After writing of INXS’s sell out to reality TV I began to ponder whether this move to reality TV has affected their music and their identity. After Michael Hutchence committed suicide it was almost ten years before the band attempted to find another vocalist. That time can be seen as respecting the original vocalist, something fans of the band would surely appreciate. That amount of time also saw many changes in the music industry. The "Idol" phenomena had begun, the Internet meant there were ways other than purchasing an album to access music, and technology had evolved to allow for faster recording times. Taking this into account, INXS is surely not entirely at loss for their move into reality TV, and at the end of the day, is the music being produced true to INXS?
It is this question of authenticity that I would like to discuss in this Blog. According to Pattie (1999), “both the audience and the performer look to the music to provide the ultimate validation, the ultimate proof of authenticity”. Many bands have seen different vocalists, and the heart of the band has remained intact and authentic, take AC/DC for example. The method of recruiting a lead singer was possibly not what INXS would have done in the 80s, but the reality TV medium was not an option then. I believe it is a forgivable move if it can be said that the music has remained ‘true’ to the INXS of old.
J. D. Fortune was selected because of his Michael Hutchence resemblance, not only physically but his attitude toward music, rock and performance. Pattie (1999) explains that, “the extent to which a group or musician is able to establish themselves as authentic depends on the extent to which its target audience accept that they are able to balance the performance of authenticity with the practice of authenticity, as reflected in the band’s and the fans’ idea of the music as it exists at that particular time”.
In a review of Switch, the first album to feature J.D. Fortune as vocalist, the Sydney Morning Herald’s Bernard Zuel said, “It's not just that the new singer, J.D. Fortune, tries his darnedest to sound like Michael Hutchence - so much so that it is almost eerie at times - but that the songs themselves are like identikit pictures of earlier INXS songs” (2005). In the light of Patties comments, is this not what the fans want out of a band they have loved for decades? The lead singer is so much like Hutchence that it is eerie, and the songs resemble INXS’s songs – if the performer and the audience look to the music to provide the ultimate proof of authenticity, isn’t the fact that the music is true to INXS a sign of the bands authenticity? And if the vocalist is so similar to Hutchence that it is eerie, then hasn’t he proven his authentic place in the band?
It seems that the music has remained very true to INXS of old, and therefore they have not ‘sold out’ as I previously thought. If anything, their crime seems to be that they have not moved on from the INXS of the 80s – they are still producing the same sound decades later. But is this really a bad thing?
It is this question of authenticity that I would like to discuss in this Blog. According to Pattie (1999), “both the audience and the performer look to the music to provide the ultimate validation, the ultimate proof of authenticity”. Many bands have seen different vocalists, and the heart of the band has remained intact and authentic, take AC/DC for example. The method of recruiting a lead singer was possibly not what INXS would have done in the 80s, but the reality TV medium was not an option then. I believe it is a forgivable move if it can be said that the music has remained ‘true’ to the INXS of old.
J. D. Fortune was selected because of his Michael Hutchence resemblance, not only physically but his attitude toward music, rock and performance. Pattie (1999) explains that, “the extent to which a group or musician is able to establish themselves as authentic depends on the extent to which its target audience accept that they are able to balance the performance of authenticity with the practice of authenticity, as reflected in the band’s and the fans’ idea of the music as it exists at that particular time”.
In a review of Switch, the first album to feature J.D. Fortune as vocalist, the Sydney Morning Herald’s Bernard Zuel said, “It's not just that the new singer, J.D. Fortune, tries his darnedest to sound like Michael Hutchence - so much so that it is almost eerie at times - but that the songs themselves are like identikit pictures of earlier INXS songs” (2005). In the light of Patties comments, is this not what the fans want out of a band they have loved for decades? The lead singer is so much like Hutchence that it is eerie, and the songs resemble INXS’s songs – if the performer and the audience look to the music to provide the ultimate proof of authenticity, isn’t the fact that the music is true to INXS a sign of the bands authenticity? And if the vocalist is so similar to Hutchence that it is eerie, then hasn’t he proven his authentic place in the band?
It seems that the music has remained very true to INXS of old, and therefore they have not ‘sold out’ as I previously thought. If anything, their crime seems to be that they have not moved on from the INXS of the 80s – they are still producing the same sound decades later. But is this really a bad thing?
Sarah Gillam
References
Pattie, David 1999, ‘4 Real: Authenticity, Performance, and Rock Music’, Enculturation, vol. 2, no. 2, spring 1999 http://enculturation.gmu.edu/2_2/pattie.html
Zuel, Bernard 2005, ‘INXS – Switch’, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 19 May http://www.smh.com.au/news/music/INXS-switch/2005/11/24/1132703305721.html
No comments:
Post a Comment