I cringed after reading chapter 6, my brain tied up in the tightest of knots trying to figure out the age-old question, what came first, the chicken or the egg? Or in the case of Chapter 6 of Starr and Waterman’s American Popular Music, what came first, the music or the culture?
The tussle between music and culture begins with swing music’s influence; swing impacted everything from “dance styles” (obviously) to “architecture” (less obvious). Swing was designed to cater to a larger audience, or was the larger culture pressuring music to cater to it? As America became integrated at a depressingly slow rate, it needed music to unite it, music was no longer for the whites or the blacks, it was for all Americans. Swing was the chosen genre, accommodating mixed audiences in large ballrooms, ballrooms with modern designs, representative of the progressive tone of the times. However, swing music did take the improvisation out of the emerging jazz culture, swing was strictly regimented with pre-written down sheet music and rarely any time to go off on a solo. This post Black Tuesday audience had probably had enough surprises, though, like, “Hey, all the money that was once in your savings is now gone, surprise!” It begs the question did culture ask for a structured music, a stabilized form, just as they hoped their lives would return to? Swing music created business, something badly needed in these depressing times, swing ushered in the New Deal era and it’s “government institutions, labor unions, and big business,” says Starr and Waterman. Peoples adjustment and comfort with these new structured lives, organized by government and big business grew comfortable, and in love, with this new genre of music that allowed them to forget about life off the dance floor.
The emergence of country music seems more clear-cut on the “what came first?” debate. Men left their lives, wives, children to fight in the war against the Nazis and America needed a song to celebrate these acts of valor, someone to cherish their lost loves one and support those still fighting. America gave the nod to country music to fulfill these duties. Country music had “themes of sentimentality, morality, and patriotism” the prefect ingredients to remedy the members of battle in a world war. The answer seems simple, before the war country was called “hillbilly music” neither respected, nor popular. During the war it accrued a third of the music business’s earnings and was a favorite to troops overseas. In these battle stricken times, the country was in need of something they could listen to that would be conjure thoughts of supporting troops, dispelling evil in Germany and getting the boys back home safe so the country turned to country. And like swing music, western music was typically “associated with movement, independence, and the future.” Like Bob Dylan said only…30 years later, “the times they are a-changin’” and they continue to change as culture begs for the next new genre to reflect their values and practices (what does that mean about our current generation as songs about partying infiltrate our airwaves?)
Culture asks for music and the industry obeys. While a myriad of genres are constantly floating below the mainstream the culture will decide what hits it big, depending on the current values of the culture. We see a constant synthesis of values pushing at one another, culture needing music to soothe it, or a genre so big it can’t go unheard and changes the values and cultures of it’s listeners (for better or worse, I’m looking at you, ICP). Now that that’s cleared up, back to the more important issue: Chicken, egg? Egg, chicken?
the egg.
ReplyDelete