By Andrew R. Duckworth
Those that know me know I have a lot to say on the current state of music. To state the obvious, there are bigger things to consider in the world right now, but I feel as though art should never be ignored. Art, whether we are discussing poetry, visual art, music, etc, is a bearing of one’s soul to the world… or, at least, it once was. And then there was art for art’s sake, admittedly an old concept, but one that feels more relevant in today’s world than it did when it was first proposed.
Allow me to be clear here: Art for art’s sake is good PRACTICE, a good way to put skills to use while attempting to come to ideas, etc. but I’ve never considered it “good” in the idea of actually creating a finished product. That’s where we get modern art, the squiggly line across a canvas that anyone can interpret in any way they choose, basically the New Criticism of the visual art world. And we are meant to view these pieces as profound… what a tragedy art has become, where an obvious lack of inspiration can be seen as “earth shattering.”
And the world of music has become nearly the same. But perhaps calling it “the same” is giving it a bit too much credit. To a certain degree, the world of music has become a joke. It’s little wonder that some would actually prefer artificially created music (AI music) rather than music created by actual creative beings. I consider artificially created anything to be garbage… but it is really telling when there are people who would rather listen to such garbage or ‘create’ (steal) such garbage in the first place.
So, how did music begin to feel so… soulless? By soulless, I’m not suggesting that those who create it have no soul (unless we’re talking about AI, in which absolutely soulless, despite who is entering in a simple prompt behind a keyboard). Rather, it seems as though the creative spirit has vanished entirely in some ways. Much of what hits the radio and music charts nowadays is, dare I say, a bit lazy. It all seems to carry the same sound. There aren’t any complex rhythms or melodies. It is cheap, created for a quick profit and it vanishes just as fast. By comparison, we still sing the anthems from the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, early 00s… I have to wonder which songs from today will still be sung in twenty years. Time will tell, I suppose. But the music created today in the pop music scene is objectively unremarkable compared to the music of yesterday. Talent has vanished, with a few exceptions, of course.
We will, of course, be talking about Taylor Swift in a couple of decades, unfortunately. However, I wonder if we’ll be singing her music or talking about how she strategically released music at the same time as other artists, in addition to her mid-level writing and her re-re-releases of old material with a new song or two spattered in with new cover art for the same initial price. As much as I would love to get into her ethically questionable at best decisions, her “art,” if you can call it that, is just the same sound as most other things. It certainly isn’t original. And, I suppose, if you like hearing a grown adult still being caught up on high school crushes and breakups, I guess Taylor Swift is your music. But there certainly isn’t anything groundbreaking or profound about her music. It feels rushed for packaging… or, to say it like a Gen-Zer, “it’s giving ‘hey here’s some music, now give me money.’” If there is one thing positive I can say about Swift or her half-baked music, it is that it contributes to keeping physical media alive, which is a plus.
Hyper-consumerism has caused a lot of problems for a lot of industries. Musicians don’t write with passion anymore. They write quickly to stay relevant, and there is a lot of pressure for this to happen. We cycle through content quicker than we breathe (obviously a bit hyperbolic, but it’s something to think about). What happens when the content runs out? We’re on to the next thing, the next shiny new thing that catches our attention, the span of which has been dwindling over the last few decades.
A lot of people recognize the problem of hyper-consumerism. However, just as quickly as we do, we often go back to the same problems, the same trends. We like to identify the problem without having to deal with any real solutions. I use “we” here because I’m certainly a part of this. I won’t pretend that I don’t play a part in the problem. It is deeply ingrained and it has taken only a few decades to get this way. Now, we like quick fixes, we like the expedient. We like the instant gratification. Little by little, we have been trained to believe quick is good. It isn’t. Quick leaves little time to think. And if one doesn’t think, they can be convinced into anything.
Apart from music, art in general feels soulless. All one needs to do is examine early 20th century architecture compared to the box, cookie-cutter architecture we pretend to enjoy now. Anything can be sold to anyone. Just put it in pretty packaging, and we buy it. This was once, for the most part, a distinctly American problem. Yet, it has now spread to all corners of the world. Modern architecture has spread across Europe, Asia, etc. leaving little character or space to express culture, etc. Even our decor sucks. What would have once been a charming, colorful living room has been reduced to beige and shades of gray. No life, no soul, no character… just gray, silent, stifled. There’s no room for boldness anymore.
In short, the problem of art and its current soulless nature extends far beyond music. But out of all forms of art, music is one thing that cannot lose soul. It serves as inspiration for so much beyond itself. Societally, we must slow down before anything has the hope of getting better. But do we still have the patience to slow down? Or are we content with trash because we want things quick?
