It’s Probably Good
Last week Vinny and I began discussing the topic of popular music. For a blog centered on the discussion and criticism of pop culture, it seemed like a natural fit to start with. The questions we have about music’s path into the future are deceptively simple. Where is it going? What is it doing? Is it a good direction? A bad one? Surely the answers to these are a matter of opinion, but then, the Chaos Collage is devoted to our opinions, and being the elitists we sometimes (or always) are, those opinions usually feel somewhat more like fact. Still, the questions remain complex.
In my last post, The Mass Market Music Blues, I briefly discussed the idea that even with artists spread across so many genres, media hyped music is focused more on image than on actual musical talent. It’s a shame, but it’s there. However, now that I’ve solidified that point, I’ll move on to the other end of the spectrum – modern music that deserves, at the least, more attention and appreciation, but just isn’t getting it.
Firstly, let’s qualify popularity. Many artists that fly under the mainstream radar are actually rather well known within their own musical niche. Joe Satriani, for example, fills large venues, has endorsement deals and gets coverage in guitar magazines, but his name is hardly ever heard on the radio or seen on television. The media pays him no serious mind because he doesn’t appeal to enough people, or the right kind of people. Hell, the man has been nominated for the “Best Rock Instrumental Performance” Grammy Award fourteen times and never won. Some might feel the nomination is enough recognition – but fourteen times? Give the guy some credit, he at least deserves some critical validation. I say critical validation because the truth is, he will never appeal to a massive audience, and I think I’d like to keep it that way.
From a personal standpoint, a world full of people who absolutely love virtuoso guitarists like Satriani would be a nightmare. Shows would sell out too quickly, tickets would be prohibitively expensive, and there would be so much chatter from the media and fans that I might lose interest based solely on saturation. Excellent musicians deserve their chance at popularity, but, like a recent commenter suggested; keeping them a little hungry may also keep them honest. The more they care about the music, the more original it’ll be, and they’ll hold on to their diehard fans while remaining obscure to the mass market. In that respect, I suppose I’d vote to keep the status quo.
Of course, the opposite could happen. Their original stuff could end up being just what the spoon-fed masses needed, and they could either start releasing consecutive albums of little consequence (hence the phrase “I liked their earlier stuff better.”), or they could defy all the scenarios I’ve set up and be wildly popular and consistently genuine with their art.
That said, and since I’m sticking up for the little guy today, I’d like to issue a question to our readers. I’ve posted a video below of a song entitled “New Beginning” by the band Gravity. Back in 2007, they beat out two-hundred other groups in a battle-of-the-bands type competition, not to mention that all but one of them was still in high school. Considering the current musical landscape, I think that’s quite an accomplishment, especially for an instrumental-only progressive rock group.
I have my own ideas about why they took home the grand prize, and while I know anyone watching this probably wasn’t privy to the competition they faced, I think it’d be interesting to hear some other opinions about why they did, or perhaps didn’t deserve to win. Comment away!