The masculine voice in contemporary music is not easily defined. I think this is due to the "crisis of masculinity" which currently plagues men in our society. It seems as though the mainstream male artists are either a reaction to, or an endorsement of, hegemonic masculinity and patriarchy. The orthodox male in our society has been one of strength, power, and dominance over women. Examples include Elvis Presley, Bruce Springsteen, Ozzie Osborne, Tupac etc.
The masculine voice today contains some artists who are very similar to these, but also those who break out of the mold. John Mayer is known as a womanizer due to his music as well as his personal life; very similarly to Elvis. He is undoubtably popular and empowered because of this male gender and his aura of masculinity.
On the other hand, there are artists today such as Sufjan Stevens who have a very feminine sound. His music is based on beauty and his voice is very passive and not aggressive like all the men referenced earlier. So the contemporary masculine voice seems to be struggling with this time of identity crisis. Some hold on to the gender roles which have proven to be successful, and others create music and gain popularity through new and creative forms. In each case however, men seem to have more freedom to explore new sounds and messages, where women seem to be on a shorter leash for popularity.
The feminine voice in contemporary music is one of strong individuality. It might be due to the dis-empowerment felt by women in society and the music industry. Even just when I think about the mainstream female voices from 10 years ago, I think of women like Britney Spears who just embodied all of the stereotypes of femininity. At that time I would have been more ready to say that the feminine voice was that which complied the best with sexual expectations. It seemed like consumers wanted to hear only what did not challenge any norms or standards. While I think there is still something about a perfect girl which is appealing to our society, most of the big female names in music today are very strong individuals. These women, though they often still gain power through their sexuality, do not as easily fit in the boxes which our society tries to put them in. In many cases these female artists push the envelope and gain a sense of empowerment and a voice due to this. Lady Gaga obviously is the main example of this. Her music and performance empowers her through preaching individuality and being true to yourself.
These women are not only considered the voice of females because of their message in lyric form, but what they do in performance and the sound of their music. Lady Gaga has control over her listeners because she combines all sorts of conflicting messages. Lyrics are only part of the message. The images, the sounds, and what she stands for off stage all combine and contrast to form such a wide-spread intrigue. Another female artist who has a very strong voice and strong stage presence is Florence Welch. Her music and message demands the attention of listeners.
Adele is another example of a strong voice both in sound and message. Her music has a message of empowerment for women and individuality. Her songs give women the idea that they can be true to themselves and break free from the restriction which men and society but on them, and her powerful voice provides the feeling to go along with this.
Miranda Lambert is another young voice who is not afraid to write songs about what she wants.
This song by Amos Lee provides us with an image of a man who acknowledges his co-dependence. Sung in a very soft and rather in-masculine way, the song gives the listener a feeling of authenticity and genuineness. One of the reasons Amos Lee is so good is that he can create a sound which I, the listener, can relate to based on the experience of overwhelming emotion. This goes against a core stereotype of masculinity that men have no or should not show any emotion. Just as clearly as his sound portrays this, the lyrics also fly in the face of some gender stereotypes. Rather than refusing to admit his dependency or to give up a position of power in relation to women, he sings from the heart about how much he misses and needs a woman. In a different sense of empowerment, this song almost empowers men to follow his lead; feel the empowerment and comfort of being true to your feelings. In a world filled with confusion, the character finds himself needing to be held, comforted, and supported by a woman. He openly desires this feeling which a child has towards his mother. Without this woman who is away from him, he feels the emptiness of a childless mother. I find this song to be inspirational and a good piece of music because of the feeling of honesty and authenticity present in the song.
The success of a musical artist is rarely due to just the quality of their song. While I do believe that we, the listeners and consumers, have the capability to acknowledge songs and artists for their musical qualities, we much more often popularize songs based on outside factors. When I describe a musical artist as a "performer" I do not mean that they get up on stage and give a good show. No, musical artists today must be performers on the stage and off. What they do, who they show themselves to be, and what identity they claim off stage has a great impact on their music. We have learned that context matters. So here is a compilation of a few contemporary artist who I believe to be expert "performers" off the stage; performers who gain popularity due to both intentional and unintentional identity formation in the media. Performers who prove that context matters.
Britney Spears
Though we all already know this, it would be ridiculous of me not to include Britney. While much of her popularity can be attributed to sexuality and perhaps even a bit of talent, a great deal is also due to the story surrounding her. Our society is intrigued by what she does off stage.
Matisyahu
I love Matisyahu's music. I think his songs are catchy, his style is unique, and his message is fantastic. But I undoubtedly have come to know him as "the Jewish rapper." His context, his identity both within and outside his music is what is so intriguing. I think this is what makes a successful artist - one who can create an interesting relationship between rapper-Matisyahu, and Hasidic-Jew-Matisyahu.
Bono
Once again, I completely love the music of Bono and U2. But Bono has become such a huge icon not just because of his music, but because of what he stands for. His identity extends into all that the does within and outside of his music. He has in organization and is a huge advocate for many social justice issues.
Eminem
Marshal Mathers is an incredible wrapper who is definitely known for speaking his mind in his lyrics. He is also know due to his past and his life as person not just a rapper. This is such a large part of his identity as and artist that he made the movie "8 Mile" which describes where he grew up and how he got his start as a rapper. His fans know where he came from and this contributes to his popularity.
We have spent the majority of our time in this class thinking about how the music industry exploits artists for their sexuality. Another large injustice of the music industry revolves around race or ethnicity. Following the same structures of power as sexual exploitation, those in power have much more of a voice than those without all the same advantages. It is no secret that white males hold all the advantages and power in our society. We have spent a lot of time thinking about the gender part of that equation, but now I would like to spend a little time examining the history of racial discriminiation and disadvantage in the music industry.
A history of exploiting black culture has been a part of American popular music since its very beginning. Beginning in the 1840's, minstrelsy was the first form of musical theater which was created and unique to our country. If you don't know what it is, minstrel shows were basically performances which were completely based around mocking blacks. Performers in "black-face" would sing songs and portray characters which were perceived to be genuine interpretations of African American culture. It took little bits of black culture and exaggerated them and created this system of gaining success at the expense of blacks. Unfortunately, this was a huge staple of popular music for a very long time, and continues to be a part of some music today.
"These negative images of blacks did have some elements of black culture in them, however twisted and distorted the overall effect was . . . Minstrelsy was the first example of the way American popular culture would exploit and manipulate Afro-Americans and their culture to please and benefit white Americans."
-Robert C. Toll, Blacking Up: The Minstrel Show in Nineteenth Century America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), p. 51.
The following performance is from 1950, 100 years after the birth of minstrelsy. This shows how long black-face remained culturally acceptable and not viewed as racist at all.
Perhaps the most relevant and common form of black exploitation in the music industry is the cover song. Artists have been covering songs of other artists for a long time. What we dont often recognize is that many of the songs which we attribute to white performers, are actually covers of songs done by black artists. Because of the power and advantage held by white people in our society, they received much greater success for work which was not even theirs. Here are some examples:
"Mystery Train"
-Junior Parker 1953 -Elvis Presley in 1955
The industry now prevents songs from being stolen by other artists, but I think it is still easier to for some artists to gain popularity based on there race. Rap was formed in the Bronx in the 1970's and 80's by artists such as Grand Master Flash. But the genre was not legitimized and did not achieve success on the charts until 1986 with "Walk This Way." The reason Run DMC achieved mainstream recognition was because he recognized how important it was to appeal to white men. "Walk This Way" is a collaboration of Run DMC and the popular rock band Aerosmith.
Our society has become one of individualism and the music industry is no exception to this. In class we talked about how in the past there have been entire group movements - people writing songs and singing about the same issues. The folk revival movement for example was a movement of not an individual, but a community. Where is that today? This doesn't mean that there are not any contemporary artists who have anything important to say, it means that everyone has their own message, their own agenda. Often times, this message seems to be about individuality. I have found that there are a huge amount of songs which are commenting on conformity. There are endless songs which contain the noble message of "don't conform. Be true to yourself. You can do anything!" Don't get me wrong, this is a great thing to teach people and all, but why does it all have to be about extreme individuality? Why can't a response to conformity be diverse unity. What is missing in our society is the idea that unity and diversity can exist simultaneously - this is true community. So why does our society and its institutions have to endorse either stereotypes which put you in the category of conformity, or individualism? Here are just a few songs which stress the common rhetoric of individuality which, once again I do not think is bad in its own right:
The intentions of an artist's work is a hard thing to know. With some, it seems as though they have no purpose behind their music; the music is just a means towards popularity and achieving celebrity status. With others, their intentions in writing and performing their music seems very clear. But even in these instances, it is incredibly hard to examine the validity of one's intentions. This is because their actions, lyrics, and opinions are mediated and influenced through so many levels of our society. Regardless of whether or not we receive or interpret an artists message correctly, wouldn't you still say their is more value in this than listening to artists who seem to have no purpose, no intentions? Discussion on Joan Baez started me thinking about what other musicians seem to have really influenced society in an intentional way. What other artists are there who have given the perception, however true it may be, that their music comes secondary to another goal? That their music serves as a means towards social commentary or any sort of passion of theirs.
Bob Dylan. It's hard to start off a discussion about social commentary in music without giving a ton of credit to Bob Dylan. When he came on the scene in the 1960's he revolutionized everything about the music industry. Rock n' roll music will never be the same. He went against all the rules of popular music such as when he came out with the 6 minute long "Like A Rolling Stone," changing the standard for song length. More importantly however, he really started the art of writing lyrics which push the envelope. After Dylan, social commentary became more of a fixture in the song writing of all popular music to come.
Marvin Gaye. Yep, believe it or not, this man was passionate. His songs clearly had a theme and passion for love and sex. But his songs, especially from the 1970 album "Whats Going On" commented on all sorts of social issues. While I can only speculate, I don't think it's too far out there to say that Gaye wrote his music out of a passion for teaching love in all its forms. This theme was present in all that he wrote, even those songs without words.
Rage Against the Machine is a band which seems to have a pretty clear message. It serves as a pretty good contrast in approach to Marvin, but none the less, they had a pretty clear message against political power and social inequality. Rage was the ultimate proponent of a truly equal society and there music and context definitely got that point across. Though they received a lot of criticism for commentaries, I still appreciate the way that the intentions behind their music seemed very forefront.
