Music Videos: the Look of the Sound by Pat Aufderheide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Music Videos Music Videos: The Look of the Sound by Pat Aufderheide Oflering an environment, an experience, a mood, “music videos have animated and set to music a tension basic to American youth culture: that feeling of instability which fuels the search to buy and belong. ’’ Music videos are more than a fad, more than fodder for spare hours and dollars of young consumers. They are pioneers in video expression, and the results of their reshaping of the form extend far beyond the TV set. Music videos have broken through TV’s most hallowed hound :i11es. .’ As commercials in themselves, they have erased the very distinction between the commercial and the program. As nonstop sequences of discontinuous episodes, they have erased the boundaries between programs. Music videos have also set themselves free fi-om the television set, inserting themselves into movie theaters, popping up in shopping nialls and department store windows, becoming actors in both live perfor- mances and the club scene. As omiiivorous as they are pervasive, they draw on and influence the traditional image-shaping fields offashion and advertising-even political campaigning. If‘ it sounds as if music video has a life of its own, this is not accidental. One of music video’s distinctive features as a social expres- Pat .4utilei-heidt~is cultural editor of‘ 111 T1ic.w Y’irnes in Washington, D.C., and a visiting professor in Intcrnatiorr;il Studies at Ihke University. A longer version 01 this essay will apprai- ill W‘utching Tclcl;ision edited by Todd Citlin (Pantheon,January 1!987). 57 Journal of Communication, Winter 1986 /‘ sion is its open-ended quality, aiming to engulf the viewer in its communication with itself, its fashioning of an alternative world where image is reality. Videos are perhaps the most accessible form of that larger tendency known as postmodern art. That aesthetic-in-formation,l signaled variously in the work of such artists as Andy Warhol, Nam June Paik, Thomas Pynchon, Philip Glass, and Keith Haring, is marked by several distinctive features. Among them are the merging of commercial and artistic image production and an abolition of traditional boundaries between an irnage and its real-life referent, between past and present, between character and performance, between mannered art and stylized life. When art, even self-consciously lightweight commercial fare, crosses that last boundary, it forces consideration of its social implications. Music videos have triggered plenty of such speculation, especially because their primary audience is the young. Literary critic Fredric Jameson has suggested (16, p. 72) that the emerging postmodern aes- thetic evokes an intense euphoria, a kind of “high” that partakes in an experience rather than responding to an artist’s statement. It is a provocative and troubling observation applied to music videos as they infiltrate the various domains of consumer culture, both on screens and on streets. A euphoric reaction is different in quality from the kind of Critical work on postmodern aesthetics is rapidly consolidating (see, e.g., 8, 19, 58). An essay by Fredric Jameson (16)and Terry Eagleton’s response (7) provide a particularly appropriate context for this discussion. 58 Music Videos I The Look of the Sound energizing, critical response once called up by rock music, hailed by Greil Marcus as triggering the critical capacity of negation, “the act that would make it self-evident to everyone that the world is not as it seems,”2 and enthusiasts of rock culture wonder if music video heralds a new, more passive era for the young. Marsha Kinder (18), for instance, finds the dreamy structure of videos a disturbing model for viewers who are stuck in real time. Not all agree; Margaret Morse (27) suggests that the populist, self-assertive energy of popular culture may be reclaimed in music video’s use of lip-synching; viewers may make that voice their own by singing along. Even Jameson, while positing a new relationship between artwork and audience, suggests that euphoria may have expres- sive qualities we cannot yet judge. Whatever one’s view, the rapid spread of the music video and its influence on popular culture is motive enough to take the phenomenon seriously. But it is particularly important because it is in the vanguard of reshaping the language of advertising-the dominant vocabulary of commercial culture-in a society that depends on an open flow of information to determine the quality of its political and public life. Consideration of music video’s form also implies questions about the emerging shape of the democratic and capitalist society that creates and receives it. Music video is rooted in the mass marketing of popular songs, not only as populist entertainment but as a talisman of subcultural autonomy and rebellion in successice generations of American youth. Top-40 radio programs cemented a pop cultural consciousness in the 1930s. In fact, unlike regional or folk culture, which unified the gener- ations by transmitting legacies while incorporating the new, national mass media were instrumental in shaping a national self-consciousness that stratified generations. As new groups and sounds were created in the image of rebellious self-assertion, they were also pop-ified, which usually meant whitening them as well. (English outsiders could market black rhythm and blues to mainstream white audiences as the R & B masters never could.) A 1960s generation celebrated its uniqueness in rock concerts, wore the badges of rock groups, and never moved to communal farms without stereo equipment. Putting music and pictures together was an early innovation. The Max Fleischer cartoons of the 1930s and 1940s were cut precisely to songs sung by the likes of Cab Calloway and Louis Armstrong. As early as 1943, the Panoram Soundies had brief success. These were jukeboxes Brown (4)cites Marcus and builds an argument that the terms of the niusic video medium conquer the critical elements. 59 Journal of Communication, Winter 1986 placed in nightclubs and diners, where viewers could punch up songs and watch performers on a mini-screen atop the jukebox. A European device called the Scopitone brought the gimmick back in the 1960s, though it never caught on, some say because it generally featured mainstream European singers without the oppositional appeal of Amer- ican pop idols. More influential were commercials borrowing a hip edge from rock sounds and the commercial-fed work of film artists like Richard Lester, who in A Hard Day's Night turned the Beatles into a visual experience. Rock videos were shown in the 1970s in European clubs, and some English underground groups rode them to celebrity. At this moment in English pop music the performer's persona had become as important as the sound of the music, so the form nicely fulfilled its function.3 The transatlantic success of music video awaited the moment at which cable TV became an option for a substantial number of Americans and targeted audiences became commercially attractive. Amid wild talk of whole cable channels devoted around the clock to specialized pro- gramming-to a big but still targeted audience-movies were a sure-fire idea and music seemed ideal. Its value was not merely because the young buy records, but because buyable popular culture is central to their lives. Pop culture commodities express personal taste, even iden- tity and identification with a subculture. No one needs to sell young people on the key role of fad and fashion in designing their identities; indeed, channeling such information to them provides a service wel- comed for its news of what's happening. Still, no one foretold the success of music video. At Warner, which gambled on the format in 1980, the prospect of a cable channel wholly dedicated to rock videos, on the air 24 hours a day, was received with major reservations. Even though the program time was to be filled with free videos given to the channel as promotion by record companies, Warner hesitated before backing the concept. Even its strongest in- house advocates promised record companies only that they would see increased sales in two years.4 When MTV (Music Television) started up in 1981, its success was almost instantaneous: MTV became a hot news item and record companies reported rising sales within months. Music videos have fueled the current boom in the record industry, a fact reflected in music industry awards for videos. The channel took a The history of mnsic video is described by several authors with an accuracy missing in much reporting on mu. ic video in (25). This hesitation in the new format was tracked not only in weekly trade magazines such as Billbourd and Broadcasting at the time, hut has become part ofthe lore of MTV, available in its own press kits (e.g., MTV press kit, 1985). For a more jaundiced overview of'the same history see (20). 60 Music Videos I The Look of the Sound little longer to start paying out. MTV stayed in the red for two ysears before Warner was confident enough of its future to spin it off as a separate company. It showed a profit by 1984, claiming access to 24.2 million viewers (with independent estimates only slightly lower), mak- ing it the highest-rated basic cable service on the air even after ratings leveled off in 1984.5 Nielsen ratings for 1985 showed a dramatic 30 percent drop from 1984; the rating was disputed by MTV, which argued with some reason that Nielsen’s cable estimates are flawed. But some falloff is indisputable and rnay reflect the proliferation of similar services in other areas, both nationally and internationally (see, e.g., 30). Meanwhile, MTV’s signal is being picked up abroad, among other places in Latin America by TV pirates.