Does the audience play an active role in the production of meaning in popular culture?

I think the audience does play an active role in the production of meaning in popular music for a few reasons. One reason is that hormonal pre-teens who are known as ‘emo kids’ are going through the stage of puberty where they don’t understand what’s happening to them. These teens need some form of release for their emotions. This is why emo music has become so popular in the last decade. The record labels saw a gap in the market for these bands that sing about being depressed and feeling like the whole world hates them. This worked well for the teens because they found someone they could relate to.
Another way in which the audience plays an active role is that people go through trends. Recently ‘indie’ bands have become more and more popular and now there are so many I couldn’t even name them all. One band decided to start this kind of music, and once it became popular there was a new audience that craved for more of the same sort of music.

Review of Hip Hop Edition

If you’re after the latest news on hip hop and rap music this is the magazine to buy. Upcoming shows, new artists and interviews with the stars are all found in this magazine. The few adverts shown are for hip hop fashion and alcohol. There is a naked woman on one of the pages claiming to be interested in hip hop music, but in her interview, she doesn’t even mention music. This shows that the readers are mainly male because of the blatant use of a naked woman to get their attention. Graffiti is shown throughout the magazine which shows that most of the readers are heavily into hip hop culture. Names of hip hop artists who are not in the mainstream also show that the readers are interested in the underground hip hop scene. The main colours used in this magazine are red and black which could be linked to gang colours or they could just be used to show a manlier colour scheme.

Are blackness and whiteness useful concepts in the study of popular music?

It seems pointless trying to define music as ‘black’ or ‘white’ because most genres of music have derived from black culture. Blues music came from the black slaves singing in the fields and it’s the only genre of music that has specific notes which are used only in that genre. These ‘blues notes’ were key in the development of rock music.

It is very difficult to define music into one genre. This is because very often the genre can change throughout an artists’ album or even partway through a song. This means that ‘blackness’ and ’whiteness’ are not useful concepts at all in the study of popular music.

These terms only seem to be useful in the marketing of music. Being able to have a ‘black’ and ‘white’ section in music shops is helpful because it defines different artists into categories. This makes it easier for the consumer to find the artist they like.

Can popular music be a genuine force for political change?

I think popular music can be a genuine force for political change. Not so much in the music or lyrics to the songs, but from the power music has in everyday life. Music is a collaborative medium which unites people in many different circumstances. By using music as a way of getting huge amounts of people together for a period of time, it gives singers or other people a chance to speak to a large group of people about something important. If the people listen and take action for the issue, it can lead to political change because the government has to satisfy the people.
Some people might argue that popular music isn’t a genuine force for political change, but I definitely think it has the potential. For example when the law was changed because of the dangerous, drug-induced raves that meant certain types of music couldn’t be played in a place where a certain number of people were together.

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

I think youth subcultures are simply a manifestation of style. However I do think that the originators of each subculture were being rebellious and original and the people that follow their trends are just copying them.
I think that famous people are a big reason as to why different people conform to different youth subcultures. If a teenager sees a famous person wearing something or hears them singing a certain type of music, they might feel like they have to dress like that or enjoy that type of music because that is what is ‘in fashion.’ I think this relates to peer pressure, especially at school, where youths feel pressurised into conforming to a particular youth subculture because all their friends are. This means that the individuals do not think they are rebelling against anyone, they are only conforming to that style because they feel like they have to.

Is DRM the best way to save the music industry?

I would have to say that DRM isn’t the best way to save the music industry. Even though I don’t think there is a way to save the music industry while keeping everyone happy, there are many reasons as to why downloading (legally and illegally) can have its positive points.
Lots of music lovers would say that by downloading one song from an album and deciding if they like the music would make them go to a shop and buy the CD. Also, if someone hears a band they like on myspace or somewhere else on the internet from a different country, it is sometimes almost impossible to find their album in the shops. This means that illegal downloading is the only way to get their songs.
By allowing free sample listening of music, word of mouth is free publicity for a band and expands their marketing immensely. Also, it creates fans for the band who will want to buy their next album and create a whole audience for their music.Some people say that charts are completely pointless now because people like to download songs. But others might argue that there is no reason to have charts anyway. This is because lots of bands release many songs from their album so people would rather just buy the album instead of each individual song.

Can Popular Music ever really be unplugged?

To answer this question I need to establish the meaning of ‘unplugged’ in the context of popular music. I am going to use this definition in my answer: “Of, relating to, or being a musical instrument, arrangement, or performance that does not feature electronic amplification or modification; acoustic” (http://www.answers.com/topic/unplugged).

There are some circumstances where popular music can be unplugged, but usually it is very difficult to do so. If there is a local band in either England or America, for example, that want to play in a local pub or venue, it is very easy for them to play acoustically with just their voices and ‘unplugged’ instruments. However, if there is a band or singer who is popular on a larger scale, for example worldwide like Madonna, it becomes more difficult. If the artist wants to sing live, with only acoustic instruments and no amplification, they can only be heard by a fixed amount of people. If they are extremely popular and lots of people want to see them perform, they would have to repeat the performance many times to satisfy the needs of their fans. This is not practical and therefore 'unplugging' most artists becomes an issue.

What is “World Music”?

I think “world music” is the simple term used for music made in countries other than England and North America. This makes it easier for record shops to create a section in the store for music created in other countries. This means that because there are so many countries which produce their own music, it would be impractical to make a section in the shop for each country. However, by calling music from other countries “world music” it seems as though music from England and North America is not music from this world.

World music could also describe music which includes influences from the country in which it was made. For example, traditional instruments or the words being sung in the language of that country. It is sometimes easy to know which country a song was created in, which I think makes it unfair to typecast all foreign songs into a single category.

Is Popular Music Art?

“Art, in its broadest meaning, is the expression of creativity or imagination, or both” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art). I think this can definitely be applied to popular music.

I think that the definition of art is a way of expressing yourself by creating something that stimulates one or more of the five senses which creates an emotional reaction. Anyone can create their own ‘art’ by making their feelings, emotions, thoughts, imaginations or opinions into something people can experience.
I think that because popular music can be defined as whatever type music each individual likes, all different types of music can be called ‘art’. Whichever way someone decides to express them self is dependant on their individual taste. If someone makes music that they believe will inspire or get a reaction from someone, it must be allowed to be defined as ‘art’. If someone believes that a song or piece of music is art, it doesn’t matter if someone disagrees because it can be up to each individual to have their own opinion.

What are the weaknesses in Peterson’s culture perspective of the birth of rock and roll?

I would say that the main reason Peterson’s theory is flawed is because at no point during his research did he look at the music. This could be, in some people’s opinion, the most important factor in the birth of rock and roll. If it wasn’t for the electric guitar and the influence of black music, rock and roll would definitely not exist today. It has been said that rock and roll started with “white people singing black songs” and Peterson doesn’t address this. Another point he fails to include in his theory is the fact that it might have been to do with the timing of when this type of music came about. Say, to do with people’s taste in music and the need for something different from the normal music. When Elvis began gyrating his hips on stage people were shocked but had a need for something exciting and new.

What is Popular Music?

There are many reasons as to why it is very difficult to define “pop music”. What it is that makes something popular is the root to this problem. The first definition I have found for the word popular is “Widely liked or appreciated” (http://www.answers.com/topic/popular). This means that to define one specific genre in music as “popular” would be a very difficult task. First off, if we are looking at people’s tastes in music, different people like different music. This means that what is popular in one group of people can be very different to what is popular in another group. This problem also reaches a dead end where time is concerned. Over time, people change their tastes and different types of music are more popular during different time periods. There is no clear cut way of measuring how popular different artists or different genres of music are. By looking at the number of singles or albums sold, we do not get an accurate account of what people like. This is due to the rise in illegal downloads which means that what music is “popular” cannot be measured.