Killing Rock, pt. 1: Canonization.
“I’ll tell you what classical music is, for those of you who don’t know. Classical music is this music that was written by a bunch of dead people a long time ago. And it’s formula music, the same as top forty music is formula music. In order to have a piece be classical, it has to conform to academic standards that were the current norms of that day and age … I think that people are entitled to be amused, and entertained. If they see deviations from this classical norm, it’s probably good for their mental health.” – Frank Zappa
Since articles speculating on the impending death, or at least total irrelevance, of Rock music continue to roll out, let’s indulge in a thought experiment. What, if anything, truly will spell the death of Rock music.
One can not broach this subject without first mentioning Jazz. Jazz is not, as is oft repeated, America’s only art form. Jazz is, however, America’s first significant contribution to the arts. Emerging out of some of the seedier areas of New Orleans sometime early in the twentieth century, Jazz would spend multiple decades as the popular music. Built on a combination of the blues form, syncopation, and improvisation, Jazz would branch off in a hundred different directions. Over the course of a half century (give or take), traditional Jazz would birth big bands, Cool Jazz, Bebop, Post-Bop, Hard Bop, Modal Jazz, Latin Jazz, Afro-Cuban Jazz, Fusion, Free Jazz, and Jump Blues. The latter of which would, ironically enough, lead to the birth of the music that would eventually supplant Jazz: Rock and Roll. Not only was improvisation a key component to Jazz, so too was another important concept: innovation. One of the things that helped to keep Jazz relevant was a constant forward evolution. While you could listen and hear the common threads – those chord structures, the syncopation, etc. – there was a world of difference between the Jazz of Buddy Bolden and that of Miles Davis. So, what happened? Where did Jazz go wrong?
This is, of course, speculation on my part, but I would say that the advent of recording and the emergence of the so-called “Great American Songbook” ultimately led to Jazz’s descent into near irrelevance. The canonization and borderline outright deification of certain songs and performers combined to turn Jazz into an inward-looking, meta referential basket case. It stopped assimilating much in the way of outside influence. It became incestuous and the blood became thin, weak. There is nothing wrong with building a strong canon. A goal of the artist, after all, is to build a body of work that lives on long after he is gone. Orchestras still play Vivaldi and Mozart centuries removed from both men’s deaths. Violinists and Heavy Metal guitarists alike both test their mettle with the music of Niccolo Paganini. The thing that separates these composers’ music from Jazz and its collection of standards, however, is that there are no definitive versions of any of these songs. Recording technology did not yet exist when these men died. As such, no one truly knows what “The Four Seasons” is really supposed to sound like. One does, however, know what “Giant Steps” is supposed to sound like. John Coltrane himself stepped into a studio and recorded it. At the end of it, it’s a difference between interpretation and imitation.
Why am I carrying on about Jazz, you ask? Because I see Rock music following a similar trajectory. After emerging from Rhythm and Blues in the back half of the 1950s, Rock reached popular music status. Over the course of the next four decades, Rock split into a hundred different directions: Psychedelia, Prog, Hard Rock, Punk, Heavy Metal, and on and on. Each one spawned its own sub genres and micro genres. There was no Rock canon, no book of “standards.” Enter Youtube, sample libraries, and the rise of internet cover culture. I was a musician at one point myself. I’ve got no problem with bands tossing a cover or two into their live set to fill out time. However, now you have guys who are building entire careers on a combination of “cover songs” and e-begging. I put cover songs in quotes because these are not covers in the traditional sense. This is not like Death playing “Painkiller.” Youtube covers basically amount to a guitarist, singer, drummer, whatever taking a rock song and attempting to copy and re-record their respective instrument’s part verbatim. This sort of rote repetition is not innovative; it is not particularly impressive, and it is frankly wholly uninteresting. It also happens to be quite vexing that the very same music outlets that routinely cry about the lack of life in the Rock and Metal sphere enthusiastically aid in the perpetuation of this poisonous trend. Ultimate Guitar, Blabbermouth, MetalSucks, Metal Injection, Metal Hammer, and on and on have all complained about the stagnation of Rock music. Yet all are positively lousy with wasted space extolling the brilliance of lazy, mindless internet “covers.” If you are so concerned about the health of this genre, then stop blaming imaginary phantoms like elitist fans and non-existent gangs of roving sexists for chasing out new blood and innovation, and start looking at what you are elevating. I have nothing against the music of the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. However, turning this material into the Rock version of the “Great American Songbook,” songs which everyone must learn to recreate verbatim, will render Rock just as hokey and quaint as Jazz. We’ve already plunged America’s first art form into formaldehyde and packed it in mothballs. Do we really want the second to suffer the same fate?