I remember being eight years old, watching my mom belt out “Daydream Believer” by The Monkees as it played on the oldies radio station. Already a music enthusiast, I thought to myself that my mom’s generation must have been a time of great music if there was an entire station devoted to it. I was jealous she was so privileged to grow up in a time of great music, with artists like Lionel Richie and the Beatles, when my own age’s artists seemed to pale in comparison. With every new act that came around to me, it seemed as though the musicians were criticized for being unoriginal and uninspiring: Madonna, Nirvana, and Green Day, to name a few.
For years I wondered, “why have all the musical greats come and gone?” However, I now realize they didn’t come and leave…pop music has always been in the same perceived rut. The natural progression of music critiquing spans the ages: a popular musician bursts onto the airwaves offering something new to the industry, and the initial reaction is to perceive the artist as shallow.
Take Madonna for example. When she first hit the music scene in 1984, her music and character were scrutinized, criticized, and despised by many. She was condemned for being too sexy, too open, and too manufactured. However, if you ask anyone now to name one of the most influential female musicians of all time is, I guarantee four out of five will say Madonna.
It is clear that this trend has been taking place over generations when one considers the “new age” Madonna: the ever-so-famous, and increasingly infamous, Britney Spears. Not only is Britney a pop artist who idolizes, praises and attempts to emulate Madonna, but she is yet another example of a “pop-artist” whose sexy image and bubble gum music was once heavily criticized. Now she is a pop icon who has greatly influenced pop history.
People have been brutally judging new pop artists for decades. Even those who I idolized for being so influential on my mom, were for not always accepted with open arms.
A prime example (that just happens to have current relevance) is Pink Floyd. The band was disparaged for many years as a new group and now it seems that has changed. Even though they had not played together for 24 years, they proved that they remained in the hearts of many avid music listeners as they drew an incredibly enthused crowd of fans at the Live 8 concert in London just a few weeks ago.
So, the question remains, why do we always want to believe we are experiencing a popular music rut? Do we want to believe we’re more musically intellectual than we really are thus choosing a modern day Chopin over Alicia Keys, if one existed? Are we averse to change? What is the reason we put down so many of the great pop artists?
The answer is the stigma attached to “pop.” The term was originally intended to describe music that was literally “popular.” However, somewhere down the line the term “pop” began to imply many negative things. It now indicates selling out for mass consumption, connotes a lack of artistry, and consequently a lack of substance. So many admired rock bands (Coldplay, Billy Talent, etc) are actually pop acts, in terms of being “popular.” But, regardless of the nature of their music, because they are not described as pop, they are welcomed more readily.
Consequently, it is important for music lovers not to be passive listeners, but to search for their real opinions about artists. Otherwise, labels will keep us from opening our ears, and the next new pop artist you turn your nose at might be the next Big One.
