World music as a whole can mean a few different things,
World music can be global and worldwide. Anglo American popular music
From the America and the UK can influence other countries who
Will keep the popular music and change the lyrics language.
Yet world music can also be indigenous music, which tends to be
More local but can still be owned by a worldwide company.
To understand more local music we must know their cultural ideas.
Worldwide music can be influenced by the cultural imperialism process,
It's important to have a category for World Music so that
We can define the music and have an open minded appreciation of the different
Styles of music and instruments, it also shows the reach that music has across
The globe and how its always been in human nature to create music.
Sunday, 27 February 2011
Saturday, 19 February 2011
Is popular music a mass produced commodity or a genuine art form?
Art is a product of a humans creativity. Art provokes emotion, it is emmersive and open to critique. Art is based on opinion and expression, it is raw, self reflective and self aware.
Theodor Adorno believed that Art was the opposite to mass production, he saw no Art in popular music. To him the Popular Music Industry was just an all consuming production line, churning out mass produced inferior commoditys. Adornos idea's can be reflected in society today with shows like The X Factor but it is narrow to suggest that all popular music is purely just a mass produced commodity. The Smiths showed how their music can be seen as an art form when they were able to be self reflective in their song Paint a vulgar picture (1987)
Even though it can be said that Popular Music sometimes involves commercial hits, cover songs and has singers singing someone elses written material. Art is open, it is different to everybody. One mans trash is another mans treasure. Live Aid which featured popular artists and popular song had the ability to effect the world. Live Aid was art in its own way. I believe that popular music can be a genuine art form, because to somebody out there popular music is their treasure.
Theodor Adorno believed that Art was the opposite to mass production, he saw no Art in popular music. To him the Popular Music Industry was just an all consuming production line, churning out mass produced inferior commoditys. Adornos idea's can be reflected in society today with shows like The X Factor but it is narrow to suggest that all popular music is purely just a mass produced commodity. The Smiths showed how their music can be seen as an art form when they were able to be self reflective in their song Paint a vulgar picture (1987)
Even though it can be said that Popular Music sometimes involves commercial hits, cover songs and has singers singing someone elses written material. Art is open, it is different to everybody. One mans trash is another mans treasure. Live Aid which featured popular artists and popular song had the ability to effect the world. Live Aid was art in its own way. I believe that popular music can be a genuine art form, because to somebody out there popular music is their treasure.
Saturday, 12 February 2011
How useful is a production of culture perspective in understanding the birth of rock and roll?
Richard A. Peterson stated that six factors were responsible for the birth of Rock & Roll in 1955. Law, Technology, Industry Structure, Organisational Structure, Occupational Career and Market. Peterson also claims that the demand of stars at the time like Elvis and Chuck Berry played no part in the birth of Rock & Roll and nor did the demand from the post war boomers.
I dont think that a production of cultural perspective is that useful in understanding about the birth of Rock & Roll. Peterson has simply set up a framework that could be applied to any genre of music, he does not suggest why this framework gave birth to Rock & Roll in particular and WHY it was Rock & Roll. Nor has he given any evidence that it was 1955 when it was born, considering there were singles released even fifteen years before this date that could be classed in the genre (The Andrews Sisters 'Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy' -1940). If he believes that the supply of stars at the time played no part, then surely without these stars like Elvis and Chuck Berry Rock & Roll may not of even been seen as what it is today.
Saturday, 5 February 2011
Is it reasonable to consider that Rock music is gendered male?
Sister Rosetta Tharpe paved the way for Rock and Roll and inspired rock musicians like Elvis Presley and Johnny Cash, not only is she seen as a remarkable musical legend but she is also a woman. Charlotte Greig wrote 'we are not a subgroup of humanity that speaks with one voice' yet when women have broken through as 'rock stars' they end up either being made to look or act more masculine or end up becoming sexualised for the male audience. Blondie, Jonie Mitchell, Annie Lennox are just a few of the names i can think of that have been successful in the genre of Rock however the list of successful male rock artists is about ten times greater. Mavis Bayton wrote 'none of us are born lead guitarists, women's absense is entirely social' I think that female musicians think twice about trying to make it big as a 'rock star' perhaps as they feel to be a rockstar they have to change to fit the 'requirements' expected in this genre, however as Frith and Mcrobbie discuss Rock is alot more than a genre, it is an audience and an artistic idealogy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


