Decent Music Getting to No. 1
So, Rage Against The Machine did make it to the Christmas No. 1 slot after all. I'm pleasantly surprised. Although I would argue that perhaps this isn't the great musical revolution that some are trying to make it into.
Sure, the news will have pissed off Simon Cowell. Even if, as a Sony shareholder, he does make money from RATM unexpected elevation to festive No. 1, I still think he'd rather have his protege as the festive chart-topper. Last night's results shows that the self-styled pop mogul can be over-turned by an amateur internet campaign promoting an old agit-rock anthem from the 1990's. It is hardly a ringing endorsement for him or his craptacular TV show.
Furthermore, this should create an interesting conundrum for the compilers of Christmas No. 1 albums. I'd imagine they'd struggle with making "Mad World" part of their festive collections, what with its lyrical depiction of a deep depression. Quite what they are going to make of a song with that refrain is beyond me; but I suspect that there aren't going to be very many complete collections of Christmas No. 1's moving forward because of RATM's success.
Yet, as others have pointed out, this does make money for Cowell and his record company. Even if it was an actually a genuine grassroots campaign, it has that unpleasant whiff of astroturfing to it. It seems ironic that a campaign that was in part a protest about cynical consumerism at Christmas is so easily made to appear cynical itself.
And the notion that this is in some way a groundbreaking thing is just plain nonsense. The charts are, to a large extent, a democracy. You can get the music you want to the top of the charts by buying it and getting your friends to buy it. You only have to look back across the history of popular music to see some great bands and artists hitting the No. 1 spot. David Bowie, The Jam, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, The Stones, Manic Street Preachers - all great groups, and all groups that have hit that coveted No. 1 spot. For the very simple reason that their fans went out and bought their records. Sure, you've always had shit hitting No. 1 in the charts - yes, Sir Cliff of Richard, I am directly talking about you - but it has been interspersed with worthwhile acts also sitting at the top of the charts. The difference these days is that a decent band hitting the top of the charts is the exception, rather than the rule. Because decent artists don't sell as many records as the pop pap relentlessly and ruthlessly promoted by the likes of the odious Simon Cowell.
Also, don't go thinking that the internet is the great salvation for the pop charts. It isn't. Firstly, bands have been using the internet for a while to get attention and to win success. If memory serves, both the Arctic Monkeys and the Editors were initially internet phenomena before having mainstream chart success. And you can bet your bottom dollar that Cowell and his terrible ilk will have noted the success of the RATM Facebook campaign, and will be factoring that into their next bid to be Christmas No. 1.
In short, there is nothing new in a good band using t'interweb to get to No 1. And if RATM's success shows anything, it is that the supposed monopoly of manufactured music on the charts is actually an ersatz domination. It just relies on the apathy and indolence of "real" music fans, endlessly intoning the facile and false idea that their sort of music just can't get to N0. 1 anymore. This campaign and RATM have shown that it can - as long as people are actually willing to buy, promote, and just plain enthuse about the music they like.
Labels: David Bowie, Manic Street Preachers, Music, Pink Floyd, Rage Against The Machine, Simon Bastard Cowell, The Editors, The Jam, TV
posted by The Nameless Libertarian @ 12:39 pm
4 Comments
4 Comments:
Who gives a feck about pop music? We live in a country in financial ruin that has turned into a surveillance state and people are worried about the charts? So what if Joe McKellhisface is a manufactured pop idol: they all have been for ages that's what pop music has always been about. Maybe if so many supposedly bright people stopped thinking that frigging pop music mattered then this country would not be on its arse.
LH, where to start?
Firstly, how are you defining pop music? As just the sort of manufactured pap produced by Cowell et al? Or all music that enters the chart? Because a lot of the music that makes it into the chart may be popular, but it isn't manufactured. And if you are dismissing music simply on the basis of being popular, then you will be dismissing the majority of recognisable music that has existed across time. Which is a big thing to do.
But why does pop music matter? Why does it matter who tops up the chart? Well, culture (including music) has an impact on politics, just as politics has an impact on culture. In fact, a lot of research has be done on how music, and other aspects of culture, affect issues of control and domination within society. Go read some Adorno; you won't agree with everything he has to say, however, he does show why culture matters. Music can both be symptomatic of a society, as well as both an opiate of the people and a catalyst for change.
Look at this way: 18.5 million people voted for the two main parties at the last General Election. Yet 19 million people watched The X Factor finale. Why? Is it because they are too stupid to be political? Is it because music - even the bastardised version on show in The X Factor - has numbed them to the real world? Or is it because they see real competition in The X Factor that does not exist in modern politics? The failure of this country is down to the inability of the main parties in this country to offer the sort of radical alternative to the status quo, not the fact that people are interested in pop music.
Besides, if you want people to start challenging the status quo, then one of the best ways to do that would be encouraging people not to listen to the dirge like pap produced by Cowell et al. Which do you think if more likely to provoke someone into questioning the status quo - the latest X Factor single, or a song with the refrain of "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me"?
That's why music matters, and that's why bright people (not supposedly bright people) care about music, the charts, and even who is Christmas No. 1.
TNL
I am not dismissing music popular or otherwise per se. But I am dismissing the idea of championing one label act over the other as some protest. It's such a false
What annoys me intensely is that so many people devote so much time to thinking about pop music. Frankly, coming from a working class background I've seen far too many people get deceived by the relative importance of popular music, get lost in it, bought the T-shirts, done the rebellion stuff: but ended up with cock all in life. So while Pink Floyd told the kids that getting an eduction was a bad thing they drove around in Ferraris.
Don't get me wrong I love music I've listened to everything from Megadeth, Joni Mitchell, the Band, El Ten Eleven and Kraftwerk on today.I also understand that music can be a very powerful cultural indicator. But it's real importance is far too often overstated.
Or in the words of a certain punk:
"Ah-ha-ha. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? Good night"
LH,
Ok, I think I see where you are coming from.
First things first, Pink Floyd didn't say that kids shouldn't get an education. In "Another Brick In The Wall (Part II)" (and the preceding song, "The Happiest Days of Our Lives), were writing about mental (and to some extent physical) abuse in schools. Their relative wealth and their choice of transport are irrelevant to what they were trying to say. And I think we can both agree that abuse in schools in a bad thing.
I agree that some people get lost in rebellion and in music, and emerge with little to show for it other than a history of teenage rebellion and an eclectic music collection. Yet music has consistently been a part of life in the UK (and the rest of the world.) So the choice comes down to what sort of music is still considered popular. So we have a choice - between bland music that saps the spirit and maintains the status quo, or more challenging music that might actually get people to think. So whilst Jason McDangleberry, or whatever the X Factor winner might be called, is on the same label as RATM, at least the latter actually have something to say in some way that is worth hearing.
Music is important, but you're right - it isn't the be all and end all of existence. But likewise, failing to take into account its potential for both a positive and a negative impact on society is a problem.
TNL
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home