Are youth subcultures genuine signs of revolt or simply the manifestation of style?

Phil Cohen suggested youth subcultures as a “compromise solution between two contradictory needs: the need to create and express autonomy and difference from parents… and the need to maintain the parental identifications (Phil Cohen, 1972). In relation to this idea of expressing autonomy, we can see the signs of revolt. Many youths will rebel against what is seen as the norm purely because they don’t want to conform to society. However, in doing so they are in fact conforming to another social norm, just one that is not as predominant as the others, for example the Goth subculture. Eventually though this subculture does become a manifestation of style. For example, what I might have thought to be a ‘chav’ when I was at school may be perceived completely differently now and could now be the complete opposite. I believe that a lot of the time youth subcultures start out as a genuine sign of revolt, but do end up as simply the manifestation of style.

Does the emergence of the digital download signal the end of the music industry?

Due to the inventions of new technology many people say that the digital download signals the end of the music industry. I have to disagree with this. Personally, I would say that the emergence of the digital download gives artists the opportunity to share their music, and in doing so increase their audience. Dating back to the 1970s, compact cassettes became the first recordable audio medium. This and the release of the compact disc in 1970 raised many problems and lead to the British Phonographic Industry launching an anti-piracy campaign in the 1980s. Therefore, piracy has always been a threat to the music industry. With internet connections being faster than ever and programmes such as limewire enabling people to share music for free, many people are choosing to do this over buying music. After all, who would pay for something when they could get it for free? However, some prefer to pay to ensure they get good quality music. Furthermore, people are still paying to go and see live concerts because of the experience, therefore leading me to the conclusion that the emergence of the digital download does not signal the end of the music industry.

Can popular music ever really be unplugged?

Due to the technological advances that we have witnessed, with the invention of the microphone in 1827, the electric guitar in 1932 and the amplifier in 1904, how can music ever really be unplugged? If defining unplugged as without the use of these inventions then surely it is very difficult for music to be unplugged nowadays. Without this technology, artists would not be able to perform live concerts to thousands of people, as their voice would simply not travel far enough to reach every person. Unplugged music is therefore acoustic music, thus meaning without the use of these technological devices. Effectively, recording is not unplugged meaning that any attempt at making music that is unplugged would have to be done purely with a live, acoustic performance with only the strength of the artist’s voice to reach its mass audience. As we can see, this is very unlikely to happen therefore leaving me to the conclusion that popular music can be unplugged, but with great difficulty. With the technology that we have now, it is more than likely that music will not be unplugged as it is much easier with the use of microphones, instruments and amplification.

What is World Music?

World music can be indigenous music, which retrospectively means local music that is native to a certain area, for example Lady Smith Black Mambazo and Band of Gypsies. However, Lady Smith Black Mambazo was featured on Paul Simmons 1986 album Graceland, which was a number one hit in the UK and America and therefore becomes international music. Consequently I think world music is not simply indigenous local music. When going into a music store such as HMV there is a specific section for world music, which includes music from countries other than Britain or America, and includes music in different languages. World music could simply be explained as music that comes from all around the world. However it is not that simple. Deanna Robinson, Elizabeth B. Buck, and Marlene Cuthbert “clearly indicate that world musical homogenisation is not occurring, but rather that international and local sounds are being fused to create heterogeneous ‘world’ music.” (1991: p4). In this instance I agree.

Is Popular Music a mass-produced commodity or a genuine art form?

To be able to know whether popular music is a mass-produced commodity or a genuine art form we need to understand what we think art is. I believe that art is a way of expression and a product of human creativity. Additionally I believe that a mass-produced commodity is something that can be produced in large quantities and turned to commercial. Some musicians create music purely because they are inspired, not to make money, thus meaning that popular music is in fact a genuine art form. However, it could be said that as soon as the music becomes popular and the artist is signed by a record company, popular music becomes a mass-produced commodity and is therefore no longer a genuine art form. Theodor W. Adorno agreed with this and said, “The popular music industry is an all consuming production line that churns out mass produced, inferior commodities. However, just because a song is mass-produced does this stop popular music from necessarily being a genuine art form as well? I believe that in the past popular music was purely a genuine art form, however nowadays, due to the fact that the same styles and beats are used, popular music is now a mass-produced commodity.