate. It is untypical of an American television show due to its out-of-the-blue episodic formula that is led by its sporadic underscoring and eccentric theme music.
After a little squiz on the official official website I learnt the man behind this creativity is Danny Elfman, yes the same Danny Elfman that was accountable for Spiderman, Batman and Edward Scissorhands. AND if that doesn’t impress you I know what will.
Da da-da da da da-da dadadadada.
That’s right, you guessed it.
Danny Elfman is the man behind one of the most recognisable theme songs The Simpsons.
In Desperate Housewives Elfman’s music is relied upon heavily to portray the narratives ironic storylines and shaded character secrets. Something it accomplishes most effectively. But is it perhaps a little too repetitive? I feel the surreal and odd music does not always work and becomes somewhat tiring after fifty minutes of viewing time. Now, I know I’m sounding a bit like my father here who has been known from time to time to comment on the inane violin plucking when he is forced to watch his daughters TV choices, but perhaps dad has a point. Sure it serves its purpose in suspending the narrative but with a little more variety (without changing the style) do you not feel that some episodes could benefit more? All I am suggesting is that perhaps Elfman needs a little kick in the comfortable piano stool bottom in order to bring us a little diversity.
After a little squiz on the official official website I learnt the man behind this creativity is Danny Elfman, yes the same Danny Elfman that was accountable for Spiderman, Batman and Edward Scissorhands. AND if that doesn’t impress you I know what will.
Da da-da da da da-da dadadadada.
That’s right, you guessed it.
Danny Elfman is the man behind one of the most recognisable theme songs The Simpsons.
In Desperate Housewives Elfman’s music is relied upon heavily to portray the narratives ironic storylines and shaded character secrets. Something it accomplishes most effectively. But is it perhaps a little too repetitive? I feel the surreal and odd music does not always work and becomes somewhat tiring after fifty minutes of viewing time. Now, I know I’m sounding a bit like my father here who has been known from time to time to comment on the inane violin plucking when he is forced to watch his daughters TV choices, but perhaps dad has a point. Sure it serves its purpose in suspending the narrative but with a little more variety (without changing the style) do you not feel that some episodes could benefit more? All I am suggesting is that perhaps Elfman needs a little kick in the comfortable piano stool bottom in order to bring us a little diversity.
Jim Jarmusch’s Dead Man and the Duality of the Live Soundtrack: Assimilation and Affiliation, the ‘Acid Western’ and Counter Culture.
Jim Jarmusch’s Dead Man [1995] inverts the ‘Western filmic frame’ and its associated conventions and stereotypes creating a disconnection from both time and consciousness. The approach taken by Neil Young in composing the soundtrack for Dead Man sonically realises the film’s constructed rhythm, recorded live as an improvised real-time experience and personal emotional response to the film, with the result situated somewhere between a traditional composed score and compilation soundtrack with the assimilating and affiliating identifications each creates. Young’s score enhances Jarmusch’s treatment of time through its stark twentieth century sound in contrast with the film’s nineteenth century image adding to Dead Man’s hallucinogenic quality, its pace and treatment of ‘reality’, and contributing to its reading as an ‘Acid Western’.
William Blake’s (the films protagonist played by Johnny Depp) journey from civilisation and ‘Machine’ to nature represents an existential search for enlightenment. Blake’s resulting death however, communicates Dead Man’s nihilistic sentiment; there is no alternative to ‘Machine’s’ industrial progression towards ‘civilisation’, rendering Blake’s spiritual quest, seemingly, futile. Young’s minimalist soundtrack with its repetitive structure of a basic distorted melodic phrase becomes nihilistic in the sense that it doesn’t progress toward any form of musical climax or resolution, adopting Dead Man’s nihilistic theme. This almost counter-cultural theme was explored in films such as Easy Rider [1969] with both films concluding with the death of major protagonists in search of the same existential truths. The use of Neil Young as an artist assists in these assimilating identifications through his particular status in 1960’s popular culture and through his ‘Hendrix-esqe’ guitar tones which recalls both Easy Rider’s soundtrack in which Hendrix features.
William Blake’s (the films protagonist played by Johnny Depp) journey from civilisation and ‘Machine’ to nature represents an existential search for enlightenment. Blake’s resulting death however, communicates Dead Man’s nihilistic sentiment; there is no alternative to ‘Machine’s’ industrial progression towards ‘civilisation’, rendering Blake’s spiritual quest, seemingly, futile. Young’s minimalist soundtrack with its repetitive structure of a basic distorted melodic phrase becomes nihilistic in the sense that it doesn’t progress toward any form of musical climax or resolution, adopting Dead Man’s nihilistic theme. This almost counter-cultural theme was explored in films such as Easy Rider [1969] with both films concluding with the death of major protagonists in search of the same existential truths. The use of Neil Young as an artist assists in these assimilating identifications through his particular status in 1960’s popular culture and through his ‘Hendrix-esqe’ guitar tones which recalls both Easy Rider’s soundtrack in which Hendrix features.
“Boogie Nights” – Family Structure
“Boogie Nights” is a film about the pornography world and even though it is based around this it shows a family structure between the cast and friends, even if this is unorthodox. The family structure in “Boogie Nights” includes the producers, film crew and cast of the show and their friends and together they form a family unit. This is not your “normal” family structure which consists of blood relations such as mum, dad, brother, sister, aunties, uncles etc. Instead this is a family of people from different walks of life who happen to understand each other as they all work in the same industry (pornography) and they mainly have each other to talk to and don’t feel that other people will understand why they do what they do or accept them. This is not your “typical” family structure. When reading through an article from “The Guardian”, who interviewed director Paul Thomas Anderson, he said that, “everyone in porn has problems maintaining contact with people who aren't involved in it, so they develop a myth of the forgiving, accommodating family structure.”
In one of the scenes Amber is mothering Dick by coaching him through their sex scenes; this would be one of the more “unorthodox” elements of the family structure that Anderson has created. It is almost as if the people have become a surrogate family for each other but because of their line of work and that they are all in the same business it makes the sense of family a little more disturbing if you will because the help and guidance they give each other is to do with the sex industry and this is very much frowned upon in “normal” family structures to say the very least! This film shows how a community of friends can become so close and dependant on each other because they understand the in’s and out’s of their everyday lives and they can relate to each other. I guess in a way it is the same as if you were in a bad, or part of the “celebrity” crowd of Hollywood, they all share one main thing in common and because of this people on the “outside” don’t understand what they go through everyday and it is much easier to be surrounded by people who are not judgemental and can relate to you.
In one of the scenes Amber is mothering Dick by coaching him through their sex scenes; this would be one of the more “unorthodox” elements of the family structure that Anderson has created. It is almost as if the people have become a surrogate family for each other but because of their line of work and that they are all in the same business it makes the sense of family a little more disturbing if you will because the help and guidance they give each other is to do with the sex industry and this is very much frowned upon in “normal” family structures to say the very least! This film shows how a community of friends can become so close and dependant on each other because they understand the in’s and out’s of their everyday lives and they can relate to each other. I guess in a way it is the same as if you were in a bad, or part of the “celebrity” crowd of Hollywood, they all share one main thing in common and because of this people on the “outside” don’t understand what they go through everyday and it is much easier to be surrounded by people who are not judgemental and can relate to you.
Lecture outlines 10 & 11 online
Kia ora all
lecture outlines for morphing and TV pop idols are now online on CECIL.
lecture outlines for morphing and TV pop idols are now online on CECIL.
The different elements of Hip Hop culture
In the lecture on Hip Hop it was brought to light the many elements that make up the Hip Hop culture such as, graffiti (or as it was earlier known as, ‘writing’), break dancing, DJ-ing, rapping, and the use of urban spaces such as the city. Hip Hop started out as a culture that had a can-do attitude about it, there were no if’s or but’s about making it in the industry it was more about getting out there and making it happen yourself. You had to bang on doors, make some money, and sell your music. Graffiti was known as a form of writing before it was given a name, nowadays Graffiti is not always seen as an art form, but viewed as something bad when it is incorporated with ‘tagging’ and the like. There are walls that you can graffiti on in Auckland and these pieces of work look more like art, with bold colours, cool images and funky lettering incorporated into one big piece of exceptional eye catching work.
In a lot of Hip Hop influenced movies most of the dancing is break dancing or at least has break dancing in the set. You can see this on movies such as “You Got Served” which is reasonably recent and aimed at the younger youth audience of today. This movie is about a dancing competition in which the prize is money. A lot of the film is filmed on the street, with evidence or basketball courts, gang fights, shootings, death and those who are poor trying to get on, there is hustling and doing others dirty work who are higher up than you. DJ-ing and rapping are a big part of the Hip Hop culture, rapping in particular. Artists such as Snoop Dog, Icecube and Biggie are among the many who are skilled in this area. A lot of their lyrics are about drugs, women and hustling which are all incorporated in the Hip Hop culture. A lot of these video clips that rap artists are in have half naked women in them, with booty’s in a club usually, with the presence of marijuana – this is also a part of what makes the Hip Hop culture distinctive to others. A lot of the Hip Hop videos we see, or the movies or any of the films or documentary’s that are about Hip Hop are set in the city, whether it be Auckland, the Bronx, LA or New York – the urban space is very commonly associated with Hip Hop. You do not see people who represent the Hip Hop culture out and about in rural areas, they live for the darkness, seductive, luring of the city.
In a lot of Hip Hop influenced movies most of the dancing is break dancing or at least has break dancing in the set. You can see this on movies such as “You Got Served” which is reasonably recent and aimed at the younger youth audience of today. This movie is about a dancing competition in which the prize is money. A lot of the film is filmed on the street, with evidence or basketball courts, gang fights, shootings, death and those who are poor trying to get on, there is hustling and doing others dirty work who are higher up than you. DJ-ing and rapping are a big part of the Hip Hop culture, rapping in particular. Artists such as Snoop Dog, Icecube and Biggie are among the many who are skilled in this area. A lot of their lyrics are about drugs, women and hustling which are all incorporated in the Hip Hop culture. A lot of these video clips that rap artists are in have half naked women in them, with booty’s in a club usually, with the presence of marijuana – this is also a part of what makes the Hip Hop culture distinctive to others. A lot of the Hip Hop videos we see, or the movies or any of the films or documentary’s that are about Hip Hop are set in the city, whether it be Auckland, the Bronx, LA or New York – the urban space is very commonly associated with Hip Hop. You do not see people who represent the Hip Hop culture out and about in rural areas, they live for the darkness, seductive, luring of the city.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Voting system on TV shows
In this week’s class, we had an analyse on TV program ‘American Idol’ about aliveness in TV show. Showing on and off stage live about contestants is one main factor to make this show look real, but in my perspective, voting system is the other main factor which to reinforce the aliveness of this show. Compare to showing contestants on and off stage live, voting system gives audience a chance to participate into the show. This interaction gives audience power to support their favourite singer to be the champion. Furthermore, it shows that singing skill is not the only factor that makes singer to success, but also the way to express self. For the reason that, the more supporters that singer has, the more opportunities he or she can be the champion. More, while the program is broadcasting on air, host would frequently encourage audience to pick up cell phone and send a message to support the contestant and emphases the deadline of voting. By doing that, two outcomes would take place, firstly, contestants would receive support from fans; secondly, network operator, Cingular, would gain money by wireless call charges. Therefore, the introduce of voting system into reality TV show brings more audience to watch and join in the show, but also creates another opportunity for producer to make money.
Pencil Tin Faces
Sure the idea of instant stardom is attractive. It is more than attractive, it is almost ideal. Why not skip the hard yards? the financial stress? Not to mention the risk-take and the trust in strangers. TV reality show, Popstars, began in April 1999. Joe Cotton, Keri Harper, Erika Takacs, Carly Binding and the hugely relevant Megan Alatini were chosen throughout a fifteen episode season. These five talented and attractive females formed the first ever Popstars group and NZ had huge expectations of their outcome. Yet they barely reached the stationary faze. A little faze I find determines the success of a group in all respects. After all who couldn’t be defined successful when a given the choice a child desires your face on their pencil tin more than Barbie’s.
Alas, what happened to them? As a pubescent teenager I too fell into the many numbers of NZ citizens waiting for the next single after ‘Tonight’, the next single that in my mind never came. Of course there was a second release but I will give fifty dollars to the person who can tell me the name of it and/or the lyrics without looking up wikipedia.
Exxxactly!
Perhaps their lack of success lay in the nature of the series. I know it’s not an original suggestion but it does have some relevance. Following the huge amount of eliminations and built up tension throughout the series there didn’t appear to be any type of closure for the audience. The program seemed to build and build but then have nowhere to go and just simply… discontinue. Essentially I guess they wanted to prepare their audiences for the public appearance of the pop group but their seemed to be fault in this method. This could also explain why the idea was sold for millions globally but did not continue past two seasons unlike their reality TV offspring NZ Idol and Dancing With the Stars.
(BTW Megan was robbed)
Alas, what happened to them? As a pubescent teenager I too fell into the many numbers of NZ citizens waiting for the next single after ‘Tonight’, the next single that in my mind never came. Of course there was a second release but I will give fifty dollars to the person who can tell me the name of it and/or the lyrics without looking up wikipedia.
Exxxactly!
Perhaps their lack of success lay in the nature of the series. I know it’s not an original suggestion but it does have some relevance. Following the huge amount of eliminations and built up tension throughout the series there didn’t appear to be any type of closure for the audience. The program seemed to build and build but then have nowhere to go and just simply… discontinue. Essentially I guess they wanted to prepare their audiences for the public appearance of the pop group but their seemed to be fault in this method. This could also explain why the idea was sold for millions globally but did not continue past two seasons unlike their reality TV offspring NZ Idol and Dancing With the Stars.
(BTW Megan was robbed)
Pencil Tin Faces
Sure the idea of instant stardom is attractive. It is more than attractive, it is almost ideal. Why not skip the hard yards? the financial stress? Not to mention the risk-take and the trust in strangers. TV reality show, Popstars, began in April 1999. Joe Cotton, Keri Harper, Erika Takacs, Carly Binding and the hugely relevant Megan Alatini were chosen throughout a fifteen episode season. These five talented and attractive females formed the first ever Popstars group and NZ had huge expectations of their outcome. Yet they barely reached the stationary faze. A little faze I find determines the success of a group in all respects. After all who couldn’t be defined successful when a given the choice a child desires your face on their pencil tin more than Barbie’s.
Alas, what happened to them? As a pubescent teenager I too fell into the many numbers of NZ citizens waiting for the next single after ‘Tonight’, the next single that in my mind never came. Of course there was a second release but I will give fifty dollars to the person who can tell me the name of it and/or the lyrics without looking up wikipedia.Exxxactly!
Perhaps their lack of success lay in the nature of the series. I know it’s not an original suggestion but it does have some relevance. Following the huge amount of eliminations and built up tension throughout the series there didn’t appear to be any type of closure for the audience. The program seemed to build and build but then have nowhere to go and just simply… discontinue. Essentially I guess they wanted to prepare their audiences for the public appearance of the pop group but their seemed to be fault in this method. This could also explain why the idea was sold for millions globally but did not continue past two seasons unlike their reality TV offspring NZ Idol and Dancing With the Stars.
(BTW Megan was robbed)
Alas, what happened to them? As a pubescent teenager I too fell into the many numbers of NZ citizens waiting for the next single after ‘Tonight’, the next single that in my mind never came. Of course there was a second release but I will give fifty dollars to the person who can tell me the name of it and/or the lyrics without looking up wikipedia.Exxxactly!
Perhaps their lack of success lay in the nature of the series. I know it’s not an original suggestion but it does have some relevance. Following the huge amount of eliminations and built up tension throughout the series there didn’t appear to be any type of closure for the audience. The program seemed to build and build but then have nowhere to go and just simply… discontinue. Essentially I guess they wanted to prepare their audiences for the public appearance of the pop group but their seemed to be fault in this method. This could also explain why the idea was sold for millions globally but did not continue past two seasons unlike their reality TV offspring NZ Idol and Dancing With the Stars.
(BTW Megan was robbed)
You would be non-conforming too if you
looked
like
ME
I have to admit I find these black haired distressed souls simply intriguing. What does their culture stand for? I have been completely unsuccessful in finding a meaning to their society. On one hand they are defined by their music, a subgenre of hardcore punk rock. It may seem that this music is fairly recent in Auckland city with the anguished tweens who pursue it however you may be surprised to find (as I was) that it originates from the late eighties, only forming itself into a genre when individual members of punk rock groups would reportedly break down and become severely emotional during performances. One of the first ‘emocore’ ensembles that hit America was ‘One Last Wish’.
I use the word ‘ensemble’ because like a majority of bands from the ‘emocore’ era One Last Wish found its career to be devastatingly short lived. In fact they released their one and only album thirteen years later after an emotional break-up following their initial recording. There is that word again ‘emotional’ which leads me to another point.
As absorbing as their title and their tortured lyrics are this music is neither this band’s nor this cultures most appealing aspect. It is the disconnection these troubled souls feel with the rest of society. Emo-kids are first and foremost upfront with their emotions. And at a closer look it is clear that what they feel cannot simply be described as sadness or anger. This group have become very efficient in describing the precise feelings under these two categories that they experience, confusion, depression, loneliness, angst, anger and above all being misunderstood.
So after a close look at what can only begin to define an Emo, how are Emo’s portrayed through the media to influence these generations in continuing the practice of this culture? I believe it is not a question of how they are portrayed, more a matter of how they are perceived. For example American Emo rock bands (Good Charlotte, My Chemical Romance) are perceived as the definition I have just stumbled through, but why? Have they explained that this is how they are feeling? Do they tell us here in New Zealand what is required of you emotionally before signing up?
I think the internet is too blame. When I feel misunderstood who better to chat to then i_want_release46. He/She is christian name-less and eager to relate to my problems. And now with the likes of youtube they are on-screen, camera-happy and awaiting my comments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEJDGLF-e18
This is a clip of feelings that lead to the conclusion that ‘I Must be Emo’. My life is spiralling downward, you would be non-conforming too if you …looked….like….me. Yet this does not provide me with an answer because I get the very distinct feeling the good old art of piss-taking has reached a new level.
So back to the drawing board.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMvMzQ4Vu-8&mode=related&search=
Bingo.
Meet Hope. She has nine chapters of her thoughts and feelings all put together in nine edited monologues. Hope is undeniably Emo.
Chapter One: The Words are dying
Chapter Two: Hiding and Seeking: Hope talks about some kids who were playing Hide and Seek and how she doesn't like gym class.
Chapter Three: "CH4NG3": Hope talks about change and using her calculator in Geometry class.
Chapter Four: True Self: Hope gets a note from her mom on stationary that is a lie and she has problems with some new twins at school.
And so one and so forth…
Now I consider myself a reasonably chirpy and positive girl but listening to Hope, feelings of melancholy began to lurch its ugly head. Not in sympathy either but in an understanding way where all of a sudden I found myself to be on common ground. All of a sudden I stared to become… Emo. So her on-screen persona influenced me, bubbly… happy… me. Luckily, I had the sense to go home to my quirky flat-mate and have her lurch me from my despair with a frozen pizza and a cheap bottle of wine.
looked
like
ME
I have to admit I find these black haired distressed souls simply intriguing. What does their culture stand for? I have been completely unsuccessful in finding a meaning to their society. On one hand they are defined by their music, a subgenre of hardcore punk rock. It may seem that this music is fairly recent in Auckland city with the anguished tweens who pursue it however you may be surprised to find (as I was) that it originates from the late eighties, only forming itself into a genre when individual members of punk rock groups would reportedly break down and become severely emotional during performances. One of the first ‘emocore’ ensembles that hit America was ‘One Last Wish’.
I use the word ‘ensemble’ because like a majority of bands from the ‘emocore’ era One Last Wish found its career to be devastatingly short lived. In fact they released their one and only album thirteen years later after an emotional break-up following their initial recording. There is that word again ‘emotional’ which leads me to another point.
As absorbing as their title and their tortured lyrics are this music is neither this band’s nor this cultures most appealing aspect. It is the disconnection these troubled souls feel with the rest of society. Emo-kids are first and foremost upfront with their emotions. And at a closer look it is clear that what they feel cannot simply be described as sadness or anger. This group have become very efficient in describing the precise feelings under these two categories that they experience, confusion, depression, loneliness, angst, anger and above all being misunderstood.
So after a close look at what can only begin to define an Emo, how are Emo’s portrayed through the media to influence these generations in continuing the practice of this culture? I believe it is not a question of how they are portrayed, more a matter of how they are perceived. For example American Emo rock bands (Good Charlotte, My Chemical Romance) are perceived as the definition I have just stumbled through, but why? Have they explained that this is how they are feeling? Do they tell us here in New Zealand what is required of you emotionally before signing up?
I think the internet is too blame. When I feel misunderstood who better to chat to then i_want_release46. He/She is christian name-less and eager to relate to my problems. And now with the likes of youtube they are on-screen, camera-happy and awaiting my comments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEJDGLF-e18
This is a clip of feelings that lead to the conclusion that ‘I Must be Emo’. My life is spiralling downward, you would be non-conforming too if you …looked….like….me. Yet this does not provide me with an answer because I get the very distinct feeling the good old art of piss-taking has reached a new level.
So back to the drawing board.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMvMzQ4Vu-8&mode=related&search=
Bingo.
Meet Hope. She has nine chapters of her thoughts and feelings all put together in nine edited monologues. Hope is undeniably Emo.
Chapter One: The Words are dying
Chapter Two: Hiding and Seeking: Hope talks about some kids who were playing Hide and Seek and how she doesn't like gym class.
Chapter Three: "CH4NG3": Hope talks about change and using her calculator in Geometry class.
Chapter Four: True Self: Hope gets a note from her mom on stationary that is a lie and she has problems with some new twins at school.
And so one and so forth…
Now I consider myself a reasonably chirpy and positive girl but listening to Hope, feelings of melancholy began to lurch its ugly head. Not in sympathy either but in an understanding way where all of a sudden I found myself to be on common ground. All of a sudden I stared to become… Emo. So her on-screen persona influenced me, bubbly… happy… me. Luckily, I had the sense to go home to my quirky flat-mate and have her lurch me from my despair with a frozen pizza and a cheap bottle of wine.
Encoded Playback Apparatus
In lecture Nabeel raised an important issue of encoded and gendered music apparatus. To extend on Nabeel's point I pose that other apparatus is racially encoded. Consumers might associate a specific ethnicity with a specific type of music apparatus. We as consumers might associate the record player to the young female teenager in the coming of age film but we might also attribute Chinese Asian or Japanese Asian to the mp3 player or the Ipod. I am undecided as to why this has occurred in recent popular films like Disturbia but the supporting male lead (an Asian American) can upload any ring tone to his best friend's cellphone and hack his Itunes account. Perhaps this is related to the where the technology is manufactured, it's country of origin, it seems the image of the Asian male is an easy trope to associate modern technological advances and mini, compacted technology?
Music exchange between generations
The soundtrack of Almost Famous (Dir. Cameron Crowe) is a rich mosaic of all the old favorites of a generation. The film's nostalgic quality is almost undeniable. However, I see the film's soundtrack as a preservation or as a historical document that immortalizes the moments in music history and the joys of sharing music. Embedded into the film's narrative are important moments where characters understand each other once they've shared music collections. The act of sharing records is like the passing down of a custom, tradition, myth or legend. It is similar to the Maui myth or the moko in Maori culture except as we move beyond the twentieth century that cultural exchange is now a Simon and Garfunkel record.
Music exchange between generations
The soundtrack of Almost Famous (Dir. Cameron Crowe) is a rich mosaic of all the old favorites of a generation. The film's nostalgic quality is almost undeniable. However, I see the film's soundtrack as a preservation or as a historical document that immortalizes the moments in music history and the joys of sharing music. Embedded into the film's narrative are important moments where characters understand each other once they've shared music collections. The act of sharing records is like the passing down of a custom, tradition, myth or legend. It is similar to the Maui myth or the moko in Maori culture except as we move beyond the twentieth century that cultural exchange is now a Simon and Garfunkel record.
The Importance of Sound Design
A comparison between Gosford Park (Dir. Robert Altman) and In My Father's Den (Dir. Brad McGann) sheds light on the importance of sound design in feature film making. Gosford Park is bigger in scope than the independent New Zealand film In My Father's Den except the latter can only be described as a 'silent' picture. A scene is played out in In My Father's Den inside a classroom, yet all sounds associated with the school are absent. The sound design has been reduced to a clean recording of the character's dialogue and that only. In Gosford Park, the sound design makes scenes come alive. Whenever a character talks it is undercut or undermined by the dialogue of another character bringing us closer to the text just so we don't miss what all the characters are saying.
Idol wont success?
Since The American idol and New Zealand idol start to become more and more popular, people start to become more aware about these kind of competition and more and more people wanting to get into the final and sing on the stage. whoever wins these kind of competition thehy not only get ther money reward as well as they also gets a recording company's contract as a singer/ artist. Get a chance to release an album of it's own.
This seems to be a real deal to many people and is a attractive rewards for many peop le who thinks they sing well and want to get a record deal. However, not every idol will have a good fortune in the industry, infact, many of them only get a chance for one album and thats the end of their carreer. Why will this happen?
In my opinion i have some answer to these question, firstly these kind of idol and singing competition focus on he singing skills of the contestant however the protential of development in the industry has often been not focus at. In the music industry , singing skill isn't everything, the most important element for an artist is to have singing skill as well as protential, these includes, got hte looks, the attutidue to try new things , and the personality , only got the good voice isnt everything, in fact is not enough.
secondly the image to public, this is also an important issue for the successful of the artist. the winner for idol will be consider as i will call them singing skill type. Typical singer, however the image they gives to public sometime is hard to be change as audience has already been identify them as is . Is hard for the singer to change the images as audience may not get use to it .
Idol competition produce good singer , however famvous artist takes some more element rather then a good singer.
This seems to be a real deal to many people and is a attractive rewards for many peop le who thinks they sing well and want to get a record deal. However, not every idol will have a good fortune in the industry, infact, many of them only get a chance for one album and thats the end of their carreer. Why will this happen?
In my opinion i have some answer to these question, firstly these kind of idol and singing competition focus on he singing skills of the contestant however the protential of development in the industry has often been not focus at. In the music industry , singing skill isn't everything, the most important element for an artist is to have singing skill as well as protential, these includes, got hte looks, the attutidue to try new things , and the personality , only got the good voice isnt everything, in fact is not enough.
secondly the image to public, this is also an important issue for the successful of the artist. the winner for idol will be consider as i will call them singing skill type. Typical singer, however the image they gives to public sometime is hard to be change as audience has already been identify them as is . Is hard for the singer to change the images as audience may not get use to it .
Idol competition produce good singer , however famvous artist takes some more element rather then a good singer.
Why hide?...if you're that good
The Gorillaz are a band that is never seen, only heard. Their music videos are an assortment of cartoon characters and anime which play instruments as representations of the band. Even their live performance at the MTV Video Music Awards left fans disappointed as 3-D imaging of the same cartoons from their videos was shown while the band played behind a black screen. What’s the difference between artists who are never seen and artist like Milli Vanilli which are the ‘face’ of some else’s voice? It seems as though the visual representation is more important, but does hiding your looks really deepen the significance of the music?
Confidence vs. Delusion; Pride vs. Prejudice
My friend John, a singer with a decent voice, attended the “American Idol” Season 5 auditions in Seattle, Washington last year. A fan of the show myself I was interested to hear his interpretation of the ‘fairness’ of the audition process. Over 10,000 people auditioned and only a hundred or so ever made it to the television cameras to perform for the judges. John only made it through round 2, of 5, but still garnered much insider information to the process as a whole. The judge’s round is the point in the show where the best and worst singers come out. But why do some advance to this round when they are obviously under par? Is it purposefully so they can be publicly humiliated and borated on television? Are they really under the illusion that they are actually talented singers? The answer is that “American Idol” does purposefully advance those under the illusion they are talented in order to embarrass them. Now is this truthful to the purpose of the show: to find the next great American idol? Or is this simply used as entertainment to boost ratings, as it has been recorded that many people only watch the auditions rounds for the purpose of laughing at the bad singers? I suppose this falls in line with authenticity, as these delusional wannabes did in fact attend the audition with the hopes of making it to the judge’s round. But is it morally right to take advantage of their disillusions for entertainment purposes? Where do we draw the line between entertainment and cruelty? America has become a place to both pride those with star image and talent but humiliate everyone else, as “American Idol” is a true representation of the ways in which the country is, and forever will be divided by prejudice.
Score!!!!
Audiences take the music within a television show or movie for granted, and it is not until we view an intense scene without the original score or musical track that we realise how integral it is to making audiences really connect with what they see unfolding on their screens. Television shows, particularly dramas, realise the importance of developing mood within shows through music and are putting emphasis on it. Such composers as Michael Giachinno who scores such shows as Alias and Lost, or Mark Snow who is best known for his composing on The X-Files are proof that the shows they score for have a particular trademark and feel, releasing compilation score albums from each of the aforementioned television series'. These composers also are the first few within the industry to use a full orchestra to deliver the music on the small screen, as opposed to such shows as CSI which use synthesisers to create the music. The music within The X-Files, for example, has a certain signature. Snow uses violins and lighter instruments such as flutes and harps to bring out certain emotions within characters, helping the show feel more grounded and human (which was vital given the subject matter of the show). When it came to the action of the show he used heavier instruments such as ethnic flavoured percussion to create more of a tension and urgency between audiences and the action which took place. In a way, the music which underscores scenes helps to connect the audience with the action or the characters and bring them closer to what they see on screen so that there is a heightened sense of immediacy. Scores dictate what we as viewers should be feeling, and flavour our reactions to what are viewing.
SEX! (and hip hop)
Hip hop music seems to be more about the promotion of sex than anything else. The videos and lyrical content seem to revolve around sex, bumping and grinding. The men all seem to have cut bodies which they are required to expose on album covers and videos, and the women all have curvy booty-licious bodies. Take Nelly Furtado as an example. A few years back she had mediocre fame, and her music was somewhat deeply emotional with a gritty edge. Her videos portrayed this and had more of an art house ambiance to them. This past year has seen her categorised as hip hop oriented because she manages to fit the mould of shedding her clothes, dancing provocatively and singing about promiscuity and eating men. But is her newly found hip hop status a result of her fitting the hip hop mould, or is she fitting the mould because she wants hip hop status? Sex seems to be one of the prerequisites of maintaining hip hop credentials. It seems that if there is sex, there is hip hop.
Band members are people too!
It’s interesting to consider the individuation of band members in recent bands like the Backstreet Boys or N’Sync. While as a whole they were successful in terms of topping the charts, there always seems to be more focus on the best looking one, and more success assigned to them when apart from the band to which they owe their fame. Justin Timberlake (from N’Sync) and Nick Carter (from BSB) went onto have successful careers post-band, whereas the rest of the band members seemed to have disappeared off the radar. It goes to show how much emphasis consumers place on the looks of an artist in order to have the willingness to hear them out. The favouritism and singling of band members is always going to exist because of the desire that people have to relate to a member who most tickles their fancy. Take novelty pop groups for example. How many times were you asked, in 1998, who your favourite Spice Girl was? (Mine was Posh, coz she was hot). Or who your favourite Hanson was? (Mine was Taylor, coz she was hot). This ranking of band members is to be expected because of the audience’s natural inclination to assign identities to members of a band rather than see them as one entity.
MTV eye candy!
People argue that MTV is too concerned with image and the notion of celebrity than it is with the actual music. However we need to consider that MTV stands both for Music AND Television, and television has largely been concerned with image since its invention. One needs to expect that the artists which are on MTV are not only required to have some form of musical talent, but also possess the looks which make viewers want to see them while they sing (or lip sync). It seems fair that MTV requires the ‘musicians’ which are showcased to possess an appealing aesthetic which will make audiences want to tune-in in the first place. After all, I’m sure artists such as Hillary Duff or Jesse McCartney would not have sold half as many albums as they did had they looked like potatoes. Seems harsh to exclude promising talent because they do not have the entire package, but the music industry needs to consider more than what is ‘heard’ by the audience.
(Not so) music industry
Mainstream music appears to be more about the image and visual aesthetics than it is about the actual music these days. So much of the “music industry” is about selling a product and getting audiences hooked on the artist’s image/persona than it is about the actual music. The classic example of this is Britney Spears (in her prime, at least). Her image (not her voice) is clearly what allows her to be constantly churning out hits which top the charts. As much as she does have talent in terms of performing, dance style, doing publicity for her albums and showing off an enthusiastic personality and curvy body which is necessary for a celebrity to have, these talents do not boil down to the ‘music’. She is out there in order to sell albums, merchandise, tickets, magazines and have the income flowing in to those who created her. Music seems to be a small portion of the equation. Perhaps this is why she is disliked by a lot of people; because there are many talented musical artists out there who aren’t given the spotlight because they may lack the image and other non musical talents to break into what is called the ‘music industry’.
Idol is in demand
It was interesting in this weeks lecture to look at American Idol and how these type of programs work and how they have impact on people. Not just American Idol but any program that involves ordinary people from our everyday life. These programs somehow create satisfaction to others because programs such as The Biggest Loser, Extreme make-over, MTV made etc. help us to explore our inner self and our goals. Rather than watching a channel such as Entertainment channel which sometimes gives our hopes up because it’s all about celebrities. That is why programmers such as American Idol are in demand and successful in many ways. People feel they are part of it and believe that they could become a star one day like all the other competitors in the show. American Idol is basically about discovering the best young singer in the country, through a series of nationwide auditions, while the competition between the competitors is determined by public voting despite there are judges. The fact there is public voting makes people feel they are part of it and that is when people start to show their support by attending the shows or even purchase the soundtracks.
MTV - Then and Now
MTV first went to air in 1981 with the music video clip "Video Killed the Radio Star", by the Buggles, little did the producers, musicians and viewers know that this television programme would change the face of music television forever. When MTV first started out it was centred on broadcasting music videos, like a radio with a screen to viewers all over America and eventually the world. MTV has since incorporated different genres of shows to suit different types of teenagers and young adults. I guess its correct to say that they have moved with the progress of today and have had to keep up with other television stations and programmes to keep their popularity up. In New Zealand we have Juice TV which is constantly playing music videos and on other channels such as C4 there is a slot devoted to music videos also.
MTV has adapted to what viewers want to see and have learnt that they need to produce other programmes to keep viewers tuned into their show. Appealing to the youth market they have shows such as, “Engaged and Underage”, “Pimp my Ride”, “Yo Mamma”, “The Hills”, “The Real Orange County” and “Jackass”, a lot of these shows have one thing in common – they entertain viewers because they are funny, embarrassing to some people in the show and the reality shows such as “The Hills” give us a glimpse into the lives of the rich, young and famous. Humour, sex, and reality tv shows sell! I asked the opinion of a friend about what they thought MTV was like before and now, and they said “now MTV is crap, because they no longer play music and only play teeny bopper shows, I remember when it used to be radio with pictures and they used to play music all the time and now a lot of music television has adverts, talking, interviews and are constantly showing teen programmes about who has the best hair, makeup or bag – who wants to watch that?”.
MTV has adapted to what viewers want to see and have learnt that they need to produce other programmes to keep viewers tuned into their show. Appealing to the youth market they have shows such as, “Engaged and Underage”, “Pimp my Ride”, “Yo Mamma”, “The Hills”, “The Real Orange County” and “Jackass”, a lot of these shows have one thing in common – they entertain viewers because they are funny, embarrassing to some people in the show and the reality shows such as “The Hills” give us a glimpse into the lives of the rich, young and famous. Humour, sex, and reality tv shows sell! I asked the opinion of a friend about what they thought MTV was like before and now, and they said “now MTV is crap, because they no longer play music and only play teeny bopper shows, I remember when it used to be radio with pictures and they used to play music all the time and now a lot of music television has adverts, talking, interviews and are constantly showing teen programmes about who has the best hair, makeup or bag – who wants to watch that?”.
Punk Music and Teens
A lot of teenagers that I see walking down the street today have chosen to dress, and act like Punk musicians and listen to Punk music. I guess this is exactly the same thing as others choosing to dress like a certain celebrity or to follow the latest Hollywood trend. Being a follower of the Punk trend and dressing like musicians of the Punk genre is different than if you like Country and Western singers or Pop singers such as Britney Spears because Punk is much more definitive. The type of influence Punk has had on teens can be seen with the tattoos that they get, the clothes that they wear – which are usually black skinny leg jeans, black studded belts, a black t-shirt – and with the latest hair-do they have, such as a Mohawk, or whatever style is the most popular, such as the fringe to the side with straightened hair that I have been seeing so much of. Punk music is one of the only genres that you can imitate and have it be noticeable labelled. If you wear cowboy boots and a cowboy hat then people are not going to be like, “that person likes country and western music”, or if you are wearing a pair or short shorts and a midriff top, with bleach blonde hair no one will say, “that person is trying to be like Britney Spears, or Christina Aguilera”. No other genre is as defined as Punk is.
A lot of people like to blame the lyrics and style of Punk songs for the reason their child is depressed, or teenagers like to use these songs as ways to tune out everything else that is going on with them. Punk is just another genre of song that teenagers feel they can relate to, a lot of lyrics in songs talk to them and they feel like they’re not alone. Punk may be one of the most influential genres of music for teenagers whether this is a bad thing or not. Punk music has a bit more substance behind it and the song titles and lyrics stand out. Such as the Sex Pistols “Anarchy in the UK” song, which as the essay in our course reader by Robert Garnett “too low to be low”, states a quote by Greil Marcus in regards to “Anarchy in the UK”, says, that the song is “as powerful as anything I know”, not a lot of people can say this about any Pop song, and I think this is another reason why teens are drawn to Punk music rather than any other genre.
A lot of people like to blame the lyrics and style of Punk songs for the reason their child is depressed, or teenagers like to use these songs as ways to tune out everything else that is going on with them. Punk is just another genre of song that teenagers feel they can relate to, a lot of lyrics in songs talk to them and they feel like they’re not alone. Punk may be one of the most influential genres of music for teenagers whether this is a bad thing or not. Punk music has a bit more substance behind it and the song titles and lyrics stand out. Such as the Sex Pistols “Anarchy in the UK” song, which as the essay in our course reader by Robert Garnett “too low to be low”, states a quote by Greil Marcus in regards to “Anarchy in the UK”, says, that the song is “as powerful as anything I know”, not a lot of people can say this about any Pop song, and I think this is another reason why teens are drawn to Punk music rather than any other genre.
Morphology And Genretism - The Sinister Rise of Confusing Neologisms.
What interested me about the morphing topic was probably the links it has with Genre. It strikes me, based on both the lecture and some of the writings here that the idea of morphing and the idea of genre are fundamentally linked (although not entirely inclusive of each other). One thing that uni has been good for is completely deconstructing my view of genre, what defines a genre, and how things fit into a genre. So when the idea that, for example, Michael Jackson as a punk comes up, I immediately began ruminating on genre and how morphing could effect it (see earlier post by Ryan “Michael Jackson as a punk”). Probably more relevant is the morphing that occurs in mash-ups like DJ Dangermouse’s Grey album. The way in which Dangermouse takes what is essentially, the ultimate extension of one genre (The 1960’s British invasion, psychedelia, pop (whatever you want to call it, The White Album was genre defining(which is funny enough given that it was genre defying too but I’ll try and avoid getting into that.)) and an epitomising example of another(Jay-z’s Black album – I’ll admit I’m not entirely sure of Jay-z’s critical reception) and combines them with out (I feel anyway) losing the greatness of either artist or having the new mashed up tracks sound terrible, or contrived or even syncopated is a fascinating example to me of morphing, and of the idea of genre being undermined(again)
(Wow, there’s a lot of brackets in this.)
(and that last sentence is ridiculously long because of it. I'm terribly proud.)
(Wow, there’s a lot of brackets in this.)
(and that last sentence is ridiculously long because of it. I'm terribly proud.)
The Star: Film vs TV vs Reality/Pop Idol
I cant help but notice the differences (in terms of responses, presentation, and emotions) between film, Television and pop stars. The film star is presented as an unattainable, admirable, idealised sign which we emulate. They are separated from us considerably, only briefly letting us in to their star persona for the two or three hours that they appear on screen. In contrast, the Television star symbol is constructed as more approachable, less idealised, and more “real.” Talkshow hosts such as Oprah and Tyra are prime examples. However, there still remains distance between us and them. We are unlikely to run into them on the street or in the supermarket. The reality Television/pop star symbol however, has been manufactured to be approachable, authentic, and every day. We are taken to their communities, shown their families, and given continual footage of how they deal with the ‘pressure.’ Break-downs and outbursts are acceptable, as they have never been presented as ideal or perfect. This not only evidences the attempted realism of such shows, but proves to the audience that they too, can become an ‘idol.’
"Snitching"
In my essay, I was very interested in how there is a very obvious masculine dominance in hip hop music videos, but after the hip hop lecture, I watched a repeat of a 60 Minutes television programme in which "snitching" was becoming an increasing discourse among black Americans. This new interest in the branch of hip hop initiated a new personal interest of mine to research the ideologies of gangster rap, talked about in the lecture.
The television programme focused on the murder of Busta Rhymz's bodyguard, and how Busta Rhymz did not disclose any information that would have helped to identify the shooter.
This was because the notion of "snitching" in America is taken very seriously, almost like an 'eleventh commandment'.
"Snitching" is the colloquial term used to describe someone who "tells" on someone or discloses information, namely, to the police. It was explicitly expressed on the 60 Minutes episode that helping the police' with regards to such issues, was condemned among black Americans and especially among 'gangsters'.
One man who was interviewed in the show, blamed the publicising of "snitching" on its endorsement in hip hop and gangster rap music videos, causing the refraining of "snitching" on anyone, a commonality among black African American communities such as the Bronx, and more ghetto areas in America.
Busta Rhymz publicly admitted on the show that "snitching" is wrong, and he just wouldn't do it. In his own music videos, Busta raps about "snitching" in a negative way, having potentially fatal consequences for those who do snitch in order to protect themselves.
It seems that "snitching" is fast becoming a pandemic in American culture, causing youth to uphold the ideology in their lives with a solid conviction for it being 'morally wrong'.
The problem seems to be not the "snitching" as an isolated issue, but the fact that it is promoted in hip hop and rapping music videos. Famous artist's do have a responsibility to the public, whether they like it or not, to convey morally right messages. They are, in effect, role models to millions or kids around the world, and the promotion of "snitching" as being wrong, is completely morally wrong.
If there is a murder in a community, and witnesses refuse to comply with the police, then justice cannot be served. In effect the messages conveyed in these types of music videos, are breaking down the law and order systems put in place to protect people in society. The public outcry expressed on the 60 Minutes episode is essential in order for changes to take place. And, as hip hop is fast becoming one of the most popular music genres in contemporary music culture, it is important that the role models that the young adults in society who idolize and respect in hip hop, are aware of the influence they have over the youth.
I think that rap artist know the influence that they hold in society, but use it in a way that is of only beneficial to themselves for the purposes of endorsement opportunities, personal interests and beliefs, and to make a profit.
The 60 Minutes episode clearly expressed how Busta's case was an example of how an artist will express their own ideologies (such as the condemnation of snitching) in their music, without keeping in mind the consequences it may have on the larger, global scale.
What I find the most worrying about the "snitching" ideology, is that its fast rise to popular discourse may extend itself even further than the borders of American hip hop and gangster culture, to places like New Zealand. Already it has been seen that the ideology of "snitching" is beginning to transgress onto our shores, as seen in the news where no one fesses up to witnessing a crime, as seen on Police 10/7.
If the resistance to snitching on someone in order to help the police becomes a 'popular' discourse in New Zealand hip hop music videos, then we too are in danger of loosing our law and order structures.
The television programme focused on the murder of Busta Rhymz's bodyguard, and how Busta Rhymz did not disclose any information that would have helped to identify the shooter.
This was because the notion of "snitching" in America is taken very seriously, almost like an 'eleventh commandment'.
"Snitching" is the colloquial term used to describe someone who "tells" on someone or discloses information, namely, to the police. It was explicitly expressed on the 60 Minutes episode that helping the police' with regards to such issues, was condemned among black Americans and especially among 'gangsters'.
One man who was interviewed in the show, blamed the publicising of "snitching" on its endorsement in hip hop and gangster rap music videos, causing the refraining of "snitching" on anyone, a commonality among black African American communities such as the Bronx, and more ghetto areas in America.
Busta Rhymz publicly admitted on the show that "snitching" is wrong, and he just wouldn't do it. In his own music videos, Busta raps about "snitching" in a negative way, having potentially fatal consequences for those who do snitch in order to protect themselves.
It seems that "snitching" is fast becoming a pandemic in American culture, causing youth to uphold the ideology in their lives with a solid conviction for it being 'morally wrong'.
The problem seems to be not the "snitching" as an isolated issue, but the fact that it is promoted in hip hop and rapping music videos. Famous artist's do have a responsibility to the public, whether they like it or not, to convey morally right messages. They are, in effect, role models to millions or kids around the world, and the promotion of "snitching" as being wrong, is completely morally wrong.
If there is a murder in a community, and witnesses refuse to comply with the police, then justice cannot be served. In effect the messages conveyed in these types of music videos, are breaking down the law and order systems put in place to protect people in society. The public outcry expressed on the 60 Minutes episode is essential in order for changes to take place. And, as hip hop is fast becoming one of the most popular music genres in contemporary music culture, it is important that the role models that the young adults in society who idolize and respect in hip hop, are aware of the influence they have over the youth.
I think that rap artist know the influence that they hold in society, but use it in a way that is of only beneficial to themselves for the purposes of endorsement opportunities, personal interests and beliefs, and to make a profit.
The 60 Minutes episode clearly expressed how Busta's case was an example of how an artist will express their own ideologies (such as the condemnation of snitching) in their music, without keeping in mind the consequences it may have on the larger, global scale.
What I find the most worrying about the "snitching" ideology, is that its fast rise to popular discourse may extend itself even further than the borders of American hip hop and gangster culture, to places like New Zealand. Already it has been seen that the ideology of "snitching" is beginning to transgress onto our shores, as seen in the news where no one fesses up to witnessing a crime, as seen on Police 10/7.
If the resistance to snitching on someone in order to help the police becomes a 'popular' discourse in New Zealand hip hop music videos, then we too are in danger of loosing our law and order structures.
Not just a rise in manufactured bands
Manufacturing pop stars is not a new phenomenon with bands such as The Monkees and The Spice Girls having started out long before the rise of shows such as American Idol and X-Factor. But despite the rise of the manufactured pop star, the rise of Internet use for sharing music and the low cost of producing an album at home has lead to the success of musicians with no commercial backing. UK indie/rock band The Arctic Monkeys debut album went to No. 1 on the UK Charts with no marketing or advertising. Sandi Thom, the Scottish singer of "I wish I was a punk rocker" was virtually unknown before she began posting concerts from her flat onto her myspace page. She quickly had an audience in the tens of thousands and was signed to Sony.
Anna
Anna
Primitive Punk
This week’s lecture on Punk introduced notions of the cut-and-paste aesthetic, as well as the torn t-shirt fashion. This blog however, will focus on the notions of primitivism that are associated with punk. ‘Primitivism’ itself seems to be a hegemonic term used by those of the present that have a sense of nostalgia about a pre-technological (or pre-civilisation) period. In doing so, people make the assumption that other unique cultures fit into degrees of progress into civilisation. For example a culture in the Papua New Guinea highlands, with nasal piercing, body paint and penis shoots are seen as a reflection of a period of pre-civilisation that must have been experienced by Caucasian tribesmen in the past. However, the pinnacle of technological civilisation is portrayed as being America or Europe. This analysis of the ‘primitive’ ideology may seem ‘anthropological’ in nature, but by understanding such ideologies, we may understand how modern people including punks, give themselves licence, to borrow from various cultures around the world and make it their own under the all embracing ‘Punk’ lifestyle. This is most clearly seen in tattoo websites or magazines; texts that usually categorise tattoo by culture. One will see headings such as ‘Japanese tattoo’ and ‘Polynesian tattoo’, as well as ‘Primitive tattoo’. Such tattoos are neither ancient, nor primitive but are created by mainstream European ‘punks’ who adopt and adapt other cultural tattoo designs as their own signs, creating their own unique meanings. Such people are ‘punks’ because they reject their own civilisation and culture in favour of nostalgia for a primitive past that is expressed through the cultures of other races. Such an ideology is part of the ‘Punk’ ideal and music. In the Sex Pistol’s ‘God Save the Queen’ they are rejecting cultural hegemony and mainstream societal pressures. When punks do this, their only other option is a primitive reality in which cultural norms are not present.
Win the audience and you will win a recording contract.
Simon, we who are about to sing, salute you!
During yesterday’s lecture, Nabeel brought up the notion of audience participation. That in shows like American Idol, or Dancing with the Stars, the audience is not simply passive. But their reactions are implemented into the show. For example, while judges give advice the audience can be heard cheering or booing concerning those comments. Camera crews will also regularly go to the hometowns of contestants, so that audience interaction with other localities can be established. Furthermore audiences are no longer just a mass of people, who are usually unidentifiable as they are captured with a crane shot. Now, there are even shots during the show to identify family members of certain contestants, perhaps to establish the character of a contestant as well as a display of emotion from family members. However with all the technological advances of the modern day, one must come to the understanding that audience participation is not a new thing. There are examples of audience participation in every culture, however; perhaps an example from a prominent culture would have to be that of Ancient Rome. During the time of Ancient Rome the type of entertainment that prevailed was known as the Gladiator matches. An example of which is portrayed in the film ‘Gladiator’. These were action spectacles that were a fight to the death, held in the famed Coliseum. During such matches if one opponent overcame the other, before the final blow was struck he would wait for the emperor’s decision. The emperor in turn, would count on audience participation to sway his own judgement. The audience in the arena could have the contestant saved or killed, the sign of which was a hand motion with the thumb being up or down. Perhaps it is a good thing that in modern times contestants on American Idol won’t be executed if they lose. However, the crowd, or rather the audience holds sway even within modern times. Audience participation was as influential in Ancient Rome as it is today. The thrill and excitement that was present at gladiatorial matches still holds sway over masses voting, texting and watching American Idol on television. Centuries have passed since the time of Gladiators yet the line from Ridley Scott’s ‘Gladiator’ rings true, “Win the crowd and you will win your freedom.”
Or rather, “Win the audience and you will win a recording contract.”
During yesterday’s lecture, Nabeel brought up the notion of audience participation. That in shows like American Idol, or Dancing with the Stars, the audience is not simply passive. But their reactions are implemented into the show. For example, while judges give advice the audience can be heard cheering or booing concerning those comments. Camera crews will also regularly go to the hometowns of contestants, so that audience interaction with other localities can be established. Furthermore audiences are no longer just a mass of people, who are usually unidentifiable as they are captured with a crane shot. Now, there are even shots during the show to identify family members of certain contestants, perhaps to establish the character of a contestant as well as a display of emotion from family members. However with all the technological advances of the modern day, one must come to the understanding that audience participation is not a new thing. There are examples of audience participation in every culture, however; perhaps an example from a prominent culture would have to be that of Ancient Rome. During the time of Ancient Rome the type of entertainment that prevailed was known as the Gladiator matches. An example of which is portrayed in the film ‘Gladiator’. These were action spectacles that were a fight to the death, held in the famed Coliseum. During such matches if one opponent overcame the other, before the final blow was struck he would wait for the emperor’s decision. The emperor in turn, would count on audience participation to sway his own judgement. The audience in the arena could have the contestant saved or killed, the sign of which was a hand motion with the thumb being up or down. Perhaps it is a good thing that in modern times contestants on American Idol won’t be executed if they lose. However, the crowd, or rather the audience holds sway even within modern times. Audience participation was as influential in Ancient Rome as it is today. The thrill and excitement that was present at gladiatorial matches still holds sway over masses voting, texting and watching American Idol on television. Centuries have passed since the time of Gladiators yet the line from Ridley Scott’s ‘Gladiator’ rings true, “Win the crowd and you will win your freedom.”
Or rather, “Win the audience and you will win a recording contract.”
Destroying potential stars rather than creating them.
New Zealand version of the Idol series originated as the hit British TV series Pop Idol. New Zealand first saw the Idol format when TV2 aired American Idol 2, which gained impressive ratings. After Australian Idol also received good ratings in New Zealand, TV2 decided to order the first season of NZ Idol. However this has proven to be a major fallout and loss, this has been proven by all the 3 seasons since NZ idol has been aired. Season 3 I think was the last straw that Idol needed to be taken off air. First of all Matt Saunoa who won this years NZ Idol, only scraped through and begged his way in to basically becoming the Idol. This clearly conveying the standard of the show. With this in mind I could not help but think how many of those that auditioned that could have potentially made it through and have had a shot at becoming the next Idol. Also through season three and before it even announced its top ten, South Pacific Pictures announced that Sony BMG was to discontinue its association with NZ Idol and so therefore was announced that the top 10 was not going to release a top 10 track, like previous seasons. I don’t usually watch NZ Idol at all but season three was exceptional as one of my friends decided to trial out and did a pretty good job and was runner up. Doing so she hoped to be recognized, however it did more than help her be recognized, it also in a way destroyed her image as being an individual, ordinary person with talent and passion to sing and perform. Because she was in Idol, instead of being judged and seen as an up and coming new talent, she was seen only as ‘the girl who was part of a failing TV program’. What she has found now is that being on Idol only made things a bit harder for her in terms of her being successful in the music industry, simply because she was part of NZ Idol.
Critics have suggested that contestants in all seasons have not been as musically strong as Idol performers from American Idol or Australian Idol, and have referred to the performances as 'karaoke'. I know for a fact that NZ idol pales in comparison to American Idol not only in regards to the production and structure of the program but also in the talent as some have mentioned earlier. However this should not matter as this is the goal of the program to create ‘stars’ out of ordinary people. But instead of doing its job, I believe it is actually destroying potential stars.
Meme and mainstream music
In yesterdays lecture the term meme was introduced in the context of remix culture, where an existing art form such as music is modified and reused in a new way. As Nabeel mentioned, the term was coined by the biologist Richard Dawkins in 1976 and refers to an entity which can evolve and change via a process of natural selection (Darwin). In using this term in the context of music, it took me back to the recent lecture on hip-hop and the popular criticism of its commercialization. Here is an art form which many claim has lost its purity, its originality and edge. This has occurred over recent years as it has expanded internationally into various cultures and sub-forms. While this has to an extent been encouraged by the artists and stereotypes of hip-hop culture, it has also been a natural progression, a meme of culture. As this is the case, why is it seen in a negative light? Why is progression seen as being disadvantageous when we usually rejoice in it? Why should the masses be kept from experiencing and enjoying something of value, purely to gratify the selfish reasoning of an elite few. Has it been corrupted in this way? Has it taken a turn for the worse and if that was the case, who has the authority to judge it? In the 21st century the majority of individuals now see the commercial art of Andy Warhol as being some of the most influential and important art of the 20th century. Why should this not also be the case of popular hip-hop being produced today?
Music in Advertising
One thing that I've noticed in advertising recently, is the shift from pre-assembled jingles to licenced tracks from established artists. Often these songs come from previously less-well-known artists, and the advertising serves as a dual platform, for both the product being marketed, and the product that is the artists music.
The most recent example, Regina Spektor, is a clear model for this. Whilst Spektor has been playing large shows for over 3 years now in the United States, I and many of my friends had never heard of her, and the product was essentially a niche market item. Since then her music has been picked up for advertising products for a wide range of companies, including Microsoft, Vodafone, XtraYahoo!, Sky UK and has also been syndicated through non-diagetic soundtrack in long running TV shows which broadcast internationally, such as Criminal Minds, Greys Anatomy and Weeds. This kind of syndication in a way acts as advertising the artist, and sometimes more so than the actual product on offer.
When Telecom NZ launched the X Meets Y campaign (see video below) they received hundreds of calls and emails asking them who the artists was. Perhaps this kind of advertising is beneficial to both the artists and the marketer?
I would counter this though, as one of my favorite bands, is one that everyone will know the music of but dont know the name. Madness have a long history of supplying their hit tracks to advertising and other televisied content. The song "It Must be Love" (from the Huggies commerical fame), "Our House" (used on a variety of building ads) and "One Step Beyond" (noted for it's opening lyrics - "Hey you! Dont watch that! Watch this!"), these songs whilst probably all well known by New Zealanders are merely "the song from that ad" rather than being directly attributed to the performing artist. This is possibly a flaw then?
The most recent example, Regina Spektor, is a clear model for this. Whilst Spektor has been playing large shows for over 3 years now in the United States, I and many of my friends had never heard of her, and the product was essentially a niche market item. Since then her music has been picked up for advertising products for a wide range of companies, including Microsoft, Vodafone, XtraYahoo!, Sky UK and has also been syndicated through non-diagetic soundtrack in long running TV shows which broadcast internationally, such as Criminal Minds, Greys Anatomy and Weeds. This kind of syndication in a way acts as advertising the artist, and sometimes more so than the actual product on offer.
When Telecom NZ launched the X Meets Y campaign (see video below) they received hundreds of calls and emails asking them who the artists was. Perhaps this kind of advertising is beneficial to both the artists and the marketer?
I would counter this though, as one of my favorite bands, is one that everyone will know the music of but dont know the name. Madness have a long history of supplying their hit tracks to advertising and other televisied content. The song "It Must be Love" (from the Huggies commerical fame), "Our House" (used on a variety of building ads) and "One Step Beyond" (noted for it's opening lyrics - "Hey you! Dont watch that! Watch this!"), these songs whilst probably all well known by New Zealanders are merely "the song from that ad" rather than being directly attributed to the performing artist. This is possibly a flaw then?
punk rock features
Punk rock included the idea that the genre challenged the ‘authenticity’ of previous rock bands. The previous rock bands had become distanced from their fans and audiences, and seemed surreal from the audience’s point of view. For example the rock bands played on large stages in huge stadiums and arenas, which allowed them to become less personable towards their fans, and were not so much of a reality but rather an unattainable object. With the introduction of punk rock, this saw an opening to become more personable and attainable, which could be achieved through their performances. Punk rock bands tended to perform on smaller stages in small clubs and bars, which allowed the fans and audience to also be involved in the bands performances. The audiences were able to interact more with the performers and were a more realistic form of performer, unlike the previous large rock bands had been. Punk “…distinguished itself in its sheer intimacy” (Rombes, p6) and therefore was not like a lot of previous bands that produced a distance between themselves and the consumers, but instead allowed themselves to be seen as performing closely with their audiences. The idea of authenticity also stems from the idea that punk rock is a very minimalist culture. This can be seen through their live performances, clothes and attitude. The presentation on punk rock did not need the fancy arena or large stages to perform in, instead choosing the smaller more minimalist bars and clubs to play their music in. Their clothing also signified this minimalist idea, as their clothes were often old t shirts, pants and jackets that were torn, or altered to fit their image that they wished to portray. They often used safety pins through their piercings instead of earrings or common studs, also showing this modest attitude towards their clothing and appearance. Both of these ideas of minimalism and authenticity tie in together in the punk rock genre to demonstrate the meanings and ideas that lay behind the emergence of the genre.
1)Rombes.N, New Punk Cinema. Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2005
1)Rombes.N, New Punk Cinema. Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2005
Self-Production
The idea that the growth of the Internet and related technologies has provided a new platform for the public to "self-produce", raises some questions for me. First of all, i find it makes sense that with the accessibility and versatility of the Internet, it holds as many self-productions as it does. In this society we seem to have some sort of bond with the "family home video" and the Internet and vehicles such as You-Tube take that relationship further than the family living room. Secondly we also seem to have an idea that due to the huge turn over of stars and celebrities we will all get our 15 minuets of fame at some stage of our life. I guess the Internet and self-production allows for this too. So, with our passion for the home video, combined with our desire to make the most of our 'promised' 15minuets of fame, alongside our human nature to mimic and copy people we look up to (celebrities), the complexity of self-produce media texts is to be expected. The net just provides the media savvy-public with a new realm for self-expression.
But what i wonder about the down loading and sharing, and re-mixing of music through the net is how much of an impact this really has on music labels? To what extent can the free trade of music on the net have a negative impact on these record labels? I think that quality V's Quantity is one issue. The quality of allot of the self-produced media on the net is 'rubbish'/ leaves alto to be desired, but then on the other hand there is some truly interesting, creative perspectives and comments circuiting through the net commenting on a wide range of social issues, and things gems of pure entertainment......these i find hold a far more valuable 'quality' stamp than what established media producing companies are distributing. (But I'm meant to be talking about the impact of down loading music is having on the music industry) with the current ever increasing use of the Internet for down loading music, does it really have the potential to send these corporations into losing money? I have no idea of the true extent of the power of the Internet, but if the direction of music down loading is leading music corporations to a down fall, how long will this take, and what is the future of popular music and the stars and celebrities that strive for fame and money? Will there soon be no more Britneys, Justins, Jacksons, Eminems?????? Does the public really have the power to bring down these music corporations, or are we just a little money leek that will continue to drip as we can't be bothered to go down to the CD store and pay $30 pinga for "their new album"????? Sorry for so many questions and very little answers :(
But what i wonder about the down loading and sharing, and re-mixing of music through the net is how much of an impact this really has on music labels? To what extent can the free trade of music on the net have a negative impact on these record labels? I think that quality V's Quantity is one issue. The quality of allot of the self-produced media on the net is 'rubbish'/ leaves alto to be desired, but then on the other hand there is some truly interesting, creative perspectives and comments circuiting through the net commenting on a wide range of social issues, and things gems of pure entertainment......these i find hold a far more valuable 'quality' stamp than what established media producing companies are distributing. (But I'm meant to be talking about the impact of down loading music is having on the music industry) with the current ever increasing use of the Internet for down loading music, does it really have the potential to send these corporations into losing money? I have no idea of the true extent of the power of the Internet, but if the direction of music down loading is leading music corporations to a down fall, how long will this take, and what is the future of popular music and the stars and celebrities that strive for fame and money? Will there soon be no more Britneys, Justins, Jacksons, Eminems?????? Does the public really have the power to bring down these music corporations, or are we just a little money leek that will continue to drip as we can't be bothered to go down to the CD store and pay $30 pinga for "their new album"????? Sorry for so many questions and very little answers :(
Self-Production
The idea that the growth of the Internet and related technologies has provided a new platform for the public to "self-produce", raises some questions for me. First of all, i find it makes sense that with the accessibility and versatility of the Internet, it holds as many self-productions as it does. In this society we seem to have some sort of bond with the "family home video" and the Internet and vehicles such as You-Tube take that relationship further than the family living room. Secondly we also seem to have an idea that due to the huge turn over of stars and celebrities we will all get our 15 minuets of fame at some stage of our life. I guess the Internet and self-production allows for this too. So, with our passion for the home video, combined with our desire to make the most of our 'promised' 15minuets of fame, alongside our human nature to mimic and copy people we look up to (celebrities), the complexity of self-produce media texts is to be expected. The net just provides the media savvy-public with a new realm for self-expression.
But what i wonder about the down loading and sharing, and re-mixing of music through the net is how much of an impact this really has on music labels? To what extent can the free trade of music on the net have a negative impact on these record labels? I think that quality V's Quantity is one issue. The quality of allot of the self-produced media on the net is 'rubbish'/ leaves alto to be desired, but then on the other hand there is some truly interesting, creative perspectives and comments circuiting through the net commenting on a wide range of social issues, and things gems of pure entertainment......these i find hold a far more valuable 'quality' stamp than what established media producing companies are distributing. (But I'm meant to be talking about the impact of down loading music is having on the music industry) with the current ever increasing use of the Internet for down loading music, does it really have the potential to send these corporations into losing money? I have no idea of the true extent of the power of the Internet, but if the direction of music down loading is leading music corporations to a down fall, how long will this take, and what is the future of popular music and the stars and celebrities that strive for fame and money? Will there soon be no more Britneys, Justins, Jacksons, Eminems?????? Does the public really have the power to bring down these music corporations, or are we just a little money leek that will continue to drip as we can't be bothered to go down to the CD store and pay $30 pinga for "their new album"????? Sorry for so many questions and very little answers :(
But what i wonder about the down loading and sharing, and re-mixing of music through the net is how much of an impact this really has on music labels? To what extent can the free trade of music on the net have a negative impact on these record labels? I think that quality V's Quantity is one issue. The quality of allot of the self-produced media on the net is 'rubbish'/ leaves alto to be desired, but then on the other hand there is some truly interesting, creative perspectives and comments circuiting through the net commenting on a wide range of social issues, and things gems of pure entertainment......these i find hold a far more valuable 'quality' stamp than what established media producing companies are distributing. (But I'm meant to be talking about the impact of down loading music is having on the music industry) with the current ever increasing use of the Internet for down loading music, does it really have the potential to send these corporations into losing money? I have no idea of the true extent of the power of the Internet, but if the direction of music down loading is leading music corporations to a down fall, how long will this take, and what is the future of popular music and the stars and celebrities that strive for fame and money? Will there soon be no more Britneys, Justins, Jacksons, Eminems?????? Does the public really have the power to bring down these music corporations, or are we just a little money leek that will continue to drip as we can't be bothered to go down to the CD store and pay $30 pinga for "their new album"????? Sorry for so many questions and very little answers :(
Television
The manufactured pop star is not new to the music industry. Many stars such as Britney Spears, Christina Aguleria, Justin Timberlake, etc. have been groomed and styled to fit a certain mould that record companies use to make money. The Pop idol TV shows allow for a star or stars to be created along the same mould, but add an important touch of intimacy between the audience and the star. The viewers watch the idol hopefuls go through heroing efforts being ridiculed and criticised extremely and over the weeks feel as if they develop a close rapport with the tryouts. People whom sign up for this chance to win a record contract and fame on a deeper level are pawns in a multi-million dollar industry. When in New Zealand there was a show to create the girl band TRUE BLISS, the contract they signed gave them great exposure on television but all royalties, appearances, - general earnings by the group went to the shows producers leaving the musicians with little or nothing. The New Zealand idol stars have much the same deal with the show having nearly complete control over what they do. These shows maybe showcasing talent, but it comes at a price for the fame hopefuls.
Television
The manufactured pop star is not new to the music industry. Many stars such as Britney Spears, Christina Aguleria, Justin Timberlake, etc. have been groomed and styled to fit a certain mould that record companies use to make money. The Pop idol TV shows allow for a star or stars to be created along the same mould, but add an important touch of intimacy between the audience and the star. The viewers watch the idol hopefuls go through heroing efforts being ridiculed and criticised extremely and over the weeks feel as if they develop a close rapport with the tryouts. People whom sign up for this chance to win a record contract and fame on a deeper level are pawns in a multi-million dollar industry. When in New Zealand there was a show to create the girl band TRUE BLISS, the contract they signed gave them great exposure on television but all royalties, appearances, - general earnings by the group went to the shows producers leaving the musicians with little or nothing. The New Zealand idol stars have much the same deal with the show having nearly complete control over what they do. These shows maybe showcasing talent, but it comes at a price for the fame hopefuls.
Morphing through Sampling
Sampling in music, typically done with a computer programme “sampler”, can be considered as one type of morphing. Kanye West, a notable American six-time Grammy Award-winning record producer/rapper often uses this technique in his hip-hop music and “Slow Jamz” in his debut album The College Dropout is a typical example. The term slow jam is often regarded as R&B influenced ballads music with heavily emotional and romantic lyrical content. Along with its moody melody, “slow jamz” starts with the chorus sung by Jamie Foxx mentioning well-known soul music artists such as Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross and Anita Baker and the high-pitched hook of “Are you gonna be, are you gonna be, are you gonna be, well well well well" is taken from Luther Vandross’ version of “ A House is Not a Home.” There is correlation between the lyric and the sound, which enhances the feeling of ‘slow jam’, and this appeals more to the listeners by having a pop-like sound. The high-pitched sampling done by speeding up the original song adds a dynamic feeling that can well mix with hip-hip, especially with the incredible fast-paced rap done by Twista (in Verse 2 and 3), which adds a kind of authenticity to the song through the blending of music genres. Kanye’s first hit single “Through the Wire” also features a high-pitched sample from Chaka Khan’s “Through the Fire” for its instrumentation and chorus. It seems that morphing through sampling and arrangement enables to broaden the musical genre with hybridisation that can bring to mind the nostalgia of 80s to the public.
Here are the cilps of 2 songs;
Through the Wire
Slow Jamz
I don't like this MV though :p
Here are the cilps of 2 songs;
Through the Wire
Slow Jamz
I don't like this MV though :p
Thoughts about pop idol
After yesterday’s lecture, a thought about pop idol shows suddenly jumps out of my brain. That is about the balance between judge’s power and audiences’ votes. The success of pop idol shows such as American Idol and New Zealand Idol is that it provides a big opportunity to the ordinary people to achieve their own “American dream”. Apart from the competitor’s performance, the judge’s comment is another highlight of the show. All the competitors are able to go to the next round only if they receive judge’s approval. Therefore, the judge’s power plays an important role in the show. On the one hand, if the judge’s power is way too stronger than the audience’s votes, the show would gain fewer and fewer interactivity from the public. Since the judge is the big boss of the show, then the “American Idol” is not “American Idol” any more. Maybe we can call it “Judge’s Idol”. On the other hand, if the judge’s power is too weak to impact the audience’s votes, then the whole selection system will out of control. As a consequence, “American Idol” will become a show which selects not the most talented singer of the country but the singer who got the most votes. Under this situation, maybe a daughter of a millionaire will be the winner in the end. Because she can buy as many votes as she needs. Obviously, the public is not willing to see this happen. Therefore, to keep the judge’s power and audiences’ votes on the same level is a very important job in the show.
Jxu063
Jxu063
I found it pretty interesting on Wednesday in the pop idol part of the lecture when Nabeel mentioned the against-the-grain-elements and contestants of the show, and how they are chosen to be left in. I admit that in my quiet moments I have also watched the occasional episode of the idol franchise, be it the NZ version or the American show, and it always seem to be these contestants that I enjoy watching the most.
The inclusion of these contestants appears to be a fundamentally political decision regarding the politics of representation. It has been noted that popular culture and counter culture assume a double-helix relationship - that is when one gains popularity the other must disappear into the underground before the medium is re-invented. While this requires a reference to the changing favour of certain genres according to popular opinion, it is clear that this simple double helix relationship is an effective characterisation of the movements between popular approval of a movement.
In this way, the idol shows can be shown to exhibit this relationship through the inclusion of these contestants. These contestants and their choices of musical genre and their own representation in terms of character are required in the show as a means of clarification. What is popular? These contestants test the boundaries of such a concept - it is obvious that a Death Metal singer, or an avantgarde voice musician (in the style of John Erik Kaada) could never be a pop idol. However to make these judgment calls we must discredit these elements that represent a counter-culture. Pop culture will slowly absorb elements from these subcultures through exposure to them and thus the movement will evolve to include parts of them.
Pop culture is a fluid concept which defies definition, and exists only by the approval of popular opinion. The creators of the idol shows have realised that popular culture is subject to change and thus use these outlying representations to promote a constant sense of redefinition. The will never win the show, but they are required to keep the show vital and current - therefore Idol judges will always encourage the existence of a certain degree of counterculture exposure to ensure ratings.
The inclusion of these contestants appears to be a fundamentally political decision regarding the politics of representation. It has been noted that popular culture and counter culture assume a double-helix relationship - that is when one gains popularity the other must disappear into the underground before the medium is re-invented. While this requires a reference to the changing favour of certain genres according to popular opinion, it is clear that this simple double helix relationship is an effective characterisation of the movements between popular approval of a movement.
In this way, the idol shows can be shown to exhibit this relationship through the inclusion of these contestants. These contestants and their choices of musical genre and their own representation in terms of character are required in the show as a means of clarification. What is popular? These contestants test the boundaries of such a concept - it is obvious that a Death Metal singer, or an avantgarde voice musician (in the style of John Erik Kaada) could never be a pop idol. However to make these judgment calls we must discredit these elements that represent a counter-culture. Pop culture will slowly absorb elements from these subcultures through exposure to them and thus the movement will evolve to include parts of them.
Pop culture is a fluid concept which defies definition, and exists only by the approval of popular opinion. The creators of the idol shows have realised that popular culture is subject to change and thus use these outlying representations to promote a constant sense of redefinition. The will never win the show, but they are required to keep the show vital and current - therefore Idol judges will always encourage the existence of a certain degree of counterculture exposure to ensure ratings.
Still music image
All my posts so far have been about music and video combinations and I thought it'd be good to look at something a little different this time around; Webcomics.
I like to look at webcomics as a kind of blog (well, many of them anyhow). There's a lot of social commentary and popular culture used as subject
material for the co
mic strips and there are many that use music as a prominent theme. Two webcomics that spring to mind that often use musical subjects are Diesel Sweeties and Questionable Content.
Both of these comics discuss the culture and ideologies surrounding music (primarily 'indie' music, especially in in Questionable Content) in a way that could even be considered analytical, although the purpose each time is (at least superficially) to make a joke. It it clear that the writers of these comics have a good understanding of the 'scene' that they're lampooning as the humour stems from intelligent observations that both writer and reader would have to have some level of background knowledge to understand and appreciate.
From these comics as a whole, I've selected two specific strips that I think illustrate the level of thought
that is involved in these works. One 
from Diesel Sweeties and one from Questionable Content. Both of these examples are commenting on the state of musical reception; 'coolness' if you will. They go beyond mere observation by proposing theories to maximise the potential popularity of the music by implementing certain situational elements that in some ways are actually quite philosophical. One is purely speculative while the other is impossible (unless someone has managed to travel back in time and kill Elvis?), yet both prompt interesting thoughts about the nature of musical popularity and how seemingly unrelated it sometimes is to the quality of the music itself.
I think that the use of comics and humour to discuss this is both appropriate and ironic, being that the discussion is about pop-culture and webcomics are exactly that. I don't think that simply writing an article would have the same impact that the comics are providing as the visuals supply additional points of interest that will help snatch the readers interest.
I like to look at webcomics as a kind of blog (well, many of them anyhow). There's a lot of social commentary and popular culture used as subject
material for the co
mic strips and there are many that use music as a prominent theme. Two webcomics that spring to mind that often use musical subjects are Diesel Sweeties and Questionable Content.Both of these comics discuss the culture and ideologies surrounding music (primarily 'indie' music, especially in in Questionable Content) in a way that could even be considered analytical, although the purpose each time is (at least superficially) to make a joke. It it clear that the writers of these comics have a good understanding of the 'scene' that they're lampooning as the humour stems from intelligent observations that both writer and reader would have to have some level of background knowledge to understand and appreciate.
From these comics as a whole, I've selected two specific strips that I think illustrate the level of thought
that is involved in these works. One 
from Diesel Sweeties and one from Questionable Content. Both of these examples are commenting on the state of musical reception; 'coolness' if you will. They go beyond mere observation by proposing theories to maximise the potential popularity of the music by implementing certain situational elements that in some ways are actually quite philosophical. One is purely speculative while the other is impossible (unless someone has managed to travel back in time and kill Elvis?), yet both prompt interesting thoughts about the nature of musical popularity and how seemingly unrelated it sometimes is to the quality of the music itself.I think that the use of comics and humour to discuss this is both appropriate and ironic, being that the discussion is about pop-culture and webcomics are exactly that. I don't think that simply writing an article would have the same impact that the comics are providing as the visuals supply additional points of interest that will help snatch the readers interest.
What keeps us watching Pop Idol?
When listening to the lecture on Thursday I found out that there was a wide range of Pop Idol shows all over the world. I realise that if little NZ has their own NZ Idol show then of course other countries would to, but I had no idea that Norway and India were amongst these countries. I guess it goes to show that I am not a Pop Idol fan, but I do understand why some people are a fan of the show and why it has become so popular around the world.
‘American Idol’ and ‘NZ Idol’ are the only Pop Idol shows that I have seen and as a viewer I can see why people get hooked. Every week the show brings you entertainment, Simon Cowell in all his glory as the judge most choose to despise and disagree with, it shows you people making an embarrassment out of themselves which viewers love to see and laugh along to. The show allows the audience to basically choose who their next ‘Idol’ will be, so they are able to participate which keeps them coming back and sitting in front of the couch each week to see what will happen and if the person they want to win the most will go through to the next round.
“Reality TV Magazine.com” said that, “the reason that American Idol has reached heights no other television show has achieved is because of a perfect combination of hosting, judging, casting, marketing, and viewer participation.” I agree with this full heartedly as American Idol was not the first show that involved viewers participation in choosing who they would like to win, but it has however become the most popular reality music show because of factors such as, judges, audience participation and casting.
‘American Idol’ and ‘NZ Idol’ are the only Pop Idol shows that I have seen and as a viewer I can see why people get hooked. Every week the show brings you entertainment, Simon Cowell in all his glory as the judge most choose to despise and disagree with, it shows you people making an embarrassment out of themselves which viewers love to see and laugh along to. The show allows the audience to basically choose who their next ‘Idol’ will be, so they are able to participate which keeps them coming back and sitting in front of the couch each week to see what will happen and if the person they want to win the most will go through to the next round.
“Reality TV Magazine.com” said that, “the reason that American Idol has reached heights no other television show has achieved is because of a perfect combination of hosting, judging, casting, marketing, and viewer participation.” I agree with this full heartedly as American Idol was not the first show that involved viewers participation in choosing who they would like to win, but it has however become the most popular reality music show because of factors such as, judges, audience participation and casting.
American Idol: To rig or not to rig
In relation to pop idol shows, I find it very interesting how people don’t really know if their voting counts or that the results each week are predetermined. In a world of hyper-reality, there is no guarantee that what we see is what we get. Most television shows are scripted in some way or another to keep people interested. An example would be the one Nabeel mentioned in the lecture, which is the very structure of the show only allows for certain vocal talents to become apparent. A show that has so much money invested in ratings and advertising, it would be crazy for there not to be some kind of intervention or fabrication when it comes to avoiding risk. The most important part is getting the right mix of contestants and the optimum amount of interest in the show. The risk of losing album sales, the risk of losing ratings will influence the outcomes of the show. Even if the voting does count for something, it counts more as a measure of how well their plan to make the most money is working, rather than measuring the true potential of the contestants as “American idols”. Furthermore, now that there is evidence of successful contestants from past seasons (e.g. Kelly Clarkson & others) these formulas can be used to determine the future success of particular contestants styles and the personas that generate the most money.
The 'Authenticity' Issue
To be honest I'm not a huge Idol fan, though I do find the issue of authenticity very interesting...
Idol is effectively manufacturing a star, as others have already mentioned, however some people seem to equate this with the fact that the winner does not have enough talent to make it on their own - they can only become famous through the Idol phenomenon.
However, the authenticity of their performances and portrayal of their talent can be seen to be greater than that of bands or singers that make it on their own to some extent. Certainly, when going to see an Idol performer at a concert, you can be certain that you will see a singer who is fantastic live, as this is how they began their 'career'.
Sadly, while the issue of 'liveness' is terribly important in band culture, sometimes when we see our favourite bands perform we can be let down. You often hear mention of the fact that a certain singer is terrible live! These bands, although making it on their own, begin by performing in a recording studio with fantastic acoustics and multiple tries to get it right.
I personally find the idea of manufacturing a star quite strange. If they evidently have that much talent, they should be able to make it on their own! The authenticity of their voices is clearly displayed throughout the stages of the competition. No Ashlee Simpson lip-synching antics to be seen...
Idol is effectively manufacturing a star, as others have already mentioned, however some people seem to equate this with the fact that the winner does not have enough talent to make it on their own - they can only become famous through the Idol phenomenon.
However, the authenticity of their performances and portrayal of their talent can be seen to be greater than that of bands or singers that make it on their own to some extent. Certainly, when going to see an Idol performer at a concert, you can be certain that you will see a singer who is fantastic live, as this is how they began their 'career'.
Sadly, while the issue of 'liveness' is terribly important in band culture, sometimes when we see our favourite bands perform we can be let down. You often hear mention of the fact that a certain singer is terrible live! These bands, although making it on their own, begin by performing in a recording studio with fantastic acoustics and multiple tries to get it right.
I personally find the idea of manufacturing a star quite strange. If they evidently have that much talent, they should be able to make it on their own! The authenticity of their voices is clearly displayed throughout the stages of the competition. No Ashlee Simpson lip-synching antics to be seen...
Morph vs Mutate
If we look at a broad definition of morphing, not solely as a filmic technique, it seems to be something like: the active transformation of something into something else. Peoples posts have shown that the idea of morphing need not be a transition technique within a film. Dj danjermouse’s 'grey album' and that preview for the shining as a feel good film both work as examples of morphing. The term seems to have use in discussing the product of creative works. The creative element seems to come in the transition from one thing (sound,image,other) but always carries with it the idea of an agent, or subject, who chooses the two things to be transformed and how the transformation will occur. ie, Dj dangermouse chooses the beatles and Jay Z as his sources then mixes it into the Grey Album.
A term i picked up from the English department to discuss a similar, but not identical, process is: The Mutant. I think in contrast to morphing mutation seems to imply that trhe process has been taken away from any individual agant and undergoes rapid transformation under the radiation of culture. The mutant is a transformed/transitioned text but it is a way of emptying the individual out and looking at culture as a whole. The Beatle’s music and the iconoclasms surrounding them (long hair?, frantic girls, peace, drugs etc etc) have definately mutated through culture in that they are constantly recycled in new and mutated forms. dj danjermouse is only a single example but outkasts video for 'Hey Ya' is a mutation of the beatles performance on the ed sullivan show and no doubt everyone can think of some Beatles mutation. Jay Z even calling his album the black album is a mutation of Beatles iconoclasms. Another term is intertextuality but I think 'the mutant' better shows how within cultural complexes, creative products take on a life/agency of their own and pop up in all sorts of forms. Maybe the virus is another good way of looking at cultural forms but has more negative undertones. After all mutation is essential to evolution.
A term i picked up from the English department to discuss a similar, but not identical, process is: The Mutant. I think in contrast to morphing mutation seems to imply that trhe process has been taken away from any individual agant and undergoes rapid transformation under the radiation of culture. The mutant is a transformed/transitioned text but it is a way of emptying the individual out and looking at culture as a whole. The Beatle’s music and the iconoclasms surrounding them (long hair?, frantic girls, peace, drugs etc etc) have definately mutated through culture in that they are constantly recycled in new and mutated forms. dj danjermouse is only a single example but outkasts video for 'Hey Ya' is a mutation of the beatles performance on the ed sullivan show and no doubt everyone can think of some Beatles mutation. Jay Z even calling his album the black album is a mutation of Beatles iconoclasms. Another term is intertextuality but I think 'the mutant' better shows how within cultural complexes, creative products take on a life/agency of their own and pop up in all sorts of forms. Maybe the virus is another good way of looking at cultural forms but has more negative undertones. After all mutation is essential to evolution.
American Idol and Race Relations
Despite anything else you might think about American Idol, what can’t be denied about the show is the space it opens up surrounding racial discourse in American society. Idol provides a relevant forum to discuss race in a country that despite being one of the most racially diverse in the world, is still very close-lipped on the subject.
However through the anonymity of the voting system of American Idol, America is able to voice its views on race, gender, looks and regional preference reflective of societal opinion and catalysing discourse on the results. However despite the fact that the show has always contained a diverse racial makeup, starting from the top down with its’ judges, it has by no means escaped calls of racism. Elton John called the show “incredibly racist” when the three he considered to be the most talented, Jennifer Hudson, Fantasia Barrino and LaToya London all young, black women, landed in the bottom three. In relation to the other contestant’s talent, there is evidence that this audience made decision had a racial bias. However, Elton John was missing the point that this was reflective of a racist American society rather than an American Idol lead decision.
To counter Elton John, I feel that American Idol is one of the most racially progressive shows on American television. As such the repercussions that inevitably arise, such as the Hudson/ Barrino/ London highlight the troubled racial climate of the country and indict the audience’s prejudices. That three black women were even in the top six on the country’s highest rating television program is a step forward when one looks at other program’s shown on American prime time. There is not one other program that would have half the main characters being black women. Similarly the appearance of Sanjaya Malakar has elicited both cries of racism and progression on the show. Theories have abounded on his presence on the show as the ‘worst’ finalist in Idol history. There is a popular assumption that part of his popularity lies in his race, and its’ unusual presence on prime time TV.
He has thus been simultaneously praised as a positive role model for Indian Americans, and lambasted as an unfair representation of Indian Americans leading to reports of schoolyard bullying by an Indian journalist. What is clear from the debate that has arisen over his continuing presence on the show is the anomaly of being Indian on American TV.
Executive producer Nigel Lythgoe has tried to play down the racial statements expressed by the show and audience voting patterns saying that “American Idol is a talent show…let’s not lose perspective on what it is. Outside of that it doesn’t really mean anything in real life”. In saying this, I feel Lythgoe is knocking the importance of American Idol as a cultural artefact, perhaps because of the contentious nature of audience decisions. Lythgoe’s playing down of the show’s importance is an often stated commentary on the frivolous nature of popular culture. However in a country where the voting of American Idol beats the voting for the President, one can’t write off the results of the American Idol elections. Instead the diverse racial and ethnic makeup of the show and subsequent results provide crucial insights into the racial climate of the country, both reflecting and amplifying the nation’s complicated relationship with race in an unparalleled manner.
However through the anonymity of the voting system of American Idol, America is able to voice its views on race, gender, looks and regional preference reflective of societal opinion and catalysing discourse on the results. However despite the fact that the show has always contained a diverse racial makeup, starting from the top down with its’ judges, it has by no means escaped calls of racism. Elton John called the show “incredibly racist” when the three he considered to be the most talented, Jennifer Hudson, Fantasia Barrino and LaToya London all young, black women, landed in the bottom three. In relation to the other contestant’s talent, there is evidence that this audience made decision had a racial bias. However, Elton John was missing the point that this was reflective of a racist American society rather than an American Idol lead decision.
To counter Elton John, I feel that American Idol is one of the most racially progressive shows on American television. As such the repercussions that inevitably arise, such as the Hudson/ Barrino/ London highlight the troubled racial climate of the country and indict the audience’s prejudices. That three black women were even in the top six on the country’s highest rating television program is a step forward when one looks at other program’s shown on American prime time. There is not one other program that would have half the main characters being black women. Similarly the appearance of Sanjaya Malakar has elicited both cries of racism and progression on the show. Theories have abounded on his presence on the show as the ‘worst’ finalist in Idol history. There is a popular assumption that part of his popularity lies in his race, and its’ unusual presence on prime time TV.
He has thus been simultaneously praised as a positive role model for Indian Americans, and lambasted as an unfair representation of Indian Americans leading to reports of schoolyard bullying by an Indian journalist. What is clear from the debate that has arisen over his continuing presence on the show is the anomaly of being Indian on American TV.
Executive producer Nigel Lythgoe has tried to play down the racial statements expressed by the show and audience voting patterns saying that “American Idol is a talent show…let’s not lose perspective on what it is. Outside of that it doesn’t really mean anything in real life”. In saying this, I feel Lythgoe is knocking the importance of American Idol as a cultural artefact, perhaps because of the contentious nature of audience decisions. Lythgoe’s playing down of the show’s importance is an often stated commentary on the frivolous nature of popular culture. However in a country where the voting of American Idol beats the voting for the President, one can’t write off the results of the American Idol elections. Instead the diverse racial and ethnic makeup of the show and subsequent results provide crucial insights into the racial climate of the country, both reflecting and amplifying the nation’s complicated relationship with race in an unparalleled manner.
The reality of pop idol shows.
The idea of Pop idol shows such as American/New Zealand idol, is that the contestants are ‘normal’ people from the same societies as us as the viewers and consumers of the show. This allows us to relate and form a particular adherence to the show, as we see these contestants as members of our own society, and not simply the traditional pop stars that we would normally view on television that seem more distant and strange to us. This idea of feeling more familiar with the contestants, raise the idea of realism within the show and its production. The first display of realism is the idea that in the auditions, we are presented on television with a wide range of performances from truly horrible performances to truly talented performances. This allows us as viewers to feel as though we are watching average contestants, almost such as ourselves, and allows us to relate better with these contestants, other than presenting us only with the good performances. The camera work used in the Pop idol shows also attempt to convey a feel of realism and ‘spur of the moment’ instances. They often use a hand held camera after the contestants come out of the audition room, focusing on the contestants. This use is to try and convince us as viewers of the realistic nature of the show, as we are shown the emotions and views of the contestants as soon as they come out of the audition room, and the hand held camera emphasises this attempt at constructing a realistic nature within the shows production.
Idol = Eurovision
Talking about Idol, I couldn’t help but think of the Eurovision song contest held every year, since 1956! Idol still has a long way to go! What is different about Eurovision, is that each active member of the European Broadcasting Union, selects a song (as opposed to singer) to send off to the contest to REPRESENT their country as opposed to representing their individual interests for a record contract.
For those new to the contest here is a blurb from the English language Wikipedia:
I have issues with the word ‘represent’ in the case of Eurovision and the case of the Idol franchise. For example, in “American Idol” we have the notion of a ‘general consensus’ of the public of USA (I don’t even want to go into the misleading properties here of the term ‘America’) – thus ‘idol’ here is associated with notion of a deity or a fantasy representative of the public. So it is taken for granted that the winner of the show and the pop music this person will churn out is what ‘America’ wants, idolizes – or at least that is how the show is packaged. Interestingly we do not get much of the personalities of the contestants (Sanjayah perhaps being one of few who seems to try to visually represent his in an odd way?) however what we DO get is a very clear understanding of who the judges are – their (constructed) personalities – and how they relate to us. And they all have a role to play – Simon is the authoritative ‘father’/’god’ who is in the right, Randy is the cool streetwise guy who you want to listen to because he knows the lingo and Paula is the mother hen worrying about and caring for all the contestants, in other words you should take eat your soup when she tells you. If these personalities weren’t kept up, the record company would lose money. What the judges ARE doing is telling us what music we should listen to; what is representative of the society; what records we should buy – they are RIGHT. Every one of their comments counts! It is the judges who play the part of ‘idol’ who we admire and follow. It is in a way a song contest: we are not buying the winning artist, instead, we are buying the songs the record company creates along with the created personality of the performer. Song is going to be sold, it is just a matter of who will sing it.
On a much larger and more culturally endangering scale, the (mis)representation of the ‘masses’ is what worries me about the Eurovision song contest. For a start Eurovision with all its French meaning implies a vision, a common goal: and idol. A (ONE) song is meant to represent an entire nation in competition against other nations. Does anyone think POP would be representative of Native Americans? No, but in Eurovision (like in Idol and all the others) Pop always prevails. This year for example Serbia put forward a THE MOST MEDIOCRE pop tune I have ever heard, which won the contest! Yet I can assure you that kind of music does not stay at the top of the charts in Serbia nor does it sell the most records. So this means that the original Serbian broadcaster put forward a song which CONFORMS to the judges tastes based on track record: It does not help that the ‘big four’ (UK/Spain/France/Germany) are guaranteed finalists – being that they are enormous pop markets. And the (financially) major participating broadcasters of the EBU surely have a financial interest in maintaining and expanding that market. With the vote handed down to the audience texting in their favourites for the last few years, in years to come a ‘representative’ song of say Turkey may well sound like the next Spice Girls release.
If you’ve missed my point, what I’m trying to say is that unlike other reality TV shows where you may or may not idolize the contestants (you may also be watching it to laugh at the stupidities) the ‘reality’ music contests construct an identity for the individual and/or the community watching which it expects to be followed by creating prestige around themselves – and it does so through the most quickly digest-able format: MUSIC! Popularity is thus not representative but constructed. $$$
For those new to the contest here is a blurb from the English language Wikipedia:
"Each member country submits a song to be performed on live
television and then casts votes for the other countries' songs to determine
the most popular song in the competition.”
I have issues with the word ‘represent’ in the case of Eurovision and the case of the Idol franchise. For example, in “American Idol” we have the notion of a ‘general consensus’ of the public of USA (I don’t even want to go into the misleading properties here of the term ‘America’) – thus ‘idol’ here is associated with notion of a deity or a fantasy representative of the public. So it is taken for granted that the winner of the show and the pop music this person will churn out is what ‘America’ wants, idolizes – or at least that is how the show is packaged. Interestingly we do not get much of the personalities of the contestants (Sanjayah perhaps being one of few who seems to try to visually represent his in an odd way?) however what we DO get is a very clear understanding of who the judges are – their (constructed) personalities – and how they relate to us. And they all have a role to play – Simon is the authoritative ‘father’/’god’ who is in the right, Randy is the cool streetwise guy who you want to listen to because he knows the lingo and Paula is the mother hen worrying about and caring for all the contestants, in other words you should take eat your soup when she tells you. If these personalities weren’t kept up, the record company would lose money. What the judges ARE doing is telling us what music we should listen to; what is representative of the society; what records we should buy – they are RIGHT. Every one of their comments counts! It is the judges who play the part of ‘idol’ who we admire and follow. It is in a way a song contest: we are not buying the winning artist, instead, we are buying the songs the record company creates along with the created personality of the performer. Song is going to be sold, it is just a matter of who will sing it.
On a much larger and more culturally endangering scale, the (mis)representation of the ‘masses’ is what worries me about the Eurovision song contest. For a start Eurovision with all its French meaning implies a vision, a common goal: and idol. A (ONE) song is meant to represent an entire nation in competition against other nations. Does anyone think POP would be representative of Native Americans? No, but in Eurovision (like in Idol and all the others) Pop always prevails. This year for example Serbia put forward a THE MOST MEDIOCRE pop tune I have ever heard, which won the contest! Yet I can assure you that kind of music does not stay at the top of the charts in Serbia nor does it sell the most records. So this means that the original Serbian broadcaster put forward a song which CONFORMS to the judges tastes based on track record: It does not help that the ‘big four’ (UK/Spain/France/Germany) are guaranteed finalists – being that they are enormous pop markets. And the (financially) major participating broadcasters of the EBU surely have a financial interest in maintaining and expanding that market. With the vote handed down to the audience texting in their favourites for the last few years, in years to come a ‘representative’ song of say Turkey may well sound like the next Spice Girls release.
If you’ve missed my point, what I’m trying to say is that unlike other reality TV shows where you may or may not idolize the contestants (you may also be watching it to laugh at the stupidities) the ‘reality’ music contests construct an identity for the individual and/or the community watching which it expects to be followed by creating prestige around themselves – and it does so through the most quickly digest-able format: MUSIC! Popularity is thus not representative but constructed. $$$
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)