Krugman SP.Pdf

One Hit Wonders Using Film to Analyze the Music Industry First Edition By Murray Krugman University of New Haven Bassim Hamadeh, CEO and Publisher Michael Simpson, Vice President of Acquisitions Jamie Giganti, Managing Editor Jess Busch, Senior Graphic Designer John Remington, Acquisitions Editor Brian Fahey, Licensing Specialist Sean Adams, Interior Designer Copyright © 2015 by Murray Krugman. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or in any information retrieval system without the written permission of Cognella, Inc. Cover image: Copyright © 2012 by Depositphotos / jamesgroup. Design image copyright © 2010 by Depositphotos / fmua09. First published in the United States of America in 2015 by Cognella, Inc. Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-62661-669-1 (pbk) / 978-1-62661-670-7 (br) Foreword v Introduction ix SECTION ONE:THE VEHICLE 1. Jailhouse Rock 3 CONTENTS SECTION TWO:GETTING TO THE BIOPIC 2. The Idolmaker 17 3. Cadillac Records 25 4. Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story 35 SECTION THREE:THE MOMENT 5. Still Crazy 43 6. Once 51 SECTION FOUR:THE HEART 7. This Is Spinal Tap 61 8. Phantom of the Paradise 69 SECTION FIVE:THE HEALERS 9. Velvet Goldmine 79 10. Hedwig and The Angry Inch 87 11. Hard Core Logo 93 SECTION SIX:THE ENVIRONMENT 12. Almost Famous 101 SECTION SEVEN:ONE-HIT WONDERS 13. The Commitments 111 14. One-Hit Wonders 117 FOREWORD once had the opportunity to produce a radio spot with Marv I Albert, one of my favorite broadcasters. He was unassuming as well as easygoing and I burdened him with only one question: “What was the best and worst part of being Marv Albert?” He was remarkably clear with his answer. The best part was the ongoing opportunity to see and participate in some of the greatest moments in the history of professional sports. The worst part was the daily litany of encounters in which every person in his path felt the overwhelming need to offer Marv their imitation of his signature “YESSSSSSS!” Men’s rooms, restaurants, banks, ticket counters, airplanes, cabs, and every other conceivable situation. Performances ranged from miserable to mediocre and while there might be a diamond in there somewhere, the cringe level made it virtually ir- relevant. Worse still was that each performer felt as though they were the first. I felt a slight twinge of guilt asking Marv to use the EXACT same tone of voice to hysterically rant “BLUE OYSTER CULT—BLUE OYSTER CULT—BLUE OYSTER CULT!” Unspoken was our shared sense of how absurdly hilarious this script was in general and in light of his imitators. V VI | ONE HIT WONDERS:USING FILM TO ANALYZE THE MUSIC INDUSTRY In retrospect I feel fortunate that “More Cowbell” was more of an inside joke. As a result there have been fewer imitators, in part because the cowbell signature had nothing to do with vocal timbre or inflection. In that spirit we leave the imitators to Marv and the numbers to Christopher Walken. But the purpose of this book was never to bump up my fourteen minutes and change. I’m not sure the tone would ever be suggestive of that. Rather, the original intent and the ensuing result couple in somewhat ironic fashion. Originally I felt a college semester to be truncated to the point of not allowing time to teach folkway. As this book channeled that folkway through fourteen fictional rock films’ raisons d’être it seemed increasingly intuitive: So many of these characters, situations, and archetypes were obvi- ously composites by virtue of the fictional process as to cover more ground in less time. The real irony is the resulting purpose. As someone who teaches the lost art of Music Industry, I have read my share of music industry texts. It is not enough that they seize defeat from the jaws of victory in universally making the exciting so boring. The unpardonable sin is that they compartmen- talize, for lack of a more creative approach, an experience noteworthy for its rapid-fire simultaneity. The stuff comes at you all at once, faster than you would hope for and without second chances. The Devil Wears Prada is entry level by comparison. Also in retrospect did I note the very visual nature of this generation of student. It’s hard to argue auditory when the weapon of choice is an MP3, an Apple, or a pair of buds. If skeptical, simply turn up the volume and listen to the sonic deteriorate. So movies become a perfectly inviting portal and fictional rock films become the most efficiently pregnant source of Music Industry folkway. I am especially grateful to my family for suffering through this periodically gruesome experience. My children, Lindsay and Sarita, whose rolled eyes gave more inspiration than they could ever know. My wife, Bobi Jentis, the light of my life, who took this book from Murrayspeak to English, regardless of my often catatonic posture. Lastly, all at Cognella for a collaborative process, and to Sharon Hermann in particular for removing me as a potential contestant on “Do You Know More Grammar Than a Fifth Grader?” If this book serves as the fulcrum in helping one person stay the course, it will have been more than worth it. What is this that stands before me? Black Sabbath Black Sabbath INTRODUCTION he process of elimination is as close as we get to defining rock T ‘n roll. Like the Supreme Court’s definition of pornography, we cannot really define it, but we know it when we see it. We are left to ad hoc our way through it, for better or worse. Murray The K as the fifth Beatle is rock ‘n roll? Maybe yes. Milli Vanilli as vocalists extraordinaire? Maybe no. Is the ability to define the form, or not, a good thing? On the plus side, one common thread is the suggested element of magic. The Lovin’ Spoonful suggested belief in that magic as a prerequisite. But does that get us any closer? We attempt to objec- tify the subjective (Angus rocks, Diddy sucks or vice versa) but our comfort level is in the numbers. This represents the theory of social proof (as in follow-the-leader). As perception, pop stardom is our lowest common denominator of legitimacy. The barnacle quotient (groupies, autograph seekers, critics, dealers, label suits) is undoubt- edly more extreme ascending the food chain, but it is not zero sum. Our use of shortcut odds in hiding behind the numbers does not really get us where we are going. “It’s big, it’s happening, it’s made it, it’s ‘The Next Big Thing’” really skirts the issue. Jerry Lee Lewis’ marriage as rock ‘n roll? Maybe yes. The endless stream of faceless work-for-hire dance or techno IX X | ONE HIT WONDERS:USING FILM TO ANALYZE THE MUSIC INDUSTRY “artists” with no live act, put together for the sake of making the record as rock ‘n roll? Maybe no. Both big but we are no closer to delineating. And while we may not get any closer than your treasure and my trash (or vice versa), some think it worth pursuing. If a definition could be found, it would in fact residually clarify the boundaries of the community. While this is community seen through attire, grooming, language, belief system, and the like, we are still left with VW vans defining de rigueur Deadhead transport. Maybe yes. Games enabling six-year-olds to jam with their parents? Maybe no. Do we spare ourselves the agony of having to ask whether or not a record like Jimmy Gilmour’s “Sugar Shack” makes the four corners of the canvas? Or in the affirmative, we confront the pain of accepting trailblazing DJ Alan Freed as the co-writer of Chuck Berry’s “Maybelline.” But how to bottle magic? It is not an institution with objective criteria. A crime, speed limit, or completing sixth grade do not seem too hard to define. Or the difference between peanut butter and jelly. But a criterion like magic complicates the equation. So we do not waste time endlessly trying to define the magic; we are too consumed with the pursuit of it. Performer, audience, support system, media, as well as elements of commercial tie-ins all seek the “je ne sais quoi.” And perhaps this is where we want to be. Magic is a hummingbird’s wings in motion or the number of angels on the head of a pin. Still, we can face our palate to determine the scope of our canvas. Oftentimes, the body of work enabling us to do this is large. This body can range from any rock ‘n roll encyclopedia, to volumes on music in cinema, to studies of the lives of performers, managers, DJ’s, labels, etc. An intriguing Jamie Foxx performance as Ray Charles may well fill in a few more blanks than a goofy Dennis Quaid performance as Jerry Lee Lewis. But again we are left to decide what our own rock ‘n roll canvas looks like. The myriad of attempts, of data, may not bring us closer, especially as everything from the databanks to the biopics simply glut the waters without unifying our canvas. And a more unified canvas, while not desiring definition so as to quell magic, might not want an infinite set of choices to address as yea or nay.

Load more