Kinda Sensible people
22-06-2006, 21:19
Forgive me for the length of what follows, but I read something this afternoon that made me very angry, and so I wrote this to express my frustration.
I am sick to death of hearing the bullshit spewed by people on the left and right regarding entertainers (specifically musicians) and politics. As an artist, a musician, and most importantly a politically interested musician, I am deeply offended by being told that I should drop my beliefs in order to be an "Entertainer". Art is a means of expression, not just a way to make a complacent public happy (Picasso's artwork disturbed and confused people with it's misshapen and childlike forms). Music, in particular, is highly connected to political content.
Those who complain that this week's Hollywood pop star with an IQ of 20 should simply "Shut up and sing" are forgetting the long and glorious history of politics in music. To vastly simplify and remain close to the "great artists" that people remember, let's start with Beethoven. Yeah, the angry, deaf guy who wrote that piece with "Brotherhood" in it (clearly a hippy :p ). The Eroica symphony was originally dedicated to none-other than Napoleon (quite the statement for a German composer to make), but later was changed to "To the memory of a great man" either because Beethoven was disillusioned with Napoleon's politics, or because it was financially inconvenient for him to dedicate it to Napoleon. Giussepe Verdi, the famous Italian Opera-writer, was deeply involved in politics. In fact, a song from his opera Nabbuco was one of the rallying songs for Italian Unification (and his name was a code for supporting Victor Emmanuel). Wagner was deeply involved in politics (in fact, he was exiled from Dresden for supporting an uprising), and most people know him as having inspired Hitler with his anti-Semitism and German Nationalism. Moving into a more modern era, we must also acknowledge the more proletarian nature of political music. Who can forget the strains of “Pie in the sky”, “The ballad of Joe Hill”, or “Which Side Are You On Boy?”. Unions often had many songs sung on the issue of worker’s rights (No, really?). Within the 20th century we must acknowledge a rash of political music, particularly showing in the folk music of Peter, Paul, and Mary, Pete Ochs, Pete Seeger, Utah Phillips, and Woody and Arlo Guthrie. It seems unreasonable to now complain that artists of a new generation should simply “Shut up and sing”
Moreover, we acknowledge the greatness of such artistic classics as “Grapes of Wrath”, “Candide”, or “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”. All of these have political discourse (quite radical for it’s time), and yet are still accepted in schools as classics that should be taught about because of the greatness of their artistic value. Why does literature get to have political content when music cannot? Why do we have this double standard regarding what can or cannot have a political opinion? Certainly, no one informed Picasso that he should “Shut up and paint” when he painted his classic “Guernica”.
Art is an expression of the self and a celebration of individualism. It is not a slave to society, and it is not in existence to either comfort or disturb you. It is one thing to disagree with the message of a song or artist and therefore not buy that piece of work, or any of that artist’s work, but it is completely different to accuse them of being poor artists because they are expressing ideas you do not like. Don’t get me wrong: I think Bono is an egotist with a messiah complex who did what he did for attention and I think Green Day sold out on Punk and that American Idiot was by no means great art. That doesn’t mean that politics have no place in art. In fact, it is fair to point out that because in the latest era music has become a whore for popular culture with the rise of the massive label entities, the RIAA, and the bubblegum pop attitude of “One album and you’re out” that, if anything, this latest group of artists is much less attached to politics than the ones who came before them. It would seem that whatever we may be told by the empty-headed drone public about how “politics have no place in music”, that politics do have an important place in great music.
I am sick to death of hearing the bullshit spewed by people on the left and right regarding entertainers (specifically musicians) and politics. As an artist, a musician, and most importantly a politically interested musician, I am deeply offended by being told that I should drop my beliefs in order to be an "Entertainer". Art is a means of expression, not just a way to make a complacent public happy (Picasso's artwork disturbed and confused people with it's misshapen and childlike forms). Music, in particular, is highly connected to political content.
Those who complain that this week's Hollywood pop star with an IQ of 20 should simply "Shut up and sing" are forgetting the long and glorious history of politics in music. To vastly simplify and remain close to the "great artists" that people remember, let's start with Beethoven. Yeah, the angry, deaf guy who wrote that piece with "Brotherhood" in it (clearly a hippy :p ). The Eroica symphony was originally dedicated to none-other than Napoleon (quite the statement for a German composer to make), but later was changed to "To the memory of a great man" either because Beethoven was disillusioned with Napoleon's politics, or because it was financially inconvenient for him to dedicate it to Napoleon. Giussepe Verdi, the famous Italian Opera-writer, was deeply involved in politics. In fact, a song from his opera Nabbuco was one of the rallying songs for Italian Unification (and his name was a code for supporting Victor Emmanuel). Wagner was deeply involved in politics (in fact, he was exiled from Dresden for supporting an uprising), and most people know him as having inspired Hitler with his anti-Semitism and German Nationalism. Moving into a more modern era, we must also acknowledge the more proletarian nature of political music. Who can forget the strains of “Pie in the sky”, “The ballad of Joe Hill”, or “Which Side Are You On Boy?”. Unions often had many songs sung on the issue of worker’s rights (No, really?). Within the 20th century we must acknowledge a rash of political music, particularly showing in the folk music of Peter, Paul, and Mary, Pete Ochs, Pete Seeger, Utah Phillips, and Woody and Arlo Guthrie. It seems unreasonable to now complain that artists of a new generation should simply “Shut up and sing”
Moreover, we acknowledge the greatness of such artistic classics as “Grapes of Wrath”, “Candide”, or “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”. All of these have political discourse (quite radical for it’s time), and yet are still accepted in schools as classics that should be taught about because of the greatness of their artistic value. Why does literature get to have political content when music cannot? Why do we have this double standard regarding what can or cannot have a political opinion? Certainly, no one informed Picasso that he should “Shut up and paint” when he painted his classic “Guernica”.
Art is an expression of the self and a celebration of individualism. It is not a slave to society, and it is not in existence to either comfort or disturb you. It is one thing to disagree with the message of a song or artist and therefore not buy that piece of work, or any of that artist’s work, but it is completely different to accuse them of being poor artists because they are expressing ideas you do not like. Don’t get me wrong: I think Bono is an egotist with a messiah complex who did what he did for attention and I think Green Day sold out on Punk and that American Idiot was by no means great art. That doesn’t mean that politics have no place in art. In fact, it is fair to point out that because in the latest era music has become a whore for popular culture with the rise of the massive label entities, the RIAA, and the bubblegum pop attitude of “One album and you’re out” that, if anything, this latest group of artists is much less attached to politics than the ones who came before them. It would seem that whatever we may be told by the empty-headed drone public about how “politics have no place in music”, that politics do have an important place in great music.