Perspective 3-

One of the biggest questions that twist me while studying popular music is that, the standpoint towards some of the most popular artists in the world nowadays, just to name a few, Lady gaga, Justin Bieber, etc. With no doubt, they are very popular, yet, I  do not like them at all. I am happy to say that it is my personal preference as a listener, they are no good. Again, I lay on a belief that we have something to protect in life, but not disliking something you like. If everyone says Lady gaga is bad, but I think it is good, I would have the obligation to argue. But now the case is that, a lot of people think they are good, whilst I do not think so, should I do so by convincing others something I do not like in the first place? By convincing other not liking something in which they like? It is not necessary. Therefore, I think what is important here is the argument, what are the reasons for not liking them. They are my reasons, only.

Popular music embodies different fields and genres, no matter it is mainstream, alternative, indie; or pop, metal, jazz… etc. For popular music, I propose to follow Adorno’s argument and give some brief words, for him, popular music is “standardized.” “Standardization” serves as a framework to distinguish between classical music and popular music. The concept of classical music and popular music cannot be distinguished by “simple and complex”, “naïve and sophisticated” in binary fashion. The framework of analysis should rely on the concept of “standardization”. Popular music is a “pre-digested” form of music according to Adorno. (For example, the song title, the dress, the language, the accent, “pre-digest” the way in which you perceive the music), even the improvising elements from the artists as well as the “mis-scale” inside the song, in Adorno’s words, is “pseudo-individualization”. Use standardized music to fill standardized life, get bored, get music and get bored again, get new music and get bored, and so on. The center of his argument is that, the audiences are passive but not a active reader. It may mainly due to the fact that the time of his work was during the period of 40’s or 50’s. The degree of communication between people as well as the frequency of information flow cannot be compared with nowadays globalizing world. However, the Marx’s perspective is still valid and provide insight for the development of popular music. For the standardization of popular music, it still happens nowadays, what is different is only the amount of money and time which are generated inside the process.

So, if the capitalist system still remains the same, as an artists, I think they have the obligation to fight against something, but not prevailing something. I think that is the talent for every true artist, to tell the world as well as its people something they don’t realize in life, by arts. I think that is a particular function of art, John Berger said, “life first gets lost, and re-found with deliberation.” This is what I saw as “dignity”. We all need some “forms” to think of, in order to find the inner self. It is the dignity of a man. Someone chooses music, someone painting, architect, dancing or whatever. Whatever forms are; What I mean to say “fight against something” is revealed from their attitude towards the music industry as a whole, it relates to what I propose to say by “prevailing”. We all understand that the capitalist system of the music industry is in no way to break, we do not have to break it, because it is ideological as well as reality, the only thing different between 1950’s and 2000”s popular music is the amount of money spent as well as the scale of the industry. What remains the same is we still consume, from 3pounds a festival to 100pounds nowadays. What is different is that, we have much more songs and artists, and every different "song and artist" should make a "different" for the system. For an artist, and his/her music, it has been a old story, practicing instruments, sending demos, get fame, what is important is what you do after getting famous, still prevailing the whole system and making money, a lot more money? Or choose to return to your inner self and tell the world the good of music. It takes a lot of time, as well as a lot of efforts and wisdom. I look at this by “longevity.” No one should blame the artist for not making a great debut, but on the other hand, it should be blamed if an artist is not innovating himself/herself and pursue for another great album. The standpoint here is “innovation”, in other words, it is “change”. To change himself/herself as well as hoping to change the overall industrial atmosphere, for the sake of music, to tell people what is good and what is no good, you do not have to be critical since innovation has been the best form of critical thinking. They should be a resistance force that exists and fights against the main ideology, the hegemony in our society. That is why I like Neil Young so much. Never "sold" himself and his music out, this is "dignity", and "longevity".

Maybe it returns to the argument of “what is good music?” I never mean to say the music of Lady Gaga, or Bieber is bad, yet, they are no good. Honestly, few of us evaluate music as good or bad purely musical, especially on popular music. For instance, you wont listen to a song by saying “the scale here does not meet with the tempo, or the diminishing chords are not supposed to use here… etc. We evaluate the goodness of badness of the song by the social use of them, in an emotional sense. Let’s say, a heavy metal song used in the coffee shop can turn the good song to bad; a very rough and unprofessional players, who are your friends, play music at your wedding could be seen as very good music, because there is lot more sentimental meanings. The only thing bad leads you to say “turn the music off”, everything is bad, the outlook of the artist is bad, the sound is bad, the venue is bad, the weather is bad, however, we listen to the song although it is no good, but not "bad". We often do not listen to the song which is bad, we choose not to listen to it. To say something bad is maybe, by practice, to turn this off immediately. Some music is no good, and it always involves in the perspective of the use of music.

All in all, the authentic of music correlate to artists, as well as the listeners. If artist side is something we can hardly in control with, should we be a active listener, or a passive listener?

On Popular Music (Theodor W. Adorno, 1941)