In this class, we have continually discussed the role of art, literature in particular, in resistance and political movements. As a form of expression, the production of literature is intrinsically linked to the process of claiming agency and becomes in itself a form of political and personal resistance. In our popular culture, we see music occupying a privileged role not only as self-expression, but also as a form of political activism especially during times of conflict. Music expresses the injustice of our times, our grief, our anger and indignation, and celebrates the self even if that "self" is deemed unworthy of basic human rights.
For this blog post, view/listen to some samples of politicized music from the last 50 or so years and then reflect on what you have seen and heard. In a 2-3 paragraph response, address the following questions: How do these artists use music as forms of political activism? Do you think music is an effective tool to express dissent and enact resistance? Why or why not? This post is due Thursday, May 15th by 5:00 pm.
Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changin'"
Gil Scott-Heron's "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"
Rage Against the Machine's "Killing in the Name"
M.I.A.'s "Born Free" (Note: This video contains graphic imagery and violence. Skip this video if you don't wish to see such images.)
Killer Mike's "Reagan"
James Brown's "I'm Black and I'm Proud"
Lauryn Hill's "That Thing"
The Beatles's "Black Bird"
Bob Marley's "Redemption Song"
Music is a form of expression and when used in the context of social and political concerns, it can act as a subtle form of political activism. Music is easily spread, it is enjoyable, and it has the power to move people. All these characteristics make music an effective tool to express dissent and show resistance. These artists use music as a form of political activism through their lyrics and the music video's that accompany the sounds.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the problem emerges when certain lyrics are too subtle or broad. For example, Blackbird by The Beatles is one of my favorite songs because I love the message and believe that I can apply the lyrics to my life personally. After doing a bit of digging I realize that Paul McCartney meant for blackbird to be a symbol for African-American's in the South that were trying to gain their freedom and fight racism. When the message is very vague, I don't think that it is effective in making people aware of certain issues.
On a completely different note is the song "Reagan" by Killer Mike, which is an explicit song that shows strong resistance against the U.S. government and the underlying powers of Reaganomics. It's directness of the lyrics and illustrations was very educational in that I knew exactly what the musician believed and why. However, with such strongly anti-governmental lyrics, it might be a lot easier to censor songs like "Reagan" as opposed to "Blackbird". Killer Mike even states that "If I say anymore, they might be at my door". It is important to note the time differences in which these two video's were made and what was acceptable to express at these times.
Music in many ways is not as infringed on as public protests or other forms of activism. Because of this, music can play an important part in political activism. Artists like Lauryn Hill or M.I.A utilize music and their popularity to showcase the problems that occur in society and express themselves in a unique way. Having a popular fan base allows for many people to be aware of political opposition and use music as a way to express it as well.
ReplyDeleteI believe that music is a very effective tool for expression of resistance. Music is known to be universal, where some songs gain popularity all over the world and therefore can impact a larger crowd. Additionally, because there are so many different genres, there are many different crowds that music can reach and make an impact on. Where some songs apply to certain instances of resistance, I believe that some songs can apply to more than one event of resistance, and therefore makes it a more effective tool.
Where protest and rallies are forms of resistance that are tangible and physical, resistance through music is far more abstract and ideological. Perhaps the biggest reason for its abstractness is the fact that while most of these songs have been inspired by events that have actually transpired in the course of history, their content is very vague and can be applied to pretty much any sort of rebellion. For example, M.I.As song "Born Free" is inspired by the killing of Sri Lankan Tamil males by the Sri Lankan army. The lyrics to the song, however, is about freedom in its fundamental form. The lyrics talk about being true to oneself and not bowing down to anyone. Thus although their content is powerful and moving, music isn't as effective a catalyst of revolution as active protest.
ReplyDeleteThat being said however, the power of music to move and inspire people to think and act differently comes from the fact that the interpretation of music is deeply personal. A song that moves me to tears may not necessarily have the same effect on someone else. While this factor definitely contributes to the fact that music is not efficient in getting people to take up arms against authoritarian governments or people in power, it also is what gives it the kind of reach that perhaps no other form of rebellion has. Music also does not have an expiry date. Songs like The Beatles "Black Bird" may have been written decades ago, but can still inspire and touch people today.
At the end of the day, music is powerful. While it may not topple governments or take down dictators, these songs have often become anthems for large movements and the artists, icons for their generations. It can empower and free individuals in an inexplicably personal way. In the words of Bob Marley "Better to die fighting for freedom then be a prisoner all the days of your life."
Music aritsts, especially in the last 50 years or so have been able to express themselves and changing views of society through their music. Since music is very popular, especially amongst youth, there is no doubt that messages can get across through music. As a popular form of expression, music has been used to portray feelings, opinions, enact activism, and much more. These artists use lyrics, catchy tunes, and visual music videos to get their ideas out to audiences. That's why successful advertisers get their products sold or get you on their side; they get a jingle or poem stuck in your head and then you remember their cause.
ReplyDeleteMusic appeals very highly to human emotion which controls the choices people make. Strong, powerful ideas portrayed in songs like these, help me to understand why people hide them in songs, not explain them straight forward. For example, in the song "Blackbird" by the Beatles, Paul McCartney uses a soft tune and the symbol, a blackbird, to portray the civil rights struggle for blacks in the US. Written and recorded in the 1960s, segregation was still a big part of society and McCartney wanted to help out colored people that were strugglin, but had to do it in a subtle way as to not get harassed for his views. The use of music to portray his view allowed a more subtle approach to his problem, as he was coding his ideas within lyrics.
These artists use music to point out the disparities within society like in Gil Scott-Heron’s Black Power anthem, “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”. In Scott-Heron’s song he comments on the racial tension in the USA. The song title was based on a popular Black Power slogan. Scott-Heron comments on this social tension by alluding to popular advertisements and television shows to contrast the struggles of the African American community to be heard and seen. A part of the lyrics are “Women will not care if Dick finally goes down with/ Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people/Will be in the street looking for a brighter day/ the revolution will not be televised”. The phrase “the revolution will not be televised” is repeated throughout the song because the Black Power movement was popularized not by mass media, but by the people themselves. The people powered the movement for “a brighter day”. The revolution will not be televised because it is unpredictable, and will be seen throughout the society rather than just on television. Scott-Heron refers to a television shows throughout the song, which implies that television is a source of advertisement and entertainment. The revolution will be empowering the people with action, rather then them watching it on television.
ReplyDeleteThe Beatles’ “Blackbird” is another statement about the racial equality battle within the USA. It was inspired with the idea that African American people in the USA, but especially in the South would be able to enjoy equality in 1968. This uplifting song recognizes the struggle of the African American people to be seen as equal, and how they have been “waiting for this moment to arrive”. Music has the ability to touch many people, but only if the song becomes popular. In the case of “Blackbird”, it was heard by mass of people because the Beatles were/are so popular. Yet the message of the song can be lost because unlike Scott-Heron’s “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” there is no specific mention of the African American people. It is only through interviews and articles that one finds the inspiration of the song. Music can introduce issues and show artists’ opinions, but again it is limited to the people who listen to their music, and if the inspiration for the song is told to the masses. It is a good medium to introduce issues, but once again it can only fuel a movement if it attracts a large amount of people.
These artists use music to point out the disparities within society like in Gil Scott-Heron’s Black Power anthem, “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”. In Scott-Heron’s song he comments on the racial tension in the USA. The song title was based on a popular Black Power slogan. Scott-Heron comments on this social tension by alluding to popular advertisements and television shows to contrast the struggles of the African American community to be heard and seen. A part of the lyrics are “Women will not care if Dick finally goes down with/ Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people/Will be in the street looking for a brighter day/ the revolution will not be televised”. The phrase “the revolution will not be televised” is repeated throughout the song because the Black Power movement was popularized not by mass media, but by the people themselves. The people powered the movement for “a brighter day”. The revolution will not be televised because it is unpredictable, and will be seen throughout the society rather than just on television. Scott-Heron refers to a television shows throughout the song, which implies that television is a source of advertisement and entertainment. The revolution will be empowering the people with action, rather then them watching it on television.
DeleteThe Beatles’ “Blackbird” is another statement about the racial equality battle within the USA. It was inspired with the idea that African American people in the USA, but especially in the South would be able to enjoy equality in 1968. This uplifting song recognizes the struggle of the African American people to be seen as equal, and how they have been “waiting for this moment to arrive”.
Music has the ability to touch many people, but only if the song becomes popular. In the case of “Blackbird”, it was heard by mass of people because the Beatles were/are so popular. Yet the message of the song can be lost because unlike Scott-Heron’s “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” there is no specific mention of the African American people. It is only through interviews and articles that one finds the inspiration of the song. Music can introduce issues and show artists’ opinions, but again it is limited to the people who listen to their music, and if the inspiration for the song is told to the masses. It is a good medium to introduce issues, but once again it can only fuel a movement if it attracts a large amount of people.
*Sorry my original post was not spaced out correctly.
As a form of art, music can inspire, express, and convey strong messages to those listening. However, music has specifically ingrained itself within world cultures as one of the most prominent inhibitors of widespread change. Music is something universal that brings people of different backgrounds and nationalities together. Regardless of language barriers, sheet music is a global form of expression that everyone can understand. Simple use of minor notes can convey a sense of melancholy vibrations that can bring serious attention to the song's attention and works just as effectively as thrashing visceral, distorted power chords in loud aggression to incite uprising. Music is so evoking of the senses when utilized to this agenda and the message or motive can be even more powerful if the music is performed by a well known artist. This makes music one of the most effective tools to express dissent or enact resistance.
ReplyDeleteThis is also how the aforementioned artists in the blog post used music to their advantage. In the 21st century it's more apparent than ever that pop culture practically constructs society. Movies, music, and other works of entertainment from the influx of the internet mold trends and popular opinions constantly. Artists like Rage Against the Machine, mentioned above, recognize their prestige in the entertainment world and wrote the song "Killing in the Name of" to highlight their perceived atrocities of military exploits in the United States. On the surface it seems like a typical expressive of rebellious angst over an attention grabbing riff, but they were more subtle in its lyrical composition of accusing organized racism within United States military and police enforcement. Just like many other artists noted in the blog, Rage Against the Machine evoke the strongest sense of emotion with their signature style and work to initially grab attention from a mass audience in attempts that their message may be analyzed in time by the largest pool possible. Such messages are likely to move at least one person with enough passion to incite action in accordance with the artist's philosophy.