The Tyranny of Pop Music

[french frank]

..and no one, including Mr Scruton, appears to have sought to ascribe such to the kinds of thing against which he inveighs, at least as far as I can tell...

I assumed the title thread had something to do with R Scruton - perhaps I was wrong?

[ahinton]

I assumed the title thread had something to do with R Scruton - perhaps I was wrong?

Well, oddly enough, I had thought the same from the outset - so if indeed you were/are wrong, then so was/am I!

[jean]

But if you thought that, why did you write #301?

[doversoul1]

But surely, classical music never existed in the first place for much of the population. Those whom I have met in my long life lead me to believe that classical music is not something that they understand, still less wish to engage with, and not necessarily because pop music has eclipsed other genres, including classical.

When I was at school in the early fifties, the number of fellow-pupils who showed any interest at all in classical music could be counted on one hand. There were, of course, certain compositions that did appeal to most of them - William Tell Overture, Grieg Piano Concerto, Planets Suite, etc, but I doubt very much that many of them would have gone on to enjoy classical music in later life.

I very much agree with your view. I think pop music has filled the space where traditionally little music (listening) existed since it became easily available on singles.

One point Scruton seems to be making in his almost embarrassingly incoherent talk is that because young people today are over or force-fed with pop music, they are deprived of the opportunity to learn to appreciate ‘good’ music. However, as alycidon points out, classical music was a minority interest even in the days when ‘pop music’ wasn’t filling the world as it is now.

Here’s the transcription of his talk. His Point of View seems to me to be entirely based on assumptions, personal taste, and perceptions based on stereotypes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34801885

[Lat-Literal]

The music itself isn't tyrannical. The problem as I see it is that it has taken over to such an extent that classical music has ceased to exist for a huge section of the population.

OED 'Is it not absolute and unlimited Sovereignty,..which we from the Greeks call Tyranny?'

'Sovereignty' being a 'supreme power'

Thank you for your replies. On the basis of your posts, I have bothered to read up on the wide-ranging ideas/definitions associated with the word "tyranny", including concepts from the Greek. It is unlikely that I will get to grips with them directly and I can only comment circumstantially. Being in the title of the thread, I think "tyranny" does have a heavy hint of criticism about it. I sense it as a bit of a hammer to a positive outlook of saying "actually it isn't all easily categorized". To the extent that one has the latter outlook, it is done with consideration and sensitivity as far as such things can be self-determined. Anyhow, given from memory of political studies, now distant, that there is arguably no such thing as political sovereignty I will take the phrase "supreme power". It seems to me supremacy in this regard might be interpreted either in terms of credentials or cultural dominance.

On the credentials, I should have thought that those of us who would try to put forward a case for significant aspects of popular music being comprehended reasonably seriously recognise that we are never more than on the back foot. George Martin had a fundamental role in the orchestration for the Beatles. Probably even he would accept that hardly any of this "stuff" was expected to be remembered for more than a few months. It is staggering to all that individual records have had such a long-term appeal and popular music as a whole became so diverse and - in places - significant that it has been possible to apply genuine study to it. As for cultural dominance, I would say "yes" in terms of prevalence. In terms of where it sits in history - a much shorter time span than classical music - and in education very possibly not. It is prevalence that has the greatest impact in the day-to-day but what is it that's dominant? I'd place the music in four time sections even if most of us will speak about a greater number of short sections with reference to detailed changes.

The first was largely connected to cinema and it is often dismissed as being wholly distinct for having preceded rock and roll. The second started in the mid 1950s and continued into the late 1970s and early 1980s. This was arguably the strongest period but ironically it was the one most seen as short term and dispensable. The third is where it all began to be defined as and by career so whereas the Beatles lasted 8 years, some groups from their period never ceased. New ones like U2 who seemed that they were to be there for a couple of years after 1980 have stayed for 35 and that is ongoing. And the fourth which began in the late 1990s sits firmly in the much broader cultural category of new celebrity.

That is not to suggest that earlier folk were not celebrities in their own right but there is a different hue in terms of the fourth group. The emphasis is arguably less on music per se. It is a return to concepts of Hollywood glamour without any glamour and not a lot of Hollywood. I don't "do" celebrity of that kind and could probably read tabloid stories of people who are meaningful to half the population. I wouldn't know them from Adam. Do I reckon that is tyranny? I rue the changes and would find it difficult to find a "pop music" radio show in which modern celebrities were absent from its content. That rules out any listening to them. Perhaps they are supreme in that respect but none of it feels substantial.

What actually happens - or happened - is that the vast majority get older and stick with music from their period. They don't even move to more recent popular music other than perhaps tacitly via their children. The rest branch out to genres or other forms of music, building on bits and pieces that made sense to them in earlier times. Folk or jazz, perhaps, and very possibly most frequently classical music. But I think the centrality of pop music in young people's lives......that era has gone with there being so many other competing interests - especially technology - and an a la carte approach to everything. That evens things up or rather down because I don't see any great consequential rise in classical music.

[P. G. Tipps]

It is a "tyranny" in the imagination of Mr Scruton - and in that environment, it's probably better not to investigate the nature of what this "tyranny" might consist.

Or could it JUST be that some prefer to replace the reality of the 'tyranny' by imagining that it does not even exist, so the 'imagination' becomes their 'reality'? In fact, I am pretty sure Professor Scruton himself has said something along these lines but it is hardly worth ploughing through his many famously telling quotes simply to prove that particular point.

Occasionally I used to bump into Noddy Holder the pop 'artist' when he lived in my local town, though we never exchanged as much as an 'hello'. He does however seem to insist on bellowing out 'MERRY CHRISTMAS, EVERYONE!' each and every day I am invited to share shopping trips with Mrs P. G. Tipps in just about every retail outlet we enter in the weeks prior to the great pagan festival. Worse, this is accompanied by the most inane and banal noise (as distinct from any recognisable tune) imaginable.

Then, almost certainly, Mr Holder's fellow-septuagenarian, Mr Paul McCartney, will follow with repetitive drivel about some barren peninsula on the otherwise beautiful West Coast of Scotland, alongside the dirgeful sound of bagpipes ringing in one's ears. Yes, I know every true Scot is unique in the world in being immediately puffed-up with pride when reminded of his or her country's countless historical calamities and disasters but there has to be a limit, especially at what is supposed to be a joyful period of the year. If that were not enough, some over-loud Yankee female is then suddenly heard screeching about seeing an obviously wine-soaked 'Mommy' 'kissing Santa Claus'.

I may not myself use the word 'tyranny' to describe this thoroughly unpleasant experience (no doubt poor old Santa's too) but surely such unnecessary public noise pollution should be made a criminal offence to protect those who are understandably deeply hurt and offended. After all society has two much better alternatives, ie complete silence or music of supreme quality, such as, say, any piece by Mozart? Or there is, of course, wonderful Christmas music by Bach and Handel and many another great composer. However, to avoid offending the noise advocates with quality music, silence is probably the better option but what one does about those who are offended by the lack of any music or noise I'm not quite sure though I may have one or two very private suggestions.

Isn't the now thoroughly discriminated-against peaceful and civilised minority entitled to the protective cloak of Political Correctness as well?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Or could it JUST be that some prefer to replace the reality of the 'tyranny' by imagining that it does not even exist,

I may not myself use the word 'tyranny' to describe this thoroughly unpleasant experience

Even if it's a "reality"? Why not?

surely such unnecessary public noise pollution should be made a criminal offence to protect those who are understandably deeply hurt and offended.

From a Scruton disciple, this is apostasy - according to that gospel, if you are offended by anything, it is your problem.

[ahinton]

But if you thought that, why did you write #301?

Note the all-important "if" in #303; clearly, FF was/is correct in her assumption outlined in #302 but ws not wrong, any more than I was/am. The thread does indeed have "something to do with R Scruton", since it's about a broadcast talk that he gave and, as you will note, I refer to him in #101. I am therefore puzzled by your question.

[P. G. Tipps]

Even if it's a "reality"? Why not?


From a Scruton disciple, this is apostasy - according to that gospel, if you are offended by anything, it is your problem.

Indeed it is!

My point ... which seems to have completely eluded you ... is that EVERYONE who claims to be offended is surely entitled to protection against that 'offence'. Not just some privileged, favoured group.

Of course Political Correctness is a complete pseudo-Orwellian nonsense because it's intrinsically an impossible fraud!

[MrGongGong]

My point ... which seems to have completely eluded you ... is that EVERYONE who claims to be offended is surely entitled to protection against that 'offence'.

I'm offended by the "text" in a certain piece by a dead English composer
how can I ensure that i'm protected from it appearing on the radio OR have people refer to it in positive terms?



(Noddy says it's better than any pension)

These are very cheap and effective

http://www.macksearplugs.com/products/pillow-soft-earplugs-6-pair-value

[ahinton]

Or could it JUST be that some prefer to replace the reality of the 'tyranny' by imagining that it does not even exist, so the 'imagination' becomes their 'reality'? In fact, I am pretty sure Professor Scruton himself has said something along these lines but it is hardly worth ploughing through his many famously telling quotes simply to prove that particular point.

I think tht one of the problems with the talk is the use of the word "tyranny" which, the circumstances notwithstanding, seems to be an over-emotive one when the subject matter is of necessity characterised by the bland and unchallenging; that piped music in public places can be an irritant to some does not necessarily of itself mark out its relay - or indeed even those who relay it - as "tyrannical". I think that I can see why Scruton chose it, in the sense that such piped music is put in front of people who haven't asked for it, but I would think that act "tyrannical" only if it were relayed at deafening volume rather than at the kinds of "background music" volume that is usually the case.

There is, as I have suggested, a purpose and an agenda in relaying such music in public places and it includes a hope of dulling the senses of some but, it seems to me, it is closer to the subliminal than the tyrannical.

The attack on "pop" music - which at times gets confused with that on piped music in public places merely because some of the latter is also the former - seems to me to be confined to the kind of music that is often dependent upon excessive repetition, a "beat" rather than rhythm patters and the simplest of melodic shapes and harmony/harmonic progressions; that said, would I want to have the sixth symphonies of Mahler, Nielsen, Sibelius, Prokofiev, Vaughan Williams or Myaskovsky (all of which I admire immensely) relayed to me in a hotel reception area, elevator, shopping mall et al? Of course not! What Scruton seems to deplore is the apparent attempts to demean music by forcing some of it into the straitjacket of relay on public and other places where it's not really meant to assume the status of "the subject" and accordingly be listened to with concentration - at least that's how I hear/read it.

[ahinton]

I'm offended by the "text" in a certain piece by a dead English composer
how can I ensure that i'm protected from it appearing on the radio OR have people refer to it in positive terms?

Leaving aside my puzzlement as to how a text - or indeed anything else, for that matter - can "appear" on radio, who is the author of that text, what is it and who is the dead English composer? (and I almost added "why does said composer's surname begin with the same letter as his forename, but let's not leap to conclusions!). Are you also offended by the music that sets this text? (you've neither confirmed nor denied this yet)...

Noddy says it's better than any pension

Here we go; another tamtamian riddle!...

[MrGongGong]

What Scruton seems to deplore is the apparent attempts to demean music by forcing some of it into the straitjacket of relay on public and other places where it's not really meant to assume the status of "the subject" and accordingly be listened to with concentration - at least that's how I hear/read it.

I think one of the places his argument falls down is where he appears to be objecting to music having a function other than the one he ascribes as 'superior'.
So, in many ways he is no different to someone who expresses the view that "music starts and ends with hip-hop, everything else is sh*t".

Yesterday I was listening to this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66ZyGAU1pbc&list=PLIY53gFblUDk1AhVDn3Lj0C_91FaangFu&index=2

Which is inspired by this seminal work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KGMo9yOaSU

also re-imagined as this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWXAP_L3pZg

Even music designed to be functional in the way that Scrote finds objectionable can be a source of much more.

[P. G. Tipps]

I'm offended by the "text" in a certain piece by a dead English composer
how can I ensure that i'm protected from it appearing on the radio OR have people refer to it in positive terms?



(Noddy says it's better than any pension)

Those are very cheap and effective

http://www.macksearplugs.com/product...s-6-pair-value

These ear-plugs are pretty useless, MrGG ... I use far more effective ones from Ashland, Oregon, USA.

It is only fair to point out that they do some things much better over there, and not just Political Correctness

[P. G. Tipps]

Leaving aside my puzzlement as to how a text - or indeed anything else, for that matter - can "appear" on radio, who is the author of that text, what is it and who is the dead English composer? (and I almost added "why does said composer's surname begin with the same letter as his forename, but let's not leap to conclusions!). Are you also offended by the music that sets this text? (you've neither confirmed nor denied this yet)...

I suspect MrGG ... like many a composer, come to think of it ... is referring to a particular 'dream' set to music, ahinton, though only he can verify that suspicion.

Here we go; another tamtamian riddle!...

Despite the aforementioned MrGG being very much an avid republican I further suspect that 'royalties' are the likely solution to the 'tamtamian riddle', ahinton.