Mixing Pop & Politics

2010-10-14T22:44:00.009+11:00

Politics and music have always mixed. Ever since Beethoven dethroned Napoleon in his third symphony – and quite probably even before that – musicians have used art to express their political points of view.

In just over a century later, descendants of African immigrants across America would use song to covertly communicate a sense of solidarity between them as they picked cotton and slaved kitchens.

Throughout the 1940’s and into the fifties folk artists such as Woody Guthrie and the interminable Pete Seeger penned and performed songs for the working- and under-classes alike.

This tradition was picked up by Bob Dylan, who then passed it onto John Lennon (top), and before long the youth of the day were wearing flowers in their hair and painting placards in support of civil rights and in protest of war.

Protest and performance strengthened with the emergence of punk in the seventies – a movement often associated with anarchist theory. At the same time however, a significant portion of the UK punk scene adopted neo-Nazi ideologies.

During the more recent Bush administration numerous artists spoke out against the ignorance and ultra-conservatism displayed following the 9/11 attacks. Everyone from Ben Harper to Pink to System of a Down all sang in protest against the invasion of Iraq and encouraged America’s youth to vote. Indeed, Bruce Springsteen’s support of Obama (right) may be credited for winning the vote of Middle America.

Similarly Australian artists throughout the Howard years also spoke out in song. John Butler ‘Something’s Gotta Give’ being a prime example.

But just as there was a grassroots movement to oust Bush, there is now a growing movement by conservative America to rid themself of this Obama fellow.

The Tea Party – named after the infamous Boston Tea Party movement of the 18th century – is a leaderless lobby group, pushing for a shift back to the right after concerns that America is hedging too close to communism.

Earlier this year Velvet Underground drummer Maureen ‘Moe’ Tucker was seen and interviewed outside a Tea Party gathering protesting against the government’s use of tax dollars.

Prompted for a quote at the rally, Tucker expresses her anger stating, “I’m furious about the way we are being lead towards socialism”. This view is shared with 90% of the Tea Party supporters (Bloomberg).

Discussing Tucker’s attendance in a poorly written, but nonetheless thought-provoking piece for NME, Laura Snapes raised the question of whether it matters if artists’ views differ from our own. Or to put it more succinctly, as Mark Whitfield of AmericanaUK did on his site’s forum: “Does it matter if musicians are right wing? “

The question of course goes beyond the political. What of artists’ spiritual beliefs? What of their sexuality? If you’re vegan, what of their dietary habits? If you’re straight-edge, what of their drug-taking?

X marks the edge

For transparency’s sake you all should know that I have never voted right, nor do I own a single Velvet Underground record. That said, I do believe Tucker has the right to express her opinion, and the general public are free to listen to Velvet Underground if they must.

For some listeners, an artist’s ideology is a determining factor in whether or not they’ll buy the album or go to the show. These are the converted that, incidentally, don’t seem to mind being preached to. In fact, being reminded of what they believe and why they believe it is essential to their listening habits.

An extreme form of this can be seen amongst many Christian communities who encourage their congregations to listen to only Christian music. I once met a person who wouldn’t even listen to so-called Christian music unless the majority of songs actually mentioned the name of Jesus.

Others take a more apathetic approach, and are prepared to dance to anything with a good beat irrespective of the lyrics. You’ve all seen the bogans at a John Butler Trio concert that, despite dancing to the sounds of political and personal revolution, leave the gig pissed as a fart, thumping the Asian immigrant on the way out the door, before downing another bottle of Jack Daniels and forcing himself upon some girl who just happened to be standing there.

Others still wish that our entertainers would just keep their politics to themselves. “Shut up and sing” as was famously said to the Dixie Chicks (below) when they dared to criticise George Bush Jr. and the invasion of Iraq.

For the converted, listening to music by artists that espouse the same views reaffirms their chosen position, and in times of doubt, can be a source of comfort. Knowing that other people think and feel the same way about a particular issue can be reassuring, and if that view is put into a melody that you and a crowd of thousands are able to sing along to, then one obtains a sense of solidarity.

One needs only to attend any rock concert, religious rally, sporting event or political protest to see this in practice. Even the most level headed of us can get swept away with the moment amidst a torrent of hysteria. The ability of a communicator to turn a stadium full of individuals into an unquestioning flock of followers is the key behind the success of evangelical Christian groups such as Hillsong. Strangely, it’s often the same tactics that were used by Hitler – albeit without the altar call and cleanly shaven, buff young men with guitars.

That said it does make sense that we feel an affinity to certain artists if we are able to relate to their views on an issues close to our heart. Which is why Springsteen appeals to the working class, Eminem appeals to the disadvantaged, white teenage boy, and Toby Keith appeals to redneck America.

The cruelest irony here is when the listener misinterprets the artists’ ideologies. As an example, I direct you to the thousands of Americans who adopted Springsteen’s ‘Born in the USA’ as a proud, patriotic song. Indeed Ronald Reagan used the song in his 1984 campaign, not realising it was in fact a stinging indictment on conservative America and their hijacking of what it meant to be American.

For the apathetics, the words mean jack shit. After all, music is supposed to be entertainment, right? A good beat and a decent melody is all that matters. It doesn’t matter if the singer is crowing about peace in the Middle East, the plight of the endangered yellow-spotted tree frog, or the sexual satisfaction he gets from banging the exhaust pipe of his Holden Monaro. If the song grooves the apathetic listener will lay his money down and hit the dancefloor each and every fucking time.

Though at first glance such an approach could be criticised as being simpleminded, it happens to provide the most freedom. As it doesn’t matter which side of the political fence the artist sits upon, the listener is free to listen to NRA card-carrying Ted Nugent (right) one minute, and peacenik hero Pete Seeger the next. They see no conflict when their playlist includes a Rage Against the Machine call for a violent overthrow of the state, followed by Charlie Daniels’ ‘A Few More Rednecks’, thus facilitating a well-rounded, all-encompassing listening experience.

The final group - the shut-up and singers - fail to appreciate what makes good art. Music bereft of political, spiritual, sexual and personal expression is not music at all. A collection of notes and beats and melodies organised in a palatable way is as much art as a flat-pack Ikea coffee table: sure it serves a purpose but you’re not going to display it in The Louvre.

Asking your musicians to not express themselves is like asking the chef at your favourite restaurant not to cook.

The problem of course is that no-one’s views are ever set in concrete. Positions change and what I believe today is vastly different to what I believed when I was a mere pup. Sitting here in my mid-thirties, I do not wish to be held accountable for my views as a 20-year old.

Yet we somehow expect an artist who recorded a song protesting the Vietnam war to speak out against the Iraq war thirty-something years later. Artists are like the rest of us – their views change along with their experiences and accumulation of knowledge and wisdom, and thus to steadfastly lump yourself in the converted category will cause any music fan some problems. Neil Young has flirted with conservatism, yet is generally regarded as a hero of the left. As has counterculture icon Bob Dylan. Murderous, raping and pillaging hip-hop duo Insane Clown Posse have recently ‘come out’ as Christian, whilst Cat Stevens converted to Islam at the peak of his career.

Rock out with your cock out, Jonny-boy!

Perhaps it’s the nineties grunge kid within me, but it seems that apathy is best way forward here. Sure Nickelback represent everything I stand against (ideologically and musically), but bugger me backwards if they produce the best cock-rock this side of Jon Bon Jovi's leather pants.

At the end of day, I know who I am and what I stand for.. And I don't need every two-bit, leftist hippy singer/songwriter with a beat up guitar to remind me why I stand for such things. As I approach middle-age, holding down a job, paying off a mortgage and putting my kids through school the last thing I need is to impose another stupid rule upon myself and limit the freedom to enjoy music in all it's brilliant and terrible glory.

Now, if you’ll excuse me. This Billy Bragg album’s finished and I feel like listening to a bit of Merle Haggard.

Resources:

Bainbridge, L. "The Ten Right-Wing Rockers", Observer Music Monthly, 14/10/07
Boyd, B. "Right-Wing Musicians Fight For Their Right To Tea Party", IrishTimes.com 14/10/10
Przybyla, H. "Tea Party Advocates Who Scorn Socialism Want a Government Job", Bloomberg, 25/03/10
Snapes, L, "Does it Matter if Moe Tucker is Right Wing?", NME Online, 05/10/10

Three Chords & The Truth

Mixing Pop & Politics