The Changing Face of Music

Anyone who knows my music preferences at all knows I listen to largely older music as opposed to modern stuff. This isn't because I'm one of those bitter people who says that everything sucks now compared to the "good old days," and while on bad days I sometimes believe this, I generally am not a cynic about the lack of modern talent. The simple fact is that contemporary music is incredibly intimidating to me with its sheer variety and inaccesibility. Everyone seems to find their favorite bands through a variety of online searching methods and I suppose through word-of-mouth. I'm curious what most people use to download music online, since I've never really been an expert at DLing music. The only real way I listen to music online is through YouTube, and even that is typically stuff I've already heard and I just want to listen to at that moment.

I don't feel that there is a lack of talent in the music business now. I just feel that it's become very hard to find a life-changing band because there are so many artists out there now in so many different genres of music. And one thing I do think has changed is that the industry itself doesn't really promote true talent or creativity anymore. So much money has become involved in the industry that it doesn't reward originality anymore as much as it pays for more of the same--Auto Tune and generic-sounding choruses and pretty much just banality. There was a brief time period in popular music where "the big thing" actually meant the big thing. The Beatles and Motown and others were not only the biggest-selling acts of their day; they were the most groundbreaking and meaningful and objectively the best. Just like there was a brief window following Bonnie and Clyde where the big movie studios were willing to finance risky projects like the two Godfather movies and Taxi Driver and The French Connection and Midnight Cowboy, there was a time period where what was at the top of the charts was also some of the most meaningful music ever to be released by pop musicians. I suppose in terms of the movies, this was just a combination of all the right factors. The destruction of the old Hays censorship code and the creation of the MPAA system coincided with a cultural revolution occuring in the '50s and '60s, and a series of intelligent and ambitious studio heads allowed for darker, more artistic projects like the above-mentioned movies to be made. Sadly, the advent of the blockbuster made it that so much money was involved, that less risks could be taken. The same thing seems to have happened in the music industry. There seems like there is absolutely no risk-taking being done with commercial music.

This is all well and good, I can hear people saying, because there is still indie groups out there that create great music. Just becuase it doesn't sell as much as Michael Jackson doesn't mean it can't be good. But what I really miss in music (and I say "miss" in the sense that I feel an emptiness, not that I was ever around for such a thing) is the sense of collective experience that comes with music that is both amazing and amazingly popular. With indie music comes a sense of elitism and exclusivism. Music isn't "good" if it's mainstream. You want to like a band before they sell out and get a major label contract. It's hard for me to understand this (well, not really, because populist tastes can piss me off probably more than anyone) because it seems almost more meaningful if an artist is not only changing your life, but changing the lives of all those around you--your friends and family and coworkers and even just random people you meet on the street. That was what happened with a group like the Beatles. Everyone in the world, it seemed like, would be waiting for the release of their next album or single.

It seems to me that the last band that had any sort of big impact on our culture at large was Nirvana. And they were not around particularly long. Maybe people can enlighten me because I'm missing out on some more recent acts, but it just seems like post-Nirvana music has become even more fractured than it already was. I think that's good in a sense, becauase I think it's fascinating that I can think of any type of music possible and I can go find a bunch of bands that perform it out there. But I would still rather be a part of a collective cultural experience of the likes of the Beatles or Elvis or Bob Dylan or a bunch of others. These were real cultural events, instead of just being new talents to crop up. I wish the music industry would still put faith in new things like they did with these artists. But I guess the culture as a whole was just different then. Like I said, it was in the midst of great changes and the music I suppose reflected these. Racial and sexual norms were changing incredibly, and rock music was the beacon of these changes. I guess music reflects our culture now. Especially the technological aspect of music. Finding music online and listening to it on an iPod anywhere you go. There is so much variety, but I feel like it is a lot less meaningful for people than it used to be, simply becuase you listen to it everywhere you go and it serves more and more just as the background for your daily life. You listen to it in the car, when you run, as you are walking to work, on your cell phone as it rings for you. I can't imagine people doing this with Revolver or Highway 61 or London Calling when they came out. This was art to experience--it wasn't something to stick on your iPod to fill up time. People who listened to that stuff were inspired to start their own bands and create music. I don't know, I feel like all of this constant exposure to music has really cheapened it in our culture. Music is everywhere, and as such, music means a lot less. I really yearn for a collective cultural experience like the huge pop acts of yore, but sometimes I wonder if I will ever live to see one. There is so much more variety in all areas of pop culture, but it comes at the expense of profundity.

--Edward