Obsessions and Lamentations #14 - Decade in Review Edition

Well here we are, at the end, and we’re wondering what it all meant. What made this decade different, and what does this difference say about us? Jesus, I don’t know. Even though I write this column containing musings on whatever cultural phenomenon seems to me worthy of either praise or derision, I actually spend most of my free time listening to old vinyl records, watching old movies and reading old books. I don’t watch any tv shows regularly other than “Hardball”, which I find to be the least polemical and most entertaining way to find out what’s going on. I don’t read the papers, and do my own research online when I want to know more about something. The internet allows me to keep apprised of what’s happening in the “culture” (the quotes indicate that I’m not sure the panoply of entertainment distractions we are mired in should really be labeled culture), without getting too involved. I like to believe that these habits keep me rooted in a glorious tradition while also providing perspective on passing fads. Probably not, but I like to believe it. 

So while I’m vaguely aware of what’s going on, I don’t really have my finger on the pulse of pop culture. What insight can I have on a decade like this if I’ve never watched more than 2 uninterrupted minutes of American Idol? Still, I do detect something that I think can be called a common theme in music and literature, and I think the mainstream reflects it as well. This is a trend towards increased fragmentation and away from mass, shared cultural experiences. In popular music, I think it says quite a lot that the best selling album of the decade was “The Beatles 1”. At the start of the decade, several records had blockbuster sales inching towards the 10 million mark. Now, the omnipresent Taylor Swift is struggling to get half that amount. Sure, we all know the illegal internet download is killing the music industry, but is the change in distribution fueling a change in the product, and our reactions to it? 

More interesting to me is the trend in what used to be called alternative music, the main preoccupation of this site. Here, the flagship act Radiohead had a number one record with Kid A in 2000, and last year abandoned traditional channels by selling In Rainbows online for name-your-own-price. But it would be hard to assert that Radiohead is some kind of organizing principle around which the rest of the community orients itself. Instead, Indieworld seems to be flailing in a hundred different directions at once, trying to hit something. I keep trying to convince myself that the ease of getting music to the public and the proliferation of new bands making records is a positive development, but I have yet to hear clear evidence of it. What I hear is talented musicians feeling free to develop their quirks without fear of having to communicate to a mass audience. Maybe this is better, but I think there’s something to be said for universality. When Kurosawa makes Ran out of King Lear he’s revealing Shakespeare’s intention to create a Human drama, rather than a strictly British one. What we have here, I fear, is exactly what happened to classical music in the 20s and 30s, modern art in the 50’s, jazz in the 60s and literature more recently. It’s also something that’s been a byproduct of our technological society – the trend away from the general and towards the specialized. It’s why we don’t see a lot of Da Vincis running around anymore. If we track the progress of rock and roll specifically we notice that as it began to regard itself somewhat self consciously, a trend which literally exploded with the internet and sites like these, the musicians started to narrow their focus and playing for a smaller audience; an audience of experts and devoted followers. Sound familiar? Do the names Anton Webern, Jackson Pollack and Cecil Taylor ring a bell? Maybe we can now add Animal Collective and Grizzly Bear to that list – music made for indie rock critics and guys who like to think they’re the coolest dude in their dorm, even though few share this opinion. 

But hey, it doesn’t have to be this way. There’s still the Arcade Fire and Wilco and The Flaming Lips, and others who at least hope to reach a little further into the populace because they believe that what they do is valuable enough that everyone should hear it. It’s very possible that the natural qualities of this music, which lean towards getting people out of their seats and into the aisles, will override the more indulgent pattern we’ve seen in recent years. Sadly, the track record in the other arts does not inspire much confidence. People still hope for a jazz revival, but it hasn’t happened yet. No one even talks about a classical music revival anymore. Maybe these things run their course and something new has to take its place. No matter what, the only way we are going to find out is to keep our ears open, and keep, (er), reaching, (uh), for…the..stars. Oy.