Bring Back the Soundtrack #1: The Ghetto Bin, Pleasant Contamination, and Authenticity
Ironic that I should talk about authenticity today, isn't it? I said last time that I was going to Bring Back the Soundtrack with a look at the last two albums released by R.E.M. before their disbanding this year, and I lied a bit. I started looking back at my old SW@ Soundtrack posts and got lost in history. I now plan to make a one issue run-through of the original column before the R.E.M. expose'. But first, here's a prompt and response FROM March 5, 2005 to one of my college writing assignments. It was from my World Music class and took place roughly 200 days before the inception of the SW@ Soundtrack column, so I thought I would release it here for my readers to use as a learning tool. Enjoy!
Writing Assignment #1: Response to David Byrne’s "I Hate World Music"
Paper Requirements:
Papers are to be: 2-3 full pages; double-spaced and typed; formatted with standard side margins of 1"-1.25" and top and bottom margins of 1"; a common 12-point font (Times Roman, Ariel, Palatino, etc.); and, importantly, in well-written prose. Papers are due in class next Monday, March 7th.
As this is our first class paper, many of you may be uncertain as to the content requirements. You will be graded on the presentation and quality of your ideas, how you support your opinions (don’t just say how you feel about an idea, try to identify why you feel that way and explain/defend it), and the quality of your writing. However, please note that there is not a secret correct answer. You may choose to completely disagree with Byrne’s ideas, completely agree with him, or agree with some and disagree with others. Be assured that you will not be penalized for a thoughtful, supported opinion. Remember, any opinion is fine provided you explain and defend it. Happy writing.
Writing Assignment:
For your first Writing Assignment, respond to some of the opinions that David Byrne expresses in his essay (found in the other folder of this webpage subfolder). Pick any of the topics Byrne brings up. For example, you could respond to Byrne’s ideas regarding the commercial category of "World Music." Do you agree with Byrne that this is a "ghetto-izing" category that makes world music irrelevant, or is he being an overly sensitive rock star? Why?
Another point you might consider is Byrne's statement of being "pleasantly contaminated." Once you are touched by different music, are you forever changed? Why? What about Byrne's choice of words [i.e., contaminated]?
What about Byrne's section called "The Myth of the Authentic;" is Byrne on to something when he talks about audiences' desire to hear/see/experience "pure" traditional roots? Do you think world music artists play toward expectations of what they think their American audiences want them to be? Would you be disappointed if you went to see an artist from an African, Asian, or Middle Eastern country and saw them wearing blue jeans, Nikes, oversized NBA team jerseys, and baseball caps (turned sideways, no less)? Is it unfair for Americans to feel they have the right to adopt foreign styles (music, clothes, hairstyles, etc.) while simultaneously not wanting the "Others" to adopt Western styles? Are you immune to how music is packaged? Does authenticity matter? Why?
You may also discuss something related that is not mentioned in the article: is there a double-standard involved when "Western" artists collaborate with non-Western artists? That is, do artists like Sting, Peter Gabriel, Paul Simon, Moby, etc. receive praise for expanding their music into other world music categories while many criticize the "non-Western" artists for "selling out" or "watering down" their music by adding Western music (such as hip-hop beats)? Both groups probably feel that they are adopting and appropriating music that they enjoy. Do you think a double standard gets applied to these cases? Why? Do consumers in the West expect non-Western artists to stay "traditional" and "pure" for their enjoyment?
Byrne does also have some polemic statements to consider. Do you agree that Western pop is the fast-food of music?
You do not have to answers all of the above questions. These are just some ideas to get you started. If there are other points or artists raised by Byrne (or artists you can think of that make interesting examples) you would rather write about, feel free to do so. As always, feel free to email me if you have questions.
When I say you've got something, I mean what David Byrne means when he says "if I am deeply moved by a song originating from some place other than my hometown, then I have in some way shared an experience with the people of that culture. I have been pleasantly contaminated." In the sense that music is a ghetto, divided by an "our music, their music" mentality, "pleasantly contaminated" is a good choice of words. Sure, we may dump unusual music into a bin and (with exception to a rare few enthusiasts) forget about it for a time, but what little we choose to dig out and what we scarcely find appealing, we develop a taste for. Like a wine connoisseur who enjoys a little beer from time to time, our musical taste buds do indeed become contaminated, but for a while we like what has corrupted our ears. I used to literally consume pop and rap until I heard what the various categories of rock and heavy metal had to offer. I sometimes go back to Nelly, Outkast, Will Smith, Britney Spears, or N'Sync, and I revel in the nostalgia of remembering the words and feeling good about myself. Hearing it once or twice more, I begin to wonder why in the world I found this generic crud appealing to begin with. But some of the more enjoyable elements of rap and pop affected what rock and metal bands I listen to today. Thus it is possible to enjoy music for a short time, become bored with it or hate it later, and still enjoy music that incorporates that old "fast food" in a new way.
This idea of fusion or incorporation in music raises an interesting question: Do music and its presentation have to be entirely authentic to be enjoyed? I think that to the public, they do. When Ray Charles began playing music, people got bored and record companies were reluctant to sign him because he wasn't performing his own music. But when he fused R&B with Gospel to bring out his unique style, religious figures protested his music because it corrupted the true gospel rhythm with sexually explicit lyrics. Kid Rock fans were disgruntled when they bought copies of Devil Without A Cause in the heavy metal section, discovering later that the songs were full of rap, country, and blues (set to heavy metal music, but not "pure" heavy metal). When Evanescence released Fallen, they were criticized for not choosing one music category (that is, for not making 80 minutes of songs similar to "Bring Me to Life"). Was I disgusted that Eminem, a vulgar yet poetic celebrity parodist, would rap about killing his wife? Would I be disappointed if Kid Rock didn't come on stage wearing the trademark white fur coat, red bowler hat, and a stripper on each arm? If Johnny Cash didn't sing about death and prison, or Carlos Santana didn't cover his CDs with psychedelics, would I complain? If the Bulgarian women’s choir sang while dressed as gangbangers, would it lower their credibility? Of course! Music stereotyping is wrong, but it stems from the idea that a certain artist or genre (whether you know the language or not) should evoke a certain feeling. If you don’t feel like banging your head, laughing, crying, smoking, or having sex when you feel you should, something isn't right—the music isn't real.
Writing Assignment #1: Response to David Byrne’s "I Hate World Music"
Paper Requirements:
Papers are to be: 2-3 full pages; double-spaced and typed; formatted with standard side margins of 1"-1.25" and top and bottom margins of 1"; a common 12-point font (Times Roman, Ariel, Palatino, etc.); and, importantly, in well-written prose. Papers are due in class next Monday, March 7th.
As this is our first class paper, many of you may be uncertain as to the content requirements. You will be graded on the presentation and quality of your ideas, how you support your opinions (don’t just say how you feel about an idea, try to identify why you feel that way and explain/defend it), and the quality of your writing. However, please note that there is not a secret correct answer. You may choose to completely disagree with Byrne’s ideas, completely agree with him, or agree with some and disagree with others. Be assured that you will not be penalized for a thoughtful, supported opinion. Remember, any opinion is fine provided you explain and defend it. Happy writing.
Writing Assignment:
For your first Writing Assignment, respond to some of the opinions that David Byrne expresses in his essay (found in the other folder of this webpage subfolder). Pick any of the topics Byrne brings up. For example, you could respond to Byrne’s ideas regarding the commercial category of "World Music." Do you agree with Byrne that this is a "ghetto-izing" category that makes world music irrelevant, or is he being an overly sensitive rock star? Why?
Another point you might consider is Byrne's statement of being "pleasantly contaminated." Once you are touched by different music, are you forever changed? Why? What about Byrne's choice of words [i.e., contaminated]?
What about Byrne's section called "The Myth of the Authentic;" is Byrne on to something when he talks about audiences' desire to hear/see/experience "pure" traditional roots? Do you think world music artists play toward expectations of what they think their American audiences want them to be? Would you be disappointed if you went to see an artist from an African, Asian, or Middle Eastern country and saw them wearing blue jeans, Nikes, oversized NBA team jerseys, and baseball caps (turned sideways, no less)? Is it unfair for Americans to feel they have the right to adopt foreign styles (music, clothes, hairstyles, etc.) while simultaneously not wanting the "Others" to adopt Western styles? Are you immune to how music is packaged? Does authenticity matter? Why?
You may also discuss something related that is not mentioned in the article: is there a double-standard involved when "Western" artists collaborate with non-Western artists? That is, do artists like Sting, Peter Gabriel, Paul Simon, Moby, etc. receive praise for expanding their music into other world music categories while many criticize the "non-Western" artists for "selling out" or "watering down" their music by adding Western music (such as hip-hop beats)? Both groups probably feel that they are adopting and appropriating music that they enjoy. Do you think a double standard gets applied to these cases? Why? Do consumers in the West expect non-Western artists to stay "traditional" and "pure" for their enjoyment?
Byrne does also have some polemic statements to consider. Do you agree that Western pop is the fast-food of music?
You do not have to answers all of the above questions. These are just some ideas to get you started. If there are other points or artists raised by Byrne (or artists you can think of that make interesting examples) you would rather write about, feel free to do so. As always, feel free to email me if you have questions.
The Ghetto Bin, Pleasant Contamination, and Authenticity
I wouldn’t say I hate world music; just that aesthetically, world music wouldn't be my first choice to listen to. Based on what little I've heard, world music is mostly discordant, unusual, and as a result, becomes rather annoying after repeated listening (especially the female Arab and Indian singing voices). But that is just one prejudiced American speaking, proving by example that the mass ghetto-ization of world music is truth—at least in part. In record stores like The Wherehouse or Music Trader, there are two ghetto bins: the World Music bin and the Música Latina bin. As Byrne says, the World Music bin contains Hindi film music, Soviet-Bulgarian choir music, field recordings of Thai hill tribes, The Best of Ravi Shankar, and so on. But where he tosses Brazilian and Tejano music into the World Music bin, Byrne makes one of the music generalizations he insists are wrong. These genres are fodder for the Música Latina bin. In the Música Latina bin, one may find Los Del Rio, Ricky Martin, Mana, Los Ketchup, Shakira, Marc Anthony, and The Best of Carlos Santana. Some Latin artists have even gained a spot in American music categories. Collaboration albums by Carlos Santana may be found in the Rock category and stay there, and Jennifer Lopez has great longevity as a pop singer. True, most of these Latino/a artists are popular because they perform half of their albums in English (conveniently on CD to facilitate skipping of the other half) or are one-hit wonders who get transferred from the Pop rack to the Latina bin in the course of a week, but the Música Latina bin is progress. Progress and truth don’t make segregation right in music, though. To contribute in the creation of smaller ghetto bins is a matter of experience. If you don’t understand the words to music you hear, go to a concert and see the facial expressions and body movement of the artists to get an essence of the words through emotions. If you don’t get the beat by listening, just stand there until you feel something and move with it. Music shouldn't be something you choose entirely because you understand it; enjoying music should come with finding something you can relate to, trying to dance to it, and figuring out how dancing to the music makes you feel. If you can connect with the artist, dance to their music, and feel however you need to feel at that moment, you've got something.When I say you've got something, I mean what David Byrne means when he says "if I am deeply moved by a song originating from some place other than my hometown, then I have in some way shared an experience with the people of that culture. I have been pleasantly contaminated." In the sense that music is a ghetto, divided by an "our music, their music" mentality, "pleasantly contaminated" is a good choice of words. Sure, we may dump unusual music into a bin and (with exception to a rare few enthusiasts) forget about it for a time, but what little we choose to dig out and what we scarcely find appealing, we develop a taste for. Like a wine connoisseur who enjoys a little beer from time to time, our musical taste buds do indeed become contaminated, but for a while we like what has corrupted our ears. I used to literally consume pop and rap until I heard what the various categories of rock and heavy metal had to offer. I sometimes go back to Nelly, Outkast, Will Smith, Britney Spears, or N'Sync, and I revel in the nostalgia of remembering the words and feeling good about myself. Hearing it once or twice more, I begin to wonder why in the world I found this generic crud appealing to begin with. But some of the more enjoyable elements of rap and pop affected what rock and metal bands I listen to today. Thus it is possible to enjoy music for a short time, become bored with it or hate it later, and still enjoy music that incorporates that old "fast food" in a new way.
This idea of fusion or incorporation in music raises an interesting question: Do music and its presentation have to be entirely authentic to be enjoyed? I think that to the public, they do. When Ray Charles began playing music, people got bored and record companies were reluctant to sign him because he wasn't performing his own music. But when he fused R&B with Gospel to bring out his unique style, religious figures protested his music because it corrupted the true gospel rhythm with sexually explicit lyrics. Kid Rock fans were disgruntled when they bought copies of Devil Without A Cause in the heavy metal section, discovering later that the songs were full of rap, country, and blues (set to heavy metal music, but not "pure" heavy metal). When Evanescence released Fallen, they were criticized for not choosing one music category (that is, for not making 80 minutes of songs similar to "Bring Me to Life"). Was I disgusted that Eminem, a vulgar yet poetic celebrity parodist, would rap about killing his wife? Would I be disappointed if Kid Rock didn't come on stage wearing the trademark white fur coat, red bowler hat, and a stripper on each arm? If Johnny Cash didn't sing about death and prison, or Carlos Santana didn't cover his CDs with psychedelics, would I complain? If the Bulgarian women’s choir sang while dressed as gangbangers, would it lower their credibility? Of course! Music stereotyping is wrong, but it stems from the idea that a certain artist or genre (whether you know the language or not) should evoke a certain feeling. If you don’t feel like banging your head, laughing, crying, smoking, or having sex when you feel you should, something isn't right—the music isn't real.
I hope you enjoyed this essayist's journey back in time, or at least found it useful for overcoming your own essay-related obstacles. It takes a special breed of individual (not to mention a fluent competency with grammar and the English language, as well as an unwavering need to kiss one's ass and stroke one's ego on an hourly basis) to write consistently at this level. As a more cynical music consumer reading my own work, I look back and chuckle at some of the things I wrote ("Jennifer Lopez has great longevity as a pop singer"--how can J-Lo sustain a music career when she can't even last one season on American Idol?), but the overall message is still as solid as Kid Rock ever stated: "If it looks good, you'll see it. If it sounds good, you'll hear it. If it's marketed right, you'll buy it. But, if it's real, you'll feel it."
Before I go, I'd like to share something you can't write: I was bagging groceries at Safeway the other day for a mother who was buying supplies for her daughter's birthday. I congratulated them and the birthday girl's sister (who was at that cute, do-no-wrong age) said they were having the party after her gymnastics class. I said, "Wow! Your sister must be pretty good at that!" And, of course, like the inadvertent punchline machines that kids her age are, she said "no." Was I the only one who caught this little nugget of stand-up gold? Probably, since children are still to be seen and not paid attention to until the hormones kick in or they try to run in front of moving vehicles to get at that giant pumpkin at the other end of their tunnel vision. I'm not saying you should walk around with your camera phone always at the ready (because kids tend to disappear into toy and clothing displays when you're checking your e-mail), nor should you stage an accident in a desperate attempt to get $100 and a Tom Bergeron T-shirt (because you're more likely to end up paying a $1,000 fine and sharing a cell with Lindsay Lohan), but whether they know it or not, kids are more brilliant than you think, so pay attention.
Comments
Post a Comment