Divas in Black: A Storify Article

Ever since I was a child two things were always evident, I love to sing, and I love to be the boss.  It seems I spent the better part of my youth immersing my imagination with vision of fame and stardom, and above all total artistic freedom.  My dream was to graduate high school, and somehow become the next Whitney or Mariah.  The kind of vocalist with the chops to sing the phonebook with ease, yet still remain classy, glamorous and somehow ”down to earth.” In the two years after leaving high school, Whitney Houston was experiencing her personal problems, Mariah Carey her “breakdown, ”my favourite group Destiny’s Child after a very public and very nasty break-up, was evolving into a musical aesthetic that did not interest me.  My idols were falling.  And thank God for that.  Whatever the personal stories of these individuals, these ebb periods of their public lives made a profound impression on what it means to famous, and what it means to popular.  Also what it means to be an entertainer, and what it means to be an artist.  As I disposed of my childhood ideals, I began to replace them with what believe were healthier ones for me.  That in the words of the great Puccini aria “Vissi d’Arte” I wanted to live for art, and I wanted to live for love.  In order to do that, I had to discover the art to living my life. When I began singing, I started in Gospel, then R&B, then Jazz.  Upon hearing that Mariah Carey had been vocally trained by her opera singer mother, I thought classical training was the sure way to get to do that "whistle thing" she does.  On my way to emulation, I found myself conflicted with the traditional paradigms I had honoured all this time, because now they were holding me back.  I wanted new challenges, new experiences to breakthrough my personal barriers to unleash my  self, and then I discovered Opera. The beauty, the clarity, the rigor of it excited me.  The history engaged me.  Singing it released me.  I can and still sing all the genres I began with, but Opera has given me a new appreciation for the gift of the voice, and that I am called to share it with others.  I think this is the beauty of music and that is why I chose to do this Storify article on the great music of Verdi, Wagner and the amazing voices they helped define.  Hopefully, someday, mine will be defined as greatly as theirs. 

Black Women in Opera

Don't Shoot the Messenger! Give him a Blog instead.

-->
-->

            In response to my last post, my blog colleagues all touched some factors that affect the validity of “the news.” Becky from Psyched About Music!  Began with a couple of quotes from Alfred Hermida, “(journalists establish) jurisdiction over the ability to objectively parse reality to claim a special kind of authority and status" and that social media subverts this "monopoly on the provision of everyday public knowledge" (2012) (Parenthesis mine).  At first I took issue with this statement thinking it put journalists in an elitist light, but recant.  Journalists do take jurisdiction and from that glean their authority and status, as journalists.  It follows that, regardless of any “Ron Burgundy” image we have in our minds, journalism is a skill and those who are especially good, have made it an art. Therefore, however wonderful it is that social media allow full access to all types of news everywhere, many times it is the “art of journalism” that make this access possible and tangible.  That said I wonder if this “subversion” Hermida speaks of really exists.  Perhaps it is more the “evolution” of journalism he speaks of, instigated by the fluid and participatory nature of the web.  Now more than ever, the journalistic standards are higher because verifiability of so much information is fair game. 

            David from Picture of Interest lamented at the rise of the Gossip column/blog. People are fascinated with celebrities and by celebrity culture, that one needn’t be talented as long at they have the money to spend time with celebrities.  Who ever heard of “celebutante” before Paris Hilton?   Even the term comes from “debutant,” a social institution that is essentially the beginning of a life of a kind of “local celebrity” for wealthy youth.  No matter the veracity, Gossip blogs and publications serve the purpose of reporting on celebrity culture, which is based on illusion. I know it sound convoluted, but then it is.  So when is news just gossip? In this case, the news is in the façade, not the facts.  The information is rarely if ever relevant to the goings on of our everyday lives. Never the less, the public engages.  In my opinion, displays a near tragic state of our social psychology. What would happen if we put that energy into ourselves? Into our own dreams?  This indulgence on speculation can diminish the need for truth in our personal lives.

            Finally, Meg from Animated Films expressed how think the majority feels about social media and professional journalism, that one augments the function if the other.  This I feel is the more balanced perspective.  Journalism, both good and bad existed well before the Internet, and it would likely continue as long as we as human society have stories to tell and information to share.  This is in part why I think blogging has become a new forum for journalism.  It allows one to be authoritative, without the limitations and politics of working within a bureaucracy.  While social media allow many voices to be heard, there is something to be said for choosing the life of the messenger, instead of just a moment.  The discipline of journalism does have place in our new media landscape.  Better still, it has many places.
-->

References
Alfred Hermida (2012) TWEETS AND TRUTH, Journalism Practice, 6:5-6, 659-668, DOI: 10.1080/17512786.2012.667269

The Rumour Has it

Personally, I rarely engage in the journalistic opportunities that social media offer outside of observing.  I believe there are plenty of people who are passionate enough to inform the public of what is newsworthy.  The extent I wish engage the process usually lies in sharing some kind of news I find socially or politically impactful to my peer group.  However, I have noticed that perhaps for the first time in history, people are actually in charge of the news as opposed to just being the in news.  Journalists used to rely on finding the next big story.  Social media have made the search much simpler by bringing the news and newsmakers to the forefront sooner.  Yet, I don’t actually believe the line between authentic journalism, and word of mouth is as blurred as is suggested.  Journalists are still charged with the expectation that their facts are verified and truthful.  Members of the general public do not receive such pressures.  In fact there is a whole new genre of quasi-journalism that has come out of this, gossip columns.  Gossip columns have now evolved into gossip blogs.  The aim of these websites is to inform people of rumours and perhaps ultimately, the veracity of these rumours.  Many of these sites began as celebrity fan blogs that grew into fully functioning websites with “journalistic” undertones.  These are not to be confused with tabloids, which do not rely on public response to the accuracy of their claims.  Gossip sites and blogs exist as means of interacting with the fan base to undercover the facts amidst all the rumours.  They find rumours, quotes, and news stories, and then speculate on what it all means or at least what is coming next.  Unless the truth comes out of the proverbial horse’s mouth, one of the next best sources are, you guessed it, official journalism outlets such as the Associated Press and celebrity journalists like Oprah Winfrey and Barbara Walters, and trusted network news outlets.  This exchange is very much in keeping with measures many traditional new organizations are taking in order to stay relevant in the Web 2. era. (Bruns & Highfield, 2012, 4.1).  Still, perhaps the biggest source of instant newsworthy content has become Twitter where celebrities often publicly post their own comments and content.  The Gossip genre has contributed to what Dahlgren (2012) calls “civic cultures” He describes these as follows, “In a nutshell, civic cultures comprise those cultural resources that citizens' can draw upon for participation.  Moreover, in the modern world, the civic cultures operate to a great extent via the media (Dahlgren, 2012).”  Social media has given the public new ways of engaging the world and each other.  The journalism has inevitably been affected, by given rise to new genres.  With the example of the entertainment Gossip site, we see journalism as an effort for cultural exchange developing them at rapid pace.

References

Dahlgren, P. (2012). Reinventing participation: civic agency and the web environment. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations. 4.2, p27.

Bruns, A. & T. Highfield. (2012). Blogs, Twitter, and breaking news: The produsage of citizen journalism. pre-publication draft on personal site [Snurb.info]. Published in: Lind, R. A. ed. (2012). Produsing Theory in a Digital World: The Intersection of Audiences and Production. New York: Peter Lang. p15-32.
 

Content Schmontent: A Podcast

            I chose to comment on this article because as both a fan and as a singer-songwriter, I have pondered over the idea of creating music that has meaning.  However, I like music of a variety of subjects by a variety of artists who I feel all have something different to offer. Although the author celebrates the intrinsic merits of pastiche (McMillan, 2013), the social implications of what he observes reflect what I see as an ambivalent attitude toward mainstream contemporary music that I think erodes any critical evaluation that leads to true artistic appreciation. 

 

References

McMillan, G. (2013, June 28). Long Live the Monkees! (or, Why "Honest" Music is Overrated). Retrieved June 28, 2013, from Time.com: http://entertainment.time.com/2013/06/28/long-live-the-monkees-or-why-honest-music-is-overrated/

Doing it for the Fans

The dream of many musicians is to land the coveted “deal,” the record deal to be exact. I remember dreaming as a teenager of “getting signed” to Columbia records, home of many of my favourite artists at the time. I was impressed by the calibre of performer and the swanky marketing their artists had. Nowadays, it seems the role of labels is changing in the industry they've essentially created. Upon reading the blogs of colleagues commenting on the issues surrounding copyright, I see two major ideas that are central to all of them as fans.  They love music and they want free and equal access to it. Period.  When I say free, I don’t mean they are unwilling to pay, in fact it has been quite the contrary. Although they have downloaded music, Derek, at Underground Radio, David at Picture of Interest, and Meg at Animated Films, all report that they gladly and intentional purchase music only from their favourite artists, as a show of support.  In addition to this, they buy merchandise and attend live shows.  I talk a lot about the agency of the artist in determining how the music reaches the fans.  This is not done with out a synergistic marketing network that is in place solely for the distribution of music.  These include, radio, music television, and good ol’ fashioned word of mouth.  As long as the can artists get music to the fans, I see that other aspects of this industry are just as relevant if not more so the artists themselves.

            I often listen to Toronto’s Jazz FM, which has listeners from all over the world via the Internet, and then there’s satellite radio. Follow blogger David posted an interesting suggestion about a music subscription service to appease the label hounds (I have wondered about this one since during the Napster days.). Vevo and YouTube have pretty much replaced music television channels, most of the music channels still have awards telecasts, and documentaries that cover artists.  Yes we can stream MP3s from our car stereos, but these “old” still provide effective outlets to experience music from all eras by people who are just as in love with music as we are. My girl Becky from Psyched About Music commented on my last post singing the praises of artist centric independent labels and rightly so! With the web, these labels have the chance to give artist great exposure at very little cost. Will they need to rely so much on copyrights? I don't think so. One of my recent discoveries (being a mommy, I kind of live under a rock, okay a play pen, but it’s okay.) was a video of a live performance of her song “Breathe Me” by Australian singer Sia in a radio station.  

            What a perfect example of the artist being simultaneously local and international in a single performance.  Then here’s American pop “idol” Kelly Clarkson singing a cover of the same song in concert.  Now in the spirit of sharing, I’m all for artist-to-artist acknowledgement of work, but most music competitions are and YouTube stars are dedicated to cover songs (and to her credit Sia has song on The Great Gastby soundtrack). My colleagues have caused me to question, is there really a need to get a handle on something that is always moving?  As it gets more and more difficult to enforce restrictive laws, there are many ways artists can get their music out that demand new approaches by the big record labels. 

Be Like Water

            When I purchase music, I want to support the artist because I enjoy the majority of that artist’s work.  I often cannot afford to go to many live shows, when I do go it’s often an opportunity to see the truth of the artist’s talent through musicianship and entertainment.  Personally, if the musicality isn’t there, it’s not entertaining.  As much as I believe in putting on a good show, I think there should be a balance between lively presentation and simply sounding good.  If I share music, it is often an economical choice as well as one of scarcity.  For my particular tastes, there’s a lot of music that is just hard to come by.  So the degree to which I comply with copyright issues is very much based on immediate circumstance. 
            To be honest, when it comes to recordings, I don’t listen to that much variety. I like what I like and I tend not to stray too far from that.  I think many musicians are like this, in that, if you sing or play, you most likely listen to what you can, or would like to eventually sing or play.  Any venture outside of that sphere is probably related to eventually creating your own interpretation. I don’t enjoy many types of music. But I appreciate all of it. (Okay, most of it. I loathe anything with an auto-tuned voice.) 
            My personal path to becoming a professional singer/songwriter has been one that has considered and encountered issues with copyright. While I fully respect the artist who wants to live of her or his craft, I have come to realize that artists have left their ability to do that up to the wrong entity for too long, namely, the recording industry.  Anyone with a bit of time to do the research will find out that record labels were basically lenders who quickly became loan sharks if an artist didn’t break the platinum sale mark.  This reality was much to the dismay of many artists who rejoiced at “getting signed” only to find out that they end up with mere pennies once they reimbursed labels for producing, marketing, promoting and distributing their work.  In many cases artists still didn’t even own the rights to the songs.  
             The advent of the digital era has rendered the current model ineffective and outdated.  Most of all, it suppresses artists and artistry.  This brings me to this question, why should the destruction of the music industry be prevented (Condry, 2004)? Ian Condry’s assessment of peer-to-peer networks illustrates its superior over the recording industry model:

Peer-to-peer systems follow the principles of network economics, which hinge not on supply-side economies of scale, but on demand-side economies of networks (Shapiro and Varian, 1998). The more participants, the more sharing, and the more distributed users and content, the more valuable the network is. (Condry, 2004)

Photo from www.indieandunsigned.com

            This type of exchange is much more in line with sharing practices between artists’ communities long before there were plugs in walls.  Conceptually, it is exactly what led previous societies to nurture, and flourish art and culture.
            These days of low quality albums, and better quality songs is not cutting it for consumers. It is often record labels, not artists who strongly influence, and in some cases dictate which songs are included on an album. Music has become more about commodities, than art.  Condry makes a great point that the lack of soul these practices produce in the final works disconnect fans from the music (Condry, 2004). The fact remains, people are reluctant to pay for music they think sucks.
            Steinmetz & Tunnell illustrated a contradiction in their research between the socialist practices of sharing versus the capitalist characteristic of consumption inherent in the culture of piracy (2013).  I believe it is viewing these complex issues through these divisive paradigms that prevents a sound solution from emerging. The coexistence of these elements is not contradictory if viewed holistically.  Can something be truly shared if it isn’t consumed on some level? Otherwise, it is straight giving. Sharing allocates.  When we share, we all benefit. I can benefit without us, but we cannot benefit without me.  We consume together.
            It is no surprise that the motivations behind file sharing are rooted in social and economical frameworks (Steinmetz & Tunnell, 2013).  Mostly, these debates just highlight the flaws of our cultural ideologies.  The struggles of the big label record industry only illustrate that being greedy makes you greedier, until you are rendered useless. Then nature takes over.
            So how might record industry deal with what they perceive to be piracy? By going away. Big labels need to disperse their subsidiaries, and return to more community supported independent models.  Digital rights management laws create ways to be more rigid. Why bother when it’s easier and more profitable to adapt (Condry, 2004)? Business is fluid, go with the flow.

References

Condry, I. (2004, September). Cultures of Music Piracy: An Ethnographic Comparison of the US and Japan. International Journal of Cultural Studies , 7 (3), 343-363.

Steinmetz, K. F., & Tunnell, K. D. (2013). Under the Pixelated Jolly Roger: Study of On-line Pirates . Deviant Behavior , 34 (1), 53-67.

Shameless Self-Promotion

A promotional video of yours truly, lookin' good and sangin'. Enjoy!