Songs in US Presidential Campaigns: Function, Signification, and Spin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Songs in U.S. Presidential Campaigns: Function, Signification, and Spin THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Garrett Amzi Brown, B.M.F., B.A. Graduate Program in Music The Ohio State University 2017 Master's Examination Committee: Arved Ashby, Advisor Graeme Boone Robert Kraut Copyrighted by Garrett Amzi Brown 2017 Abstract In this document, I examine the history of the campaign song in presidential elections in the United States, finding its changes in function as a result of the changing American electorate and advancing technology. As voting rights get extended to a greater percentage of the total American population and as popular mediums for dissemination of information change, the format of an effective campaign song changes from contrafacta of a well-known song to unaltered popular songs. I also identify the various signifying elements of popular songs that allow them to complement campaign rhetoric. Finally, I provide an exegesis of several popular songs whose original political meaning has changed as a result of their being used in the context of American presidential campaigns. In providing this analysis, I show how popular songs come to represent shared American ideals in the absence of any broad agreement as to what form those ideals should take. ii Dedication Dedicated to my loving wife Haley Harris-Brown. iii Acknowledgements I would like to express appreciation for the guidance and constructive criticism provided by Arved Ashby. I would also like to thank Graeme Boone, whose class on emotions and music first interested me in the relationships between politics and music. I also extend thanks to the Musicology faculty at The Ohio State University for making me aware of a wide range of issues in music history and to Dr. Kraut for introducing me to controversies in artwork interpretation. iv Vita May 2009 .......................................................Darlington Upper School 2013................................................................B.M.F. Music Performance, Samford University 2013................................................................B.A. Philosophy, Samford University 1980 to present ..............................................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Physics, The Ohio State University Publications Brown, Garrett A. "Politicizing Popular Songs: Understanding Emotional Responses to Popular Songs in Presidential Elections." Journal of Ewha Music Research Institute 20.4 (2016): 99-122. Fields of Study Major Field: Music v Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... iiv Vita ...................................................................................................................................... v Chapter 1: The Changing Role and Form of the Campaign Song ...................................... 1 Chapter 2: Understanding Signification in Popular Songs ............................................... 21 Chapter 3: Reconstitution of Song Meaning in the Context of Presidential Campaigns .. 42 References ......................................................................................................................... 62 vi Chapter 1: The Changing Role and Form of the Campaign Song In 1800, the second election after George Washington’s presidency, presidential campaign songs entered the American political scene. With Washington’s presidency, the Electoral College was decided before any need for a campaign arose, and in the campaign of 1796 actively campaigning as a presidential candidate was generally considered inappropriate.1 By the time presidential candidates started actively campaigning for Electoral College votes in the election of 1800, campaign songs sprang up in support of party, candidate, or platform. These early campaign songs were generally contrafacta of previously existing songs, with songs like “Adams and Liberty” set to the tune of “To Anachreon in Heaven” – better known now as the tune to “The Star Spangled Banner” – and “The Son of Liberty” set to the tune of “Variety.”2 These songs were tools for disseminating information that supported a particular candidate’s claim to the presidency, and the lyrics of the song presented explicit, if simplified, arguments in favor of one candidate over another. But it is initially unclear why campaigns should have turned to song at all, as opposed to more directly persuasive and detailed mediums such as speeches or essays. It is even less clear why campaign songs have changed from presenting newly-composed lyrics in direct support of the candidate and his platform to the unaltered, pre-existing popular songs employed on the campaign trail today, seen 1 Taylor, C. James. "John Adams: Campaigns and Elections." Miller Center. University of Virginia, n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2017. <https://millercenter.org/president/adams/campaigns-and-elections>. 2 Schoening, Benjamin S., and Eric T. Kasper. Don't Stop Thinking About the Music: The Politics of Songs and Musicians in Presidential Campaigns. Plymouth, UK: Lexington, 2012. 33-35. Print. 1 most recently in President Donald Trump’s employment of The Rolling Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” at campaign events.3 In order to understand the political soundscape of presidential elections today, we must understand the conditions that gave rise to campaign songs as a fixture of the campaign trail, and the technological, cultural, and electorate changes that changed the persuasive function of these songs from disseminators of information about the campaign and candidate to popular culture artifacts introduced into the political arena to support a candidate’s message inexplicitly. The types and number of voters that elected the U.S. president gave rise to the need for campaign songs. While electors for the Electoral College were chosen by state legislatures for 10 out of the 16 states that participated in the election of 1800, candidates needed to make a direct appeal to the voting public in the entire state for Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Tennessee. Additionally, two of these states, Kentucky and Tennessee, had no economic-based qualifications for voting rights as long as the potential voter was a white male, which further complicated the task of spreading information to the voting public that would prove relevant to deciding on a candidate.4 In requiring the candidates to get their message out to not only the mostly literate propertied class, but also to many illiterate non-propertied white males, Kentucky and Tennessee imposed a burden on the candidates: to spread information convincingly, simply, and broadly as opposed to requiring candidates to make more concentrated efforts to sway smaller concentrations of political power, to sway the legislatures that 3 Suebsaeng, Asawin. "Mick Jagger on Trump Using Stones Songs: I 'Can't Stop' Him." The Daily Beast. The Daily Beast Company, 12 Oct. 2016. Web. 26 Mar. 2017. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/12/mick-jagger-on-trump-using-stones-songs-i-can-t-stop- him.html>. 4 Engerman, Stanley L., and Kenneth L. Sokoloff. "The Evolution of Suffrage Institutions in the New World." The Journal of Economic History 65.04 (2005): 891-921. Jstor. Web. 26 Mar. 2017. 2 appointed the electors as they did in ten states, or to sway only the propertied class in Virginia, Rhode Island, North Carolina and Maryland. This requirement meant that verbal communication, in form of either live speech and argumentation or song, would best persuade a large segment of the voting population in at least these two states. This is not to say that no candidate employed print media in an attempt to make his appeal to the more literate propertied classes in the four previously mentioned states, but print would prove an inefficient means of disseminating information for entirely different reasons in those states. The main reason for the difficulty with print dissemination had to do with the economics of newspaper distribution in early America. In order to be guaranteed pay for their labors, the editors of newspapers had to gain subscriptions from the local populace, keep track of who wanted to receive the paper regularly, and collect the dues. Without such lists of subscribers, newspapers had trouble selling advertisement space and, consequently, struggled to stay in business. As an additional problem, the postal service did not deliver these papers for free in early America. Every facet of print news dissemination was thus monetized, hiding the information about national affairs behind both a literacy requirement and a paywall – usually between $6 and $10 annually out of wages ranging from $100 – ~$350 annually.56 Newspapers, thus, only reached a small segment of even the literate population, though the exact number of subscribers is unknown because newspapers inflated subscriber lists in order to sell more advertising space. As a result of the monetization of the information contained therein, spreading 5 Steffen, Charles G. "Newspapers for Free: The Economies of Newspaper Circulation in the Early Republic." Journal of the Early