|
RB:
I suppose that all art and all music is political regardless of its
specific content because it’s produced either in a capitalist
society or is funded or supported by a particular class or market
or whatever. So you can't escape politics from that particular point
of view regardless of whether you feel you have a direct political
comment or voice. Also, a song can become political or politicized
through its appropriation by a specific movement or in dealing with
a specific context. Jaques
Atali who wrote a book called "Noise, the Political Economy of
Music" said something interesting "music is a herald for
changes inscribed in noise faster than it transforms society. Listening
to music is listening to all noise, realising that its appropriation
and control is a reflection of power that is essentially political”.
I think music can be a source for political change and transformation
and how the definitions of music can be challenged and what constitutes
music is actually maybe more political than a political song. To challenge
what constitutes music in our culture can be equally as political
as writing a protest song in a traditional folk genre. BH:
Do you think that political songs actually have an impact on people,
in shaping their political consciousness or they just reaffirm existing
values and views? RB:
I definitely think that songs that appeal to a broad sentiment for
change for example Lennon's songs - "Give Peace a Chance"
or "Power to the People" - simplistic, sloganistic songs
that are actually heartfelt emotions that can be chanted in any context,
definitely create an atmosphere where change or the potential for
change becomes realisable and therefore gives spirit to a movement.
I think all protest movements or all political forces for change need
to have an old fashioned thing called morale and an idea that an ideal
can be realised or else what's the point of getting involved in social
action. There were other artists in Britain like Billy Bragg, who
was very important and influential and especially throughout the Thatcher
government and the miners strike. He articulated in song some very
important criticisms of government policy in an ironic way. BH:
I can think of some examples of songs that changed people's behaviour
in some way, like for example The Smiths "Meat is Murder"
or Minor Threat's "Straight Edge". Do you think that these
kind of changes are just a part of forming an identity along with
a pop group or examples that that songs can succeed in inspiring some
small changes? RB:
They can be effective in single issue based politics or affecting
lifestyle changes particularly I suppose if you are an adolescent
and you're trying to assert difference, pop music is a conventional
way that people do that. It's also where you assert your economic
difference because you're buying a particular commodity which situates
you either differently from your schoolfriends or your parents and
that can come down to choices of vegetarianism or other things I suppose.
Personally I wouldn't proselytize against either alcohol, drugs, sex
or meat but then that's just where me and Morrissey differ. If you're
in that position yourself, the choice is either silence and acquiescence
with power or interruption and resistance and you're always going
to open yourself up to those charges of egotism if you do speak up
in those circumstances. BH:
Looking at some other strategies, some bands like The Clash, even
with singles high in the music charts, always refused to play on ‘Top
of the Pops’. Their absence implied a rejection of establishment
pop culture that I could relate to but as a big fan, I remember that
I would still have loved to have seen them appear in amongst the vacuousness
of the other acts. RB:
It's an old one, I don't think Lennon ever played 'Top of the Pops'.
I think there's a certain nobility in that tradition, a kind of purist
antagonistic position to blatant consumerism and the commecialisation
of creativity in mainstream capitalist culture. That obviously that
takes place, but at the same time, the retreat from that space, which
is actually a communicative space in that it has a market in every
living room in the land, to not take that stage, is problematic as
well. It's a question of whether you attack from the outside or whether
you attack from the inside. I
suppose the KLF would be a primary example of a group who tried to
implode the music industry from the inside, at the same time as making
a lot of money, but when they entered into the art world as the K-Foundation,
they tried to attack it from the outside and both strategies were
equally futile but at the same time, it was very entertaining watching
them do it. It was like this feedback system where it showed the system
to itself but to the viewers and the audience at the same time. I
think the real thing is about audience because when we're talking
about buying a guitar or whatever instrument or buying a sampler or
couple of decks, it moves you from a notion of an audience and consumer
to a producer of your own culture, and that means finding your voice
and articulating your voice. Even if you emulate another voice, I
think that's fine, it's about production of your culture rather than
consumption of it. Any means or mode or mechanism which enables or
acts as a catalyst towards that is the first step towards transforming
society. If you can transform the culture around you, then you can
transform the society around you. BH:
What do you think about the role of the traditional protest song in
relation to contemporary pop music? RB:
Well, I suppose first of all we have to acknowledge that protest songs
are popular music. If they weren't popular, then they wouldn't be
effective as protest songs. That then introduces a dialectic between
the protest song as opposition and the protest song as commodity for
consumption in a market, so if a protest song is on the one hand antagonistic
towards capitalism, say something like Billy Bragg or John Lennon
or a whole host of writers of protest songs or bands like say Chumbawumba
in Britain or Public Enemy who are antagonistic towards a particular
cultural condition, we can't escape that on the other hand, they are
commodities with a market, so they are popular music. However,
the singing of protest songs collectively on the street in a march,
is a shared experience that stands outside of the notion of commodity
and maintains an antagonistic relationship to the market. Some of
these have songs have their roots in folk music traditions, something
which is actually quite conservative, but has subversive potentials.
This idea of a collectively sung folk song actually stands outside
the apparatus of capitalism. It's real relationship is not to the
commodity but to exchange and to a legacy, something that's freely
exchanged. It appeals to the logic of the gift and that I think is
a potential source for change. |