the original inventor of originality

When a musically inclined new-comer emerges onto the scene, it can be hard to find any respect for them (beyond mild amusement) when they become popular from a cover song. If the song was good enough to re-create, why would that artist ever think they could make it better? And how would they be able to establish themselves as a respectable musician if they became popularized by something that was already popular in the first place. Take Six Pence None the Richer’s version of “Kiss Me” which took them to number 607 on the Billboard charts. But were they ever heard from again? Or what about Orgy’s 1999 hit, “Blue Monday?” it’s catchy, but mostly because it was already made popular in 1984 as a dance hit. Again, after the song fell off of the charts, did we ever see them re-claim the top-notch on the charts? Nope.

Cover-songs can be good when an already-established artist, takes a good song and alters the feeling of it; doesn’t just copy the song for brownie points, but explores other possible meanings by employing a few minor changes. Take Annie Lenox’s “Sweet Dreams,” the original song comes off as a light-hearted social commentary, where Marilyn Manson seems to use the inflections in his voice to change track from a borderline pop song to a ready-made theme for a horror movie.

Veterans to the music scene don’t fall off don’t fall off the face of the planet after they cover a song because they tend towards employing their own personal creativity. They don’t rely on riding the coattails of artists that came before them.

Artist, Tim Dung, more commonly known by his Pseudonym, Girl Talk is an exception to this “new-comers can’t successfully recreate songs” rule. He, like Marilyn Manson brings his own manic, yet cohesive flare to any song he re-creates. In lieu of physically creating a new version of an entire song, he smashes up 10-20 individual songs to develop one new, epic song. He then sews 12-14 of those songs together seamlessly to create your own personal dance party themed album.

Girl Talk’s 2008 album, “Feed the Animals” goes beyond re-creation for the sake of fame and even surpasses being merely an amusing dance track. By exploring the effects of combing instrumentals of deeply personal and emotion provoking songs with the lyrics of frivolous pop-song lyrics, Girl Talk finds his own niche.

The 4^th track on “Feed the Animals” combines the angsty fast-paced guitar of Metallica’s “One” with the lyrics from Lil’ Mama’s “Lip Gloss.” This dynamic melds the adolescent appeal of makeup and physical attraction with the hard-hitting, borderline depressing feeling of Metallica’s instrumentals. These paralleling attributes shed light on the normal human condition. He creates and lives in an environment that seems to acknowledge and welcome anyone that’s willing to listen.

Throughout his discography Girl Talk uses 1000’s of clips from 100’s of different artists ranging from Ludacris to Senead O’Connor and Kelly Clarkson to Radiohead. His albums cover artists that not only span genres but also decades.

There is no other artists that can successfully combine the Beatles, “Come Together” with KRS One’s “Sound of da Police” and make it appealing to listeners who aren’t necessarily fond of one song or the other.

Girl Talk brings the art back into music, even though he isn’t the one playing the instruments. In concert Girl Talk is essentially just a man and a computer, no live band. His outright unparalleled originality more than makes up for his lack of actual instrument playing.

Girl Talk also finds a successful way to re-introduce influential artists from previous generations by mixing them with current chart toppers. In turn the younger generations gets a dose of The Pixies with their 50 cent or some Elton John laced into their Wham. He gives credibility to music that this generation merely regards as what their parents listen to. The final product seems to conclude that we can’t forget or try to force out the past. Good music is good music, regardless of what generation or genre it stems from and Girl Talk never looses sight of this.

Girl Talk is the pioneer of a much needed musical evolution. He gives a positive spin to the downfall of pop music, and  does so in a way that is rarely attempted and almost never done successfully.

           

"Climb Trees, Go out on a Limb"

Up until my early days of high school I believed that hip-hop was a motley assortment of foul language, misogyny and drug references by the less than talented misfits of our dwindling artistically inclined culture. “Personal Journals,” by Sage Francis made me realize my ignorance towards hip-hop and rap music.

To judge hip-hop by solely focusing on the likes of Lil’ Wayne and 50 cent is like judging punk music by referencing your experience with Good Charlotte or determining what constitutes good country music when your only frame of reference is Carrie Underwood. They don’t represent the origins of the music, but more exploit the popularized aspects of each genre.

Hip-hop didn’t start as a way to brag about money or to delegitimize the importance of women. It started as a way for a subverted culture to come together and share their interest and love for art and movement. Sage Francis re-introduces this aesthetic and finds his own footing in the vast garbage pile of all too common, ready-made music.

The importance of family and the idea that we have to take care of our own is present through the entirety of the album but rears its head most noticeably through the song, “Inherited Scars.” The song is a tribute to his younger sister who turns to self-mutilation as a cathartic experience. “If there’s a vacancy as far as room in your life goes, say it to me but don’t do it with a knife under your clothes.” The depth of his concern for his sister’s addiction to harming herself is paralled by the guilt he feels surrounding the idea of their deadbeat, less than available father. He wants to be the go-to male figure in her life but often times finds himself falling short of his own expectations, “My feeble attempt at being a strong big brother doing father figure 8’s,” just scratches the surface of his overwhelming concern for one of the people that means so much to him.

Hip-hop isn’t female friendly music unless you’re down to shake your ass and be an object rather than a real person, right? I had this idea about hip-hop until I was introduced to Sage Francis. His song, “Broken Wings” is devoted to highlighting the endless talent of a particular woman who is constantly regarded as an object, not an actual capable and gifted woman. “I’d like to see her take flight into the stars, instead of letting her fly free they keep her in jars.” It’s a pretty daring task for a hip-hop artist to shed his uber masculinity in order to humanize a woman. He doesn’t see her as a less than capablefemale, but a talented  person who has been beaten down by the men around her. He comments on why this particular woman isn’t treated as an equal, “It isn’t hard to see why they keep her captive, she’s naturally attractive, speaks with adlibs, she’s uncommonly talented.” This comes off as more of a personal commentary towards the roles of women in general, not just the woman he wrote the song about.

Another aspect of typical hip-hop music missing from “Personal Journals” and the entirety of the Sage Francis’ discography is the emphasis on drugs and alcohol. Sage puts himself out on the line when admitting that he doesn’t drink any alcohol, ever, nor does he use drugs which are staples of popularized culture. “I had no dead homes to honor while pouring out the liquor I don’t drink, you can flash your shiny objects in front of my eyes and I won’t blink.” This comes off as a satirical response to the frivolities of popularized hip-hop music. He states pretty boldly that he won’t conform to the standards set out for him; he’s going to pave his own path and avoid distractions. He also poses the idea to his audience that you can only get as far in life as you expect from yourself, “If you’re a poor man’s version of anything it’s your self-perception.”

Not everyone cares all that much about what is infiltrating the air waves and burrowing its way into the skulls of the masses.  It’s really not a widely accepted idea that the media surrounding us does have actual direct implications on our culture and how we assimilate into the world surrounding us. Until women are regarded as more than objects by our pop-icon idols they’ll continue to be treated accordingly. When hip-hop artists on TV start focusing on the importance of self-worth and not their cars and excessive amount of “bling” our culture is infinitely more likely to follow suit.

Media shapes our ideas of reality. To think that art imitates life is way off. Life tends towards following the trends of our successful entertainers in attempt to emulate them. Artists like Sage Francis infuse their music with life lessons and personality in the hopes that maybe it will rub off on a few people and in turn maybe even slightly change the perspective of our culture.

Our Culture is Missing Something

Never has an album continuously made my spine tingle like Arcade Fire’s, “Funeral.” Maybe it’s the nostalgia derived from the individual songs that gets me. Maybe it’s lead singer/songwriter, Win Butler’s subtle, yet perfectly arranged lyrics that give way to encompassing feelings I didn’t even know there were words for.

There are too many aspects of this album that give it permission to be labeled one of the all time greats of the 2000s to quantify. Arcade Fire somehow successfully combines electronic, disco and folk influences within one album to arrive at one beautifully composed record that continuously touches on the theme of an unspecified neighborhood and the value of personal reflection.

The album acts as social commentary, poking at our culture’s inability to take advantage of what lies right in front of us. What the icons of our day are missing is the ability to sell an idea without having to be so blatant about it. Popular music has become an art (or lack thereof) for entertainers who don’t aim to explore their own emotions beyond what’s right on the surface. Where pop-music acts a way for artists to put their feelings, however shallow they may be, out there, Arcade Fire turns the tables and puts the listeners own personal insight on the front burner.

The depth of the album’s impact is measured by how much the audience is able to take away from what they’ve heard. The most widely known Arcade Fire song, “Rebellion (Lies),” featured in the television show “Six Feet Under” and Bono’s “Project Red” campaign, poses the idea that ignorance, especially on a personal-insight level is unconsciously saying that you’re done trying to grow into a better person.

“Sleeping in is giving in, no matter what the time is, sleeping in is giving in, so lift those heavy eyelids.” The song engages the idea that people attempt to relocate their obstacles to an out-of-mind place, and in turn inadvertently asks the audience to determine what the potential future holds when living so independently from personal responsibilities.

“People try and hide the night underneath the covers, people try and hide the light underneath the covers.” The goal through the song “Rebellion (Lies) doesn’t seem to be to push the audience towards any particular action or goal, but rather towards their own personal realizations and recognition of who they really are.

Even when Arcade Fire turns their focus towards personal realizations and discovery, the album doesn’t switch gears towards melancholy. Butler lives inside of his emotions. Through the lyrics the audience becomes mindful that his own desperation isn’t fleeting. The prevalent theme of the song, “Crown of Love” is knowledge of self, even in the most desperate times. The honesty that’s derived from his personal insights gives tangibility to heartache without having to be expressed in Layman’s terms.

“They say it fades if you let it. Love was made to forget it. I carved your name across my eyelids, you prayed for rain, I prayed for blindness.” Beyond being perfectly phrased to give insight into love-induced desperation, it’s also simply eloquent.

Honest emotion isn’t something most people are seeking when they flip on the radio. As a culture, the prevalence of emotion in music may be accepted with a bit of cynicism amongst newcomers to this cathartic type of music. Where the term, “emo” used to derive meaning from emotionally charged content, it turned towards encompassing whiny, adolescent, ready-made music. The idea of sitting through an entire album that subtly begs it’s audience to look inward without coming off as borderline manic depressive is a mere pipe-dream for the pop-icon martyrs of our day. Arcade Fire almost effortlessly entangles their music with emotion, but avoids coming off overly dramatic.

 

Mind Control

There’s a huge gap between what constitutes art vs. entertainment. They really don’t even go hand-in-hand anymore.  Artistry is derived from creativity and a thorough understanding surrounding the usage of a particular medium. Art has the capabilities of transcending generations by inciting change or introducing a new style or idea created through personal revelations and experience.

Many aspects of pop culture seem to parallel the parameters of art. So well actually, that our culture, for the most part, thinks they encompass the same things. Pop music closely resembles legitimate art, but only by carefully picking apart the aspects of influential art, then utilizing the parts that seem to garner the highest monetary response in the consumers. What comes is music that incorporates some artistic qualities, but in turn completely loses its own creativity.

Producers of popular music follow trends. They find out what incites consumers to buy, and then they apply their findings to creating an album that will potentially sell millions. They find borderline (at best) talented potential pop icons then alter their personas to create an ideal image. Uglies and fatties need not apply. They then are paired with repetitious music that takes some of the qualities of actual artistically inclined music, but they alter those qualities beyond recognition to serve the purpose of selling more albums.

So now, that catchy, fast paced drum beat that say, Radiohead concocted, is now used throughout the entirety of a whole pop-album. It was proven that particular beat stuck in the minds of those who listened to it. So now they’ve not only taken a major original contribution to music and basterdized it by straining and hoarding the catchiest parts, but in turn have also completely lost any residual clout by voiding their own music of any originality.

On the surface this garbage is entertaining. When it gets stuck in the collective heads of an entire audience, it becomes familiar. When something is familiar, the audience is more likely to gravitate towards it. The multi-billion dollar industries that make and promote pop-music are not ignorant to this, they pioneered it. And they’re selling it and making billions. And we’re buying it.

Our culture participates in passive listening. Often times we can’t admit that this music does make a significant impact on us because we aren’t consciously aware of it. These songs sung by “the beautiful people” make the audience question their own physical appearances because they don’t match up with what they see on TV. These songs also tend towards sub-human levels of intelligence. How many songs can possibly be produced revolving around hittin’ the clubs or teenage quazi-love songs? These prevalent themes reiterate to their audience that these things hold actual importance, which they absolutely do not.

How many pop songs are devoted to say, expressing the satisfaction of hard work or pushing listeners towards personal mental expansion? Not many.

God loves you, even if you're ugly

As a teen I was in a continuous routine of break-up then get back together with my then boyfriend of almost four years. The childish mess of a relationship that I recognize today totally seemed worth the habitual screaming fights and long bouts of sobbing with my head against the bathroom floor. Ridiculous? Yes.

However this introduction into the world of relationships was an absolutely integral building block for the rest of my relationships to follow. The hardest part of this time in my life was how isolated I felt in my grief, especially when the relationship finally ended. I really didn’t have words to describe the heartbreak I thought I was going through.

Then, in comes my introduction to the ingenious, yet heartfelt hip-hop duo, “Atmosphere,” consisting of lyricist, Slug (Sean Dailey) and beat-smith/producer, Ant (Anthony Davis.) With a little help from a well-versed underground hip-hop fan, I got my hands on their album “God Loves Ugly” released in 2002. The album as a whole disregarded most of the expectations I had for hip-hop music at the time. But the one song that stood out, almost begged me to listen and relate to it was their ever-popular and equally loathed, “Fuck You Lucy.” Standing as the fourth song on the album it doesn’t appear to be the intentional highlight.

 Now, this was content that I wouldn’t have ever found somewhere on the radio back in 2005. The lyrics didn’t hone in on the extremities of the actual content, but dove right into the heart of it. Even six years after I first purchased this album and with the residual longings of relationships past, long gone, it still channels that original organic emotion it first delivered. But don’t get me wrong, the exactness and depth of the content is unexpectedly refreshing.

“Fuck you Lucy for leaving me, Fuck you Lucy for not needin’ me. I wanna say fuck you , because I still love you.  No, I'm not OK, and I don't know what to do.” Slug puts himself out on the line as completely vulnerable and as having no control over the situation; not exactly what the average listener would expect to find on a hip-hop album. And if you’re a listener of Atmosphere’s discography, you’ll find Lucy Ford and her emotional path of destruction all over Slug’s lyrics.

Slug is a story-teller; he captures the fact-based personal struggle aspects of life, similarly to old-school fables. In doing this, he tends towards representing a more accessible type of artistic figure. His rhymes are about every day, relatable life situations and personal struggles. When the frivolities of modern, popular hip-hop are stripped away and the talentless drones clad in parachute sized pants and “tall-tees” are replaced with a group having 22 years of experience under their belts, the idea of hip-hop takes on an entirely original meaning.

Now, I’m completely aware that, for the most part most subject matter is not completely imaginative. It’s the mark of a true artist when they can suddenly give new meaning and put precisely the appropriate words to a specific emotion. Like fellow independent hip-hop artist Aesop Rocks says in his song, “Face Melter,”  “I find that interesting style can often out-weigh the subject.” This rings extremely true throughout the entirety of “God Loves Ugly.”

Track 15, “Modern Man’s Hustle” is a beautiful, true-to-life love song. Really, it’s not optimistic, it doesn’t border on dreary; it’s just kind of a ballad exploring the parameters of a modern relationship. It captures the honesty and loyalty one could hopefully expect.

“I said Ill make you smile for the simple fact I’m good at it I’ll make you smile just so I can sit and look at it.” It’s not a man’s play-by-play of his history of hook-ups. He really brings life to the minor details that are so often over-looked.

Ant is the mastermind behind the beats and production. Without his blatantly recognizable 80s infused, often funky and always original production, Atmosphere would not have the following that they do. The two mesh their own understandings of hip-hop and infuse it with their combined mid-west Minneapolis mind-frame. The emotion of Ant’s work continuously melds with the progression of Slug’s lyrics. The entirety of their music captures a complete mood not just one specific element.

Atmosphere represents a style of music that carries the potential of influencing culture towards a more practical mentality. They advocate for loving life, no matter what path you’re on, and staying out of business that’s not your own. Slug and Ant, 22 years after they started this project still have a ridiculously large following in every city and continue to preach positive ideals. “God Loves Ugly” made me realize relationships do not make or break us as people.

Check out "Fuck You Lucy" here

Stupid Student Center

So, the Student Center. Maybe I really shouldn’t even care. Maybe I’m putting too much thought into this ridiculous building, this building that will house the same things we already have here on the SSU campus, but will just cost lots of extra money. Oh yeah, and they will have more shitty quality food choices to help pack on the freshman 15 just that much faster.

This issue is a representation of the bigger problem, just on a smaller scale. There is a lack of emphasis put on the academic part of college. Our ASI feels that effort and time put forth towards improving the social lives of SSU students is more pressing than saving our teachers.

Ok-so maybe ASI President Bridgette Dussan’s explanation of the benefits of constructing this student center does make sense. Yes, costs of materials are at an all time low, so we can secure a lower cost of construction right now and that price will carry over for the entire 30 year pay-back period. Even if costs do go up, we will still get to lock in this price permanently.  But that’s $150 extra dollars per semester per student for a completely unnecessary building.

State universities were originally created with the idea that anyone who wanted to continue their education after high school could have the chance without paying the price of an ivy-league school. Now that costs are generally so high, it’s now not so plausible that “anyone” could afford an education. So why would we purposefully raise tuition costs solely for the purpose of constructing “fun” oriented building? This school is not just full of 18-year-olds searching for a place to congregate and meet new friends.  I’d venture to say that there are a majority of us that care slightly more about the dwindling state of academics. Our teachers are far more valuable than a common place for teenager to eat pizza and gossip.

I understand the money that would go to the student center is not interchangeable with the money allotted to pay teachers’ salaries. Dussan suggested that people shouldn’t be mad that this extra $150 per semester would go to a new Student center and not our teachers. Bull shit. ASI chose to put their effort into creating the Student Center above all else as per Bridgette Dussan herself. They could have used their power and resources in creating a referendum towards pushing for more money for our teachers. But as Dussan said, referendums towards allotting more money for teacher s don’t usually pass, so why put the effort towards it? Uh… because we need our teachers

I’d rather push for keeping our teachers in a good standing and possibly fail, than push for increasing costs for tuition so SSU can have a spot for students to get together and hang out.

It seems an easy feat to go around to sororities and explain all of the positive benefits of this purposed Student Center. I’m sure, based on what I’ve heard from students who have received the “The Student Center is great” spiel, the negatives were not discussed. So by Bridgette saying that the STAR was giving biased negative coverage of the student center is ridiculous. The bias seems to be in her court. We give equal coverage to the best of our ability. We don’t stay up at night pondering ways to sabotage the inner workings of ASI by giving unfair coverage.

And By the way, learn how to read a fucking paper. The first two inside pages are for opinion articles; equal coverage is not required even in prestigious papers. And “Letters to the Editor” is not written by the staff of the STAR. Our fellow students with pressing opinions write this. We run all of the “Letters to the Editor” regardless of whose ideas and opinions they support. It just happens to be that most of the students we hear from absolutely do not support this dumb building.

My potential doesn’t lie in the hands of new Student Center. A new building does not push us closer towards becoming an ivy-league. It ends up pushing further away from the original idea of college, a good education by knowledgeable teachers at an inexpensive price.

Yes- movies make college look like a lot of fun. Mingling with cute co-eds is an exciting aspect of college, but without our amazing teachers, some of which may lose their jobs, we may get a degree, but we’ll lose out on a quality education.

I’ve had five teachers throughout my school career who have changed my life. By encouraging my capacity to think for myself and personally pushing me towards my given-talents these teachers have help build my character. No building has ever, nor will ever give my life the same kind of meaning. It disgusts me that this school would even consider putting effort towards an un-education oriented class while some of our valued teachers aren’t even sure if they’re coming back next semester. How’s that for a slap to the face?

Throwback

I didn’t want to like them.

 Sounding enough like The Rolling Stones or Led Zeppelin to turn me off, I pretty much gave up on The Black Keys before I ever let myself give into them.

My initial assumptions clouded my judgment. And for the record I am not a classic rock fan. It’s pretty much a foreign subject that I have very little interest in delving into.

But there’s no denying that classic, old-school 1970’s rock is a major source of influence for The Black Keys. And I also can't deny that I totally love it.

Their album, “Brothers,” released in 2010, deviates entirely from the current trend direction of uninspired, uninfluenced, garbage music.

Instead of following modern trends, they take cues from other music genres and incorporate them into their own sound. It gives their final product a familiar feeling which most listeners can relate to, but they most definitely do not Bogart anyone’s style.

Through the 16 songs on the album they channel everything from an alternative, independent sound to classic rock and hip/hop. Generally the lyrics flow uniformly, it’s the instrumental choices that continuously draw parallels to music typically un-found in the main-stream.

Their song, “Howlin’ for you,” is a major 1970’s throwback. The beat-flow and dueling guitars border the style of the Indie band, The Rapture enough to capture some of their fans, but not so much that they come off sounding like a copy-cat band.

“I’m not the One,” is reminiscent of the style of DJ/beat-smith, ANT from the hip/hop group Atmosphere. The instrumentals from this song could have been laid out with other tracks from Atmosphere’s 2008 album, “When Life gives you Lemons, you Paint that Shit Gold.” Again, their sound is similar enough to take notice, but not so much that their originality is lost.

Most noticeable are the similarities between The Black Keys and The Beatles. The instrumentals from The Black Keys’ song, “Unknown Brother,” could be easily found somewhere on “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.” Upbeat, but thick, almost hollow sounding instruments unite these two bands through a variation of songs.

Their use of language is something else to be admired. There are only so many interesting, relatable subjects that a band can touch on though their lyrics and unfortunately, it’s all been done. But The Black Keys look at familiar situations through a new set of looking specs.  Subjects like love, death and jealousy have been beaten to the ground before, but their off-beat perspective and word choices create a new, previously undiscovered texture. They ask you to make inferences in order to understand the depth of their stories.

The true art factor of this band exists through their alternative perspectives. Instead of giving the listener the whole and exact story, they leave up to the imaginations of their audience.

“The look of the cake, it ain’t always the taste, my ex girl she had such a beautiful face” from the song “Next Girl” essentially explains that judging a book by its cover is often a regrettable decision.  But instead of using the old cliché, they employ language that requires the listener to pay attention because on the surface, the lyrics may not make complete sense. Their music doesn’t come off boring, or incite that “I think I’ve heard something just like this before” response.

I didn’t want to like The Black Keys because I thought they were going to be another band trying to bring back the classic rock 1970s style because they couldn’t create and refine one of their own. In actuality, their style takes cues from music before it became an art for the talentless. They channel some of the successful aspects of well-known bands, and then fill in the blanks with their own stories and structure. As much as I wanted to hate them, I’m even more stoked off of their originality.

Limited Exceptions

The Grammy’s are making leaps and bounds in recognizing alternative bands as worthy of “Album of the Year.” Last year “King’s of Leon,” a band previously unrecognized by the main-stream media won the sought-after Grammy for “Album of the Year.” This year Indie band, Arcade Fire shocked the crowd by taking the coveted prize for their album, “The Suburbs.” However, these bands have to work harder and wait longer than pop acts for the prestigious award.

            Where as industry new comers like Lady Gaga, Katy Perry and Taylor Swift receive nominations after releasing just one or two albums, other, less popular bands have a harder time gaining their deserved recognition.

            Without big production companies and constant radio rotation these lesser-known bands aren’t recognized as worthy Grammy contenders.

            Arcade Fire, a seemingly unknown band took the cake this year for their third full-length album, “The Suburbs.” The album which channels personal responsibility and introspective disappointments was pretty far off from the easy listening and adolescent feelings of Lady Gaga’s, “The Fame Monster” or Katy Perry’s “Teenage Dream,” which were both nominated. Though both of these ladies albums sold more copies in the US than Arcade Fire, their popularity didn’t lend to recognition for “best” anything as far as the Grammys were concerned.

The NARAS or, The National Academy of Recording and Sciences vote on who wins each award given. This group, comprised of musicians, producers, recording engineers and other recording professionals are the authority on determining what is talent, versus what is simply just popular.

Though Lady Gaga’s Album sold the most albums in 2010, upwards of 5.8 million, it doesn’t prove that the NARAS thought it was the best.

She didn’t release her first album until just over two years ago, but because of her physical appeal and instant notoriety, her album “Fame Monster” gained her a nomination for “Best Album of the Year.”

Because of her vast popularity, not her talent, she was considered a front-runner to win the award. When un-known Arcade Fire won, viewers across America were asking, “Who is this band?” and “how did they win?”

Arcade Fire has been around for 10 years; they’ve been featured in commercials, television shows and even the trailer for “Where the Wild Things Are,” but rarely do the public associate their music with their name and faces. They’ve been a voice for a generation desperate to go back to a time where personal insight and a sense of community count for more than fleeting relationships and teenage angst. Their music gained them recognition ranging from a nomination for ”Best Alternative Music Album” to winning “Best International Group” and “Best International Album” from the BRIT Awards.

Now they’ve won a Grammy; a widely recognized symbol of great musical ability. Even though they’re not necessarily selling the most albums, they are selling the best album.

Hopefully the public will begin to recognize what is constantly on rotation over the airwaves isn’t the best and it’s certainly not all that is available. Digging a little further into indie culture can be a worthwhile venture. These experts who are the authority on talented musicians picked this “un-known” band over the more popular ones because the album spoke for its self. There were no gimmicks, no fads, just unparalleled talent.

Though they may have had to work harder by sticking to an independent label which provides far less advertisement and waiting longer for their recognition than other nominees they did prove themselves as worthy and talented musicians.

Maybe this trend towards recognition of alternative artists will lead to a greater thirst from the public for creative music with previously untouched viewpoints.

           

Accidental Influence

To create staying power, a band or artist has to touch on a style that has yet to have been discovered. Some music entities become popular, sans actual originality and talent, but their fame is often short-lived. It’s the hype and trend that lifts them into super-stardom, not their talent, so their mark fails to stand as ever-lasting.

            One band that exemplifies originality channeling its way into long-lasting fame is The Beatles. After making it big in the 1960’s they used their fame and a massive amount of drugs to popularize and create a never-been-heard sound.

            “The White Album” released in 1968 is arguably their most original piece of art. It introduces a style and texture in which many aspects are still carried over in modern music.

The album as a whole is heartbreakingly beautiful. Finding elegance through depression and masking it in a blanket of contentment had been done before by the ranks of blues artists, but The Beatles perfected it for the public.

Lyrics like, “Black bird fly into the light of a dark black mind,” are not just supposed to sound pretty, that’s real deep shit. Alternative and emotional music still employs these tactics; introducing emotionally charged content, but finding a way to channel the intense imagery, not just the depression.

Most notable from “The White Album” is the often over- looked, “Revolution 9.” Not to be confused with their super-popular “Revolution,” this song for the first time combines subtle instrumentals laced with random sound clips. The eerie texture bordering on a fucked-up-fun-house mentality is more interesting than off-putting. Obviously LSD influenced and probably very heavily at that, it’s the first introduction to disjointed, almost demonic music that the Westernized culture had access to.

Some of these qualities are still employed through popular music.

Radiohead pioneered electronic music. The execution of computer-made beats and sound-clips lends to their notoriety, but they take cues from the sound originally produced by The Beatles. Take their song, “Pull Pulk, Revolving Doors” off of their album “Amnesiac.” You could lay the track right next to “Revolution 9” and recognize their parallels; sound clips coming in at varying speeds, looming instrumentals, disturbing undertones, an all-around culmination of disjointed sounds that are gently pieced together to create well-balanced music.

Another artist that showcases The Beatles’ influence is the Dj, Girl Talk. He takes upwards of 20-30 popular songs, pulls the instrumentals from the beats and lyrics then mashes each piece together with parts of other songs to create one final song. The end product is a new song created completely from the parts of a myriad of other tracks. He lays tracks that are essentially reinventions of other artistic mediums, similar to The Beatles.

You can call The Beatles the first boy band or regard them simply as music for old people, but their innovations are still paving the way for talented artists to come. Because they strayed so heavily from the expectations laid out for them, they introduced ideas that would have been otherwise ignored.

All About It

           The idea of the modern rock band has been taken over by over-produced, auto-tuned, marketable faces. Essentially, the art is being taken out of music and haphazardly replaced with monotonous teeny boppers masquerading in big kids clothing. The image and fame of these entertainers over-shadow the talent or lack thereof that they may possess.
            Popular music in 2011 has more hands in production purely for profit and creating a "marketable" sound opposed to highlighting new talent than it ever has.
            What would the history of music look like if our culture relied as much on looks and marketability back in the day as we do now? Forget The Stones, Jagger looked creepy, Elvis; his hips were too damn controversial. Ozzy; fucking satanic, no go. Janis Joplin was as far from dainty and beautiful as humanly possible for a female. Madonna was a slut. Bob Dylan sounded like a full-fledged emphysema patient.
            At a first glance these hall-of-famers weren't glittering stars, but their careers relied solely on their ability to deviate from what was naturally expected of them.
            My goal is to focus on music that was created before auto-tune and Taylor Swift; back when talent actually held some clout. I want to redirect the focus back to music that speaks for its self and doesn’t need to ride the coat tails of special effects, gimmicks or attractive young faces.
            So, my plan, go back and review albums and artists that came out before this pop music baby-boom. This generation could benefit from shifting our focus back on artists that utilized their talent and created their own sound. These artists were made popular because they made a difference in the previously paved direction of music and art.