These Real Country Girls Haven't Gone Gaga
Thank God for the real women of country music, like Miranda Lambert, Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood. That's what I'm thinking now after having just read this story in the New York Times about how "Everywhere you look, pop has gone Gaga." It concludes that there's a new feminism in pop music and how freeing the expansion of music liberation has been. But what it's really about is how unrealistic stars like Lady Gaga and Madonna really are. It's about Katy Perry's cupcake boobs in her "California Gurls" video. And how Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera were all about their ostentatious image early in their careers. But to me, the unwritten story here is how real country music is.
Yes, pop-loving feminists, there are a few elaborate video costumes here and there, but never the freak show that goes on in the pop world. The music, both live and recorded, has always felt steeped in reality somehow. And any crazy stage antics are completely unnecessary. I mean, could you even imagine someone as authentic as Martina McBride on a trapeze? Sara Evans in a wig? Or even Faith Hill in a cupcake bra?
The story goes on to say that Lady Gaga has almost removed the music altogether and that "her songs are perfectly blank, mere skeletons to drape herself around." It would be a very, very sad day if that kind of artist ever made it to the top of the country music charts.
Photo credit: Rick Diamond, Getty Images
(BMI Awards 2009)
©2008 Country Music Television, Inc., a Viacom company. A division of
Jake says:
You make ‘feminist’ sound like it’s a bad thing to be?
Tim says:
Since when is wearing a wig a “freak show”? If it is, I guess Taylor Swift’s You Belong With Me is a freak show since she wore a wig in that video. I guess Martina’s Safe in the Arms of Love video is a freak show since it contains a freak show act.
Tim says:
That last comment should say “trapeze act” at the end instead of “freak show act”.
ALexis says:
Both Carrie and Taylor are not even real country. Whats the difference between the video of “Cowboy Casanova” and a Britney/lady gaga music video? In fact there is no different between Carrie and pop stars. People might turn a blind eye to what Carrie wore at the ACM award but I won’t. The only true country artist is Miranda.
ALexis says:
Why do Carrie fans hate on Taylor Swift. They are both guilty of the same crime. They are both country pop. There is nothing country about “Undo it”
Davis says:
“Taylor Swift is not country. Anyone who thinks she is country must be dumb enough to believe that Obama was born in Kenya. Kanye interupting her was a career defining moment for her. Its why she won all those awards; CMAs Grammys etc.”
Taylor was winning boatloads of awards BEFORE the Kanye incident. In case your memory is faulty, Kanye interrupted Taylor while she was (brace yourself) WINNING AN AWARD. Your post is full of fail.
rosyz says:
There are lots of younger adults and younger kids who really love Lady Gaga’s style and music and the newest single of Katy Perry including my kids. They are looking forward to her new album. Like my daughter said you can’t help it but like and listen because it’s everywhere. I am not a fan of their music but I am a huge Carrie fan.
There is a big difference between Carrie and Lady Gaga and Britney. They are surely different persons, values, talent and different style and delivery of entertainment. Carrie is a pure flawless vocalist that truly separates her from them.
You crtiticized Carrie’s pink outfit at the acm because she is showing some cleavage. There is nothing disgusting about it compared to Lady Gaga’s outfit who is showing more body parts or Katy Perry new album cover posing nude. You sound hypocrite Alexis. You are barking at the wrong person. You’re opinions are clearly biased and you know it. So just leave Carrie alone. You dont like her so be it.
ALexis says:
Am not criticizing her pink outfit, am talking about what she wore during her opening performance, the outfit she wore when she performed with Miranda. I don’t have a short memory to forget that horrendous outfit. Carrie is a pure flawless vocalist as Christina Aguilera but that does not excuse her trashy look. I knew Carrie a long time ago, and she never dress like that but now she is competing with her felloe counterparts aka Christina A
rosyz says:
I dont think she looks trashy at all just because she wore short skirt and showing some legs. She wore short short at the cma fest too but it does not look trashy at all. She does wear some sexy clothes and in an elegant way. She is still the same down to earth nice girl next door. She has grown so much in every way and in a positive way. She is a good role model.
I dont think Carrie is competing with anybody out there. She wears clothes that she is comfortable with. There is no trashy at all about Carrie Underwood. But then that is your opinion. But I and millions of her fans think she is a wonderful and classy person and we are proud of her. She just scored her 13th No.1 hit of Undo It. Way to go Carie.
We support you all the way.
Robin says:
yawn
J.J. says:
Hey Redmaz! Are you lurking? Come out and play. I mean here’s your bully pulpit. The classroom’s almost full. They may be reluctant students but hey - beggars can’t be choosers.
NicoNYC says:
I totally agreed. Pop music now is just pure trash wrap in a whole bunch of costumes and theatrics. Pop artists always have been more free to experiments with looks on concerts and music videos but now it seems that people are more interested on the crazy outfit and theatrics than the singing or quality of the song. I hope that in a short period, all the theatrics stay on Broadway and good singing start playing again.
Sonya says:
Dolly Parton wears wigs,has fake boobs and wears a ton of clown makeup..I wouldn’t consider her a freak anymore than I would GaGa. Different strokes.
Julie4726 says:
There is nothing country about Undo It and Cowboy Casanova, I agree that it’s like a Britney production.
chris says:
Let’s be clear about all of this, shall we? Carrie-started off country, but now is slowly moving towards pop…..i like her music, however, that’s not considered “country”. Taylor, first of all, yes she was winning awards before and now not so much. However, if people watched the ACM’s and CMA’s last year-she did not deserve the CMA “Female Vocalist of the Year” award. Key word meaning, “vocalist”. Especially if she was up against Reba and Martina-that’s a crime. I know from watching and speaking to others that the CMA heard alot of backlash on that.
As for Dolly-she’s a treasure. She is not just looks-there is something more to her. Lady gaga came on to the scene (kind of like Taylor) and expects to be showered with all this attention?
Personally, the best artists came from country music in the 90’s. You had the most amazing songs, unlike today.
Give me Reba and George Strait anyday over alot of today’s artists-music has gone to hell!
Redmaz says:
Hi JJ, I have no idea who you are, but if you’re taking the time to address me personally, you must be paying attention to me, and I appreciate that, but it may be more important to address the blog topic at hand instead of focusing on me. For example….
To Chris, you seemed to be a bit confused as to what Pop Music is. Pop Music is NOT an individual genre of music. Pop consists of MANY genres of music including Country. You personal opinion/preference may be you like Strait and Reba, but they are just as much part of Pop as Underwood and Swift. Pop Country. As always…if you can prove to and show me where they’ve been recognized in Americana/Roots music, I’ll gladly retract my statement and make a full apology. As far as the Pop awards you speak of (ACM, CMA), by definition the people who won these awards deserved them. They received the most airplay, record sales, concert ticket sales revenue, etc.
Robin says:
Redmaz is actually the most interesting part of this blog. I must be getting old.
By the way Chris, Reba and George are from the 80’s not the 90’s (Reba even the 70’s).
And, Chris, most critics of commerial country musics direction, directly blames the artists of the 90’s.
As for me, I like all types of country music (most sub-genres) whether it be played in the pop country industry or the Americana/roots “industry”.
By the way Redmaz, that too is an industry wether you like it or not. It’s just not the most “popular” of country music’s industries. It too is made up of radio stations, record labels, charts, artists trying to make money, like any other industry. They just have realistic expectations.
Redmaz says:
The walking POP contradiction is now telling me what Americana/Roots music is. How ’bout that?
Kate says:
Lady Gaga came onto the scene along time ago..just not as lady Gaga..she is an accomplished pianist and musician and can actually sing..however nobody noticed her ..so she came back as Lady GAGA and voila you have a hit…
It’s the entertainment businesss people..the clothes the makeup it’s all part of the tools of the business…
bella says:
taylor swift and carrie underwood sing “country/contemporary music”, they AREN’T “traditional” country and i think for the most part everyone agrees on that, I’m kind of tired of hearing people bring up how country music is lost, i don’t think it’s lost, it’s just evolving because every generation evolves. i am a loyal carrie fan since back in the day of her American Idol Debut,but truth be told, carrie doesn’t sing classic country, that’s obviously a given, so why must people always bring that up,we country/pop fans understand and we get it, but we LOVE this music, so people who HATE it should at least respect the choices of others, because our styles are all different. this is the “YOUNG” country of this generation, theres a lot of people who love this type of country/pop music and they wouldnt have never thought of loving country music if it weren’t for girls like carrie, taylor and so forth, i know this because i am one of the large mass of fans out there who loves these artists and without them i would have never converted to country music because of acts like carrie,taylor and miranda, lady antebellum,oh of course the lady who started it all “shania twain”, she definitely broke barriers and rocked the boat for country pop to be what it is today. i know that merle haggard,george straight,eddie arnold,trace atkins,tammy wynnette,barbara mandrell, dolly parton, and the list goes on…are not my cup of tea but i do not need to put them down because by me putting them down im putting their fans down. the classic country artists have so respect for what they have done and they are legends and they have opened so many doors for the country and for the country women of today, and they definitely are some of the most talented people, however i cant listen to that kind of music traditional country has never appealed to me i’ve always found it to folky to honky tonk and at times depressing..many people feel this way..it just wasn’t our time different era and the younger country artists are more relatable to us fans now then dolly parton was then.im grateful for COUNTRY ARTISTS OF TODAY because they are bringing in more fans, country music is more acknowledged now as being cool, and it’s just good music with great and inspirational stories carrie,taylor, will be icons one day just like martina,shania,faith these women in my opinion are phenominal…as for lady gaga that isn’t music i dont know what that is and im a pop fan!!, she is very talented,creative and unique i’ll give her that but she’s kind a over the top with her outfits her make-up and her songs, to me that is just too much….people who have been true and amazing pop artists and who have stayed true to themselves without going gaga would be, “pink, and alicia keys”, there the same when they started in the 90’s …even beyonce has gone gaga on her telephone video…and christina aguilera ok dont get me started on her shes very gaga now…..and its a shame because she has one of the most amazing voices but i cant listen to her anymore….you gotta a point allison country artist of this generation is the only honest music.
Robin says:
Actually traditional country is in Carrie’s wheelhouse. See “Stand By Your Man” and “I Told You So”.
Bonnie says:
Everyone just stop arguing! Country music is a huge umbrella with lots of room for everything. Pick what you like and SHUT THE HELL UP!
Alternative country
Cowpunk (this is also considered a sub-genre of Rock music)
Blues country (this is also considered a sub-genre of Blues)
Deathcountry
Gothic Americana
Hellbilly music
Hokum (this is also considered a sub-genre of Blues)
Outlaw country
Progressive country
Psychobilly/Punkabilly (this is also considered a sub-genre of Rock music)
Psydeco
Rap country
Red Dirt
Rockabilly (this is also considered a sub-genre of Rock music)
Rock country/Cosmic American music (this is also considered a sub-genre of Rock music)
Soul country (this is also considered a sub-genre of Soul)
Techno-Country (a Eurodance country style, popularized by the Rednex)
Texas Country
Americana
Australian country music
Bakersfield sound
Bluegrass
Heavy Metal Bluegrass
Neo-Traditional Bluegrass
Nu-grass
Old-time bluegrass/Appalachian bluegrass
Progressive bluegrass
Reactionary bluegrass
Cajun
Christian country music
Classic country
Close harmony
Cowboy/Western music
Dansband music
Franco-country
Gulf and western
Honky Tonk
Instrumental country
Lubbock Sound
Nashville Sound/Countrypolitan
Neotraditional Country
New country
Pop country/Cosmopolitan country
Sertanejo
Traditional Country music
Truck-driving country
Western swing
Redmaz says:
Thanks for the support Bonnie I with you all the way…
Steven says:
Everyone named in this blog is pop music! You make no sense Alison
concerned says:
If Carrie Underwood is “real country” what the heck do you call Pasty Cline, Dolly Parton, Loretta Lynn, etc.??? What a dumb article. Go get an education or at least learn a LITTLE about country music before you start writing about it.
Robin says:
concerned - you ever hear “Islands In the Stream”, it’s more “new”/”contemporary” country than 80% of Carrie Underwoods music. By the way, so is “Crazy”.
Holly says:
Alison works for CMT. She doesn’t have to know about music.
Rita says:
Not sure why everyone went crazy on this post. I like the way our singing country women dress. I don’t like the way Lady Gaga dresses but then again, I don’t listen to her music either. I listen to a wide variety of country singers and watch lots of country videos. I don’t have a problem with any of them or the way they dress. I have a great time watching the award shows and seeing what everyone wears. I don’t think any of the women in country look trashy. They strive to look there best but they are entertainers. I don’t think they do there a lot of there own shopping for most of what they wear on videos, award shows or most concerts. I am so glad there are such fantastic singers such as Carrie, Reba, Martina and the list keeps going, and there ever changing wardrobes.
Carrie and Miranda! says:
I like Carrie and Miranda…. not Taylor! She isn’t even country! I also love Kellie Pickler! Carrie is my favorite.
Bonnie says:
In response to the statement “Not sure why everyone went crazy on this post” my opinion is this: These “fans” can’t seem to dig themselves out of the high school mentality. To manage an adult outlook on all this is beyond their juvenile scope. It’s too hard for them to simply enjoy the music they support and leave the rest alone. And when a “true” subject comes up for debate, all they can manage is name calling and personal attacks on some of these artists. If you go check out past blogs or articles, the ones that get attention are the ones where one of these pea brains can lash out at an artist in the name of “not country enough”. I’ve stated this before in an earlier comment from a different blog; CMT mostly supports mainstream “country” music. I for one enjoy what is termed as today’s mainstream. If they decide to call it something else next week, next month…next year, I’ll still enjoy it. So all these nasty little remarks about trashy clothing or whatever is just a smoke screen to hide disappointment that “their” favorite artist isn’t getting enough attention, enough radio airplay, enough record sales or enough award nominations/wins. They can’t change it so they lash out in the only way a juvenile mind can do. It’s a pitiful way to act, but that’s the reality.
I posted a long list of the different types of country music before. I wanted to make it easy for those of you that can’t seem to find music that is “country” enough. Well, look over the list and find where the music you like fits in. Then search out sites that support that kind of music and stop ranting about things you cannot change.
lifetime says:
Taylor and Miranda are so awesome and love the country sound of them both!!!Want Faith and Shania to come back and maybe do a cd together….that would be great!!! I would like a duet of love songs from Tim and Faith some time soon too…Love there country sound too!!!!
Shadow says:
LOL!!! Get used to it Bonnie. It’s been like this here, for as long as I can remember.
By the way, great list! You got some of my favorites there.
Redmaz says:
Bonnie…a rare breed. An actual Mainstreamer who knows there is more to todays Country Music than just Pop Country. It had seemed up to this point that according to most Mainstreamers, “Rooters”(is that what they call us) were the only ones who knew about ALL of todays Country Music scene. Bonnie has proven them wrong.
Carrie No.1 fan says:
lifetime, Taylor is horrible!
Robin says:
Bonnie - while I personally don’t think there’s anything wrong with the way the women in the pop country industry dress, it isn’t always the case that people who think so just are mad that their favorite isn’t this that or the other. MOST of the time it is, but it’s not always the case.
I don’t like the pop (all genre) scene. I don’t like that 90% of them are trashy. I don’t like the music either. But, it’s more than that. I don’t like THEM. It doesn’t matter what other artists are doing.
Some of these people don’t like the way Carrie or Taylor dress. I haven’t seen them dress horribly ever. But, some people don’t like short shorts. They like the more conservative dress in entertainers because that’s the world they want to support. You cannot make such a blanket statement. People have different agenda’s.
Redmaz’s agenda seems to be that if you talk about mainstream country music, you don’t know anything else exists. His agenda whether conscious or not, is to try to make maintream country music listeners stop trying to affect what’s in the mainstream country music scene. The internet age has changed things and now people can affect something by more than just what they purchase. They have a voice and can actually state what they mean.
I listen to mainstream country music and the 90% of country music that’s not in the mainstream. When I speak of country music here (on a mainstream country music website owned by an even more mainstream cable network), my attempt is to participate in the mainstream country music scene. It’s that simple. It’s not hard. It’s not about ALL country music. It’s about where you are at and what you are talking about. Knowing your audience is a great thing.
Redmaz says:
First the walking POP contradiction is telling ME what Americana Music is, now she’s telling someone else what my agenda is. Keep digging yourself in deeper miss blue grass.
Linda says:
Well, the whole cupcake bra thing (that video was so slutty) and Lady Gaga, Christina Aguilera, etc. is totally a pop image. That’s what mainstream pop music is about. The hits are hits because they’re catchy, and that’s most important. Just like the country image has always been more dignified and serious. It’s just a different culture. And rock music has their own look, heavy metal, opera, etc.
Robin says:
Redmaz - you don’t have to “know” your agenda to have one. Your words are attempting to solicit a specific response and thus your agenda created.
It’s all simple. You want to make it hard. Go ahead. But this is real easy stuff.
I just happen to know where I’m at on the web. If for some reason you believe you are where ALL country music is the central theme, then your problem glares you in the face.
By the way, while pop may be an industry (an industry which is divided by genre whether you like that or not as well) it also refers to the all-genre hodge podge that doesn’t fit nicely in “other” genres and has for many many years.
Robin says:
And, Redmaz, I’VE listened to roots music as long as I’ve been around. Never needed YOU to “tell me”, “show me” or whatever it is you think you’re doing anything. But, I do have the common sense to know where to find it. This and other mainstream blogs are not it.
You see Allison’s name, then it’s mainstream. I’ve never seen her have a serious blog about roots music.
Redmaz says:
More doubletalk. You been busted lady
Bonnie says:
Robin said: “Bonnie - while I personally don’t think there’s anything wrong with the way the women in the pop country industry dress, it isn’t always the case that people who think so just are mad that their favorite isn’t this that or the other. MOST of the time it is, but it’s not always the case”.
I only mentioned the “dress” thing because it was a current “discussion” here, therefore more relatable. As I stated clearly in the post you responded to (and I’ll paraphrase) many people who frequent these blogs continually fight each other over childish subject matter. These “fans” I speak of behave in an adolescent fashion. It’s a never ending struggle of who is more popular, who sings the best, who has the most #1’s, etc. Nowhere in my comments did I say that this was an “always” occurrence and nowhere did I use the “dress” thing exclusively. My statement wasn’t a blanket one meant to encompass every single fan that posts on these blogs. At any rate, the artist’s music is what interests me, not their manner of dress. If people enjoy discussing fashion, that’s fine. As I said, it’s of little importance to me.
Shadow says:
Hey Red, just so you know, miss bluegrass also answers to “opinion” expert. Which I see they’re busy with displaying one more time, while ignoring the obvious.
Robin’s back to calling this a mainstream website. I guess someone should tell that to Craig Shelburne and some others, so they stops writing blogs for on here. With recent blogs on Griffin House, Ana Egge’s, Alison Krauss, the Avett Brothers, various bluegrass artists and Pickathon 2010, I guess they don’t know their audience either. Heck, I even saw Del McCoury’s name today on the sites home webpage.
Keep em coming though, Robin. Your comments are always good for a laugh. Liked your one about Alison and roots music. I’ve never taken her seriously when she talks about roots, either.
Bonnie says:
Shadow – If you don’t mind, I’d like to speak to one of your comments to Robin. You seem to have taken exception to the assertion that the CMT website is a mainstream country music site. While it is not wholly mainstream, it does seem to cater to the typical mainstreamer. I use as an example the blog entries here. It appears that 8 or more blogs out of 10 (or 41 out of 50 by my count) are addressing mainstream country music subject matter. This fact leads me to the conclusion it isn’t such a far stretch to refer to CMT.com as a mainstream website. And Robin is correct in that MTV owns CMT. That speaks for itself.
Shadow says:
Of course I don’t mind Bonnie. After all, this IS a discussion site. The thing I take exception to, is Robin twisting it around to make a point. Yes, this blog site, it’s website, and its owner, all cater to mainstream. That’s obvious. But, as you have even pointed out, it’s not wholly mainstream. Roots artists are talked about here on this blog-site, the website lists AND supports many roots artists, as well as artists in other genres other than country. Only Robin knows if they were referring to CMT or MTV as the owner when they made that comment, but either way, CMT supports to some degree, roots music, so that would mean MTV allows them to.
You can come to any conclusion you want, but as long as I read, see, and hear roots artists being presented here(look to your left on the blogroll, all kinds of sites that support roots artists even being advertised), I have to come to the conclusion that this is NOT solely a mainstream website. It’s not my only place to find articles about what’s happening in ALL of country music, but it is one of them. If the writers here can talk about any artist, any genre, as they see fit, I believe I should be able to, likewise.
So the tables are turned now. Since I see roots artists on this site, I guess I’m the stupid one, for not being able to see how this is strictly a mainstream website. Or maybe I’m just crazy, and THINK I see blogs written by Craig Shelburne, etc?
barb b says:
there is nothing country about taylor
now miranda on the other hand is
country
TG says:
“Thank God for the real women of country music, like Miranda Lambert, Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood”. LOL!! I couldn’t read the rest of the article after that first sentence from laughing so much!
TG says:
Robin is a long time fan of roots music? That’s funny.I’m pretty sure this is the same Robin I asked to name 3 songs by Patty Griffin,Steve Earl and Jonh Prine without hitting google up and she couldn’t do it.(in a blog about Miranda Lambert)
Seeing this blog is about real women of country music here’s 3 more names for ya-
Sunny Sweeney
Heather Myles
Kelly Willis
Oh and I broke down and read the rest of the article -”I mean, could you even imagine someone as authentic as Martina McBride on a trapeze”? After seeing Martina flying around on a moon on stage and seeing her be Kid Rock’s background singer and dancer,yes I could imagine her jumping around on a trapeze.Martina flying around on a moon,Carrie flying around in a pick-up truck and Swift has a huge theatrical production..All the above is VERY Lady GaGa’ish…And leave Katy Perry’s cup cakes out of it!
D Trotter says:
I will never understand why some of you feel it is so essential to label everything. It’s all music. Enjoy it or don’t enjoy it, but categorizing it doesn’t make it any better.
I’m sure some would classify Keith Urban as “mainstream”, and blues guitarist-supreme John Mayer as “not country at all”, but their guitar virtuosity on CROSSROADS was extraordinary. You think Buddy Miller would dismiss that kind of playing just because they don’t fall under some Americana label?
Redmaz says:
Your personal preference or opinion will not change basic music fundamentals or genre description. From my observations most people(mainly mainstreamers) have a hard time with this. Now more than ever basic music fundamentals are essential, because there is such a wide variety of music out there. It shows a knowledge of music that most people don’t have. I know that Urban is a good guitar player, but I can’t stand his Pop Music. That doesn’t take away his talent on guitar. Actually it holds him back. From what I’ve heard when checking out his music, He doesn’t cut loose on guitar on his studio Pop singles. Also just because I support, promote, and defend Americana music, doesn’t mean I like it all. Far from it. Of all the Americana Music I listen to…I personally like less than half I hear, but again…that’s my opinion. However I support the Americana Music organization and what it represents 100%.
Bonnie says:
Redmaz – I’d like to address your comments on Keith Urban and I’ll try to be objective although I’m a fan of his so objective is probably a stretch. I get where you’re coming from. Not until I saw him live did I realize the depth of his talent. But since his main focus seems to be staying on that pop/country (or whatever you want to call it) chart, it makes it almost impossible to really highlight his guitar skills on singles released to radio. As it is, his singles are hacked to death to fit the radio format. His talent is much better showcased on his albums. His repertoire is so extensive that many industry people call him the human jukebox because there isn’t a song, from any genre that he doesn’t know. So while you feel that his pop music holds him back, the people that have seen him in concert know that this is not the case. He is widely respected across the board by many, many musicians. His pop radio music doesn’t seem to have hurt him in that regard and the pop tunes are what keep him on that mainstream chart. Maybe it goes against your sensibilities and you feel he’s sold out in some way but if his music strictly showcased his guitar chops, he wouldn’t consistently be in the top 5 on the country radio charts. He likes making lots of money and being successful…sue him. But I understand your dislike for pop music. I was raised on Motown and east coast 50’s music then British invasion music in the 60’s so obviously I’m rooted in that. Its funny how people’s perception is so different and again, I think it largely has to do with what you grew up with. To me, I thought Alan Jackson was as country as you can get. Your extensive knowledge says otherwise. I would never argue your expertise on the subject for two reasons. One, I’d lose (lol) and two, I just listen to what I enjoy and that’s enough for me. That doesn’t make me lazy and it doesn’t make me stupid. It just means that there are other subjects that I’m passionate about and get more of my attention. But if I ever have questions about basic music fundamentals, I know who to come to.
Shadow says:
From D. Trotter: “I will never understand why some of you feel it is so essential to label everything. It’s all music. Enjoy it or don’t enjoy it, but categorizing it doesn’t make it any better.”
I don’t understand why anyone would even suggest that categorizing has anything to do with something being better, based on enjoyment. But I guess it would explain why many come on here complaining that Taylor Swift isn’t country, though (see above post from barb b). I guess they say that because they don’t like her music, and decide it isn’t country based on what they think country should be.
Personally, I think Swift is just as country as Hank Snow or the Carter Family. I say this, because I know the difference between the country of Snow and Swift, and it has nothing to do with one being better than the other. If people would understand that they are labeled different, there would be no room for complaint that Swift isn’t country.
Also I like labels, because it helps me find music to my liking. As Red pointed out, there is a wide variety of music out there. Since over 90% of the country available, is never played on commercial radio, I have to look elsewhere for the music that suits my taste better. When I find something new I like, it’s good to know what style of country it is, so I know where to look to find more of it. If I heard a Zedico country song for the first time for instance, liked it, but didn’t know what it was, how would I know where to find more, if someone didn’t put a label with it?
Can’t really help you, Trotter, if you can’t understand that. So we’ll just have to agree to disagree, and realize that some of us will continue to label, some will continue to call Swift not country, others will just continue to listen to what’s easily available to them, and others will absorb as much as possible. Hey look at me, now I’m labeling categories of country fans, as well. ;^)
D Trotter says:
Shadow,
At least you have a good reason for wanting labels — helping you to find other music like it. But the first time I heard Zydeco, courtesy of Clifton Chenier, I didn’t ask what kind of music it was. Instead, I asked, “WHO is this?”
I love all kinds of Cajun and New Orleans performers. Not just the obvious (Professor Longhair, Fats Domino, Dr. John, the Neville brothers) but more obscure entities like The Wild Tchoupitoulas as well. Ever hear of “Swamp Pop”, which (despite the scorned word “pop” in its name) evolved from an amalgam of several roots music? I like it — but I never would have paid it any attention w/o being lured by the songs and performers.
There’s Alt-Country bands I LIKE, and Alt-Country bands I DON’T LIKE. Frankly, none them are making music I never heard before; they’re just trying to combine old elements in unique ways. I don’t think the name Alt-Country is necessary at all.
And THAT’S why I have low regard for anyone who present an “elitist” attitude that ONLY their favorite music is “good” music, or that artists who happen to be popular are all pandering to banal commercialism and are devoid of artistic merit.
The best and most creative musicians listen to everything. The Beatles assimilated Elvis, Little Richard, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly, MoTown, The Everly Brothers, Show tunes, skiffle and folk, funneled it all through Liverpool
and then fed America’s young its own music with an English accent. The quintessential POP band, the Beatles never stopped assimilating, growing, and experimenting throughout their career.
Paul Simon, perhaps the most professional songwriter of the last 50 years, went to the roots music of Africa, South America and New Orleans to inspire some of his best work.
All that matters is whether the music — regardless of genre — has creative inspiration, is performed with honest feeling and passion, and connects to the listener. That’s what makes great Country Music, great Blues, great Folk music, great pop or great rock.
Shadow says:
Very nice. And after saying all that, I see you made yet another post elsewhere, giving all kinds of Swift stats.
If “All that matters is whether the music — regardless of genre — has creative inspiration, is performed with honest feeling and passion, and connects to the listener” as you just said, then why a need to keep reminding others how well she has done numbers wise?
Labels mean nothing to you, stats mean nothing to me. I’m not going to change what’s important to me, and I doubt if you’re going to change what’s important to you. With that, have a wonderful day. It’s been a pleasure discussing with you. I’m off to work now.
D Trotter says:
Shadow, I have no idea why you’re bringing up comments I make on totally unrelated posts.
In the one instance, I’m addressing someone’s statement that Swift’s current lack of airtime on some local radio station, countering that it hardly signals a significant decline in her overall popularity on the bigger landscape, using facts and “stats” to demonstrate. It’s always amusing how many people (I’m NOT talking about you)say Taylor stats don’t matter, but use any decrease in her numbers as an excuse to ring the death knell.
But you are mistaken if you think I like Swift because she’s popular, or because of her record-breaking numbers. I like her DESPITE the fact that she’s become a larger-than-life media phenom (cringe). All the things I listed — what really matters in any kind of music, despite the genre — I find in Taylor’s music. I heard them and became a fan when her first single wasn’t anything more than a blip on the country chart.
I’m not going to decide to DISLIKE Swift just because the media over-saturates the news with her and puts her into a situation where she has unbelievable pressure to achieve near-impossible standards. For example,there’s dozens of internet stories lately where music insiders are saying Taylor may become THE ONLY ONE to do what no one else — not U-2, not Jay-Z, not eminem — has come close to doing: Sell over 1 Million copies of her new album in the first week of its release.
Geez! She’s like 20, just moved into her own place, and now she’s supposed to save the music industry! Nice. And if she does it — girl is full of surprises — people will STILL bad-mouth her.
But none of this has anything to do with our discussion — incidentally, I thought your comments on Taylor were extremely fair, and I really didn’t mean to insult you in any way. I’m just weary of all the posts correcting terminology and/or implying that all “pop” is essentially driven by commercial avarice rather than creativity. But people like Bonnie, who have positive things to say about American or any musicians, are a joy, even if they value labels.
Shadow says:
Whoa Trotter! Back up the wagon. I brought up those comments for one reason and one reason only. You QUITE often bring up stats when talking about or defending Swift. I wanted to make a point that while you don’t see a need for labels or correct terminology, I see no need for stats. Popular and great don’t mean the same thing in my book. We all have our aversions. That is one of mine. I’m not sure why you thought you were insulting me, we’re just discussing our views.
The rest of your post is only your mind going into overdrive trying to defend your position for Swift. You need not do that with me. I support any one’s right to like what ever and whom ever they want. I’m not a Swift hater, nor will I ever be. I simply don’t listen to her music, because it doesn’t relate to me.
As far as you being weary of all the posts implying that pop is driven by commercialism instead of creativity, it’s part of the definition. No one here has made it up. To post a remark from another recent blog:
“According to Simon Frith (a specialist in popular music culture), pop music is produced “as a matter of enterprise not art”, is “designed to appeal to everyone” and “doesn’t come from any particular place or mark off any particular taste”. It is “not driven by any significant ambition except profit and commercial reward … and, in musical terms, it is essentially conservative”. It is, “provided from on high (by record companies, radio programmers and concert promoters) rather than being made from below … Pop is not a do-it-yourself music but is professionally produced and packaged.”
If you have a problem with that, take it up with Frith the pop specialist, not me. It’s not intended to be a cut down, dirty word, or insult. It’s a definition, and I accept it for what it is.
Me, I study music for its art, not its enterprise. Do I think all mainstream is devoid of any artistic merit? No, but I’m not going to listen to hours of radio music that I feel is, just to hear some that isn’t. Too many choices else where. Is all that I find elsewhere artistic or even likeable? No, but a much larger percentage is. And I feel I have as much right to say that here, as do you to post the comments that you make.
By the way, now that I have more time to comment, I agree with the comments you made earlier here about all the artists you mentioned, as well as many others. Keep in mind though, pop music had a little different meaning during the time span you speak of. It’s only since the blurring of the genres, and the greed of major labels, that it’s grow to mean other things. I have read too many testimonies from artists of this era, who had problems with showing their own creativity, because the labels wanted music done their way, not necessarily what the artist wanted.
I liked your comment about the British Invasion feeding America’s young its own music. The ironic part is, many didn’t know that was the case, and probably still don’t to this day. They had no idea that much of the music was based on Delta Blues. This Delta style blues folk music inspired the creation of the music, from which eventually came the artists and bands of the British Invasion.
Cool stuff, but most don’t care about it. They’d rather fight over whether an artist has perfect vocals or not..
D tTotter says:
Shadow,
I like much of what you say, but I was asking what YOU believe, not Mr Firth. Simon Firth is a classic example of “those who can, make music; those who can’t, write smug opinions about those who can”.
He loves to give opinions, such as the one you quoted about pop music. But that quip doesn’t get to be the “definition” of Pop Music just because Firth says so.
Firth is a mass of contradictions. Blink and he’ll say something completely the opposite.
For example:
Simon has heaped praise after praise upon Abba — maybe the poppiest band of all time — saying they belong in a hall of fame.
Simon has also praised the Eagles’ “Lyin’ Eyes”, calling it the “most perfect pop record ever made”.
Among the tunes Firth would take to a desert island are the Kinks’ “Waterloo Sunset” (a better song than “Lyin’ Eyes” in my opinion), Harold and the Bluenotes “If You Don’t Know Me By Now”), a Kraftwerk album and the wonderful Dusty Springfield’s Greatest hits. POP, POP, Synthopop and POP.
Simon’s list of the 10 greatest albums of all time include classic pop albums by the Beatles (Pop-rock), Randy Newman (pop) and David Bowie (glamrock-pop). (Hey! Making up labels IS fun!)
First of all, I should tell you that when I refer to Mainstream or Pop, I’m usually referring to Billboard 200 and Hot 100 artists. I lean toward the larger “Popular Music” concept which includes pretty much everything that isn’t traditional or classical.
My view of “pop” isn’t limited to some bubblegum offshoot of rock, first noticed in the 50’s. Instead it would include, historically, such Pop Music Giants as Harold Arlen, George Gershwin, Cole Porter, Frank Sinatra and Ella Fitzgerald. (If they aren’t “pop”, where do you put them?)
Even using the more narrow definition of Pop, the following persons are generally regarded as “pop artists”, at least for much of their work. Does their work meet Firth’s description of being about “enterprise, not art”, designed to “appeal to everyone”?
Buddy Holly/ The Beatles/ The Kinks/ David Bowie/
The Pixies/ Lou Reed and The Velvet Underground/
Roxy Music/ Kings of Leon/ Tina Turner/
The Byrds/ Green Day/ XTC/ Big Star/ Randy Newman/
Carol King/ Queen/ Radiohead/ REM/ Talking Heads/
Elvis Costello/ Madonna/ Eric Clapton/ Neil Young/
Stevie Wonder/ No Doubt/ Gin Blossoms/ Genesis/
The Beach Boys/ Elton John/ Rod Stewart/ Fleetwood Mac
Do you really regard this group of artists as “conservative”, vision-less hacks, lacking in passion and creativity, not worth your time?
Redmaz says:
Speaking of contradictions….why the name change “D tTotter”. No need to answer, I already know.
D Trotter says:
It’s called a typo red. I don’t really think it qualifies as an attempted name change, do you?
(Well, maybe it’s important to you LABEL guys.)
J.J. says:
Hold it! Stop the presses. I think we just moved into some parallel universe. Did D Trotter just admit to making a typo? The world as we know it must be over.
Shadow says:
Sorry Trotter, I didn’t see where you were asking me what I believe. Even after re-reading your posts, I still don’t see it.
What I believe, is what my ears and mind tell me when I listen to the majority of mainstream music. I don’t like it, it doesn’t move me, it doesn’t appeal to me. I consider it music of the least common denominator. I don’t listen to it, because I don’t listen to what I don’t like. I have found ways to listen to music I enjoy, without having what I don’t like, shoved down my throat by repetitive radio play. I’m not going to listen to hours of radio music that I don’t like, just to hear some that I might. Whether I think these artists are talented or not is immaterial. I don’t like their sound, because it doesn’t have the substance that I look for in music, so I don’t listen to them. For me, Simon Frith’s “opinion”, is right on. Since I couldn’t help but see a post of yours on another blog, that you admitted most pop is artistically banal and commercially-driven, especially when controlled by marketing monsters like Disney and the big labels, I know I’m not talking to a brick wall, here. You obviously agree to an extent.
If you feel I’m being an elitist (or an intellectual, as one poster put it), for thinking my favorite music is better, than so be it. For me, it is better. I wouldn’t be listening to it, if I didn’t think it was. On the other hand, I can’t decide for someone else what they consider better. If you like mainstream music, great, enjoy it. That is what it is designed for. I’m glad you can find something of value in it.
The rest of your post, once again, much of that music was of a time when pop had other meanings. Including for your list of pop music giants. Their time, pop meant popular.
But you certainly do realize they all had other labels attached to them as well?
Maybe your problem here (other than just trying to bait me), is because of your adversion to labels, you are also lumping all ERAS of pop together, even though the meaning itself has changed over the years?
That last batch of artists you listed, some I liked, others, not so much. I own one Beatles album, for instance. Never play it. I Want to Hold Your Hand…. yeah, yeah, yeah. Great stuff, indeed! And yes, I know. they got more creative as they matured.
I primarily listen to music of the country genres. Pretty much always have, even as a youth. Although I have sampled music from many on your list, out of fairness to these other artists, I pass on discussing them. They have never been my main focus.
D Trotter says:
Shadow,
Sorry, I thought the way it worked on here, especially when you address me by name (as you did) and I address you back, is:
You present your views on an issue; I counter with my own; etc., etc.,
Hopefully you don’t need me to say: “What do you think, Shadow?” If so, my apologies.
Now that you’ve identified yourself as a “Country-phile”, someone who really ONLY likes Country Music, we probably don’t have much to discuss. I’m a “music-phile” myself. I like good music of all kinds.
Your comment that my “problem”, because of my “adversion” (sic) to labels, may be a tendency to lump “eras of pop together” … just makes no sense to me.
I believe Music evolves, gets assimilated … is a continuum. It doesn’t suddenly change because someone comes up with a new label.
New instruments — the addition of drums and electric guitar to Country Music, the use of synthesizers and vocorders in Pop/Rock — those may effect changes; so does exposure to new ethnic influences (New Orleans, Jamaica).
But I don’t think there’s all that much difference between hordes of teen females screaming for the “popular” Jonas Brothers … or the “popular” Beatles … or a “popular” Elvis … or “bobby soxers” screaming for Frank Sinatra. Popular music singers, all of them. (Do you, Shadow?)
I admit, Shadow, I thought you were an Americana guy. And such fans often can talk Roots Country, Blues, Jazz, Folk and Rock.
They talk about Band of Heathens … and they talk about The Band, with Robbie and Levon;
Not just Porter Wagoner and Marty Robbins, but also Bottle Rockets, The Derailers, Drive By Truckers and Wilco;
Not just Johnny Cash and June Carter, but also Carolina Chocolate Drops, Uncle Tupelo and Reckless Kelly;
Folk artists like Pete Seeger and John Prine;
Rock bands like The Byrds, The Buffalo Springfield, The Flying Burritos and Creedence;
Fathers of Rock like Elvis and Buddy Holly and Gene Vincent;
Eclectic virtuoso musicians and like T Bone Burnett,Buddy Miller and Ry Cooder;
Singer/songwriters like Neil Young, Bruce Springsteen, Lucinda Williams, Patty Griffin, Carrie Rodriquez, Lyle Lovett, Townes Van Zandt and Bob Dylan.
Those are people, not labels.
Taken together, they enrich my musical listening. If you’re just as happy with just Country, good for you.
Redmaz says:
Oh cmt deleted that too. It’s not a typo. It proves you use different screen names
Shadow says:
Boy, for someone who doesn’t like labels, you sure are starting to list quite a few of them. Unlike the important things of pop culture like looks, fashion, perfect vocals, and entertaining shows, its hard to have a discussion about actual music, without using them, maybe?
I’m beginning to understand why you are having trouble understanding what is said. You aren’t paying much attention to what is BEING said.
I stated I PRIMARILY listen to country music, not solely. I listen to these Americana artists you mentioned. And quite a few more. I also hope you realize, many of the ones you listed, do have country music as part of their repertoire. Patty Griffin is currently touring with Robert Plant, and singing many of the songs that Plant and Alison Krauss sang together. Buddy Miller is their band director. I’ll probably buy their Band of Joy album. Do believe T.Bone Burnett just produced and performed with Willie Nelson on his latest album. Been a fan of Reckless Kelly (red dirt, country rock). So yeah, I can talk about those things.
Just as my example of pop changing meaning over the eras made no sense to you, your inclusion of asking about screaming teen females makes no sense to me, except to reiterate what I said about popular music. I don’t see a connection at all between my saying the definition of pop has changed meaning over the years, to you coming up with comments about innovations in music and ethnic influences. As one who believes a knowledge of these conditions are important in knowing about the history of these changes and influences, I never ran into a situation where screaming teenage fans was a part of that history. It was only an indication that someone was excited about the newest latest and greatest.
Since we seem to be on different wave lengths, your probably right, we don’t really have anything to discuss. It’s getting quite tiresome trying to explain every detail to you. As I said early on, lets agree to disagree, it seems to be the popular choice on these blogs.
D Trotter says:
Red, sorry, but sometimes you sound like a whiny child who sulks when he doesn’t get his way.
You can’t “prove” anything … because you’re just completely wrong. I have one screen name, never use another. (Other people use MY name sometimes.)
Instead of pursuing this lame misguided notion of yours, why not pick some of the things I’ve been discussing with Shadow — you ARE an Americana guy, you should be able to answer.
How do YOU compare (Pop’s) Paul Simon and (Americana artist) Ryan Bingham?
Is it your belief Ryan is driven only by his artistic vision, wand has absolutely NO concern for appealing to a wider audience?
Is Paul just a craftsman trying to sell the most albums he can to the masses, with NO interest in creating art? Is he completely under the control of his record label to do what they want?
Let’s have a real discussion.
D Trotter says:
Shadow
You fail to understand my basic point:
THE EVOLUTION OF MUSIC HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LABELS. INDIVIDUAL MUSICIANS AND THEIR CREATIVITY — THAT’S WHAT MAKES GREAT MUSIC.
As for screaming teens, they represent a common thread through the history POPULAR music. Since you don’t see the connection, I’ll tell you. ALL those musicians being screamed at? They were POPULAR Artists. Not Traditional. Not classical. Popular.
And they affected musical BECAUSE of their popularity. This being America and all, it wasn’t seen as a crime to make money and sell merchandise. Before you knew it, lots of kids wanted to be … popular! Just like Elvis. Make money, get girls to scream at them too! They sat around and practiced, and tried to do something a little different. And maybe … just maybe … they became the Beatles. And the cycle repeated.
Not always, but SOMETIMES, this frenzy for a given artist or artists who seems new and exciting inspires a whole wave of copycats, and before you know it, the press had to come up with one of those LABELS you love. Thus we get Rock n’ Roll … the British Invasion … the “Boy Bands”, etc.
Sure I can use labels. But I don’t buy an album based on ‘em, I do it because of the artist. And I ESPECIALLY don’t like ‘em when they’re employed as a form of musical snobbery.
Americana?
The term didn’t even exist until the mid-1990’s! But the ROOTS music it claims has been around way, way, WAY longer … and did just fine w/o the LABEL!
Many of those artists have been inspired by, and made music, in MULTIPLE genres.
How important could the LABEL be, compared to the actual musicians and the music they make???
Not very much.
Redmaz says:
“You ARE an Americana guy” What or who gave you the idea I’m a guy?…and an americana guy at that? Labeling again? I thought you were the one who didn’t understand why labeling is necessary?
solongsowrong says:
Since you include the use of labels multiple times in your post, your opinions don’t hold much water with me, but then again, they don’t really need to.
Your original statement on this blog: “I will never understand why some of you feel it is so essential to label everything. It’s all music. Enjoy it or don’t enjoy it, but categorizing it doesn’t make it any better.”
I don’t think at any point I disagreed or questioned the part about categorizing making anything better. I did give you my reason’s for liking labels. You even said, I have a good reason for wanting labels. Yet you immediately dismissed my reasons, because you look at it differently.
Now you’ve brought the discussion back to: THE EVOLUTION OF MUSIC HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LABELS. INDIVIDUAL MUSICIANS AND THEIR CREATIVITY — THAT’S WHAT MAKES GREAT MUSIC. I’m still not going to disagree or question that statement about creativity, even though you have at one point admitted yourself, that most pop is artistically banal and commercially-driven, especially when controlled by marketing monsters like Disney and the big labels. I even see and will concede your point about screaming fans, even though I’ve never been one, even as a young’un, who has been influenced by what sways the masses by means of fads, popularity, frenzies, or what have you.
I think I clearly stated why I don’t like or listen to certain types of music, and once again, it has nothing to do with creativity, even when it’s good creativity. It has to do with my individual tastes.
Americana. Gee, there’s another term, just like pop, that has changed to mean other things as time passes.
So I guess our discussion has come down to the evolution of music. To know what it has evolved to, it’s always helpful to know what it has evolved from. You want to talk about some the history of music, including its evolution, and the fact that Americana, has only recently been dubbed as a music term… the labels need to be there to describe it. If you want to continue this discussion, do so without using labels. You gave a challenge to Red, I give one to you.
solongsowrong says:
And yes, the name has been changed to my original idenity on here. I at one time changed it because of troubles posting, and tried something different. It’s time to get back to being just me. Maybe you want to fess up, too, Trotter?
D Trotter says:
Solong, I always use the same screen name (or a close typo version of it). I think my tendency to be verbose would kinda give me away no matter what name I use.
And I don’t care what name you use as long as you don’t try to pretend to be different people. (I kinda like Shadow, actually).
No, I can’t debate the use of labels w/o using them — I’ve already said as much.
Truth be told, it’s not labels themselves that annoy me so much as people who use them as banners of superiority, or people who try to categorize everything into little boxes. I don’t believe MOST artists WANT to be shoved into little boxes and told that’s where they belong, don’t try something different.
Yes, I said mush pop music is banal. But I gave you lots of examples of creative pop artists with integrity and artistic vision. Generalizations about an entire group of anything, especially pejorative ones, are discrimination.
I don’t really want to argue with you. I like your musical tastes. You write and argue well. And you’re not a hater. Enjoy your music.
D Trotter says:
Ha,ha … I meant “MOST” pop is banal, not “mush pop”. Good name though. Wonder if it’s a genre?
Redmaz says:
If it is a genre, I know you will never understand why it is so essential to label it as such
Redmaz says:
Your reply(about Chenier) would be something like…”he plays good music” OR “it’s all music enjoy it or don’t enjoy it” or something like that. Once again putting your personal opinion before basic music fundamentals and genre description.
D Trotter says:
Obviously sarcasm and irony go right over your head, Red. Must be too busy trying to convince everyone that we need 40 or 50 different types of labels for Country music.
Incidentally, are you a paid by someone to promote Americana as a genre?
J says:
Since when is circus a freak show? It is a determination driven line of performance. It takes hard work, sweat, blood and tears. Trapeze is not for freaks, it is for passionate people who love what they do.
Jalia says:
So true. Hoestny and everything recognized.
Sebast ian Cox says:
Hey folks, Could be the U.S. far better off keeping Syria’s Assad?