Manufactured Pop: The ultimate in musical evolution?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

My argument stems from Human development. Ancient, prehistoric society was fully dependant on the family to provide for most of the individuals wants and needs. The cave mans home was his house, temple, school etcetc.

As the centuries past, society became larger to adapt to the needs of the growing populace. New institutions appeard, to cater for single Need. For example organised religion took away the familie's spiritual function...etcetcetc.

Anyway...the current peak of human civilisation can be seen as the Industrial/post modern period. Here Society can be said to be Specialised and Differentiated. Each of societies individual needs now has an institution to provide for it.

So, how does this relate to music you ask? well, i argue that in a sense "real" bands are prehistoric societies. They may play all their own insturments and write all their own songs AND perform live but they generally cannot perform each and everyone of these tasks to an outstanding level. Meanwhile, the "manufactured" bands are Industrial society. The band seen by the public are essentially dancers. They are paid to provide a pleasing image for the product, which they do well. Meanwhile a fully trained song writer/session musician/producer handles the musical aspect of the product, to an outstanding professional level.

That is why Liberty X = Brain Surgery
and Oasis = Trepanning...

I R thinking that I R 0wning j00.

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 19:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Your argument should be titled:

Dr. Poplove: Or How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love Pop

I understand your argument, but I don't think that industrialization (other than mechanical reproduction) accounts for art. Your argument could take the mechanical reproduction route and reach the obvious conclusion that, say, the Backstreet Boys are immensely important, simply for the sheer number of people that they indoctrinate... er... reach.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 19:34 (twenty-two years ago)

or employ. reminds me of john waters saying that littering is great because it creates jobs.

(the real current peak of human civilisation = the bins courtesy-umbrellas i read about yesterday on ILE)

― the actual mr. jones (actual), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 19:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Why doesn't the process of social development apply to art?

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 20:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Because your idea of a single need is fine with basic requirements (food and shelter). But industrialization does not make the human race the Borg with singular desires. Even within the idea of "society," there are individual needs. And even within those individual needs, which you call institutions, there are more and more fragmented needs, so this idea of a single need is inapplicable to art. Art is not something consumable quite the same way that food would be. There aren't daily allowances of melodies needed for sustainment. The ideas that you rehash work for basic needs, but not for luxuries like art.

And as for your last graf, in no adequate way do you differentiate between a prehistoric band and an industrialized band. Doesn't MTV make every band that they air and promote and industrialized one?

― Yancey (ystrickler), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 20:26 (twenty-two years ago)

zzZZzZzZZzZZzZzZZ ... let's kill this thread before it gets any more far-fetched or ridiculous.

― fields of salmon (fieldsofsalmon), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 20:32 (twenty-two years ago)

I dunno. Sometimes, or rather quite often, I wonder if embracing technology to this degree (by that I mean equating easier with better) could be our ultimate downfall. I'm not sure I believe it because many of our favourite conveniences already do some things far better than we ever managed on our own. But I also suppose the word 'better' in that sentence is still debatable. Eh?

― Kim (Kim), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

But Yancey then the world of Art is already specialised and differentialised!(depending whether the work deals in sound/still images/moving images) Industrialisation is here. HA.

erm, i dont quite understand your second paragraph. could you rephrase for me please?

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 20:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Manufactured pop is often terrific but not really for these reasons. It's terrific because i) the interplay over time of public-song/private-song/persona-in-song/persona-of-celebrity/'reality'-of-singer/motivation-of-songwriters/motivation-of-record-companies/motivation-of-fans is interesting, ii) it has great hooks! Nice to see Fatnick back though.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Evolution doesn't neccasarily mean the highest quality.

I am simply saying that commercial pop is the Most EFFECTIVE music...or is it?

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:06 (twenty-two years ago)

What I was saying is that, by virtue of having a video played on MTV ferinstance, a musician is performing to an outstanding level, as you said in your first post. But now I'm wondering if I'm missing your point. Are you arguing for the superiority of a Menudo-type band or are you stressing the importance of pop because of its exposure?

Somehow Elvis impersonators are important here, I think.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:07 (twenty-two years ago)

"of having a video played on MTV ferinstance, a musician is performing to an outstanding level"

BUT how many videos are directed/shot/produced by the band?

even your most hardcore of "real" rock bands normally wont direct there own video, so the videos YOU see on mtv are made by a specialised agent.

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:10 (twenty-two years ago)

you compare pop with bands as if these are the only things around.

I think you should buy a wider range of recs.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:10 (twenty-two years ago)

What difference does it make who directs the video? As industrialization has changed food preparation more and more people have become involved in its prepartion, rather than the Nugent Kill It And Grill It approach. How is this any different?

So Elvis impersonators are like McDonald's franchises, I've decided.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:13 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes. Elvis impersonators are a bit like McDonalds franchises. And hey - as to where i'm going with this, I don't know. Im only making observations - Like Marx (only without the wacky predictions).

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:21 (twenty-two years ago)

ALSO: my point about the videos was that to get on MTV "prehistoric" bands have to adopt the practices of "industrialised" bands. IE hiring a specialised movie director to create their video.

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Fatnick it sounds to me like your theory is the equivalent of saying that its better to shop at Walmart rather than the local market for your fruit and veg...or that its better to drink in a trendy wine bar rather than the Red Lion pub...sure there's an advantage to be had somewhere along the line but you also lose a lot in the process

well it makes sense in my head anyway, and thats what matters

― blueski, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:29 (twenty-two years ago)

HANG ON! i've just remembered what my original point was!
All i was originally trying to say was that many people underestimate "commerical Pop" because all they see is the pretty face at the end. All of the work done behind the scenes, by skilled professionals is totally ignored.

― Fatnick (Fatnick), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

art should never be created by skilled professionals.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:54 (twenty-two years ago)

the more people you have behind you the worse you are as an artist ;) appreciating and enthusing over the slick machinations of the pop industry is really the territory of money-motivated marketeers and business heads with the same taste in music as Laurence Llewellyn Bowen has in interior design

― blueski, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Blueski I think that's complete rubbish, mostly cos it suggests buskers make the best music.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 22:22 (twenty-two years ago)

The thing is that the system of songwriters, producers, choreographers and stylists working with tightly controlled figurehead artists is no more than a return to how the music industry always did things until the Beatles came along. What was seen at the time as a permanent change may eventually prove to have been more of a blip. And of course given a choice the industry prefers to work this way. They weren't really happy with free-spirited, madcap bands of the '60s and '70s but had to go along with it because it was profitable.

― David (David), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 22:43 (twenty-two years ago)

5h4k3y |\/|0 sez:

- art should never be created by skilled professionals.

Pah. Hooray for thee skattersh0t generalis-ation. Art should be kreated by anyone who wants to kreate it. Some of these people may be skilled professionals.

― N0RM4N PH4Y, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 23:04 (twenty-two years ago)

but if art was made by everyone, there would be no need for skilled professionals. The term would be obsolete - when discussing something that everyone does (like, say, breathing) calling someone a "skilled professional" holds no meaning.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 23:16 (twenty-two years ago)

haha buskers make terrible music because they are only in it for the money, not the soul of the thing!

the best music is therefore made by people too rich/well off to give a fuck if it sells or not because only they are free to work for the ART.

this is also why the best politicians are the incredibly rich ones, by the way. STEVE FORBES ROCKS MY WORLD! VINCENTE FOX IS SUPER FOXXY!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 23:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Strokes.

― wl (wl), Tuesday, 1 October 2002 23:44 (twenty-two years ago)

haha! I'm with Sterling. Surely the tunes that Bill Gates' whistles on his way to the bathroom are beyond sublime! If mechanical reproduction = evolution, bazillionaire capitalists = the Master Race, since they have the largest industrial systems at their beck and call and have the most people working "behind the scenes" for them.

I'm sorry, I can't help it. I'm feeling very "agent provocateur" today.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 1 October 2002 23:48 (twenty-two years ago)

In the late 20th Century, as the Industrial Age finally drew to a close, the human race was found to be increasing exponentially and the planet's sources dwindling rapidly.

It therefore became necessary for mankind to be subdivided into two separate sub-species.

The superior beings would take control of the planet and thenceforth be free to enjoy a life of luxury and sensory pleasure of the type derived from listening to the music of "real" bands.

The inferior ones would exist in a life of drudgery and servitude to perform those menial tasks necessary to keep their masters in this luxurious lifestyle, before ultimately being slaughtered for food when they had outlived their usefulness.

Manufactured Pop was therefore introduced as the method by which the members of the inferior sub-species could be controlled and herded, as they flocked mindlessly towards it; and maintained in a state of blissful ignorance of the dreadful fate which awaited them.

Well, that's my theory anyway.

― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 10:56 (twenty-two years ago)

NO MCDONALDS ANALOGIES WITH ANYTHING, PLEASE!

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:03 (twenty-two years ago)

would you like fries with that ronan?

― gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes I would actually, I'm starving.

I was thinking of those anti pop mcdonalds analogies more than fatnick's, but as a general rule they all are pretty evil.

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:33 (twenty-two years ago)

"They may play all their own insturments and write all their own songs AND perform live but they generally cannot perform each and everyone of these tasks to an outstanding level"

what evidence is there for this anyway? i think its nonsense, there are so many bands who do all these things and are considered to do them to an outstanding level e.g. Spiritualized who i'm not even that mad on but concede they do what they do extremely well...

as do the likes of Justin Timberlake of course...which then got me thinking who is more valid or more of an artist then its tough...Jason and Justin can both write, produce and perform...they're both very image-conscious (albeit in different ways) and have a say in the creation of their videos, stage shows etc. - if you really think about it there's not really anything that swings it in either's favour, they;re both career artists....except Justin can dance...so he's the better artist overall cos he can cover that extra base ;)

one problem with the manufactured pop thing is because of the one person doing one thing system who deserves the most credit/respect/awards/money? and who's the most important cog? i suppose that argument has applied to many bands in the past as well

― blueski, Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:55 (twenty-two years ago)

and if you can explain how the Mcdonalds analogy is wrong regarding manufactured pop then i would genuinely like to read

― blueski, Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Big Macs are actually physically bad for you, music can't be. QED.

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 11:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Swans fucked my hearing Ronan.

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:00 (twenty-two years ago)

but i might be live to be 90 despite eating thousands of Big Macs...

lots of DJs are getting tinnitus after years playing loud music in clubs

― blueski, Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:03 (twenty-two years ago)

who deserves the most credit/respect/awards/money? and who's the most important cog

the interplay between. although, is there a definitive answer to this? should there be?

― gareth (gareth), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:06 (twenty-two years ago)

probably not

― blueski, Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Shit I take it back, I remember once I slipped on a record sleeve!

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:15 (twenty-two years ago)

The only problem is that division of labor and so-called "manufactured pop" is much older than the rock band. Old jazz sessions would basically consist of a producer calling in a bunch of musicians to produce a certain sound that was in vogue: ragtime, swing, etc. Not only that, but all you have to do is look at, say, Phil Spector or producers from the '50s to realize that the manufactured band is an integral part of music history. The problem is, the music itself AIMS to be of the moment and not last. And even music that IS lasting was produced in this way... Motown is a great example.

The most intelligent book on taking manufactured pop music "seriously" is the Manual by the KLF.

― Aaron, Wednesday, 2 October 2002 12:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Was I making a McDonald's - manufactured pop comparison? I wasn't intending to. I was just running with the original idea in this thread (before it was conveniantly changed) and I was thinking that Elvis might be the most effective performer ever, since he has many Mini Elvises running around singing his songs. So he's performing at an outstanding level without the use of television. So it's like a romantic reproduction, or something like that.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 14:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, and David is OTM by pointing out that this was how things functioned before the Beatles. A key point that completely discredits this whole thread.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

"Oh, and David is OTM by pointing out that this was how things functioned before the Beatles."

surely the beatles aren't solely responsible?*

*yes this is a real question

― DG (D_To_The_G), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)

i argue that in a sense "real" bands are prehistoric societies.
No, the next step is neither the requirement of the tribe (read: 'rock') or on the overlord (read: 'manufactured fluff') but on the SELF. (read: any music that the artist has 100% control over and requires no human help to create.) Ergo, Aphex Twin is the truly modern man, and Britney Spears is the last, dying vestiges of a dying era.

― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 15:53 (twenty-two years ago)

surely the beatles aren't solely responsible?

Well yes in so far as they pretty much started the trend of self-contained instrumental/vocal groups that wrote their own material.

― David (David), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

so NO ONE did it before them?

― DG (D_To_The_G), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I think the idea was on its way DG but the Beatles encapsulated it in such a way as to make it commercially undeniable. Motown was doing much the same thing with the idea of an autonomous collective that would write, play, sing and produce all its music in-house.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 15:59 (twenty-two years ago)

"I think the idea was on its way DG but the Beatles encapsulated it in such a way as to make it commercially undeniable."

heh that's fine, it's only the idea that they invented it that bothers me

― DG (D_To_The_G), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:04 (twenty-two years ago)

oops that looks like I'm pointing thee finger at someone in particular, I'm not

― DG (D_To_The_G), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:04 (twenty-two years ago)

it's only the idea that they [the tastemakers] invented it [the ersatz popstar] that bothers me
[ENTERING RANT MODE]
Yes, and we know that Cloning and AI are nowhere near sophisticated enough to completely 'make' a popstar from nothing. Somehere along the line a HUMAN BEING was sacrificed to create these popstars.
Just think about this: Rob Pilatus and Fab Morvan had terrible voices, but a moderate amount of charisma. Left to their own devices, they might've created something new and interesting (I'm picturing a German pair of geto-disco George Michaels.) but instead, Frank Farian molded them into shiny, hollow popstars. And now not only are they the butt of every bad lipsyncing joke, one of this is DEAD DEAD DEAD.
If Frank Farian had left well enough alone, we would have two mildly interesting Musicians with a unique sound...instead of two useless, spent punchlines, one of whom is DEAD DEAD DEAD.
So Remember:

SOYLENT POPSTAR IS MADE OF PEOPLE

All popstars were once musicians with their own ideas. But Maurice Starr (or that guy that owns N*Sync/O-Town) comes in and lobotomizes them. They could've lived productive lives, but instead they became drones that play what their dark masters tell them to.

Are we to be truly free or are we to be drones?
[/RANT MODE]

― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I was speaking with a friend about Motown this morning. He went to see a screening of a documentary on the Motown house bands (the name of the movie escapes me at the moment), and he had this to say about it:

"While making a good case for the importance of the house musicians to the success of the label, the film skirts the issues of their treatment as hired hands."

I dunno if this is really related or not, but it came to mind when reading this last bit.

And no, the Beatles did not invent the idea of self-creation. God did.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I see what you did there :P

― DG (D_To_The_G), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Taking Sides: Motown Records vs Marvel Comics; or; "With great art comes no responsibility to the workforce"

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Might as well through Menudo into that TS as well, Tom.

― Yancey (ystrickler), Wednesday, 2 October 2002 16:29 (twenty-two years ago)

That is why Liberty X = Brain Surgery
and Oasis = Trepanning...
Well, I'll agree with the second half of your hypothesis.

― Lord Custos Alpha (Lord Custos Alpha), Saturday, 5 October 2002 01:47 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.