pbs, protest, and west bank heroes
i tuned into the pbs documentary "get up, stand up" as soon as i saw that public enemy's chuck d would be narrating. the globe thought the doc was safe as milk, while the times called it one of "most daring, and perhaps hippest" programs on pbs (now that i think about it, both statements are probably true). cultural sociologists probably found it superficial -- thirty seconds of a song set against a little photo montage, and then .004 seconds of analysis from an erudite rock critic (e.g., dave marsh). it doesn't feel much like pbs to me, though. i started imagining a ken burns-style documentary: zoom in super-slowly on a black-and-white photo of kenny rogers and paul simon doing "we are the world" while shelby foote spins a yarn about robert e. lee and an echoey piano tinkles "dixie" in the background. much of the time was spent on megaconcerts such as live 8 but at least some of the archival footage is spectacular (e.g., live bob marley, billie holiday's otherworldly "strange fruit"). pbs also set up a nice link page that connects to the centre for political song and other nice sites.
watching the pbs/scorcese documentary "no direction home: bob dylan" i realized how dylan became an icon at an absurdly young age. as a child of the seventies rather than the sixties, i always saw dylan as grizzled, wizened, and downright gnarly. but by age 22, he had recorded "blowin' in the wind," "the times they are a-changin' and "masters of war." the songs were great, of course, but watching him, i have to think that his youth and good looks were part of the package that brought instant icon status. for me, the highlight was seeing dylan onstage and backstage with what became "the band" (i.e., the late rick danko joyously waving his bass around, robbie robertson smiling knowingly). around the minnversity, we mostly hear about dylan hanging out in west bank spots near what is now the social science building (we don't hear anything about him attending classes).
all this leads me to a couple questions.
1. first, what are the best "get up, stand up" songs written since 2000? some anti-war protest songs from green day and system of a down have hit the radio, but most seems to remain underground. i mean, would any 21-year-old write anything like "masters of war" today? bands such as anti-flag or (earlier) rage against the machine generally catch criticism for being "heavy handed" or wearing their politics on their sleeves (as do right-wing country singers, for that matter).
2. second, would we even notice another dylan if s/he came along? his first album sold poorly, so he would likely have been dropped by most record labels before the landmark freewheelin' album was recorded. or would the songs have found a way to an audience through live performances, word-of-mouth, and blogs? i'm skeptical since i don't exactly see huge audiences lining up for ani difranco, billy bragg, or conor oberst.
i know that dylan was funny and sarcastic in a way that might connect with my students today, but would his sincerity? u2 is a partial exception, but my worry is that earnest doesn't sell too well these days -- unless it is emo/personal rather than emo/political. part of me thinks that post-dylan generations have become more jaded, cynical, and resistant to the sort of statements expressed by woody guthrie or bob dylan. it seems as though a modern dylan would have to be even more enigmatic, more complicated, and more opaque. on this issue, here's a favorite quote from david foster wallace on such trends in my generation:
The intellectualization and aestheticizing of principles and values in this country is one of the things that's gutted our generation. All the things that my parents said to me, like "It's really important not to lie." OK, check, got it. I nod at that but I don't really feel it. Until I get to be about 30 and I realize that if I lie to you, I also can't trust you. I feel that I'm in pain, I'm nervous, I'm lonely and I can't figure out why. Then I realize, "Oh, perhaps the way to deal with this is really not to lie." The idea that something so simple and, really, so aesthetically uninteresting -- which for me meant you pass over it for the interesting, complex stuff -- can actually be nourishing in a way that arch, meta, ironic, pomo stuff can't, that seems to me to be important. That seems to me like something our generation needs to feel.


12 Comments:
Hmmm, I'll have to give your questions some more thought, BUT, I just have to say that I am so BUMMED that I completely missed out on "Get Up, Stand Up!!" Chuck D, how do I love thee??? Let me count the ways! I saw him speak at U of IA once - really can't remember anything he said but his mere presence was captivating enough. Nobody, nobody, nobody can flow like Chuck D. When I'm really feeling like The Man's gonna get me down, I just throw on "Don't Beleive the Hype" and let all the suckas know just where I stand. "Suckers, liars, get me a shovel!"
I think you’re missing a key point. You’re talking about two things here – social commentary and popular music – and I think you’re mistakenly seeing a bond between the two. Different generations use the mediums that best suit the cause to make their particular criticisms heard.
In the first decade of the 20th century, Mark Twain was the Bob Dylan of his time writing against New Imperialism.
Dadaism – which was mostly visual arts, poetry and theater – was the major artistic force criticizing the brutality of World War I. American stars included Marcel Duchamp and Man Ray.
During the depression, it was photojournalism with stars like Dorothea Lange.
WWII begat the first set of folk stars like Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger.
In the 50s, the “beat generation” sprouted to protest the conformity of popular culture. (That conformity was actually a protest against the chaos of civil rights/imperialism/war during the 40s.) The beatniks we mostly writers like Kerouac, Ginsburg, and Burroughs.
I’d probably argue that oratory was the art form of the early 60s with superstars like MLK and Malcolm X.
I’m not sure who the protest stars of the 70s were. It was the rise of the environmental, peace, and women’s lib movements. As I understand, it was probably the most daring decade for cinema to date, but I don’t know enough about the content to say much about its social criticism.
The 80s? I don’t know. Springsteen maybe?
So anyway, the two (social commentary and music) have no innate bond.
The obvious next question is, “What is today’s form, if not music?”
If I had to put money on something, it would be documentaries. I think the protest stars that future generations will remember will be people like Michael Moore and Errol Morris. The “Blowing in the Wind”s of today are films like “Super Size Me” and “Bowling for Columbine.”
Wow. I think Ochen may really be onto something! There has to be some reason why every time I go to a protest rally we sing, "Down by the Riverside" and "We Shall Overcome" and I feel like, "yeah, but that's just not really IT." I'm diggin on the idea that "Different generations use the mediums that best suit the cause to make their particular criticisms heard," though I'm not sure how I feel about Michael Moore - but that's another story. I once joined a crowd following him to the president's house one night after he spoke at the U of Iowa (around 10:30pm) hoping to see Mary Sue Coleman (now Prez at U of Michigan) come out in her pjs to hear our thoughts on the U's contract with Nike for official U apparel...
sarah, i'm sure they'll repeat the doc so you haven't missed your chance. chuck d seems to have mellowed (or matured or sold out, i guess) depending on your perspective. these days, i really like to hear him talk about music, race, and history (e.g., he's great on muddy waters).
ochen, i love your periodization -- it reminds me of greil marcus' lipstick traces. have you seen it? it draws a line from dadaism to the sex pistols. there was a killer touring production a few years ago in minneapolis that really affected me (it opened with a blaring power chord, as i recall). so i agree completely that different media take on greater significance at different points in time. you're right -- there's no necessary connection between pop music and social commentary. though it is dear to my heart, maybe popular music is no longer where the action is (maybe).
still... i think one can also make some meaningful comparisons across time within a particular medium. something connects dylan back to woody guthrie, leadbelly, billie holiday, blind lemon jefferson, and hank williams (and forward to loretta lynn, bruce springsteen, paul westerberg, and chuck d). so, i guess i'm asking whether (a) anybody is producing ("good") social commentary as ("good") popular music (that is, as anthems), and (b) whether the markets have changed to such an extent that this music would be produced but not heard. or maybe the anti-war songs will only begin to bubble up to the surface over time (e.g., a folkie wrote "masters of war" around 1963, but metalheads didn't write "war pigs" until 1969).
i should add that i'm really intrigued with your 2000s documentary hypothesis -- partly because cheap new video technologies and distribution techniques seem to have opened up the possibilities. some influential sociologists are starting to turn their attention to film and i see tremendous potential in such work. now that every basement band can get a cheap four-track recorder and upload their stuff to the internet, i'm hoping we'll start to see a democratization of music as social commentary. but if you're betting on documentaries, i'll place a longshot bet on video games. who knows? maybe the next dylan will be coding social commentary into video game software ...
Perhaps today's youth are simply not as preconditioned to enjoy and interpret poetry as earlier generations (hey, I'm almost one of them; I should know), which would make music a less-accessible means of social commentary. It seems like the youth of today are more influenced by sound-bytes and quick blips that provoke an immediate gut reaction. No wonder documentaries, especially the hard-hitting kind like those made by Michael Moore, have a greater impact than music. Listening to Dylan requires some interpretation.
But if you're looking for anti-war and consciousness-raising music, you should check out Le Tigre. Their music, which is fast-paced and danceable, seems to be geared more towards the attention deficit generation.
brayden, i'd forgotten about le tigre! our local alt-npr station (the current) plays them pretty regularly. maybe it is a question of "sophistication" rather than cynicism. teens and twentysomethings seem to have a different relation to text than earlier generations. An undergrad who was struggling in my class told me that she didn't do the reading because she was "not the kind of person to sit down and read a book." i was flummoxed, but have come to understand that my students don't necessarily get their information the same way that i get mine (e.g., they might watch the daily show, but might not read newspapers). i told her that she'd probably do well to read this particular book, but resisted the urge to ridicule her or howl at the audacity of the statement. so i don't want to be an old prof bashing younger generations. a dizzying number of interesting (to me, at least) issues arise in thinking about the possibility of a new dylan in 2005 -- the turn toward niche rather than mass consumption, changing tastes and technology, demographic changes in the size of youth cohorts versus aging cohorts, new and old media...
Sarah: I’m not crazy about Michael Moore either, but unfortunately, that has no effect on whether he’s remembered by future generations. Remember that most people hated disco during its popularity, but we now consider the 70s the disco era.
Chris: “it reminds me of greil marcus' lipstick traces. have you seen it?”
I’ve had the book on my shelf forever, but haven’t read it. I know I’ll enjoy it when I get to it, but time, time, time…
“i think one can also make some meaningful comparisons across time within a particular medium. something connects dylan back to woody guthrie, leadbelly, billie holiday, blind lemon jefferson, and hank williams”
Absolutely, but I don’t think it’s because of any medium-to-topic penchant. The world is more cyclical than we usually assume. This includes music trends. Qualities of popular music can be graphed pretty easily, and if the quality is present long enough, it will be cyclical.
An example: the virtuosity/complexity of music. Since I went forwards on the “social commentary through mediums,” I’ll go backwards here. Popular music is relatively complex. While it may be a painful experiment, listen to the arrangement of a Britney Spears song. The programming is complex, inventive, surprising. It’s the vocal content that’s unpleasant. (but that’s a different quality to graph.) Now listen to Bjork and you’ll hear the same programming. This complexity developed as a reaction to the low-complexity of the grunge movement of the 90s. Grunge was intentionally rough and raw, as a reaction to the equally loud but far more virtuosic guitar gods of the 80s, who were reacting to the low-complexity of punk which was in reaction to high-complexity of disco, yadda yadda yadda.
Yes, you can draw a line from 50s rock through punk through grunge, because it’s one cyclical quality.
“so, i guess i'm asking whether (a) anybody is producing ("good") social commentary as ("good") popular music (that is, as anthems)”
In a word, no, and there are good reasons for it. If you think of the 100 different qualities of music one can graph, it would look like a biorhythm. Movements happen when enough of those lines intersect. Right now, we’re not in a cycle that produces political rock. We’re in high-complexity. Political rock comes during low-complexity. (e.g. Springsteen and Dylan) Political rock needs the age of the primary demographic to be somewhere around 25. Today, it’s around 15. Major musical movements can comfort and criticize, but usually not at the same time. Listen to any country station and it’ll be clear we’re in a comfort period.
Not all of the graphs are down, and some that are down are coming up, so don’t fear. We may hear a great song sometime within the next decade. :)
“now that every basement band can get a cheap four-track recorder and upload their stuff to the internet, i'm hoping we'll start to see a democratization of music as social commentary.”
I think that’s exactly what’s happened over the last five years. Every band has a site with mp3s. The upside of multiple voices is also the downside. As the available listening options increase, the likelihood of any of them becoming “popular” decreases. The music industry is still an industry and the financial gap between the homemade and the industry-made is as big as ever. The wonderful realization is that many bands are happy with the success available within the homemade segment.
“maybe the next dylan will be coding social commentary into video game software”
I love that! (even though I hate video games.) Ever seen Sissy Fight 2000? It’s a very interesting commentary on the power dynamics learned and practiced by young women and how they differ from those of young men.
Brayden: “It seems like the youth of today are more influenced by sound-bytes and quick blips that provoke an immediate gut reaction. … Listening to Dylan requires some interpretation.”
Let us not forget that Dylan’s critics were saying the same thing – that his simplistic and heavy-handed material was indicative of the decline of sophisticated dissent. We can look back now and realize that it wasn’t a dumbing-down, but a different sensibility, a new sophistication.
great observations, ochen. i'm not sure i can agree completely on the complexity point (at least i'll have to think about how to operationalize complexity), but i'm feeling your biorhythm image of intersecting lines. maybe the next movement will sound something like sigur ros.
Really have to call you out for casually mentioning that right-wing artists such as everybody's favorite Toby Keith (whom, incidentally, has now said maybe th war wasn't such a good idea) are criticised for their ham-fisted political views. Maybe by progressive music reviewers or some such group, but certainley not by mainstream press and definately not by the public. It's nearly impossible to see a refference to RATM or Steve Earle or anyone else in that vain without "political" being tagged before the description of their sound. However, Toby Keith and LEe Greenwood and the like that make a mockery of country music are never tabbed as political. Ever. At first, I was inclined to say this is because their views fit more squarley with the media's play-it-extremely-safe attitude, but then I realized it's more because of a sort of normative view we have on country music. It's so dopey and red-state (in the eyes of big city folk and coasters) that it must be harmless. This is why the Dixie Chicks did not get a tipper sticker for a song in which they described in great detail making plans for murdering someone and following them out, or Faith Hill and her ver lucky/physically unatrractive husband also do not get censored for recording duets about having sex all night long. Contrast this with dead prez or Anti-Flag and so many others who use very little offensive language, but because their music is either black or "political" it must be dangerous, therefore worthy of a warning. kind lost my original point in this rambling, but the main thing is that I can't let you get away with implying that leftist music and rightist music are equally stigmatized.
Geez, only from academics...
hey woz, i was just trying to give a little equal time here. you make a good point, but i think the issue is a little trickier than that. to the extent that country gets a pass, it is because it has managed to divorce "love of country" or patriotism from partisanship. as has been widely reported, "right-wing" toby keith is a registered democrat. the warnings stickers are a good indicator (worthy, i think, of a good paper!), but you'll have to admit that anti-flag says "fuck" a whole lot more than lee greenwood ("fuck the flag" comes immediately to mind, off terror state). i'd guess that the word draws an immediate penalty as much as the sentiment behind it.
for the record, i'm an old-school hank, george jones, and johnny fan. i'd love to see country get more "real" both politically and otherwise. in my view, country once offered strong critiques of the class system (e.g., loretta lynn, johnny cash). on politics, they were equally overt. one of my favorite examples is this strongly reactionary gem by merle circa 1970:
I hear people talking bad about the way we have to live here in this country
Harping on the wars we fight and gripping about the way things aught to be
Tonight won’t mind them switching sides and standing up for things they believe in
When you’re running down my country, man you’re walking on the fighting side of me
Yeah walking on the fighting side of me
Running down a way of life I fight and fought and died to try to keep
If you don’t love it, leave it; let this song I’m singing be a warning
When you’re running down my country, man you’re walking on the fighting side of me
I read about some squirrelly guy who claims he just don’t believe in fighting
And I wonder just how long the rest of us can count on being free
They love our milk and honey but they preach about some other way of living
When you’re running down my country, Hoss you’re walking on the fighting side of me
Yeah walking on the fighting side of me
Running down a way of life I fight and fought and died to try to keep
If you don’t love it, leave it; let this song I’m singing be a warning
When you’re running down my country, man you’re walking on the fighting side of me
Yeah walking on the fighting side of me
Running down a way of life I fight and fought and died to try to keep
If you don’t love it, leave it; let this song I’m singing be a warning
When you’re running down my country, man you’re walking on the fighting side of me
ps - did you ever notice how old-school country basslines and punk basslines are often the same thing played at a different speed? the supersuckers taught me that a few years ago and i can't help hearing the similarities ever since.
Sure, you can point to the fact that most lefty bands tend to have potty mouths, but isn't this just a great smoke screen? I mean (and I could probably say this much more eloquently) noting the fact that offensive language has been a mainstay of the new left, it's quite simple to make offensive words the problem. That way we still look nice and liberal saying we have no problem with the ideas they're espousing; it's just that naughty words aren't good for our children. Much like Lenny said "If you can't say fuck, you can't say fuck the government."
But point taken, especially about divorcing (uncritical) love of country from partisanship.
>for the record, i'm an old-school hank, >george jones, and johnny fan. i'd love to >see country get more "real" both >politically and otherwise.
Ahh, always the musicians that fokls who don't listen to country say they like, but it's not too bad for a city kid :). But again, I think this comes back to the idea that mainstream labels are not going to put out overtly political stuff, unless it's "safe" politics. Beacuse there's a great deal of progressive country out there nowadays (Steve Earle, Stephen Smith, some other folks not named Steve), it's just on independent labels, and sadly, often on non-country labels. But it's been that way for some time (recall Johnny's notorious ad in response to being snubbed by the CMA's). But even great social criticisms like Johnny's have also been followed by rather emberassing overly patriotic sentiments, like Ragged Old Flag.
Oh, and the reason punk bass lines and country bass lines are so similar is obvious. Punk really came as much from country as it did from rock. Country used to be the people's music, but it got stale, and punk rose in it's place. Punk became commercialized and Hip Hop took its place as the poeple's music. Now that HipHop is dying its slow death, its an exciting time to see what new springs up.
woz, we agree. i think social distortion's ball and chain is probably the best johnny cash song not written by johnny cash. i like the sound of the alt-country stalwarts (dave alvin, tupelo/sonvolt/wilco/bottle rockets, old97s), but the songs seem thin relative to mainstream radio-friendly country of the 1960s. think about prison songs: merle did hard time before writing about prison, and songs by porter wagoner, johnny cash, hank snow and their cohorts had more face validity than most of what i hear on the subject today. i know steve earle (e.g., billy austin), of course, but i'm probably missing a lot of good stuff being released on independent labels.
Post a Comment
<< Home