Popular music has been viewed in many different ways and it is often set apart from 'serious music' (like classical music) as it viewed as being easier to consume and is also viewed as being for a lower class of people. Because of this view a lot of people would say that popular music is definitely not an art form. Adorno says that music is standardised and that music acts as social cement that brainwashes its audience and this can be seen in the sense that audiences these days accept what they are being given and they don't challenge it, people are accepting computer generated music that has no originality anymore. Music can be seen as an art form depending on the creator, a person who sits in front of a computer creating electronic music could not really be seen as an artist but musicians who create music from scratch including lyrics as well as classical artists would be seen as creators of art to many different people. Music can only be defined as a popular commodity or an art form by the people who consume it.
Wednesday, 5 March 2008
Is popular music a mass produced commodity or an art form?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
If your suggestion that "audiences these days accept what they are being given and they don't challenge it" is true, how do you account for the fact that 80% of releases fail to make a profit? I would also take issue with your assertion that people who create computer generated music "could not really be seen as an artist". Overall though you have summarised some of Adorno's points rather nicely and have focused on the question quite well.
Post a Comment