Sunday 27 September 2009

Now! That's What I Call A Post About Pop Music

I basically believe that we close out the Noughties with chart Pop Music in an exceptionally healthy state, having emerged fully and finally from the spectacularly dire early to mid-Noughties Atomic Kitten / Westlife era. While my taste in old music has become ever wider and weirder and more esoteric as I've gotten older, my taste in contemporary music has solidified in recent years into an unashamed love of good mainstream pop music, and a general disinterest in, and suspicion of, middle-of-the-road 'alt' rock.

Maybe this is due to a greater sensitivity to (and distrust of) marketing & packaging, and a greater difficulty accepting the cynically disingenuous marketing of 'high art' rock product as 'authentic' or 'serious' or 'real' than the relatively accurate marketing of pop product as 'sexy' or 'fun' or 'new'. All (perhaps not all - certainly most) pop music is presented by its accompanying media in such a way that it appeals to a particular audience, playing on that audiences sense of identity, politics, sub-cultural allegiances etc. This is as true of The White Stripes as it is Cascada.

So I guess at some point you realise that the only real, worthwhile pleasure one can take from listening to a piece of pop music is via a willingness to go with an honest, gut-reaction to it, and that an honest reaction to a piece of music has nothing to do with style or politics (either personal or global) or what subculture you identify with, or who produced it, or what type of drums they used on it, but some impossible-to-fathom, incomprehensibly complex arrangement of experiences and your DNA that generates in your soul an undeniable sensation when presented with that sound. It's entirely arbitrary, and once you've accepted that it makes life much easier. "This person looks cool / sexy / exotic. Their song has a great melody / beat / sound. It makes me want to sing / dance / cry / fight." Is it really any more complicated than that? Madonna has spent huge swathes of her career trying to 'matter' in a variety of 'serious' arenas, but her instruction of 'And you can dance!' from the beginning of 'Into The Groove' is a more important statement than anything she's ever had to say about gender politics - it is a license to let go, permission to indulge unselfconsciously in the almighty power of pop music. Maybe even a timely reminder, a nudge to po-faced Mojo Magazine orthodoxy "...uh, you can dance, y'know. This is meant to be a party."

British pop music reached the millenium in a dire state, and wallowed in this depressed funk throughout the late 90s and early Noughties. Dudes on stools ruled, and it wasn't cool. Westlife remain the single most hateful pop group of my lifetime. Indeed, one cannot describe Westlife accurately as a pop band at all, lacking as they do any of the basic qualities common to that formula, ie: exciting songs, charisma, style, a sense of humour, relevance, ideas, etc etc. They just sucked, and continue to suck. They are anti-pop.

Elsewhere we suffered through endless hi-NRG Abba covers and tinny re-hashes of the Max Martin /Jive Records sound, so effective on Britney ('Oops I Did It Again', 'Crazy') The Backstreet Boys ('Backstreet's Back') & NSyncs ('Pop!') best records, but copied so weakly by British producers, and fronted by entirely talentless, pre-programmed popbots (Billie Piper's 'Day & Night' was one notable exception to this rule, being a pretty convincing British Britney rip-off.) Many of these boy/girl groups mighta had one or two acceptable records (S Club 7 had a couple of fine Motown pastiches, and 'Don't Stop Moving' is a pretty good disco track. All Saint's 'Never Ever' was a very effective 90s redux of that old girl-group sound. Rachel Stevens put out a couple of good Goldfrapp rip-offs), but overall they churned out vast amounts of garbage. The Spice Girls & Take That were genuinely powerful pop acts, vastly exceeding the limits of their formula through force of personality and the occasional great single, but the dozens of dozy Spice-Lites & Fake Thats that appeared in their wake were largely brainless, cynical business exercises exhibiting no love of pop music whatsoever. The top pre & post millennial US acts were hugely creative RnB / Hip-Hop performers like Missy Elliott, Eminem & Destiny's Child, undeniable talents, artists producing wildly original and exciting work. We had Steps & Atomic Kitten, non-singers dancing badly to cheap sounding music.

At some point in the last two - three years British pop has shook itself off and re-energised itself as a world-leading market force, back where it should be. The emergence of MOR Alt Rock - Foo Fighters, Green Day, the diabolical Red Hot Chilli Peppers - as the preeminent mega-selling unit shifting genre of choice gave pop a kick up the arse....it allowed room for pop to be the alternative choice, to be the place where the real creativity and excitement was happening. Enter Dizzee Rascal, Amy Winehouse, The Streets, Klaxons, artists making monumentally catchy, smart, NOW music. Acts ticking lots of boxes instead of one, or none, and existing on the fringes of the mainstream seemingly for a matter of minutes before being absorbed into the charts and the tabloids. After a shaky couple of years dominated by the horribly un-cool Pussycat Dolls, the US has produced Lady GaGa, whose shtick is more provocative off-Broadway drag-act than teen pop puppet. She's like a twisted, bizzzaro-world cartoon caricature version of the Blonde American Pop Princess, like if Britney Spears had missed out all the early cheerleader stuff and cut straight to the drugs and sex breakdown bit. GaGa is the perfect End Of The Noughties act, equally at home on the main stage of Glastonbury as she is performing at some LA hipster industry hang-out, a calculating, fame-obsessed suicide blonde train-wreck, lassooed to a thumping, buzzing electro-pop beat, whose career thus far is framed more like one of those semi-scripted Mtv reality TV shows than something approaching actual reality.

I'm not here to defend mainstream pop music, because it doesn't need defening, and anybody prepared to ignore or dismiss it on principle is a moron. There have been many, many great pop singles released in the past year, and it's simply worth noting that we appear to be in the middle of a genuine golden age for exciting, intelligent, fun mainstream music. These things go in cycles, and it won't last. A new Westlife / Atomic Kitten era will inevitably befall us within a couple of years. Maybe even a couple of months. So enjoy this pop era while you can...and remember: you can dance.

7 comments:

Helena said...

OMG! This is the most profound music post I have read in a long time. You should be publishing this stuff in mags!

I agree strongly with you on the late 90's when pop went shite stuff. Mostly for three reasons.

1. Britpop was my ultimate era in any decade I have lived through. I do, however enjoy other genres, but the heart ain't there as much. By 98, things did wane from the British sound and I started to lose interest.

2.I haven't lost faith all together. Despite the manic diversity to music, it hasn't died and it's back nearly 20 years on still influencing youth.

3. My personal reason is that my son is the drummer in band, doing very well in the local circuits with their own material reminiscent of good British sounds. And their popularity is growing.

Look, I'm not fishing for compliments just because I'm proud of them. But if you visit my blog (the once will do) and click the music video's on the side bar and have a listen to Casino, I'd appreciate it.

More so because you're spot on with bands losing their sense of humour and EVERYONE should go with their honest gut reactions! I think the boys deliver that! Simplicity is often all music needs.

Keep up the posts!

Paul 'Fuzz' Lowman said...

Thanks Lena, that's very kind. I'm heading over to your blog now.

Anna Lowman (annawaits) said...

This is indeed one hell of a post. Love it. Nice one bro :)

Helena said...

Thank you so much for the visit!

Mof Gimmers said...

Great stuff man. I revisited my article after reading yours and felt like I had more to say and I'm currently battering yet another Pop article out. Check ER and be the only person to leave a comment again!

Michael said...

"and anybody prepared to ignore or dismiss it on principle is a moron" - So you are here to defend it.
I agree wholeheartedly with your excellent article, i've noticed the trend towards pop becoming alternative when the scene started by Franz Ferd and Bloc Party quickly degenerated into rubbish commercial acts like Razorlight and the Kooks in the same year that crazy frog hit number 1. A vacuum was created which rock music filled, leaving pop lost and then able to find itself again.

However, every time someone brings this up in conversation or on a blog it is in a defensive way, can we not just wholeheartedly embrace it without referencing the fact that we are being ironically alternative by doing so? Can we not be neither cool nor uncool, both of which are interchangable, but just music listeners?

Paul 'Fuzz' Lowman said...

Thanks for popping by and taking an interest, Mike.

Of course, notions of cool are arbitary and interchangable, and of course it would be nice if we lived in some utopian ideal where such notions had no currency. It is ridiculous that pop music is regarded as 'uncool' by millions of music fans globally, and ridiculous that somebody writing intelligently and passionately about it might be regarded as subversive in some way, but this is the reality of the situation nonetheless.

My article was about the wrongheadedness of snobbery, which, like it or not, still dominates so much discourse on pop music, and it would be disingenuous and pointless to ignore this or pretend otherwise.

So you're right, I guess - there is a defensive tone to some of my article. I wish there didn't have to be. Pop music absolutely shouldn't need defending in 2009. But the truth is that, to some extent, it does.