Last year, my high school friends and I travelled to Las Vegas to see a band that we loved in our high school years. The B-52's advertised they were performing in Las Vegas as a farewell to live performances. We enjoyed the concert but I think it was the opening act that left a bigger impression on me.
In his paper, "On Popular Music", Adorno stated that popular music is characterized by "standardization". Adorno is saying that due to standardization, popular music is the same, no matter what genre you are listening to. He reasons that when one song becomes popular, others imitate that winning formula.
I at first was uneasy with Adorno's theory, because he is in essence saying that popular music lovers are not smart. They must have music that they feel comfortable with because they can anticipate how it will go. In his culturally elitist way, he tries to make the point that popular music fans are not intelligent enough to enjoy serious music (which I do love and listen to by the way). According to Adorno, popular music is created for and dummed down for the masses. I was at first offended, until I remembered the opening act for the B-52's concert I saw last year.
DJ Cummerbund came out onto the stage and mixed a variety of songs that got the crowd pumped up for the concert. Music was blaring, music videos filled the giant screens on stage, and everyone was on their feet dancing. The songs all blended into one despite they were different songs and different bands and different genres. I was wowed! DJ Cummerbund was a sorcerer! Somehow he remixed songs that seemed unrelated in elements and tune all into one. And it worked! Song lyrics were interchanged into the main song, their structure close enough that they seamlessly morphed together. It was fascinating. And that is when I first had the thought…. Is there nothing new? Are we just reusing the same creative ideas?
So maybe there is something to Adorno's accusation that all popular music is the same. Do you think that Adorno might be onto something?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAdorno was definitely onto something. Pop music, by and large, is nothing more than simple, replicable entertainment. It's a predictable, marketable, commercial product. Adorno wrote, "As one particular song scored a great success, hundreds of others sprang up imitating the successful one." This is a function of both artists and record labels looking to produce mainstream hits. Same chords, same structure, same length. Rinse and repeat.
ReplyDeleteBut honestly, I rarely turn to music when I want to challenged. I'd argue it's a passive pleasure for most.
Based on the examples we see comparing modern music, and even in Dr. Stein’s power point, there are distinct similarities in many popular songs. So, yes, I do think that there is some truth to Adorno’s ideas of popular music being standardized. However, I don’t know if I agree with his assertion that the main reason we are drawn to or respond to a certain song is because it is familiar. I think we often like a song for a variety of reasons, including the small things that make a song unique. In an article by a musicologist Nolan Gasser (2019), he explained, “If you play something for a baby a few times and make a slight shift, the baby turns its head at that shift. It recognizes the deviation. The power that we have as infants to process and understand music is extraordinary” (para. 1). In contrast to Adorno, Gasser goes on to emphasize how intelligent people are when it comes to forming their preferences in music. Gasser (2019) asserts, “We all come hardwired to be very sophisticated in our musical understanding. Ultimately, there’s no reason why someone who doesn’t play an instrument or compose music can’t be as eclectic and sophisticated and devout in their music listening as someone who is a professional musician” (para. 9). While I am not a professional musician, I like to think that there is more to my tastes than simply be drawn to something because I have heard something similar to it before.
ReplyDelete