LEFT OFF THE DIAL - "Pop Music" Is A Meaningless Term

BANDS:

Punk & Ska
80's New Wave/
Post-Punk/
College Bands
90's & Beyond
Virginia, North
Carolina, & DC

INTERESTS:

Venues
Publications
Record Stores
Radio
Record Labels
Album Reviews
Live Gig Reviews
Past Features
Links

ETC...

About LOTD
Contact/Staff
Submit Music
Advertise
Home

Pop Music is a Meaningless Term

Often times when writing for this site, I will describe a band or artist as having a very good aptitude for writing well-crafted pop songs. And every time I write something like that, I fear that it will be taken the wrong way. After all, this site is called LEFT OFF THE DIAL, and it features mostly music that is under-recognized by the mainstream. By praising a band for writing good pop songs, I dont want my readers to think that I am writing about the type of music that is widely referred to as pop by the music media. So how is it that the musicians I refer to write such perfect pop songs, yet most of them are not widely popular?

The problem lies in the ambiguous definition of pop music. Does it refer to a certain characteristic of sound that the music has? Or does it refer to the number of people who consider themselves fans of it? Theres no real answer to these questions, largely because they are matters of both semantics and opinion, yet I cant help but feel a little irritated that the type of music represented on this website can be described as being in the same genre as much of the rubbish that is most often called pop music. One reason I feel this way is that what the mainstream refers to as pop music is on the whole written and performed by two or more entirely separate parties. What many music fans dont know is that there are numerous songwriters across the country who have made careers for themselves by turning out pop song after pop song for some new group of teeny-boppers to perform. Very often, the pop star is not even exposed to the song until the song-writing process is complete. In other words, the singer(s) performing these pop songs take no real part in creating them. If music is to be looked upon as a form of art, it is not possible to separate its creative and performance aspects, which would indicate that these pop stars are not truly musicians.

Take a look at this web page that lists the year 2000 songwriters association award winners: ASCAP 2001 Pop Awards. You will notice that the songs sung by the manufactured acts (Backstreet Boys, N Sync, Jennifer Lopez) are all written by someone else, with the notable exception of Destinys Child*, while the other songwriters that are recognized usually coincide with the singer or band that performs the song (i.e. Goo Goo Dolls, Train, and even Blink 182). Still, all these acts constantly fall together under the pop music umbrella.

If these manufactured pop stars are not writing their own music, then what is this driving force behind their mass popularity, you ask? The answer begins with the brilliant marketing crusades by a man named Lou Pearlman. This businessman noticed that the popularity of over-commercialized pop acts of the past, like New Kids on the Block and Vanilla Ice, happened to coincide with two events: a general dry spell of good music in the industry and economic prosperity coupled with general good times in America. The mid to late 90s seemed to meet both conditions for Pearlman, who then endeavored to manufacture first the Backstreet Boys, and upon their success, N Sync. Who can deny that todays pop stars would not be stars at all without the unavoidable hoopla that surrounds them? Im referring to the risqu and/or trendy clothing they all wear, the outlandish (non-music related) production put into all their live performances, the unending celebrity endorsements which plaster their faces everywhere, the cheesy dance routines, and of course, the general physical attractiveness of those who are selected to be pop stars. None of this hoopla would be generated if it werent for architects like Pearlman and those in his wake, purposely instigating all of it so as to sell records and merchandise for every reason imaginable except the music. The business student in me is amazed; the music-lover in me is disgusted.

This overabundance of hoopla is a far cry from the do-it-yourself indie band that believes in what they are creating and bares all kinds of hardship to have their music heard for the musics sake alone. This is the kind of band featured so often on my site, specifically those under the 80s New Wave/Post-Punk/College Bands page. One almost begins to think that these manufactured, processed acts and these hardworking musicians should compete in completely different industries. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the pop music label continues to get slapped onto both groups. And what becomes painfully evident is that those rewarded in the industry are those who spend the least time on the music and the most time on the markets to which the music is aimed.

Let me jump off my soapbox for a moment to point out that there have existed other brands of this hoopla-surrounded music in the past, and some of this music has actually been very good, the prime example being grunge music. The entire grunge look and persona was created and commercialized by one Bruce Pavitt, founder of Sub Pop Records, the primary grunge record label of the late 80s and early 90s. Pavitt dressed up middle-classed bands like Tad to look like lumberjacks in flannel shirts. As this Northwestern underground music slowly seeped into the mainstream, every kid in America (myself included) was wearing flannel shirts. Still, there exists a key difference between this kind of commercialization and the current commercialization of pop acts: these grunge bands were talented songwriters, writing and performing their own music. In fact, when many of these groups defected to major labels, they demanded creative control over all artistic decisions. Todays pop stars are simply the puppets of the powerful, money-hungry businessmen of the music industry.

Still, critics continue to use the same wordpopto refer to both Britney Spears and a band like the Replacements (for whom this site is named). Perhaps it is that the critics who laud a talented singer/song-writer like the Replacements Paul Westerberg by saying he writes perfect pop songs are really implying that this is how pop music should sound. Or maybe we just need a more diverse music vocabulary. As it stands, the words good and bad would be an improvement over simply pop.

*Destinys Child is most definitely the exception to the modern pop star persona. These talented singers write and perform their own music, prompting SPIN magazine to pay them the unbelievable complement of comparing their current rally of accomplished music to Bob Dylan in 65 and Husker Du in 85.

-Catherine Nicholas

What do you think? - All responses to this article will be published.