The struggle for non-mainstream music acts to be recognised is long and hard. The relationship between the development of music genre and style is now closely linked to the music industry and consumption. Simon Frith notes that in writing about music,”The sociologist of contemporary popular music is faced with a body of songs, records, stars and styles which exists because of a series of decisions, made by both producers and consumers, about what is a successful sound.” (Frith 33)
It is concerning that the music business now takes on aspects of capitalism (Lovering 34) in its operation, and that this influences the production of contemporary music. Lovering believes that the “consumption and marketing of particular kinds of music in particular places clearly influences the development of musical tastes and subsequent musical creativity“. (Lovering 33), and this is certainly true when one looks at the development of the rock genre in all its many forms. While once there was a clear distinction between heavy, soft, hard rock, etc. now the mainstream music industry has amalgamated these sub-genres into one colossal category. There is a blurring of the lines between these sub-genres; and some would argue that what is known as mainstream rock is actually pop, such as popular band Snow Patrol.
The music industry’s evolution into a media sector with capitalist tendencies, makes it harder for musicians who do not fit the mainstream mould to break into the industry. Loverling also notes that “the music industry is profoundly dependent on public systems of regulation…there is and can be no such thing as a completely “free market” in the real world…” (Lovering:34).
To expand further on Lovering’s comment, if there is no such thing as a free market, this explains in part how it has come to be that the music and genres that are deemed successful and popular in the mainstream continue to be produced and reproduced in bulk. There is a multitude of beautiful young pop singers who top the charts on a regular basis with frustratingly similar-sounding songs. This can also be said for the success of musicians in rock, rap and R&B, genres which now seem to have a “brand”, that is, if we watch a music video clip of a rapper for example, we can almost certainly predict the thematic content, aesthetics and sound of the piece, because they signify the rap “brand”.
Perhaps it is a case of supply and demand, where at present the supply is plentiful in response to a demand that is narrow? I just can’t accept that this is the case, when the plethora of music styles available and supported online suggests that there is a wider music audience interested in more than Top 40 rock and pop. The reason for this must lie strongly in our consumer culture, where the music industry’s view of music is as a “commodity” (Loverling) to be capitalised on, rather than an art form to be developed.
References:
Frith S (1987) “Towards an Aesthetic of Popular Music” in Popular Music: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies. Accessed Online
Lovering J (1998 ) “The Global Music Industry: Contradictions in the Commodification of the Sublime” in The Place of Music, ed. Andrew Leyshon, pp.31-56, New York: Guilford Press
May 28, 2008
Categories: Academic Research, Personal opinion . Tags: capitalist, commodity, consumption, free market, mainstream, sub-genres . Author: caitlinjudith . Comments: No Comments