Elton John: Master of Reinvention and Mass Appeal

One of the world's most well travelled, musically diverse and successful artists in Rock 'n' Roll, Elton John aka Reg Dwight has been a mainstay of Rock and Popular Music audiences in kind for 4 decades almost. After performing to a portentous crowd at the Troubadour in his first ever American show, Dwight received praise dubbing him the new musical talent and performer for his era.

In the wake of Rock 'n' Roll's most recent casualty list, including Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix and the breakup of The Beatles supergroup, people craved less and less the social activism which had charged Rock music of the 60's and instead looked to musicians to provide something new, something more individual, vibrant and artistic; "Elton John had somehow captured the zeitgeist of a new decade." (p. 238) Several things set Elton John apart from the previous decade's cohort, especially in regards to background, musical discipline and work ethic. Firstly, he was a suburban boy from the cosy Middle Class streets of Pinner, northwest of London. This in itself was not particularly remarkable, as many famous British musicians including John Lennon, Keith Moon and Mick Jagger had come from the suburbs, however unlike his predecessors who had rejected their suburban roots for inner city living, John revelled in and prided himself on his humble suburban roots. Secondly, he was not an amateur musician. By the time he had played his first show at the Troubadour in the US, John Lennon had over 10 years experience in the music business, having engaged in varied and musically diverse occupations working in all levels of the music industry itself. And into the present day, when charting Elton's progress, one can observe a veritable 9 lives in the business itself as Laing charts in his investigation of the man himself:

1. Classical Piano Prodigy
2. Pub pianist
3. Pop group member
4. Publisher's office boy
5. Backing musician
6. Songwriter
7. Session musician
8. Soundalike artist
9. Solo recording artist

As we can see, John comes from one of the most developed and musically diverse backgrounds of any performer today. Whereas many of the musicians of the 60's had simply picked up guitars, drums and were self-taught, John was trained in classical piano up to 8th grade before he even entered secondary school at age 11. Whilst it was this strong grounding in classic piano's artform which would inform his virutousity, it was his mother's love of pop music, especially the rock n roll of the 50's (Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley) which would ultimately decide his career direction in the music industry.

However Elton John's success is not only indicative of a shift in attitudes and perceptions of Rock music and a return to instrumentalism in the genre itself, but also of changing patterns in lifestyle, Rock audience demographics and the resegregation of music. At the time of his stardom being launched in the USA in 1970, John, a self-confessed suburbanite was hugely popular with a demographic which was more than ever, suburban in lifestyle and outlook, middle class to the core. Just as the backlash against the anti-war and civil rights movements of the 60's began to intensify and the idealism of the previous decades faded out, Elton John would come to dominate a music industry returning to the order and generic differentiation of popular music from yesteryear. What a curious coincidence.



Certainly Elton is a nonthreatening suggestion for any lover of rock wishing to steer clear of its activism and drug addled phase, however is such an explanation complete? Academics point to the resurgence of Elton John in a decade growing tired of the rock bands and supergroups of the 60's and certainly his appeal to older tastes in music, hearkening back to his love of popular music and rock 'n' roll in the 50's is a reflection of this. However it is not only his ideological differences, but also his musical background which play the biggest parts in creating his appeal.



Through his incorporation of jazz, blues and folk influences/styles in his work and the apparent readiness of a public wishing a return to good old Popular Music, but still craving a Rock vibe, Elton provided the perfect choice, a man who loved both popular music and Rock 'n' Roll, but whose social attitudes/performance were unthreatening and apolitical. Furthermore, his tastes and influences in music, as well as his training provided him with a virtuousity unshared by his counterparts and more appealing to a popular music audience which increasingly located itself in the suburban setting and hoped for a resurgence of the styles still popular in the 50's. By mixing old with new Elton was able to capture a Rock audience engaged in the mainstream and through his knowledge of the music industry and performance, has since been able to constantly reinvent himself to remain a popular artist through to the present day.

Therefore, In my opinion it is both a combination of his family background, musical training and social/cultural attitudes which gives John his appeal, combined with the favourable social conditions and apolitical cultural climate in which his music first emerged, perhaps even coming to typify the mood of the 70's themselves. Would he have enjoyed such success in the revolutionised world of the 70's which his hippy predecessors envisioned? Probably not. But that's not how the story went. How lucky for Elton.


Laing, D. (2008), 'Nine Lives in the Music Industry', Popular Music History, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 237-261

BLINK182.. In the spotlight

Following the recent return of the infamous BLINK 182 I thought it was high time we did a puff piece on them showing who they are and where they came from.

So In the beginning the band consisted of 3 members Mark Hoppus(Bass Guitar) Tom Delonge(Lead Guitar) and Scott Raynor(Drummer) and releasing 3 albums together "Buddha" , "Cheshire Cat" and of course "Dude Ranch" before the drummer Scott Raynor left and was replaced with the well know Travis Baker.

The bands first big hit was the well known "Dammit(growing up)" which quickly became and infectious teen anthem.

The band then went on to write another 3 albums and making it in to the charts with songs like "What's My Age Again?", "All the Small Things", "Adam's Song", "The Rock Show", "First Date", "Stay Together for the Kids","Down", "Feeling This", "Always" and "I Miss You".

The band split up in February 2005 saying they would be going on an "indefinite hiatus," and to everyones surprise in April of 2009 the band has returned saying they are touring again and writing a new album

Source = http://www.starpulse.com/Music/Blink_182/Biography/

Rock and Roll... & it's Influence on Sexual Attitudes

While scouring the internet for an interesting topic to blog about I came across an interesting on detailing rock and rolls influences on peoples sexual attitudes. I for one found this topic rather intriguing and also quite relevant. With today “pop stars” clothing seeming to get shorter and more revealing with every live show performed and also the added amount of swearing and sexual innuendo one cannot go without thinking that some of these messages might be messing with today’s youths minds.

Lady gaga is a perfect example of this. Don’t get me wrong I love the girl she’s quite possibly my favourite top 40 artist at the moment (not saying much I know) but surely when she stands up in front of the media and say that all of her songs are based upon sex and was written for homosexuals. Don’t believe me? Ever listened to the lyrics? “Let’s have some fun this beat is sick. I wanna take a ride on your disco stick.” But don’t think is stops there. Many other artists seem to be slipping in homosexual orientated lyrics into their songs. I mean we’ve all heard Kate Perry’s “I’ve Kissed a girl” and don’t tell me that you didn’t stop and think... hang on

Sue stone wrote and interesting article about the subject showing how lyrics in songs are not the only influence on youths but also the atmosphere in which the music is listened to. One could even surmise that technology has also assisted with this as the ability to listen to music on the go has become more and more possible as the years have passed.

But the real test of how true this theory is is to look at how certain songs have affected your life. Have songs such as Kate Perry’s made you want to cross to the dark side and try something different? I believe it can happen and Sue Stone thinks so too. While these songs are not necessarily rock music they are a good example as to how music can affect people lives and ever their sexual attitudes. I firmly believe that all forms of music can have a vast affect on people attitude both mental and sexual.

Source = http://www.xomba.com/rock_n_rolls_influence_on_sexual_attitudes

BLINK182 - Reforms and write new album

Rock? or Punk?... I believe that this long lasting band deserves a reclassification... Punk Rock. but why you might ask? simple. Being an avid Blink182 listener from back in high school and throughout university I never lost hope that this band would someone pull it back together. I for one have never really been a huge fan of neither Rock or Punk however I will happily sit back with an icy beer and enjoy song after song from this band.

The great new news that's just happened in the last few weeks is that this awesome band has announced that they will be reforming the band, writing a new album and organising a new world tour.

The band members were quoted saying "To put is simple, we're back, We mean really back. Picking up where we left off and then some, in the studio writing and recording a new album. preparing to tour the world yet again. Friendships reformed. 17 years deep in our legacy"

The band are expected to be on tour later this year

source = http://www.nme.com/news/blink-182/42641

Rock Music, The Disabled and What you Might Not Know

So i had been wanting to find something really interesting for my last couple of blog posts, as up until now i have been mostly analysing differing works of artists', movements within the sub-culture and social issues as they related to the genre. However for all the praise and critique loaded upon Rock 'n' Roll, I've yet to come across an issue which both exposes the inherent biases in performativity of Rock Music whilst concurrently challenging such essentialist notions of the rock band and the musician themselves.

"Fight for the Right to Party" documents the musical profile of British heavy metal band, Heavy Load, some of whose members have learning disabilities and their fight to gain greater freedoms and rights for disabled fans attending their concerts. Their "Stay Up Late" campaign illuminates the capacity for Rock groups and Rock culture to be both truly inclusive and catalyse change for those it hopes to capture as fans. The efforts of this band therefore showcase the ability of rock to be socially subversive and alternative in a manner which does not tokenise, but rather values and revels in difference and the triumph over adversity:

"The campaign, which is supported by learning disability charity Mencap, aims to make managers and support workers aware that people with a learning disability want more control over their lives and should be consulted when staff draw up rotas which affect things such as how late they can stay out"

Conversely, whilst this particular case highlights the positive role that Rock 'n' Roll music can take in affecting changes in attitudes towards and the cultural behaviours of previously excluded social minorities, it arguably raises the question, is Rock Music inclusive of those not able to (easily) access it as a medium for expression and artistic endeavour.

Whilst the members of Heavy Load possessing learning disabilities would have no doubt faced serious problems and issues in mastering instruments as technically complex as required to play in a rock group, they are only a part of the heterogeneous lotting of categories constitutive of "the disabled". In fact it may be this very categorisation itself which harms and limits the ability of those with learning and mobility impediments, as without a consideration of this difference and the unique challenges presented to differing disabilities, one cannot adequately gauge how best to innovate and cater for these groups.

Granted, some inroads are being made. 'Music Making for the Disabled' in Futurist magazine recently reported on the emergence of new technology for music composition in digital production, centered around a keyboard/piano program using facial tracking to aid those with mobility difficulties (particularly those who are quadriplegic or have Cerebral Palsy): "With the Keyboard Interface, the user sits in front of a camera and chooses a point to track, such as the tip of the nose; when the user "points" at the keyboard image, the software tracks the correct note to play"



Certainly, this is a great example of Rock and music in general being made accessible through human ingenuity. However the article the only one i was able to come across exemplifying this sort of inclusiveness in music production and creativity. Not only this but the article itself occupies about 3 paragraphs on a single page.

With a degree of certainty then could we assume that this issue is far from being adequately addressed and will continue to remain so as long as Rock music's performers are primarily able bodied and able minded musicians. Perhaps more tragically, this problem cannot be trusted to resolve itself, as disabled populations are both socially and culturally marginal and thus are often less able to have their opinions and quandaries considered. Furthermore, whilst they remain out of public awareness of Rock Music and are absent visually and culturally from the scene's acknowledged demographic audiences, they will be continually ignored. The issue itself presents a Catch 22 to disabled communities.

Therefore it is the duty of Rock pioneers, audiences, composers and disabled performers already involved in the scene to promote this cause; until then Rock cannot be truly said to be inclusive and absent of discrimination in its performance and participation.



References

1. Lucy, H. (2009, 'Fight for the Right to Party', Learning Disability Practice, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 18-19
2. Martin. P. L, (2007), 'Music-Making for the Disabled', Futurist, Vol. 41, No. 5, p. 2

It's Not Fair but We Don't Care-Punk's resurgence in the 90's

When Punk exploded onto the scene in the 1970's, it emerged as the voice of a disaffected and disgruntled youth full of rage, rebellion and incivility; alienated by a society that refused to acknowledge or value its contributions, ideas or listen to its problems, Punks of the 1970's were an angry and violent mob it seems. As Susan Hopkins (1997) states:

"Twenty years ago, the Sex Pistols released the punk anthem, 'Anarchy in the UK'. Against a backdrop of rising unemployment, street riots and political unrest the call to anarchy made its own peculiar chaotic sense.The Sex Pistols didn't so much write songs as give voice to anti-establishment anger and frustration."

And so it was that punk was born, its rage and uncivil behaviour, its chaos and contempt for a world that refused to deal with it directed against whatever manifestation of society it could get its hands on or around. And then as soon as it had come, it died out with the emergence of post-punk genres such as New Wave and Indie in the 80's.

In the 90's, bands such as Blink 182, Green Day, Rancid, Bad Religion, No Doubt and Pennywise stepped in to put Punk back on the map. But several things had changed. Punk was no longer about the problems and ills of a society that needed to be torn down, nor was it about the fight against a controlling impersonal state structure. Instead:

"Today the essence of punk remains misgovernment, as to be worthless is to be free from certain rules and conventions.Yet while the essence of punk remains, the focus of its erratic politics has shifted. It is no longer society in decline, but the self in decline, which has become punk's preoccupation."

This is not the only part of Punk's form and function that has shifted in kind with late/post-modernity, as Punk itself no longer operates on the social and musical margins, it is nowadays popular with the mainstream itself. This itself creates an odd paradox in Punk culture, something which Punks themselves have struggled with in the wake of the counter-culture's increasingly popular appeal, which has in turn been compounded by the popularity of original punk groups with newer audiences:

"To an extent unimaginable in the 70s, punk is now big business, anarchy is now commercial. For all their rhetoric of music industry revolt,even 70s punks have returned to ride the new wave of commercial punk. The figureheads of old-style punk, the Sex Pistols, reformed in 1996 and began their "Filthy Lucre" tour."

The return of the sound was not unaided by any means. Linking in with concurrent trends in Grunge Music, itself a reproduction of many facets of this newer form of Punk music, the return of a disaffected youth with Nirvana would ultimately inspire the revival of Punk in the 90's under a pall of identity crisis, uncertainty, self deprecation, distrust of the old and a seeming resignation to the circumstances in which young people found themselves. Punk it seems had grown tired, weary, even of itself and its ideology:

"The punk which emerged out of social decline and disarray in 70s London has been reborn in the US, injected with a 90s sense of introspection, irony and black humour."

What was once formed in rebellion to a society it sought to critique, tear down and remould, is now as much a victim of the controls of society it sought to rail against. Punk no longer exists to critique society, instead much of its content now deals with the critique of the self, the anarchy of identity and the violence and rage felt against the self, alienated from all and uncertain where to turn: "If there still is anarchy in punk, it's a kind of anarchy of identity. Now more than ever, critique of the postmodern personality is to be found within popular culture itself"



Hopkins, S. (1997), '20 Years of Punk', Youth Studies Australia, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 11-19

Australia the Island

There is no hiding it, I love 80s rock music. The bigger the hair and the shinier the leopard print vest the better. However I can’t help but feel us Aussies are being ripped off by our indignant isolation.

For artists to come ‘down under’ to Australia it involves a lot of time, money and resources. The sheer isolation of our continent to the rest of the world is enough to deter touring artists from coming here, or at the very least scale back their show production due to the logistics. This is a real issue for me as most 80’s rock metal makers require a full scale production to showcase their enormous talent (enormous enough to match their egos and hair!)

For example, not being able to see Poison’s world tour of the 80s the way it was intended, could severely alter the way they are represented and thus taken in by the audiences. It is common theory, that the foundations of rock and roll are embedded in the live performance and production of place. The distance of Australia from the rest of the world will thus affect this relationship and the central connectivity to the audience.

Tours like Bon Jovi’s Slippery When Wet and Motley Crue’s Girls Girls Girls are examples of this scaling back idea when it comes to Australia. The pyrotechnics and acrobatics of both tours were not reproduced for Australian audiences due to the high costs of insurance and legal frameworks. These details were commented on by the band in the VH1 series, Behind the Band Bon Jovi. It is these important characteristics of their show and persona that makes Bon Jovi and Motley Crue who they are. Without that, they may as well be a covers band, playing at the RSL, wearing spandex.

The recent sell out of the ACDC Black Ice tour set for February next year is an example of how in demand these types of all out productions are, with audiences promised a no holds bar extravaganza from the Back in Black foursome. This really highlights the current demand for such ‘stage show’ productions. Let’s just hope that my glittery 8o’s rock heroes have taken note and recognize that there truly is a call for large scale gigs. As Brian Johnson, the lead singer from AC/DC stated – we give our fans a pub gig – except ours is on steroids!

Check this out...

The Electric Guitar

The electric guitar is the single most identifiable object of the rock and roll genre. It is also the object responsible for making rock and roll what it is. The way it sounds, the way that the musician holds it all epitomize the genre.

Technological innovations and new ways of playing the guitar impacts on rock and roll and helps it evolve. These advances have even gone so far a to develop an all new genre of music that became popular in the early 1990s. Hardcore and alternative, have alldevlped through additions to the manufacture of the electric guitar and the way the sound is produced and recorded. Tinkering is the name given to this type of redevelopment with two of the biggest ‘tinkerers’ in the industry being Eddie Van Halen and Greg Ginn.

According to Waksman, “Tinkering has served a number of interrelated functions: it has been a means of exploring the ways in which technology can be put in the service of creating a certain kind of sound; it has been a way for musicians and instrument makers (two categories that often blur together) to redesign the electric guitar to more individualized specifications; and it has been a mode of self-directed activity in which musicians have sought to carve out a sphere of 'independence' from the broader structures that govern the music and guitar-manufacturing industries,” (2004, p. 34).

Therefore exploring and pushing the boundaries of the traditional functionality of the guitar, they have been able to push the boundaries of rock music. I have been a firm believer throughout this blog, that traditional rock and roll is dead, but now I am starting to think that it is evolving. The only catch is, are the rock music listeners’ ears evolving with it?

I am finding that slowly but surely, I am accepting the new sounding rock and roll, coming in the form of Kings of Leon and The Killers. However I am also a hue fan of bands like Nine Inch Nails and Muse. So it could be fair to say that as the humble electric guitar evolves, it has a follow on effect to people’s music tastes, as it did with music genre.

References
Waksman S, 2004, California Noise: Tinkering with Hardcore and Heavy Metal in Southern California, ‘New Technologies and Music’, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 675-702, SAGE.
Date accessed 29 May, 2009 via Internet Explorer.
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4144357

Rock in a Hard Place: Napster, Mainstream Rock and the changing face of Digital Distribution

Napster was a revolution. In fact, forget that, Napster was like opening your eyes for the first time to the possibilities of what owning a record store of unlimited size might be like. And when i say unlimited, i mean unlimited.

Whilst distribution, digital rights management software and mp3 vs. AAC format wars might seem to have nothing to do with the changing face of rock, the ramifications of these new developments in music are far reaching: Rock is a substantive share of the Popular Music Industry, arguably an umbrella term for many styles, especially in light of the influx and incorporation of new and old popular music styles into the rock format and the form and function of the industry itself is changing in concert with this, as we will see.

"It's Just Not Rock 'n' Roll" follows the evolution of musical distribution, from the inception of Napster and its dissolution in 2002, through to the present, discussing the iTunes Music Store, Musical Piracy, Digital Rights Management Software (DRM), changing formats and methods of musical distribution (mp3, FLAC, AAC) and how this has affected patterns of consumption.

Napster it seems, inspired a knee jerk reaction in the major record companies, who were cautious, even of iTunes and its vast menagerie of digital tunes to choose from. Since then many industry giants have insisted on DRM software on songs they sell over iTunes in order to maintain a control over the spread of music after it is purchased. Honestly, this is where i believe this debate connects with Rock 'n' Roll. Rock emerged as a deviant and fringe sub-culture in the 1950's out of the shadows of the Cold War and played an integral role in many movements for greater social and environmental justice. However, the invovelement and subsequent power lent to large record companies in exclusive rights over distribution and creative property has led to both an alienation of consumer and artist, both of whom have since sought to carve out their own niche in the world of digital music: "There is (also) a thriving download culture beyond iTunes, frequently offering greater freedom and better quality".

Consumers therefore it seems are willing not only to change formats, they may also be willing to look outside of the realm of established popular music distributors online, instead opting for an engagement with digital music reflective of their relationship with music; contrasting with previous trends which placed decisions regarding the consumption of music, especially in regards to format, quality and accessability in the hands of the distributor rather than the customer. And a similar trend is now emerging with artists. Artists as far ranging in musical taste and background as Radiohead, Weird Al Yankovic and Kid Rock have begun to release music digitally, either in concert with musical companies such as iTunes and Rhapsody (Yankovic and Kid Rock respectively) or completely independent of music labels and site owners, instead managing the consumption of their music entirely by themselves.

The message is clear, people want music and they want it their way, on their terms. And who could blame them? The same industry they gave their support to has been left behind with the times and technology, stubbornly refusing to change its ways in favour of the devil it knows. What happens when a format becomes invalid, left behind by an increasingly techno savvy community of music lovers worldwide?We'll just have to wait and see what comes next.



References:
1. Wilson, J. (2009), 'It's Just Not Rock 'n' Roll', Engineering and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 32-33
2. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, (2007), Radiohed Online Release On Track, CBC, Canada, viewed 2 June, 2009, http://www.cbc.ca/arts/music/story/2007/10/10/radiohead-download.html?ref=rss
3. Lardinois, F. (2008), Digital Music Distribution: Weird Al and Kid Rock take Different Paths, Read Write Web, viewed 2 June, 2008, http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/digital_music_weird_al_and_kid.php

Music in the Digital Age

Vinyl records gave way to tapes which gave way to compact discs (CD’s) the contents of which can now all be contained digitally on ones computer (Sevits 2009). CD’s became the most used form of storage for music in 1986, but since then the digital age has taken over even further with the introduction of online music available from sites like Apple’s ‘ITunes’ which was introduced in 2003 (Sevits 2009). It was always possible for friends to share CD’s and burn the songs onto their own computers, so that each person didn’t have to buy the original CD, however a much more influential sharing method rocked the music industry in 2000, with the development of Napster (Sevits 2009).Napster was a peer file sharing program over the internet where you could download pretty much any song you wanted for free. This was music sharing on a level never before seen, and it wasn’t long before the music industry was taking steps to shut it down. It was that year that recording sales declined for the very first time. Napster was quickly shut down, however the door has been left open (Sevits 2009).

File sharing is not illegal and thus there are still places to get music online, however it is much less prevalent and more sites are becoming digital retailers of music (Zentner 2006). Obviously with the decline in recording sales, there is a substantial impact on artists and record companies from file sharing, but with modern technology are these people safe from further exploitation? We have the abilities, thanks to modern computers, to upload, download, and send our favourite music very easily, so even thought the music industry has slowed the occurrence of such file sharing it will not disappear (Zentner 2006). People will continue to find ways to cheat the system and pirate music.

With that said, many music lovers are simply switching to the ease of online purchases, and because of the ease and ability to buy only the songs that he or she wants, overall music purchases may increase.
References:

Sevits, M. 2009, Timeline: A History of music media, Media Management Group, viewed 2 June 2009, http://media.www.dailyemerald.com/media/storage/paper859/news/2007/09/17/Pulse/Timeline.A.History.Of.Music.Media-2970538.shtml.

Zentner, A. 2006, ‘Symposium: Piracy and File Sharing: Measuring the Effect of File Sharing on Music Purchases’, The Journal of Law & Economics, vol. 49, no. 63, LexisNexis.

The Tour

One of the most time consuming and physically demanding jobs for a band or artist is going on a tour. Musicians may tour the a country, several countries or the world and perform concerts and make TV and other event appearances. So why is it so important to go on tour?

Going on tour can mean different things to in different situations. As an up and coming artist, getting the chance to go along on someone else’s tour to open shows is good promotion, it gets their name out to the thousands of event attendees. The extra band awareness comes without the high cost of advertising as fans are paying to attend the concert. Also, touring with well known bands gives lesser known artists an automatic status increase.

For headlining bands, touring is all about bringing their music to their fans while doing what they love and making a living. Artists will often embark on a tour to promote the release of new music. Well executed live performances get consumers excited about the music and makes the artists album a ‘must have.’
It is one thing to see your favourite rock stars on TV but it’s not very often that fans get to see them in person. Fans look forward to and appreciate when the artist comes to them. It’s sort of a mutual ‘thank you’ from the artist who makes a living from their fans and the fans who enjoy the entertainment value from the artist.

We cannot forget though, that in the end, concerts and tours are money making events.
They are building blocks for the artist who through the extra entertainment value of a live concert can influence attendees to buy their latest album or other merchandise.

The Rock Band

There are artists with back up bands, and then there is the traditional band. A lead guitar, bass and drummer for starters with the possibility of a lead singer or multiple singers. There is something about bands that captures audiences and is different from that of single artists. It could be that many legendary bands like the Rolling Stones, the Beatles and AC/DC brought together more than just a group of talented musicians. The popular saying, “two heads are better than one,” is especially true with 4 or 5 band members that are experts in their respective areas. Of course a single person can develop a melody and lyrics alone, but a group can create synergy when it brings together songwriter and musical genius to form a band.

Bands tend come across as a group of mates, doing what they love and having fun doing it. They travel together, write together and perform together, and it often shows in their music (Five reasons rock bands break up 2002). We also notice a level of entertainment that bands provide over single artists, for example, at a concert it’s more like watching a number of headline performers at once rather than a single artists and their backup entourage.

So if being in a band is so good why do so many bands break up? Well the term ‘musical differences’ is usually the official reason, but there are several possibilities. It is true that as musicians age they may tend to look in different directions creatively and inspirationally, leading to musical differences. However other reasons such as losing the love for the music, solo careers, money and outside influences (Five reasons rock bands break up 2002). Any of these reasons can potentially mean the end of a good thing, sometimes that means the end of the band, sometimes the formation of a new one and sometime, like the Rolling Stones, they just roll with the punches and keep on going.

In the end we have to remember that the musicians that make up our bands are people too and they have differences in ideas, personalities and backgrounds.

References:

Five reasons rock bands break up, 2002, Pagewise, viewed 2 June 2009, http://www.essortment.com/all/rockbandsbreak_rtmm.htm.

Assembly Line Rock Stars

Are rock stars born or made? Of course we all know that someone can go out and pay to be taught how to sing properly, but we also know that there are those special few who are born with undeniable talent. I think it would be safe to say that most of these individuals are not born ‘rock stars’, but normal people with a marketable talent. We hear all sorts of stories about how artists are told what to do and how to do everything, from what to look like to how to act, by record labels. So is this an issue in the rock and roll industry?

I referred in the above paragraph to singing being a marketable talent. By this I meant that there is a demand for entertainment, and singing and music being a form of entertainment, can be used to ones advantage to make a profit. Marketers are well known for manipulating aspects of a product in order to achieve maximum returns. This is the same thing that is done by record labels to artists that they sign. Record labels are of course money making businesses and as such use the desire of artists (especially younger ones) to become well known musicians, to manipulate them and make them into money making machines.
The idea is sort of like cars on an assembly line in the fact that record labels know what sells and molds upcoming artists into one of their ‘best selling’ categories, even if this means compromising their integrity. One of the most well known tactics is sex. Take a look at artists like, Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, and Jessica Simpson and compare their how they were when they first appeared on the music scene, to present day. I’m sure anyone would see a notable difference in appearance, actions and in music.

So what message is being sent to consumers, especially children as they are easily influenced? They are being told that in order to be ‘somebody’ they need to act a certain way, dress a certain way, hang out at certain places etc.

Artists have mentioned this topic in songs such as Pink’s ‘Don’t Let Me Get Me’ where she sings:

LA told me, "You'll be a pop star,
All you have to change is everything you are."
Tired of being compared to damn Britney Spears
She's so pretty, that just ain't me

Pink also pokes fun at the ‘glamour girl’ image that record labels are promoting to the youth of today, in her song and music video ‘Stupid Girls’ below.



References:

Don’t Let Me Get Me Lyrics, 2009, ELyrics.com, viewed 2June 2009, http://www.elyrics.net/read/p/pink-lyrics/don_t-let-me-get-me-lyrics.html.

Skirts Off and Pants On

Walking into a pub gig is hard. You must walk past the rows of men throwing down scooners and telling ‘those’ stories’. When you have finally arrived at the bar you find it hard to order a champagne and orange juice without getting weird and degrading looks through the clouds of smoke coming from men of all ages gathered at the local. You start thinking to yourself, crap, my skirt is tucked into my undies isn’t it, or I have toilet paper on my shoe. Your brain skips over the concept that these men are not used to women pulling up a seat next to them, ordering a wine and listening to hard rock as well. I am sure I am not the only woman who has ever somewhat alienated when catching a secret show of her favourite band.

According to Steve Chapple and Reebee Garafalo, rock removed women from the music industry and simultaineously the bar stool too..
“The revolution in music that was rock 'n' roll effectively re-moved women from the pop charts for seven years, until the advent of the "girl groups." Prior to the beginnings of rock 'n' roll in 1955, female artists accounted for one-third of the positions on the year-end singles charts. Most of these women were pop artists like Patti Page, Doris Day, and Rosemary Clooney, who were not replaced by women singing rock 'n' roll. By 1956 the proportion of women on the singles charts had declined to 8 percent,” (Chapple and Garafalo)

Rock and Roll brought about a new wave of change, where women were not looked upon as people but as servants to the gods of rock and roll.

Susan Fast, author of Gender and Sexuality in Led Zeppelin is a fellow Hard Rock fan that has found herself in the same predicament as I mentioned earlier. Her research and study blames this cultivated assumption about women in rock and roll as groupies only, on the women themselves and their lack of involvement in shaping the discourse of Hard Rock.
Fast states, “Journalists, academics, and others writing about the band have been for the most part men, who have claimed, derided, or otherwise defined it as "male." The few women who have written about the music do not seem to be themselves actively engaged in its consumption-I have come across only one academic who discloses that she listens to it (and on her discomfort with this,). Their interest, too, has been in delineating and interpreting the characteristics of the culture that seem to make it "male." (1999, p. 247)

“Where does it leave me as an avid fan of this music since I first stumbled upon my brother-in-law's copy of Led Zeppelin III in 1972 at the age of four-teen and played "Immigrant Song" over and over again until I wore out the vinyl?”

To answer Susan, it leaves us women fans at the pub on a Saturday night getting the looks that they detest and the subtle brush of the arm, followed by a “sorry love didn’t see ya there”.

Gwen Stefani and Alanis Morrissette have been able break the mould with their personas of the 1990’s. However it was only that they didn’t act like a girl that they were able to do so. Gayle Ward noted this contradiction in her article ‘Just a Girl?’
“Performers such as Stefani and Alanis Morissette have discovered in acting "like a girl" new ways of pro-moting the cultural visibility of women within rock music. At the same time, the music industry has discovered in these female stars (each with her own carefully cultivated star persona) new ways to sell its products to young female consumers (i.e., "real" girls).(Wald, 1999, p. 587)

No wonder women of rock are in such a conundrum. If we are not filling the shoes of Bebe Buell or Penny Lane, we are acting like men. Comeon’ sisters let’s do it for ourselves and give women a voice in rock and roll.

References

Wald G 1998, ‘Just a Girl?’ Feminisms and Youth Cultures, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 585-610, The University of Chicago Press. Accessed via Internet Explorer, 1st June 2009.

URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3175302?origin=JSTOR-pdf

Fast S, 1999, ‘Rethinking issues of Gender and Sexuality in Led Zeppelin: A woman’s view of pleasure and power in hard rock’, American Music, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 245-299, University of Illinois. Date accessed 1st June 2009, via Internet Explorer.
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3052664

The Rise and Fall of Grunge-Reasons, Explanations, Ambiguities

When the likes of Nirvana and Pearl Jam, Soundgarden and The Screaming Trees stormed onto the world's international musical radar, bringing with it their deafening cacophony of distorted guitars, soul tearing vocals and despairingly honest lyrics the world sat up and took notice. They wondered, what is this incredible music and where does it come from? And almost as quickly as these questions were asked, people started to come up with answers. It's grunge they said. And it comes from Seattle. It's the Seattle Sound. And everyone cheered. And suddenly that Seattle sound was everywhere. Grunge hit the airwaves and took the world by storm and then just as quickly as it had come, it was gone, Kurt Cobain was dead and everybody was left wondering "what now?".

But the story is never so simple and perhaps the creation of the Grunge Aesthetic, as it swept across all facets of youth culture, is as important in the rise and fall of grunge as the efforts of musicians themselves in crafting the "Grunge" sound, if one could be said to have existed. For as Thomas L Bell notes in his examination of the evolution of Seattle Grunge:

"First, there never really was, and there certainly is not now, a "Seattle sound" contrary to the wishes and the hype of the popular press. What there was in Seattle was a major university along with a lively and rather recent melange of music clubs and lounges that had sprung up around areas of downtown Seattle and near the University of Washington campus."

What Bell describes in the coming together of Grunge at the beginning of the 90's is a lively alternative music scene with bands exhibiting incredible creative energy, one which existed in juxtaposition to Seattle's primary alternative music label, Sub Pop Records and the new prevalence of A&R representatives in bringing new music trends to a changing musical market. Sub Pop Records itself is largely responsible for the promotion of Grunge in its earliest days, including Soundgarden, MudHoney and Nirvana on a boxed set called "Sub Pop 200", including 20 pages of pictures, largely responsible for the creation of the "grunge rocker" image itself.

This release, more than anything else would launch both Grunge and Seattle into the music scene. Designers, trend creators and aritsts alike immediately utilised this in marketing a new form of consumable youth culture, with journalists and music commentators alike labeling this new wave of music "The Seattle Sound", even if they were only able to piece together three common threads:

1. The music is loud. Really loud. Tinny guitars, screaming and low growly vocals played through deafening amps left no doubt of this. Grunge bands had little money to finance large ensembles and even less for studio time. What you heard on their tapes was what you most likely heard live. Some artists even recorded their tapes on bare bones equipment in order to retain this live feel to their music.
2. The lyrics and the musicianship is honest, true and vibrant. The lack of money available lends authenticity to their sound as we mentioned through the congruence between live and studio performance/sound, but the lyrics themselves are brutally honest and resonated deeply with the audiences they played to.
3. Many big names in Grunge have gained significant recognition elsewhere and internationally, before gaining any tangible following/credibility in their own home town.

However whilst some of these trends reflect the actual form and operation of the scene itself, much of Grunge's culture was itself constructed in reaction to the emergence of the genre, not by those embodying its sound. The importance of A&R music reps in picking up and disseminating Grunge music cannot be underestimated, as it is the explosive force with which Grunge was hurled from the alternative scene, into the music industry by these trend savvy music lovers that would be the cause of both Grunge's downfall in the end. Marketing of cultural cool is never to be underestimated, both in its ability to change a sound from niche to mainstream and the way in which it can limit the shelf life of those trends it elevates to the status of hip and trendy:

"As the music of Seattle became more mainstream, much of the creative energy was lost. Grunge metamorphosed into a Madison Avenue advertising ploy. Movies such as "Singles" hyped the Seattle scene until it became a parody of itself."

The death of grunge itself therefore, was a result of its own success and discovery by A&R music reps in a new era of cultural consumption. As Seattle became known and characterised for its Grunge "sound", the same forces which promoted the idea of a coherent link between otherwise creatively diverse bands, instead denied an emergent scene the ability to differentiate and develop as they were defined and culturally constructed as part of an imagined movement in music:

"Seattle thus became: less a geographical locale than a psychic space... an associative cultural signifier readily transferable from music to fashion, books, generational politics"

By creating the Seattle Sound out of disparate and incongruous threads, by marketing Grunge culture and engineering its consumption as commoditised mainstream chic, higher ups in the world of music effectively limited its creative expansion, geographic location/spatiality and its ability to develop independently. The overexposure of Grunge and the assertion of its personality as the "Seattle Sound", is the death of this unassuming child of alternative rock.


References
Bell. T. L. (1998), 'Why Seattle? An examination of an Alternative Rock Culture Hearth', Journal of Cultural Geography, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 35-49

Music and its effect on brain power

OK so we have all heard they myth. classical music will help you think harder and loud heavy music with diminish your brains power. But have you ever looked to see if anyones done a stud y to prove it? Well it turns out there was a study done by the University of Nebraska by a Mike Manthei and Steve Kelly.

The 2 of them did extensive studies using large test samples and produced a series of results that were quite intriguing.

Before you go out and stock up on then essential Mozart collection featuring Bach you should jump over to their site and check out their results.

But if your too lazy to do that i'll give u a brief summary here :). basically they found no direct correlation between a certain style of music and intelligence only that one form of music was able the relax the listener much better than other ones(take a guess which one). That's right classical music has been proven to calm people down.. but unfortunately at this point in time they haven't found the magic song that will help u pass all the exams :)

source = http://music.arts.usf.edu/rpme/effects.htm

The Best of Rock... Festivals :P

So ... if you’ve lived in Australia for more than a year, and you enjoy/ love rock music then there’s probably a good chance that you have heard of the Big Day Out festival before. That is of course unless you have been living in a cave, with your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears.

The Big Day Out is a yearly even that runs on the Australia day long weekend and is probably the biggest festival in Australia if not the biggest rock even in Australia. With a different line up each year and ever growing popularity bands. The event has been running for 17 years and has shows at Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland, Gold coast, Adelaide and Perth.

With an average ticket price of $138 you really do get bang for your buck with 19 different bands. You are sure to have an awesome, long and eventful day. For ticket go to the main Big Day Out Website at http://www.bigdayout.com/

Source = http://www.bigdayout.com/

They Are Rock Stars After All...

What is it about rock stars, film stars, socialites and IT people that give them such a status that they are exempt from any social and cultural persecution? These people have been elevated to such a level that they are above the law. In the case of the typical, rock musician or rock star, taking drugs, abusing women, spending time in jail and having a severe illicit drug dependency seems to add to their success, as fans worship them regardless of their extracurricular activities. Tommy Lee, Anthony Keidis, Scott Weiland, Steven Tyler, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, Slash and Paul McCartney are all big names within rock and roll, and have all been involved with a number of criminal offences.

One answer a to why the rebellious, law breaking rock star is accepted into our hearts time and time again after partaking in an act that would have us ringing 000 if we were involved, is the concept that their music, songs and personalities have created an ulterior meaning to the devoted fan, cancelling out any wrong doing in the audiences head.

Richard Dyer comments about this is in the article mapping the rebel image in that “the move star and rock star, as a publicly fictionalized subject whose cultural meanings are embedded in and yet cut across a wide variety of texts (songs films television appearances, magazine stories, album covers, videos and biographies), creating ideological subject positions,” (Dyer, 1992, p. 5).

I am guilty of this too. I worship the afore mentioned names with no regard to their rebellious desires to take drugs and treat women like crap. Even the subject matter of rock music is far from tasteful, yet with the right beat, melody, wrapped up in a big marketing ribbon, I accept and even enjoy the music. The power that these rock personalities have to evade cultural norms is amazing. The culture that rock and roll music evolved from and now breeds is commented on by Leerom Modovoi in a recent study by Martin and Segrave.

“With its black roots, its earthy, sexual or rebellious lyrics, and its exuberant acceptance by youth, rock and roll has long been under attack by the establishment world of adults. No other form of culture, and its artists, has met with such extensive hostility. The music has been damned as a corrupter of morals, and as an instigator of juvenile delinquency and violence. Denounced as a communist plot, perceived as a symbol of Western decadence, it has been fulminated against by the left, the right, the center, the establishment, rock musicians them-selves, doctors, clergy, journalists, politicians, and "good" musicians.... Rock has been blasted for promoting drugs and sex; for destroying hearing; and, by insidiously adding back-ward messages to records, pimping for Satan. And that's just the beginning. (Martin and Segrave 1)
Yet it one of the most popular and enduring music genres.

It is mind boggling that the fans, media and society in general has their guard down when it comes to the rock star, as if that is an excuse for them to behave like a criminal.

Nickelback’s song ‘Rockstar’ pokes fun at this unique relationship between the rock star and their fan. Have a listen…

I'm through with standin in line

To clubs I'll never get in

It's like the bottom of the nineth

And I'm never gonna win

This life just hasn't turned out

Quite the way I want it to be

(tell me what you want)

I want a brand new house

On an episode of cribs

And a bathroom I can play baseball in

And a king size tub

Big enough for ten plus me

(so what ya need)

I need a a credit card thats got no limit

And a big black jet with a bedroom in it

Gonna join the mile high club

At thirty-seven thousand feet

(been there done that)

I want a new tour bus full of old guitars

My own star on Hollywood Boulevard

Somewhere between Cher and James Dean is fine with me

(so how ya gonna do it)

I'm gonna trade this life for fortune and fame

I'd even cut my hair and change my name

Cause we all just wanna be big rockstars

Livin in top houses

Drivin fifteen cars

The girls come easy

And the drugs come cheap

We'll all stay skinny Cuz we just won't eat

References:
Modovoi L, 1992, ‘Mapping the Rebel Image’, Cultural Critique, no. 20, pp. 153-158, JSTOR.
Accessed via Internet Explorer 1st June, 2009.
URL: http://0-www.jstor.org.library.newcastle.edu.au/stable/pdfplus/1354226.pdf

Nickelback, Rockstar Lyrics. Accessed via Internet Explorer, 1st June, 2009.
URL: http://www.lyrics007.com/Nickelback%20Lyrics/Rockstar%20Lyrics.html

Top driving song of all time (Top Gear)

For many people the TV show Top Gear is not only the greatest TV show on TV at the moment but possibly of all time ( Not that i'm being bias or anything :P)


In one of Top Gears recent TV Season they did a segment on the top driving song of all time and requested that the audience voted on what they thought the best driving song of all time was and after season long effort to find the answer to this question the results were as follows.

1. Queen - Don't Stop Me Now
2. Golden Earring - Radar Love
3. Meat Loaf - Bat out of Hell
4. Steppenwolf - Born to Be Wild
5. Deep Purple - Highway Star
6. Motorhead - Ace of spades
7. Kenny Loggins - Danger Zong
8. Led Zeppeling - Immigrant Song
9. AC/DC - Highway to Hell
10. Fleetwood Mac - The Chain

Some of these songs probably more obvious as driving songs than others. I mean who hasn't heard at least 1 of these songs while driving to and from work/school or university. Personally I was voting for Radar Love to win (damn). Interestingly with this list is that most if not all these songs can be considered to be of the genre rock. Perhaps a study should be done as to a correlation between better driving and rock music :).

Source = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(2002_TV_series)#Soundtrack

Rock and Roll...You Devil You

Lately I have come across several articles pointing out the ‘evil’ in rock and roll. Most of these seemed to refer to songs in heavy metal as a subgroup of rock. For example, this quote was taken from a church supported website: “Today, at almost any "heavy-metal'' rock concert one can hear the audience being exhorted to rape and murder in the name of Satan” (Phau). The article goes on to back up this statement with the following lyrics from the song “Demons” by Rigor Mortis:

"We come bursting through your bodies
Rape your helpless soul
Transform you into a creature
Merciless and cold
We force you to kill your brother
Eat his blood and brain
Shredding flesh and sucking bone
Till everyone's insane
We are pestilent and contaminate
The world Demonic legions prevail"

This is one of the most extreme examples that I encountered, however it sums up the possible magnitude of evil messages in rock music that todays generations are listening to.

So is it just heavy metal that conveys these types of messages? Not according to my research. I came across this quote from rock star, David Bowie in taken from Rolling Stone magazine:

"Rock has always been THE DEVIL'S MUSIC . . . I believe rock and roll is dangerous . . . I feel we're only heralding SOMETHING EVEN DARKER THAN OURSELVES." (Rolling Stone, Feb. 12, 1976 quoted in Watkins 1995).

So even rock artists themselves, admit to the genre having an evil side to it. Perhaps no one does this more than, Marilyn Manson, who is widely known for his anti-christ views. But we will save this for another discussion.

There is no question that the rock genre seems to bring out the naughty or ‘dark side’ of artists and listeners alike. The genre has produced one of the most well known cliches: “Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll.” But does all rock have this underlying evil? I don’t think all rock artists and music is this however we certainly see through listening and watching, that rock has a tendancy to lean toward the ‘dark side’.

So how is this affecting rock music listeners? Well rock is on T.V. in music videos, on radio stations and of course has it’s own fashion sense, so we as consumers would be hard pressed to avoid it. So what do we do? The same thing we do when deciding how to eat...that is, think critically about how it will affect us. If we allow ourselves to eat unhealthy food for long periods of time, gradually we become fat, similarly if we allow ourselves to listen to satanic music and be sent evil messages through it, gradually it may start to affect us.

In the end, the decision is ours. Do we let bad messages rot our brain like candy rots our teeth?

References:

Phau, D. 2000, The Satanic Roots of Rock, Dial-the-Truth Ministries, viewed 1 June 2009, http://www.av1611.org/othpubls/roots.html.

Watkins, T. 1995, Rock Music: Devil’s Advocat, Dial-the-Truth Ministries, viewed 1 June 2009, http://www.av1611.org/rock.html.

The ways of a Rock ‘n’ Roller

When thought of, rock ‘n’ roll produces the idea and is popularly associated with sex and drugs. Many of rock and roll's early stars were known as hard-drinking, hard-living, rebellious people. During the 1960s the complex and crazy, glamorous and envied lifestyles of many stars became publicly known. They were fed by the growth of the underground rock press, which documented the extreme ways of the rockers, often exploiting them in the process. Musicians were famous for attracting the opposite sex attention, and having groupies spend time with the bands, doing sexual favors for the members. It was a common, fast paced lifestyle. Some rock artists and groups seemed to steer clear of this attention, while other artists and groups did little trying to stay away from it, and actually encouraged it. Some sexual escapades became part of the rock music scene during this time of the rock era. As these “ways of the rocker” started to dwindle in this sense, rock lost a lot of this specific connection. Rock groups and artists then became more of sex symbols.

Drug use became popular in the 1960s as well. Recreational drug use by musicians may have influenced the use of drugs and the perception of acceptability of drug use among the youth of the period. When the Beatles, once marketed as clean-cut youths, started publicly acknowledging the use of certain drugs, journalist Al Aronowitz wrote "...whatever the Beatles did was acceptable, especially for young people. Pretty soon everybody was smoking it, and it seemed to be all right.” The connection between rock music and the rejection of conventional, social norms became associated with drug use, including the use of marijuana, leading to the use of harder drugs. This drug use flowed many different ways, and by the end of the 1960s, drugs and rock music were part of a general youth scene.

References:
http://www.rocksbackpages.com/writer/html?WriterID=aronowitz

http://www.scribd.com/doc/124458/Rock-Music

An Unhappy Ending

Sociologists may argue there is a positive correlation between Rock & Roll music and the demise of our younger generation. After watching rock idols abuse drugs and in some cases, choose suicide as a means of solving problems, it’s no wonder why many young fans follow down this same path of destruction.

Society, and parents especially, haven’t always been relaxed on rock lyrics and the shocking statements and actions of rock artists. Such seems to be normal in today’s standards. However, dating back to Elvis Presley’s first appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show in 1956, adults were so offended by the way he shook his hips that the cameras only showed him from the waist up. Following this was the outrage that many adults felt about the vulgar lifestyle of rock & roll artists such as the Rolling Stones.  And, today, many artists and bands admit to the use of drugs – which is apparent by the large numbers of deaths and suicides resulting from drug abuse.

Given the history and alternative lifestyle of rock and roll artists, do fans and followers repeat the mistakes of their idols? And, are all rock stars doomed for this fate? The following is a short list of people who have lost their life because of drug abuse and suicide.

• ·      Jimi Hendrix – age 27 – asphyxiation on vomit as a result from alcohol and drugs
  
• ·      Keth Moon (The Who) – age 32 – drug overdose
  
• ·      Kurt Cobain – age 27 – suicide
  
• ·      Paul Williams (The Temptations) – age 34 – suicide
  
• ·      Brian Jones (The Rolling Stones) – age 27 – drowning thought to be suicide 

Why is it that many prominent figures that have died from drug overdoses and suicides are rock musicians? Does the lifestyle of a rock & roll artist ultimately take you down this path of destruction? Or is it avoidable?

Unfortunately, this fate is becoming common for rock & roll artists. Many sociologists differ on whether or not the music and the lifestyle is the cause for their unhappy ending. It’s a chicken and egg situation. Is their violent and sadistic behavior a result of the rock industry or are they rock artists because they are innately vulgar and unstable?

It’s something to think about.

Schoolboy Rockers and the Band Aesthetic-A Grassroots Examination

Ever wonder how we got from Chuck Berry to Elvis Presley? From Little Richard to The Rolling Stones? I've always marveled at how something which emerged in close alignment with Jazz and Blues and whose pioneers were diverse in background, but very noticeably featured a large swathe of African American musicians, could have so quickly become dominated by mostly Caucasian artists and audiences. Isn't Jimmy Hendrix still the greatest Rockstar of all time? Or is he just the greatest guitarist now? I wonder. Perhaps even more importantly, how did we get to Elvis Presley from the likes of popular female artists of the day, which accounted for almost a third of artists in the singles charts prior to the emergence of Rock 'n' Roll.

Nevertheless, somewhere along the line, things must have changed. Because from the early days of Rock's emergence in the cultural mainstream, the Rock format and the aesthetic of the Rock Band has shifted to reflect a very Anglicized and male dominated picture of the culture's form and purpose.

An account of grassroots trends, participation and the production of cultural forms and aesthetics in Rock Music by William T. Bielby (2004) attempts to map these transitions, looking specifically at trends in popular music consumption, gender roles and the like, hoping to give us an insight onto the subject. Whilst previous accounts frame the emergence of the first wave of anglicised male rock bands as an expression of anti-authoritarian pre-adolescent rebellion embraced by young males mimicking the aggressive, sexually charged looks, lyrics and sounds of contemporary black musical styles, this does little to explain the absence of females from Rock n Roll bands, especially considering that the study itself indicated teenage girls held greater savvy in both consumption of popular music/culture and listened to rock music as much as males of their age.

Previous explications of the subject pointed to the greater rebelliousness of boys and the more conformative emphasis on female gender roles in society. However Bielby elucidates upon School Culture and specifically the congruence between organised sport as a status culture and participation in Rock culture as holding the key to unlocking gendered participation and the appeal of rock n roll band to males. Whilst the pursuit of status and popularity with social networks of boys and girls within educational peer groups is a perk offered by both, where these two differ is that whilst school teams are often conformative with school values and hierarchies, Rock n Roll culture and circles of those participating in the culture itself formed as what the author describes as a "deviant subcultural movement" outside of the moral, political and authoritative bounds of their parents and thus their control.

This seeking out of deviant sub-cultures is part of a process of social navigation which the author asserts, allowed boys specifically to gain greater social standing and attain better occupational outcomes in later life, primarily due to their participation in the rock scene which is comparable to "college fraternity life and careers where after-work socializing is an important part of workplace culture." allowing boys to carve these connections out in a still as of yet unfilled and undominated sub-cultural movement. The author attributes the domination of this field by males specifically to the differing social attitudes towards girl's and boys involvement in activities like drinking, dating and partying, which, in association with rock sub-culture, was permissible for boys, but not for girls whom they would tolerate no such deviance from.



References

1. Bielby, W. T. (2004), 'Rock in a Hard Place: Grassroots Cultural Production in the post-Elvis era: 2003 Presidential Address', American Sociological Review, Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 1-13