Should music reflect the national mood or entertain us?

Posted at 8:11 AM on February 3, 2009 by Bob Collins (8 Comments)
Filed under: Marketing and advertising

I'm not much of a music guy, but I like Bruce Springsteen. "He's kind of sold out," my wife -- the former '70s disc jockey -- said to me the other day as I hoped the Cardinals and Steelers would use more running plays... the better to speed the clock along to Springsteen's half-time show. Sell-out or not, I liked the show better than the first half of football.

Slate magazine, however, reminds me that I'm alone, so very alone. In "Bruce Springsteen misreads the national mood," Stephen Metcalf paints an interesting proposition -- that entertainment --at least in the person of Springsteen -- isn't mean to distract us from the ills of the day, it's meant to reflect them.

The national mood is sober bordering on a galloping panic. Lively as he was, I wouldn't say the Boss did much to either banish or capture it.

The Springsteen persona was originally intended as a stand-in for a blue-collar working class living in an insular white ethnic neighborhood and working a job on more or less permanent offer from an industrial economy. He was the poet of their decline, but he's moved away from that specific community of origin as his persona has evolved into a bit of general-purpose kitsch Americana. Not coincidentally, Springsteen has flogged more and more a highly abstract idea of "community," one centered around Bruce Springsteen. "It's not just my creation at this point," he recently told the New York Times, referring to the Springsteen iconography's debt to its fans. "I wanted it to be our creation. Once you set that in motion, it's a large community of people gathered around a core set of values."

What?

It's just a show, isn't it? What is the role of entertainment when the national mood is depressed?

---

Comments (8)

In the early 70s popular music underwent a fantastic period of exploration and experimentation, while the national mood was pretty sober. Music is entertainment, and the early 70s produced some of the most entertaining bands to date: Aerosmith, Kiss, P-Funk, Ted Nugent, KC and the Sunshine Band, Lynyrd Skynyrd. But, musical artists of large stature usually write reflective songs as well, and shows are not typically monothematic.

Posted by Dave Rockwood | February 3, 2009 8:59 AM

---

I don't think of entertainment as being monolithic, so talking about what role entertainment should play in these waning days of our empire is a non-starter for me.

Maybe it's just me, but as our empire's decline accelerates, I see the role of someone like Springsteen as being a whole lot different than that of Britney Spears, though both are entertainers (yes, I know that Bruce is a lot more than "just" an entertainer, but I assume you see my point).

I'm a Bruce fan, too, and my concern is that as he becomes more of an Americana act, he's in danger of losing his relevance. I'm nervous that it won't be long until he's on the casino circuit...

The good thing is that it is entirely within his power to reinvigorate his music and put the populism back in it. (I liked his very erudite indictment of the Bush administration -- not sure where I saw it, maybe Slate or Salon, during the Presidential campaign.)

Go, Bruce!

Posted by Bob | February 3, 2009 9:28 AM

---

What relevance is that that he might lose? Do you mean the messages of the music? I didn't hear anything on Magic to suggest that he's lost touch with reality.

So I guess I don't really know what you mean when you say "put the populism BACK in his music." Give me examples of how, say, Rosalita was significantly better than recent material.

Like I said, I'm not much of a music guy so the usual music review terminology is lost on me.

Posted by Bob Collins | February 3, 2009 9:38 AM

---

Strange that, in the midst of the enormous sums of money spent on the Superbowl event, the guy chooses to rip on the halftime show for failing to reflect the national mood.

Posted by bsimon | February 3, 2009 9:40 AM

---

Bob, forget Rosalita. The following excerpts highlight the populist Bruce I'm talking about.

“…his angry yet triumphant Born in the U.S.A. (1984) was infused with working-class sensibilities and political commentary.

His subsequent tour, followed by the release of Live/1975-1985, which included covers of Woody Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" and Edwin Starr's "War," was nothing less than Whitmanesque in its populist proclamations--a rock & roll Leaves of Grass singing the body politic electric.

Springsteen has once again discovered America's dispossessed in The Ghost of Tom Joad (Columbia).”

www.metroactive.com

“Nebraska comes as a shock, a violent, acid-etched portrait of a wounded America that fuels its machinery by consuming its people's dreams. It is a portrait painted with old tools: a few acoustic guitars, a four-track cassette deck, a vocabulary derived from the plain-spoken folk music of Woody Guthrie and the dark hillbilly laments of Hank Williams.
The style is steadfastly, defiantly out-of-date, the singing flat and honest, the music stark, deliberate and unadorned.”

www.rollingstone.com

“[Obama] speaks to the America I’ve envisioned in my music for the past 35 years, a generous nation with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems, a country that’s interested in its collective destiny and in the potential of its gathered spirit,” Mr. Springsteen wrote.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

Posted by Bob | February 3, 2009 10:22 AM

---

Are music reviewers paid by the overwrought adjective?

Whitmanesque? Well, fabulous. But didn't get Pete Seegeresque just a couple of years ago?

Like I said, I don't speak the language, or comprehend it. Maybe if the reviewers wrote in the language of the working man...

Posted by Bob Collins | February 3, 2009 10:27 AM

---

The guy in the foreground, right side of the photo looks like he could be a music reviewer. Doesn't appear to be having much fun.

As far as your question on the role of entertainers, they play to their audience. I thought it was a good, fun half-time show.

Some fans feel superioirity and a sense of ownership when they follow an obscure talent. While Springsteen is far from obscure, having to share with the masses may be too much to bear.

Posted by kennedy | February 3, 2009 11:45 AM

---

That depends:
What does the songwriter have to say?
How does the listener interpret the song?
The same song can mean a dozen different things to a dozen different people, none of which reflect what the songwriter intended to convey...

Posted by BJ Bonin | February 5, 2009 10:39 PM

---

• E-mail this page
• Print this page
• Tweet this page
• Share this

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories