I'll try to make this one brief, in part because I came soooooo late to the Electronic Dance Music party, and since it's sooooooo close to Christmas and Family Time. I've got a few links to share, that have turned me on to the idea of getting deeper into EDM and its flavors and nuances:
www.somafm.com
www.hbr1.com
They are, essentially, specialty online radio stations. Soma FM deals in an eclectic mix of music and and equally eclectic mix of programmers and DJs, venturing beyond the realm of EDM into alt-rock, folk, roots, and other genres. HBR1 deals primarily in EDM and its permutations: trance, trip-hop, etc. A friend of mine at work turned me on to them, and I decided to finally give the sites a spin. Spin taken, and I'm not dizzy. They are both listener-supported, so sending a few bucks their way should guarantee you good karma for the New Year (or any other time).
Speaking of the E in EDM, this film presents a fascinating, if somewhat incomplete and at times overly technical, history of the synthesizer:
http://www.idreamofwires.org/
I Dream of Wires starts the story back to the early days of electrical generation, through the Theremin in the 1930s, and discusses Robert Moog (father of the ubiquitous MiniMoog, Taurus, and other synthesizer products that bear his name), Don Buchla, and a few other pioneers, and traces a path through the decline of the analog synth, through its resurgence and new developments today, and its current use in EDM. The extra features found on the DVD and iTunes releases feature a (very) brief overview of how a modular synthesizer (think of those big machines Keith Emerson and Steve Porcaro took on the road with them back in the day), as well as an extensive interview with Vince Clarke of Depeche Mode/Erasure/Yaz fame. I would like to have seen some more footage devoted to other synthesizer pioneers, however: Suzanne Ciani, Alan R. Pearlman (developer of the ARP synthesizer), and Dave Smith (Sequential Circuits) come to mind. The ARP story, especially, is fascinating enough to warrant its own film - google it.
So, a few links to whet our mutual appetites to modern music and how its made. I'm still old-school, and always will be. But it's nice to get outside for recess and get some fresh air.
Thursday, December 24, 2015
Saturday, September 19, 2015
The New Marionette Masters
The entertainment industry has been associated with a variety of metaphors: a fun-house of mirrors, a fantasy factory, an island of illusions and illusionists, etc. etc. Big Music certainly takes up it's enormous share of this perception, as albums said to go multiple-platinum are discovered to not even go gold, performers discovered to not perform on their own albums (see Milli Vanilli), alleged ghost writers for other performer's supposedly self-written work (see Kanye West), and on, and on.
This article in The Atlantic gives a bit of insight into one of the worst-kept secrets in the music business - who is actually doing the creating? Look at the writing credits of most popular albums today by the likes of Swift, Grande, Minaj, Maroon 5, and the like - you'll likely see one name on those credits more than any other: Max Martin. He, along with a small cabal of Scandinavian-native writers and producers, are supplying the majority of what America sees and hears now. The writing credits you see on these records should be taken with a grain of salt (or maybe, a shaker-full), since there is no real way to tell how much each person given credit actually contributed to the writing of the song in question - and as the article indicates, the performer's writing credit may be for simply changing a word or phrase - "change a word, get a third". And of the performers you see on TV and hear on the radio, very few of them can actually claim to be "artists". For most of them, their careers are carefully managed down to the minutia of what lipstick color or what clothing accessory to wear. The formula for this, in fact, has been taken to a science in the world of J-Pop and K-Pop, where there are dedicated schools where prospective performers go to learn the craft of pop performance. A book, now referenced heavily by the pop music industry in those countries, contains what can be described as the "formula" for packaging a pop act in those (and increasingly, this) market: which chord progressions to use in which countries, which clothes to wear for a given audience, which hand gestures and idioms to use, etc. etc. Market-tested and focus-grouped formulas now govern the entirety of the pop world.
None of this manufacturing of culture is new. Motown Records, back in the Sixties and up to the early-Seventies, had this kind of packaging down to an assembly-line process - an inhouse charm-school for the performers, writer/producers wrote and produced, the Funk Brothers house band played, the singers sang. All potential releases were given the ultimate up-or-down by Berry Gordy himself. Other record labels and managers engaged in similar practices - even The Beatles had to go through a period of grooming in order to shed the remnants of their Hamburg wild-boys days and become the clean-cut mop tops that dominated pop back in the early-to-mid-Sixties. Producer-Songwriters like Lieber and Stoller, Chinn and Chapman, Rodgers and Edwards (Chic), and others, supplied the songs and the sounds for countless performers. So how is this any different than what is being done today?
Two things: Technology, and the change in buying habits brought about in large part by technology.
Back in "the day", there were analog tape machines, analog mixing desks, real musicians, real engineers and technicians, and more often than today (in my opinion), real singers. In other words: TALENT. Back then, there were a few tricks that a producer or engineer could use to coax a performance out of a singer who either didn't quite have the chops, or who had the chops but not the head that day, such as slowing down the tape so that a singer can hit a high note he or she otherwise could not. There was no Autotune, which allows a producer to snap an out-of-tune note into place. There was also not the advanced editing tools of today, which allow a producer to copy a perfectly-played part and paste it in the appropriate places in the song (among a host of other things). The change in recording technology is further detailed in Dave Grohl's excellent film Sound City, about the venerable studio in Van Nuys. As stated in the film, software such as Pro Tools now enables people who otherwise "have no business being in a band, to become stars", to quote noted producer and former Sound City runner Nick Raskulinecz.
Then there's the Internet, and all of the byproducts of it's introduction as a public utility in the early 1990s. I don't have to get into all of those details here, as they have been written about extensively by myself and many others much more expert on the subject than me. But consider this: our society has always had a propensity to favor instant gratification. We don't like to wait for anything, whether it be the latest release from our favorite band or singer, or much of anything else. With iTunes, YouTube, and other outlets, we no longer need to wait. These days, a song can literally be recorded in the morning, mixed and mastered in the afternoon, and be on your iPod the same evening. And as for the songs themselves - one big hook is no longer enough to get you a hit - you need a bunch of hooks, sometimes only seconds apart. For an old school listener like me, when I try to listen to this newer breed of pop song, I'm left to wonder exactly how am I going to remember it? Up to the decline of Grunge in the late 1990s, a song needed a couple of strong hooks, and enough time in the song for those hooks to sink in and "hook" into your head. The new songs try to put in hook after hook after hook, in rapid fire succession. Too many hooks, to me, means no hooks at all - like the cliche, "If everything were special, then nothing would be special." And no memory of the song means it's just another four-or-so minutes of disposable sound.
To me, all of this is just another reason why I'm looking to find artists/stations/outlets who think about music the way I do. It's not just background music, or mere "ear candy" - it's an experience which I need to feel I'm an active participant in.
This article in The Atlantic gives a bit of insight into one of the worst-kept secrets in the music business - who is actually doing the creating? Look at the writing credits of most popular albums today by the likes of Swift, Grande, Minaj, Maroon 5, and the like - you'll likely see one name on those credits more than any other: Max Martin. He, along with a small cabal of Scandinavian-native writers and producers, are supplying the majority of what America sees and hears now. The writing credits you see on these records should be taken with a grain of salt (or maybe, a shaker-full), since there is no real way to tell how much each person given credit actually contributed to the writing of the song in question - and as the article indicates, the performer's writing credit may be for simply changing a word or phrase - "change a word, get a third". And of the performers you see on TV and hear on the radio, very few of them can actually claim to be "artists". For most of them, their careers are carefully managed down to the minutia of what lipstick color or what clothing accessory to wear. The formula for this, in fact, has been taken to a science in the world of J-Pop and K-Pop, where there are dedicated schools where prospective performers go to learn the craft of pop performance. A book, now referenced heavily by the pop music industry in those countries, contains what can be described as the "formula" for packaging a pop act in those (and increasingly, this) market: which chord progressions to use in which countries, which clothes to wear for a given audience, which hand gestures and idioms to use, etc. etc. Market-tested and focus-grouped formulas now govern the entirety of the pop world.
None of this manufacturing of culture is new. Motown Records, back in the Sixties and up to the early-Seventies, had this kind of packaging down to an assembly-line process - an inhouse charm-school for the performers, writer/producers wrote and produced, the Funk Brothers house band played, the singers sang. All potential releases were given the ultimate up-or-down by Berry Gordy himself. Other record labels and managers engaged in similar practices - even The Beatles had to go through a period of grooming in order to shed the remnants of their Hamburg wild-boys days and become the clean-cut mop tops that dominated pop back in the early-to-mid-Sixties. Producer-Songwriters like Lieber and Stoller, Chinn and Chapman, Rodgers and Edwards (Chic), and others, supplied the songs and the sounds for countless performers. So how is this any different than what is being done today?
Two things: Technology, and the change in buying habits brought about in large part by technology.
Back in "the day", there were analog tape machines, analog mixing desks, real musicians, real engineers and technicians, and more often than today (in my opinion), real singers. In other words: TALENT. Back then, there were a few tricks that a producer or engineer could use to coax a performance out of a singer who either didn't quite have the chops, or who had the chops but not the head that day, such as slowing down the tape so that a singer can hit a high note he or she otherwise could not. There was no Autotune, which allows a producer to snap an out-of-tune note into place. There was also not the advanced editing tools of today, which allow a producer to copy a perfectly-played part and paste it in the appropriate places in the song (among a host of other things). The change in recording technology is further detailed in Dave Grohl's excellent film Sound City, about the venerable studio in Van Nuys. As stated in the film, software such as Pro Tools now enables people who otherwise "have no business being in a band, to become stars", to quote noted producer and former Sound City runner Nick Raskulinecz.
Then there's the Internet, and all of the byproducts of it's introduction as a public utility in the early 1990s. I don't have to get into all of those details here, as they have been written about extensively by myself and many others much more expert on the subject than me. But consider this: our society has always had a propensity to favor instant gratification. We don't like to wait for anything, whether it be the latest release from our favorite band or singer, or much of anything else. With iTunes, YouTube, and other outlets, we no longer need to wait. These days, a song can literally be recorded in the morning, mixed and mastered in the afternoon, and be on your iPod the same evening. And as for the songs themselves - one big hook is no longer enough to get you a hit - you need a bunch of hooks, sometimes only seconds apart. For an old school listener like me, when I try to listen to this newer breed of pop song, I'm left to wonder exactly how am I going to remember it? Up to the decline of Grunge in the late 1990s, a song needed a couple of strong hooks, and enough time in the song for those hooks to sink in and "hook" into your head. The new songs try to put in hook after hook after hook, in rapid fire succession. Too many hooks, to me, means no hooks at all - like the cliche, "If everything were special, then nothing would be special." And no memory of the song means it's just another four-or-so minutes of disposable sound.
To me, all of this is just another reason why I'm looking to find artists/stations/outlets who think about music the way I do. It's not just background music, or mere "ear candy" - it's an experience which I need to feel I'm an active participant in.
Monday, August 24, 2015
Table for One, Volume I
I am a single man. I have been single my entire life,
though I do not lack for the experience of having shared intimacy (and in one
case, a roof) with other members of the gender opposite mine. When I was in my twenties, and through my thirties,
many thought of bachelors like me as the “ideal”, and even seemed to look at me
and my kind with a bit of envy, as my father did shortly before he departed
this mortal coil. As I’ve aged, however
– I’m in my late forties now – people are starting to look at me
differently. They see the growing
presence of gray streaks in my long hair and in my beard (when I decide to grow
it out), the look at the texture of my facial skin and my hands which suggest
advancing age, they observe my darkening vocal tones and speech, and see me
alone, with no one in tow. Some back
off from me as a result, I suspect, thinking that if I’m this old and still
alone, then something must really be
wrong with me. I’m seen as a bit
creepy, a bit – oh, what’s the word? – off. Something must really be wrong with me, they
likely think.
The truth of it is, I never
really made pursuing a life partner my life’s pursuit. Sure, life for two can have its advantages,
especially if the relationship represents a perfect match (which I submit, are extremely rare.) And life for two, especially if that life is
certified with a marriage license, has a bevy of goodies not available to
singles: tax breaks, special legal treatments like privileged communications,
increased social standing, etc. Some
sources, such as from authors like Bella De Paulo, cite over 1,100
married-exclusive legal and fiscal benefits.
Marital supremacy rears itself in many other way as well: employment,
military, and other sectors of society are affected by this yay-for-marriage
attitude.
I don’t need to get into,
however, all of the pitfalls and pratfalls of life for two. The emotional roller-coasters which ride on,
and on, and on. The constant
compromises. The realization that we’re
growing apart from each other and unwilling to acknowledge it, lest we lose all
those bennies – the relationship of convenience. The social ramifications associated with
broken relationships and divorce. I’ve
been there, and done that. And I’m no
longer in an active pursuit mode.
As I spent some time reading
through Bella De Paulo’s Singlism, I’m
reminded of the lyrics of a song written by the great tune-smith Rupert
Holmes. Lullaby For Myself, which you can hear off of 1977’s Streisand Superman, spends most of the
song extolling the virtues of the unattached life:
>You don’t have to compromise
your taste for champagne and cheese when your partner craves the plainness of
pork chops;
>You learn that twice the
earning doesn’t necessarily mean twice the fun;
>No one is marking your time
when you come home at four in the morning;
>And many other things for
which you should consult with the lyric sheet contained within the album.
He’s leading us singles right
down what he thinks is the primrose path.
Sure, the song’s subject is female, having likely been commissioned by
Streisand for either the album or for the previous year’s A Star Is Born. But it
applies to us males, as well: no jailer to mark your time, your refrigerator
can contain whatever you want it to – including unintentional science projects –
without reprisals, and other features of single-minded freedom. He makes it sound like yeah, this is the
perfect life (which I’m agreeing with – right on Rupert! Sing it, Barbra!) But then, the last verse of the song sends
the singleton’s hope for BJS-branded affirmation right over the cliff: she’s singing that she would be grateful for “one
damned man” to “share the need to be alone with me.” With that line, Holmes encapsulates the
common perception, at least to academics like De Paulo, of older singles in
today’s hitched world. We say we love
to fly alone, but secretly pine for somebody to fly with.
I’m left to ask: What
about those that don’t have a burning need for someone “to be alone with me”? What about those that are the “self-contained
and self-content” types? Who is writing
music from that perspective? I don’t
hear too much of it, at least from the artists I listen to (which are
comparatively old-school compared to what is coming out today).
Singles can and do lead
perfectly purpose-driven, full lives, without the need of a partner. Their successes in life prove that coupling
is not a necessity to greatness or a fulfilled life. Remember that preacher from the Levant from
about 2,000 years ago, whose name is screamed from on high by some of the world’s
biggest hypocrites and frauds, but whose example is led by some of our greatest
examples of humanity? He was a
singleton. So was Beethoven, the Wright
Brothers, and Thoreau. Alvin Ailey and Nikola
Tesla are also among the ranks of the unhitched. Many, many others who have achieve greatness
while never having taken that fateful walk down the alley can be easily
googled.
I’ll have much more to say about
this topic in the coming months. It may
make its way in my other blogs, so stay tuned.
Saturday, August 8, 2015
If Barry Gibb was a Heavy Metal Singer...
...he'd probably sound a little bit like this.
Wax Audio has done it again. I thought that the Metallica/Herbie Hancock mashup was the pinnacle of this art form - but he's topped himself with this one. Amazingly, the songs actually work together musically - same key, the melody amazingly fits the chords, even Robin's and Maurice's harmonies work with what Angus/Malcolm and company are laying down, and the rhythmic syncopation between the two songs fits together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Yes, I was actually doing a bit of the head bang to this put-together masterpiece.
Perhaps the biggest reason why Wax Audio's mashups work so well is because the guy who puts them together is a musician himself. Based out of Australia (where, incidentally, both subjects of this mashup hail from), Tom (his real name) played guitar in several bands during his earlier years - and this is in the Australian pub-rock scene which is known for being one of the most vibrant, and demanding, live music club scenes on the planet. This background gives him an advantage in terms of musical knowledge, not only in terms of genres and bands but how music works from a theory level: chords, melodies, structures, etc. This, combined with his mastery of editing techniques likely culled from his full-time occupation as a video editor, provides him with an enviable skill set.
He now has a fourth album of mash-up-pieces, available for free (no less!) at www.waxaudio.com.au. Known as Mashphonic, he delves into the music of ZZ Top, Madonna, and other songs familiar and not-so-familiar. Check it out - you can't beat the price, and while you're at it, show a bit of financial support by purchasing one of the newly-released T-shirts. I intend to.
Wax Audio has done it again. I thought that the Metallica/Herbie Hancock mashup was the pinnacle of this art form - but he's topped himself with this one. Amazingly, the songs actually work together musically - same key, the melody amazingly fits the chords, even Robin's and Maurice's harmonies work with what Angus/Malcolm and company are laying down, and the rhythmic syncopation between the two songs fits together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Yes, I was actually doing a bit of the head bang to this put-together masterpiece.
Perhaps the biggest reason why Wax Audio's mashups work so well is because the guy who puts them together is a musician himself. Based out of Australia (where, incidentally, both subjects of this mashup hail from), Tom (his real name) played guitar in several bands during his earlier years - and this is in the Australian pub-rock scene which is known for being one of the most vibrant, and demanding, live music club scenes on the planet. This background gives him an advantage in terms of musical knowledge, not only in terms of genres and bands but how music works from a theory level: chords, melodies, structures, etc. This, combined with his mastery of editing techniques likely culled from his full-time occupation as a video editor, provides him with an enviable skill set.
He now has a fourth album of mash-up-pieces, available for free (no less!) at www.waxaudio.com.au. Known as Mashphonic, he delves into the music of ZZ Top, Madonna, and other songs familiar and not-so-familiar. Check it out - you can't beat the price, and while you're at it, show a bit of financial support by purchasing one of the newly-released T-shirts. I intend to.
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
The Echoing Roar of Thunder Thumbs
I just learned about the sudden passing of one of my bass heroes, and one of the guys who put the electric bass guitar front-and-center in popular music, Louis Johnson. The low-end anchor of the Brothers Johnson, as well as hits by Michael Jackson and others, he was one of the most respected musicians in the business. He was also generous in sharing his considerable knowledge, as attested by the instructional videos found on Youtube (Though I still say, buy them, please!) as well as the bass-specific school he founded, the Louis Johnson Bass Academy.
He had monstrous chops, to be sure, but they were always in service to the music. As with all musicians whose work stands the test of time and continues to earn respect, his pursuit was finding the right notes, and playing and phrasing in a way that served what the song was trying to convey, whether that song was his or written by somebody else.
The cause of death has not been release as of this writing, but at this stage, does it really matter? He gave me and millions of others who picked up the instrument, inspiration and guidance. He gave many more millions great songs of his own, and great support to the music of others. Everything I've heard and read about him says that he was somebody I wished I would have had the chance to meet. In absentia, all that's left to say now is:
For the inspiration,
for the direction,
for the great music -
Thank You, Louis Johnson.
For everything.
And rest - in eternal peace.
Friday, June 19, 2015
Avast, ye Musique Pirates!
(...you are only a symptom.)
At the end of this video (around the 14 minute mark), Gene Simmons tells Henry Rollins that the fans, through digital piracy, are responsible for killing the music industry:
Here, legendary music executive John Kalodner blames the fans in a similar fashion in the middle of this interview, by again going after the fans for "looting" the artists:
(The entire interview is actually quite fascinating - I'll allude to it in future postings.)
The issue of music piracy is old hat at this point, but it points to something that should be mentioned about the evolution of the music business since the RIAA went after the college students, kids, and other casual music fans for online music piracy (which Mr. Simmons claimed didn't happen, or at least to his satisfaction.)
One of the features of an industry - any industry - that ensures its continued viability and relevance is its ability to evolve, to change with the times, tastes, and preferences of the intended audiences. The problem I have with the piracy statements issued by the two gentleman listed above (and no lack of respect intended in the slightest), is that they seem to place what I think is too much weight on what is actually a symptom of a much bigger problem for Big Music.
At the end of this video (around the 14 minute mark), Gene Simmons tells Henry Rollins that the fans, through digital piracy, are responsible for killing the music industry:
Here, legendary music executive John Kalodner blames the fans in a similar fashion in the middle of this interview, by again going after the fans for "looting" the artists:
The issue of music piracy is old hat at this point, but it points to something that should be mentioned about the evolution of the music business since the RIAA went after the college students, kids, and other casual music fans for online music piracy (which Mr. Simmons claimed didn't happen, or at least to his satisfaction.)
One of the features of an industry - any industry - that ensures its continued viability and relevance is its ability to evolve, to change with the times, tastes, and preferences of the intended audiences. The problem I have with the piracy statements issued by the two gentleman listed above (and no lack of respect intended in the slightest), is that they seem to place what I think is too much weight on what is actually a symptom of a much bigger problem for Big Music.
Saturday, May 16, 2015
When “AI” is NOT “Artificial Intelligence”…
Good Freaking Riddance to American Idol.
After 15 long seasons, and about 12 years after the novelty
wore off, the world’s most successful television musical “talent” contest is
getting its mostly-unheralded final sendoff at the end of this season.
I was never a fan. I
don’t relish in the look of others embarrassing themselves, or being allowed to
for sport the way the AI producers did, or the way that Simon Cowell would
“honestly” appraise their performances.
Even most of the good performances were, at best, products of wannabes
who most people knew would probably not “make it”. Sure, the show produced a few substantial
and notable careers: Kelly Clarkson, Clay Aiken, Carrie Underwood, and a few others come to
mind. But to me, the show seemed like
more than simply a talent show to Big Music, especially considering how seriously it was
taken by the music industry in search of the next “major recording star” as
Clive Davis put it after the near debacle of season 3.
I saw American Idol as, essentially, a way for the music
business to “outsource” their A&R work.
By this, I mean that rather than having A&R representatives listen
to countless demo tapes, go to countless nightclub gigs, and otherwise trying
to find the proverbial needle in a haystack, why not have the potential
“needles” come to you in the form of a television show, seen by millions every
week, and a promise of a recording contract and, for the winner, a guarantee of
$1-2 million? You didn’t even have to
win the show itself in order to succeed – Clay Aiken didn’t, neither did
Jennifer Hudson. Exposure was what
counted, and the longer you stayed, the more exposure you got, and the greater
the chance of landing that holy grail known as a major-label record deal and
all that such a contract entails. So
the record companies get free A&R work as well as an artist or few artists
who, by their exposure, are guaranteed to sell x number of copies of their
debut album. That sounds like good
business, and is probably why the show stayed on the air as long as it did – it
was basically Fox Television and the general public doing Big Music’s market
research for them.
The risk to the industry, of course, was that the people
would vote for somebody they didn’t want.
To wit, remember the website votefortheworst.com? They succeeded in this game for a long time,
propping up singers that, in all honesty, should have gone home much earlier
than they did. Remember Sanjaya Malakar
and Jasmine Trias? These singers were
among many that benefited from this site’s “appreciation.” (I loved that site, not only for this
gum-up-the-music-industry-works approach, but for their honest and accurate
appraisal of what AI really was.)
So Big Music will now have to go back to the old-fashioned
way of discovering new talent. Worn
shoe leather, burning eardrums from all of the bad demo tapes, and countless
viewings of Youtube (who inflicted Justin Bieber on the world) and .mp4 videos,
are now back to being the rule.
To wit, as a closer, check out what Rob Cavallo said toward
the end of this video, about how to tell if somebody is really ready to be
signed. It’s toward the end – and its so
very true.
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Those West-erly Winds
I don't pay a whole lot of attention to the Grammys (or other award shows of its ilk). I find them to be super-glitzy infomercials for the entertainment industry and their product, much of which I find to be complete pabulum (on a good day) and freshly stinking tripe on other days. I figure that my personal "grammy award" goes to those for whom I purchase my music (I don't believe in illegal downloading - I'm a musician, and I can fully empathize with my fellow musicians who are having a hard-enough time trying to make a living at their craft).
That being said, it just would not be a complete event without an outburst courtesy of the frontal facial orifice of Kanye West. The man comes off as somebody who has absolutely no concept of anything related to social graces, decency, or scruples, as attested by his recent storms on the Beck parade flotilla, as well as his similar action to Taylor Swift back in the days when she was a country singer. So while his outburst earns him the scorn he has received, let's take a look at this from a somewhat-different angle.
It pays to keep a couple of things in mind. First, Kanye West is not only an entertainer in his own right, but he's also a the head of a highly successful record label. You don't get to where he's at without knowing how to make waves and gain attention for yourself. You have to know promotions and marketing like the back of your hand, and he's proven his adeptness at those arts. He may appear to look and sound like a buffoon, but I guarantee you, he knows exactly what he is doing.
The fact that ethic groups other than Caucasian are still, largely, not at the levers of control in the music and entertainment industries is certainly not lost on Kanye (or any other artist of color.) Most of the highest positions in those industries are still chaired by middle-aged or older white men. While there has been some progress in this area - Louil Silas, Jr., Randy Jackson, Sylvia Rhone, Berry Gordy, Jay-Z, and a few others come to mind - it's no secret that minorities and women are still grossly underrepresented in the top ranks.
So my suggestion is this: recognize that Kanye's outburst was not the product of an idiot. Kanye is a modern-day P.T. Barnum, and he knew what he was doing.
That being said, it just would not be a complete event without an outburst courtesy of the frontal facial orifice of Kanye West. The man comes off as somebody who has absolutely no concept of anything related to social graces, decency, or scruples, as attested by his recent storms on the Beck parade flotilla, as well as his similar action to Taylor Swift back in the days when she was a country singer. So while his outburst earns him the scorn he has received, let's take a look at this from a somewhat-different angle.
It pays to keep a couple of things in mind. First, Kanye West is not only an entertainer in his own right, but he's also a the head of a highly successful record label. You don't get to where he's at without knowing how to make waves and gain attention for yourself. You have to know promotions and marketing like the back of your hand, and he's proven his adeptness at those arts. He may appear to look and sound like a buffoon, but I guarantee you, he knows exactly what he is doing.
The fact that ethic groups other than Caucasian are still, largely, not at the levers of control in the music and entertainment industries is certainly not lost on Kanye (or any other artist of color.) Most of the highest positions in those industries are still chaired by middle-aged or older white men. While there has been some progress in this area - Louil Silas, Jr., Randy Jackson, Sylvia Rhone, Berry Gordy, Jay-Z, and a few others come to mind - it's no secret that minorities and women are still grossly underrepresented in the top ranks.
So my suggestion is this: recognize that Kanye's outburst was not the product of an idiot. Kanye is a modern-day P.T. Barnum, and he knew what he was doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)