Showing posts with label Aural Fixation. Show all posts

Friday, October 27, 2023

Aural Fixation: What Is Rock and Roll?

Aural Fixation:

What Is Rock and Roll?

“Aural Fixation” is a music-themed column I wrote for PopMatters.com from 2011-2013. They are no longer online there, but I have reformatted them here at the DMDB blog with additional videos, photos, and links, such as where to buy referenced albums. I have also used the title “Aural Fixation” for any essays I have written outside of PopMatters.com as well. To see the essays, check out the Dave’s Music Database Aural Fixation page. You can also purchase the essays in book format here.

Read the comments section of any Facebook post from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and you’ll be hammered with incessant whining about who has been overlooked for induction and, more annoyingly, who has been inducted that doesn’t belong. I challenged – politely, I might add – one of these complainers to offer his definition of rock and roll. This perfectly reasonable request worked him into a frenzy involving name-calling, trolling my Facebook page, and bashing hip-hop. You know what he didn’t do? Define rock and roll.

He isn’t alone in his hell-bent agenda to play gate keeper for admission to the rock and roll big top. His inability to explain his vetting criteria, sadly, is par for the course. The arguments are generally no more sophisticated than “rap isn’t rock and roll” or “well, you know it when you hear it.”

To be fair, the reason these self-appointed rock purists can’t offer a perfect definition is that one doesn’t exist. Rock and roll is generally defined as a genre which emerged out of the 1950s as an amalgam of R&B, country, blues, gospel, folk, and other genres. It is typically associated with a gravelly-voiced lead singer spitting out simple melodies and lyrics backed by electrically-amplified instruments such as guitar alongside a heavy beat provided by drums and bass.

However, the wheels then start falling off immediately. Let’s look at the very first class of Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees in 1986, which included architects of the genre such as Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, and Buddy Holly. Would anyone argue they aren’t rock and roll? Of course not. Let’s key in on Elvis for a moment, however. He cranked out undisputed classics of the genre with songs like “Hound Dog,” “Don’t Be Cruel,” “Heartbreak Hotel,” and “Jailhouse Rock.”

Let’s analyze a few of his biggest post-‘50s songs, however. “It’s Now Or Never” was based on the Italian operatic song “O Sole Mio” from the 1890s. “Are You Lonesome Tonight” was a traditional pop ballad which originated in the 1920s. “Crying in the Chapel” was a country gospel song first recorded in 1953. These are just three songs by the undisputed King of Rock and Roll which taken individually might not fit the conventional idea of rock and roll.

How rigid are we going to be in adhering to the idea that rock is a guitar-driven genre? The first class of inductees included Jerry Lee Lewis and Little Richard whose instrument of choice was piano. Is anyone going to say “Great Balls of Fire” and “Tutti Frutti” aren’t quintessential rock songs?

Let’s analyze two other inductees that year – Jimmie Rodgers and Robert Johnson. The former has been called the Father of Country Music and the latter is a blues legend. The Hall sent an important message from the onset – rock music doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It was born – and continues to grow – out of multiple genres.

In the decades since the emergence of rock and roll, it became such a dominant force in shaping commercial music that the term “rock” became almost synonymous with the term “pop.” That means rock has absorbed pretty much every popular trend in music for roughly three quarters of a century.

So what can we conclude? Rock and roll is driven by guitar. Or not. It focuses on upbeat songs from the 1950s and later. Or not. It is a separate entity from other genres. Or not. The problem in defining any genre of music is there are no absolutes. Rock and roll, in fact, may defy boundaries more than any other genre. Part of its character since its infancy is its rebellious nature, its proclivity for not sticking to the rules. Whining and complaining about something not fitting into one’s conventional ideas is about as un-rock-and-roll as it gets.

For more essays, check out the Dave’s Music Database Aural Fixation page.

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”

First posted 10/27/2023.

Friday, February 10, 2023

Aural Fixation: Why the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame isn't a Joke

Aural Fixation:

Why the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Isn’t a Joke

This post is a response to a question posted on Quora: “What is your opinion on the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Do you think it is a joke, or does it really matter who is inducted into it?”

To address this question, I’m posing the common arguments made that the Hall is a joke. Then I offer a rebuttal.

	The Argument: They induct non-rock and roll acts. The Rebuttal: Rock and roll is not a pure genre without the influence of other genres. It is generally considered an amalgamation of R&B, country, jazz, folk, blues, and more. As such, the Hall has - since its beginning - acknowledged artists which some might not consider rock and roll because of the influence they’ve had in shaping rock and roll. The very first class saw inductees which people would call blues (Robert Johnson), country (Jimmie Rodgers), and R&B (James Brown, Ray Charles).
	The Argument: Rap isn’t rock and doesn’t belong in the Hall. The Rebuttal: This is a variation on the first argument but I separate it here because rap is a genre which has emerged since rock and roll. The Hall has acknowledged its wide definition of rock in that it sees it more as the music that is an expression of youth culture. The development and growth of rap has followed a similar trajectory as rock. It is also a genre which has shaped the continued development of rock and roll. Inductees like the Red Hot Chili Peppers, nominees like Rage Against the Machine, and potential future inductees like Linkin Park all are generally defined as rock bands but show the influence of rap. Side note: for all those complaining about rap like it has taken over the Hall, there are - as of the 2022 class - less than 10 inductees which can probably be strictly defined as rap out of 365 inductees.
	The Argument: Why not just call it the Music Hall of Fame? The Rebuttal: As much as some detractors would have you believe that any and all music can get in the Hall, that isn’t the case. The focus is on music which tends to be an expression of youth culture, specifically popular music which has emerged in generally English-speaking countries, primarily the United States, since the 1950s (as well as some early influencers). As such, as huge as names like Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby are, they aren’t likely to get in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but they’d be shoo-ins for a Music Hall of Fame (not to mention classical giants like Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, etc.)
	The Argument: Jann Wenner calls the shots. If he likes the act, they’re in. If he doesn’t, they’re doomed. The Rebuttal: As the founder of the Hall, Wenner certainly has held significant influence and there are plenty of rumors about who couldn’t get in because of him. However, he hasn’t been on the nominating committee since 2006 and stepped down as the chair in 2019. I’m sure his voice still holds sway, but there have been acts like Kiss who got in despite Wenner’s stance against them. It’s also important to understand the process. The nominating committee selects the list of possible inductees each year, but they don’t vote on them. That decision is made by the 1000+ past inductees and other members of the music industry.
	The Argument: The Hall sucks because (insert name of favorite band here) isn’t in. The Rebuttal: We all have our favorites. We may even have good arguments for why they belong in the Hall. However, people often fail to recognize that their individual opinions do not necessarily reflect a larger opinion shared by the masses. Also, with 365 inductees already, it’s hard to argue that any first-tier acts haven’t been inducted. Check out any social media post complaining about who isn’t in and it is a slew of possible names, many of which might get the reader thinking, “yeah, they oughta be in.” However, there isn’t one name that comes up over and over universally from every person who comments.
	The Argument: The Hall just inducts high-profile names that will draw audiences (i.e. money) to the annual induction ceremony. The Rebuttal: Let’s be clear. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is technically a non-profit organization. Still, they do need to make money to stay afloat. Here's the thing about attacking the Hall for trying to be financially viable - it's hypocritical. The people lobbying these accusations then turn around and whine that their favorite act isn't in - an act which has been a part of the music industry and, more likely than not, isn't some obscure act that has never made any money. They're likely to be high-profile acts who've been around for decades and made plenty of money BECAUSE of the music industry.

Conclusion:

I realize this was an incredibly long answer. I absolutely think the Hall has its flaws, but ultimately it remains a relevant way of recognizing some of music’s greatest contributors. It most assuredly is not a joke.

For more essays, check out the Dave’s Music Database Aural Fixation page.

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”
RockHall.com (official Rock and Roll Hall of Fame website)
Dave’s Music Database: “Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductees”
Quora (2/10/2023). “What is your opinion on the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Do you think it is a joke, or does it really matter who is inducted into it?”

First posted 2/10/2023; last updated 10/27/2023.

Monday, January 31, 2022

Aural Fixation: National Recording Registry - Kenny Loggins' "Footloose"

Aural Fixation:

National Recording Registry - “Footloose”

The essays from PopMatters.com have been gathered in book form as Aural Fixation: Essays from a Music Obsessive. Essays written from 2009 to 2011 have been gathered in the book No One Needs 21 Versions of “Purple Haze”. You can purchase the essays in book format here.

At the request of the Library of Congress, I wrote this piece in 2022 about Kenny Loggins’ song “Footloose,” a 2017 inductee into the National Recording Registry You can read the original here or read it below.

The Movie:

Kevin Bacon bounds into the prom in the closing scene of “Footloose” with his rouse-the troops proclamation “I thought this was a party! Let’s dance!” Audiences heeded the celebratory cry and the movie danced its way to the top of the box office for three weeks in early 1984. It raked in $80 million domestically, ranking #6 for the year. ¹

Thematically, the movie traversed in the classic trope of puritanical adults bent on rescuing misguided, rebellious teens from their delinquent proclivities. When outsider Ren (Bacon) comes to town, he’s stunned by the antiquated no-dancing-allowed law and becomes a rebel with a cause. His effort to fight the system puts him at odds with the town council and local preacher (John Lithgow).

It may sound like a plot set in the emergence of rock-n-roll in the 1950s, but the seemingly eyerolling fiction was based on real events in the present day. In 1981, the high school junior class in the Oklahoma town of Elmore City petitioned to overturn an 1898 law outlawing dancing so they could hold a prom. Reverend F.R. Johnson, from the nearby town of Hennepin, declared, “No good has ever come from a dance… When boys and girls hold each other they get sexually aroused.” ²

Dean Pitchford turned it into a movie. He’d never penned a screenplay before but was no novice to songwriting. He won an Academy Award as the lyricist for the title song to the 1980 film Fame. Irene Cara turned it into a top-five hit. Pitchford would also co-write the nine songs which comprised the Footloose soundtrack.

The Soundtrack:

Nineteen eight-four was one of the most important years in the history of pop music. Michael Jackson’s Thriller wrapped up a record-breaking run of seven top-ten hits. Bruce Springsteen unleashed his own blockbuster with Born in the U.S.A., eventually matching Thriller’s enviable count. Prince, Madonna, Lionel Richie, Cyndi Lauper, Tina Turner, and Huey Lewis & the News all similarly milked albums for multiple top tens in 1984.

Only five titles topped the Billboard 200 album chart that year. In addition to Thriller and Born in the U.S.A., Prince reached the summit with his Purple Rain soundtrack and Huey Lewis & the News achieved the feat with their Sports album. The only other chart-topper that year was the Footloose soundtrack, which logged ten weeks at #1.

With sales certified by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for nine million, Footloose ranks as one of the ten best-selling soundtracks of all time. ³ In 2007, The National Association of Recording Merchandisers (NARM) and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame listed the soundtrack among their “Definitive 200” list of albums. Dave’s Music Database ranked the album as one of the top 100 soundtracks of all time and one of the top 100 albums of the 1980s. Like its peers, the album sent a slew of ditties into the upper echelons of the Billboard Hot 100 charts. Six of the nine songs charted, most notably the Mike Reno and Ann Wilson ballad “Almost Paradise” (#7) and “Let’s Hear It for the Boy” by Deniece Williams (#1).

The Song:

Of course, the most memorable cut was the title song, co-written and performed by Kenny Loggins. Released as the first single, the toe-tapping “Footloose” ousted Van Halen’s “Jump” (itself fueled by a can’t-sit-still manic energy) from the pinnacle the week of March 31. The call-to-dance anthem ranked #4 for the year. ⁴

It was the biggest hit of Loggins’ career, but it wasn’t his first venture into top-ten territory. He’d reached #4 with the 1972 Loggins & Messina song “Your Mama Don’t Dance” and hit #5 in 1978 with “Whenever I Call You Friend,” a duet with Stevie Nicks. In 1980, Loggins proved his talents could translate to the movies when “I’m Alright,” from “Caddyshack,” got to #7.

However, being part of 1984’s cream of the crop isn’t an automatic pass into the National Recording Registry. Take a gander at the top 10 songs of 1984: ⁴

Prince, “When Doves Cry”
Tina Turner, “What’s Love Got to Do With It”
Paul McCartney & Michael Jackson, “Say, Say, Say”
Kenny Loggins, “Footloose”
Phil Collins, “Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)”
Van Halen, “Jump”
Lionel Richie, “Hello”
Yes, “Owner of a Lonely Heart”
Ray Parker, Jr., “Ghostbusters”
Culture Club, “Karma Chameleon”

Other than Kenny Loggins’ “Footloose,” only Prince’s “When Doves Cry” and Tina Turner’s “What’s Love Got to Do with It,” both as part of their respective albums, have been inducted into the National Recording Registry. None of the other songs have been inducted as parts of albums or as individual songs. In fact (as of this writing), only six songs from the entire decade have been inducted (not including those as parts of albums). What makes “Footloose” so special?

The American Film Institute named it one of the top 100 movie songs. Dave’s Music Database also ranks it in its top 100 movie list, as well as lists for party songs and mainstream rock tracks. It also received an Academy Award nomination for Best Original Song.

Often the tunes that capture collective hearts and souls are those that elicit the listener to bump and grind, whether it be in the bedroom or on the dance floor. In the movie “Footloose,” music serves as a clarion call for the youthful spirit to kick back against the stodgy powers-that-be who would dare to squelch that need to groove, clothed or otherwise.

However, the lyrics and mood of the song “Footloose” don’t sound the alarm to unite in extending middle fingers to some oppressive authority. They don’t incite rebellion or have any political motivation. Like Kool & the Gang’s “Celebration,” one of the other National Recording Registry inductees from the ‘80s, the song is simply about having a good time and partying the night away. Like Bill Haley & the Comets’ “(We’re Gonna) Rock Around the Clock,” Chubby Checker’s “The Twist,” and Martha & the Vandellas’ “Dancing in the Street” (all National Recording Registry inductees) it comes down to Ren’s immortal words at the closing of “Footloose”: “Let’s dance!”

Dave Whitaker has authored more than 20 books including “Music of the 1980s” and “The Top 100 Songs of the Rock Era, 1954-1999.” His website, DavesMusicDatabase.com is devoted to ranking, rating, and reviewing music of all genres and eras. It has more than two million visits while his Dave’s Music Database podcast, available on Spotify, has reached listeners in over 50 countries.

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”
Dave’s Music Database (1/4/2022): “4/21/1984: The Footloose Soundtrack Began 10-Week Run at #1”
Dave’s Music Database (1/28/2021): “3/31/1984: Kenny Loggins hit #1 with ‘Footloose’”
¹ Box Office Mojo
² 405 Magazine (5/26/2015). “Dance Fever: The Town That Inspired (and Got) Footloose” by M.J. Alexander
³ MentalFloss.com (12/13/2018). “The 20 Best-Selling Movie Soundtracks of All Time” by Austin Thompson
⁴ Wikipedia.org “Billboard Year-End Hot 100 Singles of 1984

First posted 1/31/2022; updated 10/28/2023.

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Aural Fixation: Three Cheers for Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll

Aural Fixation:

Three Cheers for Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll

I’m into Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll. The show. I mean the show.

Denis Leary’s latest TV endeavor debuted on FX on July 16. Fans of his stand-up comedy and TV shows like The Job and Rescue Me know to expect a no-holds-barred, brash style which will have an insightful, yet brutal, honesty. With the possible exception of his voice work in the animated Ice Age movies, Leary could never be accused of being warm, cuddly, and lovable. Thus it should come as no surprise that Leary’s talent for in-your-face, deeply-flawed characters is on full display in Rock & Roll.

Leary isn’t out to glamorize the rock lifestyle or make himself look cool. Johnny Rock, lead singer of the Heathens, is an egotistical jerk unaware of how much he looks like an idiot with his childish behavior. He boasts in a bar about a younger woman’s attraction to him, only to find himself punched in the crotch when it turns out to be his daughter.

As the daughter, Elizabeth Gillies holds her own with Leary. She insists he revive his songwriting partnership with Heathens’ guitarist Flash (played by John Corbett) to boost her career. Instead of seeing an opportunity to connect with the daughter he never knew he had, Leary sees only dollar signs. By the end, however, his own twisted version of fatherly protectiveness sets up a hilarious scene where he lambasts his bandmates for objectifying his daughter.

Based on Leary’s track record, this won’t veer into sappy territory with touching scenes of father and daughter bonding. He’ll continue his bad behavior and frustrate everyone around him. She will prove to be the only one capable of taming him. I’m sold.

For more “Aural Fixation” essays, check out the Dave’s Music Database Aural Fixation page page.

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”

First posted 7/17/2015; updated 10/27/2023.

Friday, April 24, 2015

Aural Fixation: The Newest Book from Dave's Music Database

Aural Fixation: More Essays from a Musical Obsessive

Available at Amazon for $9.95.

This sequel to No One Needs 21 Versions of “Purple Haze” trots out another collection of music-themed essays, this time as originally featured in the PopMatters.com column “Aural Fixation.” Essays take on the Grammys, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Glee, terrestrial radio, Tom Cruise, and the state of the music industry, often voicing a contrary opinion to the all-too-common laments of the typical music critic. Whitaker asserts that rock and roll isn’t dead, that pop music matters, and that best-of lists are a good thing. 146 pages. Published 2015.

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Aural Fixation: The Five Year Anniversary of Dave’s Music Database Blog

Aural Fixation:

The Five-Year Anniversary of Dave’s Music Database Blog

Today marks the fifth anniversary of the DMDB blog. It has come a long way in five years! That first post, entitled “How to Get into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame”, mocked that institution’s biases with five observations about what will (or won’t) lead to canonization in Cleveland. I ripped on the organization for failing to induct acts like Kiss, Rush, Genesis, and Alice Cooper. All are now in.

I put up a whopping 13 posts in 2009 and another 14 in 2010. About mid-way through 2011, I changed the focus of the blog from essays on music-related topics to more objective snapshots of musical history tied to that particular day. That paid off in spades. Prior to the thematic switch, my biggest month was September 2009 with 422 hits. I more than doubled that number in June 2011 with the new approach. I noted in a 2012 post, “The History of the Dave’s Music Database Blog”, how the blog had mustered 31,000 hits. I was quite proud. It has grown by more than ten times that in the last two years. By the end of January, the blog should log 400,000 views.

I’m not sure how I’ve been so lucky to get so much attention to my blog, but I’m grateful to all the fans. Thank you for reading!

The Fifteen-Year Anniversary:

And now for another update – January 22, 2024 marks the fifteenth anniversary of the DMDB blog! The blog has now amassed five million hits, an average of more than 900 hits a day! The most popular post, with over 120,000 hits, is “The Top Songs by Decade, 1800-2019.” Not far behind is “Radio’s Most-Played Songs in History” with 119,000 hits.

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”

First posted 1/22/2014; last updated 1/21/2024.

Friday, June 28, 2013

Aural Fixation: Why Radio Still Matters

Aural Fixation:

Why Radio Still Matters

My kids roused me out of bed on Father’s Day morning to come eat breakfast. I suspect my wife did all the cooking, but the handmade cards stuffed in the donut box were original work. Among my gifts was a book called The Hits Just Keep on Coming: The History of Top 40 Radio. Nary a holiday slips by without me shredding the wrapping paper from some music-related book. My family knows me well.

My history with radio began in the 1970s in my pre-teen years. Walt Bodine, a staple of Kansas City radio for more than 70 years before his death just a few months ago, did a call-in show on various topics. One night focused on left-handedness. I dialed in to share my earth-shattering talent for capably manipulating right-handed scissors despite being a Southpaw.

Before you scratch your head too much over why a kid was listening to an AM talk radio call-in show hosted by a guy more than four decades his senior, I blame my father. He faithfully listened to sports and talk radio. As a kid, I could have rattled off the entire rosters of the Royals late-‘70s and early ‘80s baseball teams. I still watch televised Chiefs football games with the sound turned down. Why? I subscribe to Dad’s philosophy of listening to the local (and biased) radio announcers instead of the national television broadcasters.

Radio was a staple of my dad’s young life in rural Georgia in the 1930s and ’40s. When my brother and I took him out for a barbeque dinner to celebrate Father’s Day, I asked him about his memories of radio. He recalled his mom listening to farm reports while he followed adventure-oriented serials like Jack Armstrong, the All-American Boy and The Adventures of Superman. At night he could pick up AM stations as far away as Chicago. Even today he follows University of Georgia football games via internet radio and webcasts.

While Walt Bodine made for my earliest radio memory, my focus shifted away from the talk, sports, weather, and news of AM radio. Before I made it to high school, I was a devotee of Q-104, the local top 40 FM station. My listening habits moved to my bedroom instead of the family’s living room. Now I could privately listen to whatever I wanted whenever I wanted.

In an era when radio is regularly proclaimed deceased, Terry O’Reilly of CBC argues that it is the ultimate survivor (cbc.ca, “Radio Is Dead. Long Live Radio.” 26 January 2013). It was the first-ever broadcast medium, launched in the United States in the 1920s. It has survived through competition from motion pictures, television, VCRs, and the Internet. Even as it now faces threats from streaming and satellite radio, traditional terrestrial radio offers what those other mediums can’t – an intimate experience listening to music spun by a local DJ.

As blogger Mark Edwards says, “Local matters. While customers may enjoy…creating custom music channels on Pandora, that doesn’t mean they’ve lost interest in what’s happening next door, down the street, and in the heart of where they live” (Markontheweb.blogspot.com, “Is Local Radio Dead? In Some Ways It Is, But Owners Don’t Know It Yet”, 7 November 2011).

Brett Moss, the gear & technology editor at Radio World, discusses how “stations where the content changes every day…can’t be replicated by a Pandora” (rwonline.com, “The Inside Debate: Is Radio Dead?”, 18 April 2011).

While his comments refer more to talk, sports, and news formats, they have relevancy for music-related stations as well. Even as stations are gobbled up by conglomerates like Cumulus and Clear Channel, their real flavor comes from local personalities. Companies like Pandora and I Heart Radio bank on the notion that people only listen to radio for the music. Another voice in the Radio World article notes that such thinking ignores what happens between songs. While streaming and satellite radio allow a listener to tailor song choices, they can’t deliver the local angle. The DJ on a music station serves as the ultimate party host, promoting and appearing at the hot upcoming events.

More than thirty years after my first radio appearance, I got another invite to the party. Last summer Slacker, the morning DJ at KCFX 101 The Fox, interviewed me (hear it here!) about my book, The Top 100 Songs of the Rock Era. I’d be hard-pressed to find a station more local. It is walking distance from my house.

Click to play my interview with Slacker at 101 The Fox

I enjoyed the off-air chatter more than the interview. We discussed the state of radio and how it has changed over the years. He confessed to being less than enthused at playing Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” and Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Free Bird” ad infinitum, but acknowledged the importance in giving listeners what they want.

How successful radio meets listeners’ needs is ultimately what will determine its fate. However, before people are too hasty to declare radio’s demise, it should be noted that a Hollywood Reporter article from last August (“CBS Radio Chief Exec: Sorry, Radio Is Far From Dead”, 23 August 2013) cited that over 92% of the U.S. population still regularly listens to broadcast radio. Ryan Matthew Pierson reported at lockergnome.com that in 2011 radio listenership had increased by 2% in the UK (“Is Local Radio Dead?”, 3 November 2011).

The key is to use modern technology to enhance listeners’ interactive experience with traditional radio. Edwards reported that 60% of Pandora’s traffic comes from mobile devices. Local radio must recognize that its survival depends on providing customers access via iPods and iPads as well as the AM and FM dials. That also means enhancing a radio station’s social media presence, both for the overall brand and the individual personalities.

While it sounds contradictory, the idea is that a fan should be able to access the local station from anywhere in the world. That means a Kansas Citian uprooted from his native Georgia half a century ago better still be able listen to radio broadcasts of the Bulldogs college football games. It means that a Walt Bodine fan in Tokyo better have had a chance to hear the beloved radio personality’s final broadcast on KCUR last April.

The local radio station can form a lifelong bond with its listener. After Slacker interviewed me, I joked about how my nine-year-old son had begged me to bring him. “You should have!” Slacker responded.

A week later, I loaded my sons in the car one morning under the pretense that we were going out for breakfast. When we pulled into the radio station parking lot, their eyes lit up. Once inside, Slacker showed them the studio and then did something I hadn’t expected – he put my boys on the air. Levi shared that he would be seven in a week and Slacker jokingly asked if he was married and had kids. Evan got to talk about how he was going to the Olympics at summer’s end and then gave a shout out to his friends. Who knows, Slacker. Maybe forty years from now one of my sons will write an article where he references the time he was on the local radio station and talked to one of the city’s most cherished DJ’s. Top that, Pandora.

Click to play my kids' interview with Slacker

Resources and Related Links:

Dave’s Music Database: “Aural Fixation essays page”

First posted 6/28/2013; updated 10/28/2023.

Friday, April 26, 2013

The Death Knell Sounds Again: The History of Music Industry Whining

Originally published in my "Aural Fixation" column on PopMatters.com on April 25, 2013. See original post here.

image from tumblr.com

If the Chicken Little music industry pundits are to be believed, the sky is falling. A business which makes billions of dollars a year can’t stop whining about how illegal downloading, streaming, and Internet radio are sending them to the poor house. There’s one problem with their complaints – we’ve been hearing them since the beginning of recorded music history more than a century ago.

I blame Thomas Edison. Thanks to his indefatigable curiosity and perpetual instinct to invent, he steered the world into the dawn of a new age: recorded music history. In 1877, he laid down a recitation of “Mary Had a Little Lamb”, and shortly thereafter, we fell down the rabbit hole.

If it weren’t for his voice-recording phonograph, we might not presently be enduring the horrible curse of being able to listen to any music we want anytime, anywhere, and any way we choose. Damn you, Mr. Edison! Look what fury you hath wrought!

Edison ruined the music industry – or at least how the form in which it was known 136 years ago. Before the invention of sound recording, the music business was built on sheet music sales. Once Edison let the cat out of the bag, the big bucks moved to recording music, away from sheet music distribution.

image from heykiki.com

Stuart Banner wrote a piece for Bloomberg.com (“The First Time Tech Ruined the Music Business”, 14 December 2012) stating:

“The music business was in turmoil at the turn of the century. Technological innovation had made songs much easier to copy, and established artists foresaw their sales plummeting. The companies that had once dominated the industry were rapidly losing ground to upstarts who produced new devices for playing music. The established companies urged Congress to tighten up the law to prohibit copying, while the innovators argued that any such change would only harm consumers.”

Here’s the kicker. While this sounds like a modern assessment of the music industry, it actually describes the state of the business in 1900. Record execs haven’t stopped griping since.

So let’s take a look at the current reasons why a multi-billion-dollar industry would have the public belief the whole system is falling apart – and when these supposedly new problems first surfaced.

The music industry can’t survive with competing formats or delivery systems.

We’ve heard for more than a decade how the compact disc is suffering a slow death at the hands of the MP3. Clearly this is a late-20th/early-21st century development, right? Uh, no. Try 19th century.

Edison's phonograph, image from wikipedia.org

Within roughly a decade of Edison’s invention of the phonograph, Emile Berliner thrust his alternative, the gramophone, upon the world in 1888. It relied on a disc instead of a cylinder, thus introducing the first “my format’s better than your format” battle.

Thankfully, the dilemma never reared its ugly head again – except for the introduction of piano rolls (1896), 78 RPM records (1906), 33 1/3 RPM records (1928), the LP (1948), the 7” single (1951), the cassette (1964), the 8-track (1966), the compact disc (1978), MTV (1981), the MP3 (1990), streaming (1995), Napster (1999), Pandora (2000), iTunes (2003), YouTube (2005), and Spotify (2008). If some of these dates sound earlier than you expected, well, let that be a lesson to you. These formats did not storm the industry and decimate them overnight. (Source: PBS.org (““Chronology: Technology and the Music Industry”, 24 May 2004).

image from rateyourmusic.com

The industry can’t compete with free, or nearly free distribution of music.

Record companies have lobbed their legal heft at Internet radio and streaming services like Pandora and Spotify in the claim that such services are ruining the recording industry. However, radio first “threatened” the music business over 80 years ago.

image from thesociety.org.au

The ‘20s saw the mass-production of commercial radio. Record companies were so terrified of the new medium that they signed their major artists to contracts forbidding them from doing radio work. As we all know, once every household in America had a radio, recorded music went away forever.

image from sheltonstella.files.wordpress.com

Oh, wait. It didn’t. As has happened dozens of times, the music industry adapted – even if it had to get over its initially panicked reaction, first – and transformed radio into a means to promote music sales.

As for the effect of modern-day services like Pandora and Spotify, Hugo Vanessen notes in a Storify.com article (“The Effect of Spotify and Pandora on the Music Industry”, March 2013) that the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) said sales actually saw a slight rise in 2012 after 14 years of decline. The article suggests the industry may owe the turn of fortune to Spotify and Pandora. Spotify founder Daniel Ek is quoted in the article as saying, “Old media are always afraid of new media… because when a new media appears on the scene you have to change in order to keep up.” In other words, if the industry would stop panicking and embrace progress, it would be much better off.

No one will buy music if they can listen and share for free.

This brings us to the dumbest move in the music business in recent memory. After Napster hit in 1999, peer-to-peer file sharing exploded. Convinced illegal downloading would bring the industry to its knees, record companies screamed bloody murder and got the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) to take on the image-shattering move of suing everyday music fans. After all, if your customer is fleeing from your company, the best way to woo them back is to chase them down with a legal machete and mercilessly (and publicly) flog them, right?

image from news.cnet.com

As far back as the 1890s, the invention of the jukebox meant no one needed to buy music for their home ever again. At the height of its popularity in the ‘50s, the jukebox was a staple at diners and drive-ins. Teens could hang out with friends at the local burger joint and wait for someone else to drop a dime to listen to the latest rock ‘n’ roll chartbuster. Ah, that fateful day when the record companies announced they were closing up shop for good because no one was buying music, anymore.

Oh wait. That didn’t happen? Well, at least not until blank cassettes threatened to destroy the sale of the beloved LP. The record honchos got the 1909 Copyright Statute amended in 1971 so that those horrible teens who swapped albums with friends could be chased down with legal machetes and mercilessly (and publicly) flogged. Wait – is anyone else experiencing déjà vu?

image from theocmd.com

Don’t shed too many tears for those poor record execs. In the ‘80s, they pulled off a major coup: a percentage of the profits from the sale of every blank tape. Once again, they managed to weather the storm.

The availability of individual songs will kill the album.

In 1948, the 12” disc, better known as the LP, was introduced. Within three years, a 7” format – the single – hit the market. The funeral procession for the death of the music industry began immediately.

image from microcosmologist.com

Yeah, yeah. I think you see the pattern by now. The reality was that both formats stuck around for decades and gave customers choices. Of course, with billions of potential bucks to be made, the record company fat cats considered customer choice a negative factor on their bottom lines and set out to destroy the single.

In the ‘80s, blockbuster albums like Michael Jackson’s Thriller, Bruce Springsteen’s Born in the U.S.A., and Prince’s Purple Rain generated hit after hit and sent fans to record stores in droves. By the ‘90s, record company execs made a concentrated effort to squash the single, often creating massive radio hits (No Doubt’s “Don’t Speak”, Goo Goo Dolls’ “Iris”) which weren’t available as commercially available singles. Fans had no choice but to buy the more expensive album.

The CD Era: Death of the Single,
image from blogs.houstonpress.com

Think of it like this. If you go to the grocery store to buy potatoes, they are available individually or by the bag. In the digital age, the return of customer choice – and the ability to buy one song at a time – sent the music biz into a tizzy because it can no longer sell you a sack of potatoes when you only want one. Let the violins play.

* * *

I won’t deny that record companies have taken a hit in the 21st century. However, for all their finger-pointing, they may be pointing at the wrong culprits. In an ABC.net article (“The real reason why the music industry collapsed”, 25 May 2012), Nick Ross graphs the number of albums sold per person from 1973 to 2009. There’s an obvious spike in the ‘90s to more than five album purchases per person. The number peaked in 1994, so when Napster launched five years later, the numbers were already in decline. Numbers dipped back to pre-‘90s levels of two to four album purchases per person. The record industry didn’t so much tank as return to normalcy.

Matthew Lasar acknowledges in an arstechnica.com article (“Did file-sharing cause recording industry collapse? Economists say no”, 23 March 2011) that global recorded music sales had dropped to about $15 billion in 2010 after being just shy of $27 billion in 2000. However, he argues, these numbers coincide with a global economic downturn in the ‘00s.

image from arstechnica.net

A graph at Ultimate-Guitar.com (“Why Music Industry Observations Suck”, 1 November 2011) looks at US sales dating back to 1999 up to projected sales for 2014. It suggests that since 2009, sales have practically leveled off to just shy of $6 billion a year.

Wake up, music industry folks. Technology and consumers are constantly evolving. Instead of fighting to derail technological advances in the music industry you are certain will destroy your livelihood. Figure out how to embrace change. Or don’t. It doesn’t matter. Music, and the way it is delivered and heard, will change whether you like it or not. If you want to blame anyone, though, I say it’s that evil Thomas Edison’s fault.

Thomas Edison with - an iPopd?,
image from farm4.staticflickr.com

Monday, March 18, 2013

Anatomy of a Viral Smash: Bauuer's "Harlem Shake"

Originally published in my "Aural Fixation" column on PopMatters.com on March 18, 2013. See original post here.

image from popmatters.com

So are you ready to gouge out your eyes and slice off your ears if forced to endure one more version of “Harlem Shake”? With 700 million views and counting, someone’s paying attention. The question is: What made it into such a viral smash?

“I love these videos. They’re great.”

“What are they doing?”

“My side is hurting.”

“What? What, what, what?”

“This is horrifying.”

“I think they’re all yucky.”

“It was very weird. It was awkward.”

“I just don’t understand.”

These are a few of the responses captured in the Fine Brothers’ Kids React online series in which the under-18 set is asked for opinions on “Harlem Shake” (10 March 2013).

</p><br /><p>

Anyone who has escaped seeing a dozen or so clips of the song either a) has no connection to the Internet or b) no interaction whatsoever with other human beings. In a viral explosion unheard of since, well, the days of Psy’s “Gangnam Style” mere months ago, the song has become the go-to favorite for office drones needing a 30-second reprieve from cubicle life.

In fact, the workplace is a popular setting for fans to create their silly but simple clips to accompany the irrepressible earworm. For those just returning from long, tech-free sabbaticals, the premise of the homemade videos is that onlookers ignore a sole dancer, generally wardrobed in a helmet or mask, for about 15 seconds before joining in after a jump cut with their own crazy gyrations and costumes.

Exactly how did this sensation start and why did it get so big? According to The Daily Beast’s Marlow Stern, amateur comedian Filthy Frank uploaded the first version to YouTube on February 2 (“Meet Baauer, the Man Behind the Harlem Shake”, 18 February 2013). The satirical blogger, known for performing video skits decked out in a pink body suit, created a clip of himself grooving wildly to the song with three cohorts.

Filthy Frank version

It was quickly replicated by five Australian teens who called themselves Sunny Coast Skate. They created the template of one person dancing while the others ignored him, only to jump into the fray after the beat drops. Kevin Allocca, YouTube’s trend manager, reported that in just over a week about 12,000 “Harlem Shake” videos were posted (“The Harlem Shake Has Exploded”, 12 February 2013). Since then, more than 700 million people around the world have seen one of the 100,000 versions of the song (The Independent, “A brief history of the Harlem Shake”, 3 March 2013).

Sunny Coast Skate version

Among the most popular are renditions from The Simpsons, Jon Stewart, Jimmy Fallon, Playboy Playmates, the Norwegian Army, the University of Georgia swim team, and the Today show. Check out some of them here. YouTube itself joined in the fun showing its logo dancing before the entire page busts a move (click here, and watch what happens to your screen).

The explosion has been fueled by Billboard’s recent change in chart methodology. The immediate effect of the magazine’s decision to factor in YouTube plays alongside radio airplay, digital sales, and streaming was the song debuting at #1 on the Hot 100 chart (“Baauer’s ‘Harlem Shake’ Debuts Atop Revamped Hot 100”, 20 February 2013). Of course, the song’s digital sales were shaping up just fine by then as well – “Harlem Shake” was shown the love on Valentine’s Day when it nabbed the top slot on iTunes (TheVerge.com, “How the Harlem Shake went from viral sideshow to global phenomenon”, 18 February 2013). As of the March 23rd issue, the song had held on to the top spot on Billboard for four weeks.

The man behind the song is Harry Bauer Rodrigues. He was born in West Philadelphia, but his dad’s financial consultant job took him to Germany, London, and Connecticut before he went to New York for college. The now-23-year-old DJ/producer got signed last year to PR agency Biz3 who released the song as a free download in June (Billboard, “Movers and Shakers”, 2 March 2013).

Baauer's full version

Success hasn’t come without controversy. The New York Times’ James C. McKinley Jr. reported that “Harlem Shake” features unlicensed samples, including the famous “Do the Harlem Shake” admonition taken from rap group Plastic Little’s 2001 song “Miller Time” and the opening line “Con los terroristas” from Hector “El Father” Delgado’s 2006 single “Maldades.” Both are seeking compensation from Bauuer’s label, Mad Decent Records (“Surprise Hit Was a Shock for Artists Heard on It”, 10 March 2013).

A street interview with Harlem residents elicited strong responses that the dance associated with the song is not the Harlem Shake (“Harlem Reacts to ‘Harlem Shake’ Videos”, 18 February 2013).

Deadspin’s Emma Carmichael said the original dance “is really not much more than a little side-to-side shoulder shimmy” (TheBlaze.com, “If You’ve Been Hearing About the ‘Harlem Shake’ Video Craze, Here’s How It May Have All Started”, 14 February 2013). Here are instructions for the dance:

The New York Times reported that the dance originated in the ‘80s. Albert Leopold Boyce, aka Al B., performed it during streetball games in New York’s Rucker Park. The dance, which is much rawer and fluid than what is showcased in the videos, became known as the Harlem Shake when local teenagers started mimicking it. Specifically, the four-man dance crew Crazy Boyz, who used to hang out at Rucker Park and watch Al B., have been widely credited with taking the dance to the mainstream in the ‘90s (“It’s a Worldwide Dance Craze, but It’s Not the Real Harlem Shake”, 28 February 2013). In a documentary by Kien Quan, he goes so far as to call them the Original Harlem Shakers (26 February 2013).

How did “Harlem Shake” become so huge? In the Kids React series, kids said the videos were funny, easy to make, and made people want to be part of a new thing. StartUpNation.com’s Zeke Camusio says viral hits engage audiences, entertain or educate them, create memorable experiences, and are short and focused (“What Makes Videos Viral”, 2009).

Allocca did a TED talk identifying three reasons a video becomes a viral hit (“Why videos go viral,” November 2011). It takes off when a tastemaker, such as a talk show host or well-known blogger, picks it up. Next, the community participates by passing the video along or putting their own twist on it. Finally, video hits have unexpectedness – something which is unique and gets attention.

In dissecting why Psy’s “Gangnam Style” became the most-watched video in YouTube history with over a billion views, Chicago Tribune’s pop culture columnist Jae-Ha Kim said there was a kind of “freak-show mentality, where people are like, ‘This guy is funny’” (TheBlaze.com, “What the Heck Is This ‘Gangnam Style’ Video Craze You’re Hearing About? We Explain”, 19 September 2012).

In consolidating these criteria, several key elements emerge which explain the immense success of the “Harlem Shake” meme:

The videos are funny and have a bit of freak-show element to them.
They have a surprise element. Even though viewers know there will be an eruption of group dancing at the 15-second mark, they don’t know what to expect in the way of the crowd’s choice of costumes.
Because the videos are short, they can be quickly viewed and passed on to others.
When it starts to take hold with the general public, media stars will latch on to it as well, reporting about it and even mimicking it.
Because of the ease in making the videos, the community actively participates by flooding the market with even more versions.
In the end, whether people are making their own videos, passing them on to others, or just watching them endlessly on their own, they become part of the viral community.

Love Bauuer or hate him for inflicting “Harlem Shake” on the world, he has made a permanent stamp on pop culture. Of course, even if he’d been given this handy-dandy list prior to his song’s dominance, he couldn’t have manufactured such success. There’s an inexplicable X-factor behind unleashing a phenomenon. As one of the pre-teens in the Kids React video said, “I just don’t understand.” That’s okay. No matter how much science and analysis is applied to this phenomenon, I don’t understand, either.

Monday, February 18, 2013

Why the Grammys Matter

Originally published in my "Aural Fixation" column on PopMatters.com on February 18, 2013. See original post here.

So your favorites didn’t win, huh? Get over it. Bashing the Grammys is too easy. Try recognizing them as markers of what is happening in the music industry, not on your iPod.

The day after the 2012 Grammys, an NPR article debating the award ceremony’s merits found its way onto my Facebook feed (“Question of the Week: Be Honest – Do You Care About the Grammys?”, 11 February 2013). As Jacob Ganz notes, “cataloging the Grammys’ flubs has become easy sport,” yet he answers his question with “a surprising yes.”

Wait – what? How could any self-respecting journalist part with the widely-held belief that “the Grannys” are out of touch and irrelevant? Didn’t this guy get his Music Journalism 101 handbook? It clearly spells out what anyone writing about music is supposed to hate: pop music made for and by teens and tweens, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, bands that sell out and, most of all, the Grammys.

After all, this is the organization which made such notorious flubs as giving a Best New Artist trophy to Milli Vanilli and deciding to break in its hard rock category by bypassing Metallica in favor of Jethro Tull. The judges thought it made more sense to give Song of the Year to Roger Williams’ “Little Green Apples” than The Beatles’ “Hey Jude”. Heck, this is the organization which gave Tony Bennett’s 1994 MTV Unplugged the lofty Album of the Year prize.

Indeed, there are some embarrassing chapters in the Grammy history book. However, more often than not, the Grammys get it right. Well, maybe not 100 percent right, but more right than wrong. Let’s look at just the last decade’s Album of the Year winners (parentheses indicate year it won, not year of release):

Mumford & Sons Babel (2013)
Adele 21 (2012)
Arcade Fire The Suburbs (2011)
Taylor Swift Fearless (2010)
Robert Plant and Allison KraussRaising Sand (2009)
Herbie Hancock River: The Joni Letters (2008)
Dixie Chicks Taking the Long Way (2007)
U2 How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb (2006)
Ray Charles Genius Loves Company (2005)
OutKast Speakerboxxx/The Love Below (2004)

The most popular criticism of the Grammys is that it leans toward safe, middle-of-the-road picks. Most of these albums can be spun at a dinner party without riling the guests. Even OutKast, arguably the edgiest act on this list, is bound to produce smiles when “Hey Ya!” kicks in.

However, this isn’t just a list of music for 40somethings and beyond. Adolescents caught with Arcade Fire and Mumford & Sons on their iPods aren’t going to become pariahs. No matter how mainstream Adele and Taylor Swift are, can anyone reasonably argue they don’t deserve golden trinkets to decorate their fireplace mantles?

Another common complaint levied specifically at the Album of the Year prize is that it’s more of a career achievement award. That certainly has happened – does anyone really think Hancock’s River or Charles’ Genius are the pinnacles of their careers? Doesn’t it seem silly that the former beat out Amy Winehouse’s Back to Black and Kanye West and that the latter triumphed over Green Day, Usher, Alicia Keys, and, well, Kanye West?

Sorry, Kanye. None of these are for Album of the Year;
image from smokingsecion.uproxx.com

However, most of these albums were significant releases representative of a surprisingly wide array of genres including folk, British blue-eyed soul, rock, country, Americana, jazz, R&B, and rap.

Cynics may whine that none of these albums represent their genre at its best. Sure, Taylor Swift may be categorized as country, but she’s more pop. U2 may be the biggest rock band in the world, but they hardly represent the edgiest stuff the genre has to offer. These albums, however, may well open up the average music fan to stretch his or her music palette.

Detractors are fond of screaming “The Grammys are just a popularity contest!” Uh, yeah. That’s kind of the point. The Recording Academy isn’t generally trying to tout the next big thing – unless it’s crowning Esperanza Spalding Best New Artist like a couple years ago. Its members are understandably looking to boost the profiles of already familiar properties. The ideal candidates mix critical acclaim and an “it” factor along with commercial clout. It should be no surprise that the Grammy powers-that-be aren’t aiming to spotlight your local club’s favorite Saturday night bar band as the best in its field.

One of the biggest flaws behind the average person’s arguments regarding awards shows, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or assessments of who should and shouldn’t get radio airplay comes down to this: people are baffled when the rest of the world doesn’t share their musical tastes.

It also wouldn’t hurt to remember that when Mumford & Sons takes home the big one, their fans who have been with them since the beginning had their dreams come true – the rest of the world did catch on to their personal tastes.

Reflect on the Grammys of yesteryear and there are signs that things have changed. Look at the ‘80s. It was the decade of the blockbuster and the Grammys were doled out accordingly. Phil Collins, Whitney Houston, Michael Jackson, George Michael, Lionel Richie, and U2 all produced memorable Album of the Year pop chestnuts, but were far from edgy picks which would challenge the average music listener to open up to a “new” kind of music.

Maybe you didn’t root for Mumford & Sons or Adele the last couple years. Maybe you have no use for them at all. However, they are flag bearers for some of the most significant directions for music in recent years. Along with success for the Mumfords comes exposure for The Lumineers, Alabama Shakes, The Avett Brothers, and The Decemberists – and maybe a dip of the toe into the musical folk-rock pond which spawned them. People who champion Adele might also try Amy Winehouse, Duffy, Joss Stone, Florence + the Machine, or other artists indebted to the blue-eyed soul of Dusty Springfield a generation ago.

That’s the context in which to judge the Grammys. They are markers of what is popular today and what is trending for tomorrow, but they can also serve as links to the musical past. Complain and whine about the awards if you wish, but as for Jacob Ganz’s question “Do You Care About the Grammys?” I reply with a resounding Yes!

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

What James Bond Can’t Teach You About British Music History

Originally published in my "Aural Fixation" column on PopMatters.com on January 30, 2013. See original post here.

If you want lessons in womanizing, dressing to the nines, or ordering martinis, James Bond is your man. If, however, you’re looking for a review of British music history over the last 50 years, the world’s favorite secret agent has no idea what he’s doing.

Oscar nominations were announced in early January and, to no one’s surprise, they jumped on the “let’s give Adele a shot at another trophy” bandwagon. Even if the Academy doesn’t follow the Golden Globes’ lead and gift “Skyfall” with the prize for Best Original Song, the movie of the same name has already won. The 23rd film in the James Bond series is also its biggest grosser (“Billion Dollar Bond: ‘Skyfall’ Crossed $1 Billion Milestone”, ABC News, 30 December 2012). Even before Bond burst into billion-dollar territory, the franchise had been called, depending on how one crunches the numbers, the most successful of all time (“The Biggest Movie Franchises of All Time in 2 Charts,” The Atlantic, 19 July 2012).

The songs accompanying these blockbusters have often been hits as well. Roughly half have gone top ten in the US or UK. A handful, including “Skyfall”, have done it on both sides of the Atlantic.

Don’t, however, let the hit status of these songs fool you. Everyone’s favorite British Secret Service employee may be a complete original, but when it comes to literally marching to his own drummer, his ability to rock a tux does not mean he knows how to rock your radio.

The relative “it” factor and success of “Skyfall” aside, most of the 007 themes over the years reveal an institution largely determined to ignore musical trends in favor of saccharine ballads to pipe into elevators. No, I’m not talking about the Grammy Awards committee (often famously derided as “the Grannies”), although there are alarming similarities.

Let’s rewind half a century to October 1962. The first James Bond film, Dr. No, opened in the UK Sean Connery took on the role of the famous secret agent created in a series of novels by Ian Fleming. The character’s look, uncanny knack with women, and mastery of whatever new-fangled technology came his way made him one of cinema’s greatest icons.

Sean Connery, image from myetvmedia.com

The legendary film franchise is one of the most famous exports in British history, but it takes a backseat in his Aston Martin when compared to the Fab Four. While Bond was taking out bad guys, The Beatles were taking over radio. The band from Liverpool also thrust itself on the UK scene in October 1962 with its chart debut of “Love Me Do.” Their look, uncanny knack with women, and mastery of whatever new-fangled technology came their way made them one of music’s greatest icons.

However, one icon was a gang of hippies with mop-top hair who made beatnik music for teeny-boppers. The other icon looked dressed and groomed for, well, a Grammy ceremony.

Naturally, the tuxedoed gent’s musical tastes aligned pretty well with his well-dressed Grammy brethren. While American radio and retail was being reinvented by the Beatle-led British Invasion, Grammy love was doled out to throwbacks like Frank Sinatra and Louis Armstrong. Meanwhile, 007 themes were crooned by people like Frank Sinatra-soundalike Matt Monro (“From Russia with Love” from 1963’s film of the same name) and, well, Louis Armstrong (“We Have All the Time in the World” from 1969’s Her Majesty’s Secret Service).

Oh, both institutions acknowledged Paul McCartney and Co., but they were cases of either too little (the handful of Grammys the Beatles did receive) or too late (Paul’s other band, Wings, recorded the title song to 1973’s Live and Let Die).

Roger Moore, image from malialitman.wordpress.com

Live and Let Die marked the franchise’s first acknowledgment of the existence of rock and roll and debuted Roger Moore as Bond. However, the next decade was pretty much a return to form. Rock in the ‘70s was defined by Led Zeppelin’s stamp on heavy metal and Pink Floyd’s brand of psychedelic and progressive rock. By decade’s end, the Sex Pistols and The Clash led rock and roll’s first revolt against itself. Meanwhile everyone’s favorite martini-swilling womanizer went right back to swaying to adult-contemporary-ready ballads sung either by UK natives (Lulu, Shirley Bassey, Sheena Easton) or US counterparts trolling the same sonic ground (Carly Simon, Rita Coolidge).

Even as Bond refused to change, the music of the ‘80s was in constant motion. The punk movement transformed into new wave which in turn fueled the Second British Invasion as synth-driven British bands flooded the living rooms of American teens desperate for music videos. The fledging network MTV built its platform on a steady reservoir of the promo clips popular on British music shows. Bands with big hair, bold clothing, and behemoth-sized personalities relished in the new-found attention.

Even a man who dressed primarily in black was enamored by the bright colors. MTV favorites Duran Duran were tapped in 1985 to record the title song for “A View to a Kill”. It remains the only 007 tune to hit number one stateside or across the pond.

While Bond got another makeover, first with Timothy Dalton for a couple outings and then with Pierce Brosnan, there was no changing the outdated musical tastes of England’s famous fictional spy. British bands The Smiths, The Cure, and Depeche Mode forged the template for college rock. By decade’s end the Stone Roses and Happy Mondays were the darlings of the music press, praised for trumpeting the shoegazing genre. This led to the much-ballyhooed battle of the guitar-based bands Oasis and Blur in the mid-‘90s. With such a plethora of game-changing sound at their disposal, the brains behind Bond turned to a stable of proven US chart veterans like Gladys Knight, Tina Turner, and Sheryl Crow who all proved woefully incapable of tackling the US charts.

Pierce Brosnan, image from bornrich.com

In 2002, Die Another Day restored hope for musical relevance with Madonna’s top ten title hit. Naturally it signaled the end of an era rather than a beginning. This time, however, the change was for the better.

Daniel Craig stepped in as the series’ seventh 007, if one counts David Niven’s comic turn in the 1967 spoof Casino Royale. To accompany the reboot, Chris Cornell delivered “You Know My Name” for the 2006 version of Casino Royale and Jack White served up “Another Way to Die” (with an assist from Alicia Keys) for 2008’s Quantum of Solace.

Daniel Craig, image from geekynerfherder.blogspot.com

Because of their rock credentials, the songs were welcome entries in the Bond canon, but emphasized the same message as most of their predecessors: songs tailored to everyone’s favorite globe-trotting spy offer little or no insight on the music going on back home. That is, unless Mr. Shaken Not Stirred had secretly applied for American citizenship. Roughly the first half of the Bond movies were soundtracked by UK artists. Since 1989, the only act with any tie to the United Kingdom was when Garbage, fronted by Scottish singer Shirley Manson, trotted out “The World Is Not Enough” in 1999 for the movie of the same name.

The world’s top gadget freak wasn’t just abandoning his own country’s music, but jumping on musical trends a decade late. As the frontman of Soundgarden, Cornell had been right at the forefront of the grunge a decade earlier. As half of The White Stripes, Jack White was arguably the biggest star of the return-to-garage-rock movement at the turn of the century.

Still, Daniel Craig’s Bond Version 7.0 offered hope. This wasn’t the same secret agent we’d come to know through more than 20 movies. Maybe he could jump off buildings and into moving helicopters backed by music lifted straight from BBC Radio 1. It took 50 years, but by tapping Adele for “Skyfall” the Bond series finally picked a song by a British superstar actually at the cusp of a movement. Thanks to Adele and predecessors like Amy Winehouse, Joss Stone, and Duffy, the Brits were right smack in the heart of an English blue-eyed soul singer era which would have made Dusty Springfield proud.

We’ll see what happens next time out. One good song choice does not a new direction make, but I’m crossing my fingers. Maybe the Bond tunesmiths will reshape history and craft the songs they should have made in past outings. Personally, I’m hoping for a Sex Pistols reunion in which they re-record “God Save the Queen” infused with a dose of John Barry’s famous instrumental 007 theme. The movie can open with Bond and the Queen of England landing a helicopter at the Olympics in London. Hey, stranger things have happened.

Sunday, December 2, 2012

Rock Memoirs Aren’t All About the Rich and Famous

Originally written for my PopMatters.com "Aural Fixation" column, but not published.

image from nytimes.com

Summary: This fall several superstars added their autobiographies to the ever-increasing market of rock memoirs. However, there’s a lesser-told story deserving of an audience as well: the life of working-class musicians who travel by van instead of private jet, tour clubs instead of stadiums, and are staying in dives instead of suites. Here’s one of their tales.

Music fans salivating for self-penned tales of debauchery and stardom from their favorite rock gods can dive into recent autobiographies from Pete Townshend (Who I Am: A Memoir, Harper), Neil Young (Waging Heavy Peace, Blue Rider Press), and Rod Stewart (Rod: The Autobiography, Crown Archetype). There’s an understandable appeal to getting a (hopefully) unguarded glimpse into the life of a legend. These are musical giants who have lived lives we mere mortals cannot imagine and likely could not have survived.

The bigger the star and the more sordid the life, the better. It shouldn’t be a surprise that Keith Richards’ Life did as well as it did. The guy personifies rock-n-roll at its baddest and best – arguably better than anyone else in history.

When unpacking the personal accounts of a superstar, however, fans aren’t just curious about how these legends achieved immortal status. Readers also want to peak behind the mask to see larger-than-life superheroes drop their oversized personas and reveal their humanity. People want to know that those who have attained unfathomable success have been plagued by fear and failure along the way.

A few months ago, Rob Sheffield put together a list for Rolling Stone on the best rock tomes (“The 25 Greatest Rock Memoirs of All Time,” 13 August 2012). Sheffield acknowledged the all-too-familiar rags-to-riches (and sometimes back to rags) blueprint of the rock memoir.

Unsurprisingly Sheffield’s list is populated with books on Bob Dylan, Paul McCartney, Keith Richards, Chuck Berry, and David Bowie. The more intriguing titles, however, are those about more unfamiliar names like Nick Kent and Kristin Hersch. As Sheffield says, “Great rock memoirs don’t always come from great artists: sometimes it takes one-hit wonders, losers, hacks, junkies, crooks.”

In that spirit, the book which caught my attention was Black Postcards (Penguin Books, 2008) by Dean Wareham.

Who?

Exactly. Readers keyed in to the indie-rock scene of the 1980s and ‘90s may know him as the frontman of Galaxie 500 and Luna, but if you’re like me you’d heard of him or his bands.

This seemed like more fertile soil than digging through the conventional bio of one of rock’s elite. For every superstar living a life of stadium tours, private jets, and hotel suites, there are hundreds of working-class musicians gigging in dives, traveling in cramped vans, and crashing in cheap motels.

Wareham actually achieved a measure of success many would be overjoyed to have – albums with tens of thousands in sales, appearances on national talk shows, and videos aired on MTV, even if only on a limited basis.

Still, there’s something which differentiates the Dean Warehams from the Keith Richards of the world. What motivates the musicians who have to keep their day jobs to keep slogging it out? Do they still believe they’ll make it big someday? Did they never dream of stardom in the first place?

For the uninitiated, here’s a brief overview of Wareham’s career. He tells how in the summer of 1987 he was in New York playing with Speedy and the Castanets. “There I was under the lights at CBGB for the first time in my life, just now realizing that I was onstage with a fool and that I needed to quit the band immediately” (p. 32).

After a summer of moping over a lost girlfriend and listening to Jonathan Richman and the Modern Lovers’ Back in your Life, he hooked up with Damon and Naomi, a pair of Harvard grad students who had dated since high school. As Wareham says, “You can spend your time placing ads…and sifting through messages left on your answering machine by idiot musicians…but the best thing is to start a band with your friends” (33). Galaxie 500, named after an old car, was born. As stated in their All Music bio, “their minimalist dirges presaged the rise of both the shoegazer and slowcore movements of the 1990s.”

However, when Wareham tired of butting heads with the voting block of his coupled rhythm section, he dissolved the band in 1990. After a solo EP in 1991, he formed Luna. With musical influences like Wire, Joy Division, New Order, and Sonic Youth, Wareham wasn’t exactly going to overcome what he cited as one of the dream-pop outfit’s biggest obstacles: they weren’t grunge. Nonetheless, Luna survived personnel changes over a twelve-year career which saw the release of seven studio albums.

I sought out a compilation and was a click away from buying it before opting to explore YouTube first. With apologies to Wareham disciples, I was unimpressed and the album remained on the virtual shelf.

The book left me with a similar dissatisfaction. Wareham chronicles nearly two decades of a life of touring small clubs in the U.S. and Europe. While there are the requisite tales of sexual conquests and drug binges, they are delivered with an aloofness suggesting nothing really excites him. The book cover says it all – a head shot of Wareham with a blank look on his face.

He reports celebrity run-ins with rapper Flavor Flav and Red Hot Chili Peppers’ lead singer Anthony Kiedis with a ho-hum detachment and a mere paragraph or two when seemingly a chapter’s worth of insight could be offered.

There’s also a quality of self-absorption. He was in New York in 2001 when terrorists brought down the twin towers. However, instead of offering moving insight into the immense tragedy happening right in front of him, he focuses on the personal turmoil of leaving his wife for Britta, the bassist in Luna.

The distance Wareham puts between himself and his lifestyle does provide the benefit of preventing this book from becoming a why-didn’t-we-make-it-big whine fest. Wareham confesses he’d “never lain awake at night dreaming of being a big rock star” (106) and that he wasn’t interested in shoehorning catchy choruses into his songs in return for radio airplay. He relayed a meeting in which he said, to the disappointment of the record executive, that he just wanted to make records. “It never occurred to me to want to be a household name.”

Dean Wareham lacked the necessary ambition and possibly talent to ever make it big. He was never destined to be a Pete Townshend, Neil Young, or Rod Stewart. He never dreamed of stardom, but Black Postcards offers an account of someone who succeeded. His life wasn’t necessarily one filled with passion, but Wareham seemed to live the life he wanted – and that’s all anyone can hope for.

Pages

Friday, October 27, 2023

Aural Fixation:

What Is Rock and Roll?

Resources and Related Links:

Friday, February 10, 2023

Aural Fixation:

Why the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Isn’t a Joke

The Argument: They induct non-rock and roll acts.

The Rebuttal:

The Argument: Rap isn’t rock and doesn’t belong in the Hall.

The Rebuttal:

The Argument: Why not just call it the Music Hall of Fame?

The Rebuttal:

The Argument: Jann Wenner calls the shots. If he likes the act, they’re in. If he doesn’t, they’re doomed.

The Rebuttal:

The Argument: The Hall sucks because (insert name of favorite band here) isn’t in.

The Rebuttal:

The Argument: The Hall just inducts high-profile names that will draw audiences (i.e. money) to the annual induction ceremony.

The Rebuttal:

Conclusion:

Resources and Related Links:

Monday, January 31, 2022

Aural Fixation:

National Recording Registry - “Footloose”

Resources and Related Links:

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Aural Fixation:

Three Cheers for Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll

Resources and Related Links:

Friday, April 24, 2015

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Aural Fixation:

The Five-Year Anniversary of Dave’s Music Database Blog

The Fifteen-Year Anniversary:

Resources and Related Links:

Friday, June 28, 2013

Aural Fixation:

Why Radio Still Matters

Resources and Related Links:

Friday, April 26, 2013

Monday, March 18, 2013

Monday, February 18, 2013

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Sunday, December 2, 2012