Wonder Woman is a jingoistic propaganda film
The handbook establishes pop culture as an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research field as well as an independent scientific discipline. In over 60 articles, it provides information on the most important manifestations and discourse contexts of pop culture and fundamentally differentiates them from those of high and popular culture. The contributions are dedicated to the terms and concepts of pop culture, the importance of pop culture research in different scientific disciplines as well as the media and genres of pop culture - from rock 'n' roll to soul, punk, techno to pop art, TV series, B -Movies, social media and much more For the first time internationally, the handbook offers a systematic overview of the entire field of knowledge of pop culture and places pop culture research on a historical and theoretical foundation.
Pop Culture Handbook
Thomas Hecken / Marcus S. Kleiner (eds.)
Pop Culture Handbook
J. B. Metzler Verlag
Thomas Hecken is Professor of Modern German Literature at the University of Siegen. Marcus S. Kleiner is Professor of Communication and Media Studies at the SRH University of Popular Arts, Berlin.
Bibliographic information from the German National Library
The German National Library lists this publication in the German National Bibliography; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. ISBN 978-3-476-02677-4 ISBN 978-3-476-05601-6 (eBook) This work and all of its parts are protected by copyright. Any use outside the narrow limits of copyright law without the consent of the publisher is inadmissible and punishable. This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming and storage and processing in electronic systems.
J. B. Metzler is part of Springer Nature. The registered company is Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany. www.metzlerverlag.de [email protected] Cover design: Finken & Bumiller, Stuttgart (Photo: iStock, Angel McNall) Typesetting: Claudia Wild, Konstanz in cooperation with primustype Hurler GmbH, Notzingen J. B. Metzler, Stuttgart © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, 2017
I Introduction Thomas Hecken / Marcus S. Kleiner 1
26 Genre cinema Marcus Stiglegger 139 27 B-Movie Marcus Stiglegger 147 28 Author's film Marcus Stiglegger 152
II Genres and Media D Television A Music
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Rhythm & Blues Martin Pfleiderer 16 Country Ralf von Appen 21 Rock 'n' Roll Christian Bielefeldt 25 Beat Laura Patrizia Fleischer / Thomas Hecken 30 Rock Thomas Hecken 35 Pop Thomas Hecken 44 Soul / Funk Thomas Wilke 53 Reggae Benjamin Burkhart / Martin Pfleiderer 57 Glam Elena Beregow 62 Disco Thomas Wilke 67 Punk Thomas Hecken 72 New Wave / Post-Punk Barbara Hornberger 78 Hardcore Jonas Engelmann 82 Metal Dietmar Elflein 87 Gothic Alexander Nym / Marcus Stiglegger 91 Industrial Marcus Stiglegger 97 Electronic Body Music Timor Kaul 102 Techno Timor Kaul 106 Electro Hans Nieswandt 111 Hip-Hop Michael Rappe 113 Sound Holger Schulze 119 Production Jens Gerrit Papenburg 123
29 TV formats Axel Schmidt / Daniel Klug 159 30 TV series Thomas Hecken / Annemarie Opp 164 31 Music television Marcus S. Kleiner 169 32 Music video Henry Keazor / Thorsten Wübbena 173 E Print
33 34 35 36
Literature Thomas Hecken / Niels Werber 178 Feuilleton Thomas Hecken 188 Music magazines André Doehring 193 Comics Felix Brinker / Christina Meyer 198
F design, advertising and art
37 Fashion Sonja Eismann 203 38 Advertising and goods aesthetics Wolfgang Ullrich 207 39 Camp and trash Jörg Scheller 40 Pop-Art Joseph Imorde 222 41 Photography Thomas Hecken / Annekathrin Kohout 226
42 Blogs Ole Petras 231 43 Social Media Carolin Gerlitz 235 44 Computer Games Jochen Venus 239
23 Radio DJs Hans Nieswandt 129 24 Radio stations / radio broadcasts Winfried Longerich 133 25 Radio formats Walter Klingler 135
III Terms and concepts 45 Popular and pop Marcus S. Kleiner 246 46 Pop theory Marcus S. Kleiner 252 47 Popular culture, mass culture, high culture, popular culture Thomas Hecken 256
48 Lifestyle and Zeitgeist Thomas Hecken 49 Public Opinion and Politics Thomas Hecken 275 50 Mainstream and Subcultures Elena Pilipets / Rainer Winter 284
IV Science 51 52 53 54 55
Musicology Florian Heesch 296 Sociology Elena Beregow / Urs Stäheli 302 Economics Andreas Gebesmair 306 Ethnology Moritz Ege 311 Cultural Studies Elena Pilipets / Rainer Winter 316 56 Cultural Studies Thomas Düllo 321
57 Education Studies Olaf Sanders 326 58 Communication Studies Marcus S. Kleiner 330 59 Media Studies Marcus S. Kleiner 335 60 German Studies Heinz Drügh 340 61 English Studies Anette Pankratz 345 62 American Studies Daniel Stein 349 63 History Detlef Siegfried 354
V Appendix Selected bibliography 360 authors 363 Register 366
T. Hecken, M. S. Kleiner (Ed.), Handbuch Popkultur, DOI 10.1007 / 978-3-476-05601-6_1, © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, 2017
Pop as culture “Pop” and “Pop culture” have been understood and brought together in the decades since the end of the Second World War to the present day. Since the early 1960s, it has not only been discussed regularly in specialist journalistic bodies, but also very often in everyday contexts. In the humanities, cultural and social sciences, pop research has been spreading slowly but steadily since 1970. Initially, Pop Art played an important role, but the focus was quickly on the various styles of pop music and their supporters, alongside the examination of literature and film. That journalists and academics often use the word “pop culture” indicates an even greater scope of meaning. Obviously, pop does not have to be restricted to art genres, but is seen at work in all possible areas of leisure time. Whether in the mass media or in small, special organs, whether in hotel rooms or in your own apartment, whether in stadiums or clubs, on catwalks or on the street, evidence of pop culture can be found everywhere - and not only there, now one comes across Pop music and special pop-cultural forms of advertising, lifestyle, fashion photography, club scenes, etc. also in museums and libraries, in public media and hesitantly in schools. This clearly shows that pop has other merits than can generally be achieved solely on the basis of its widespread use and economic profits. This is undoubtedly a success for all those who have advocated a positive cultural and artistic assessment of pop since the 1950s. Much of the general talk about pop was precisely trying to gain cultural recognition. This was done in three ways: First, by attempting to highlight the artistic originality and / or complexity, as well as the cultural significance of the pop culture phenomena. Second, through the assertion that volatility, superficiality, catchiness, artificiality are positive (and not, as previously assumed, negative) properties. The third
Defense or even affirmation of Pop began more scientifically, either in the outcome of empirical studies or in theoretical fundamental debates. The main objective here was to demonstrate that pop culture does not merely (or even slightly) contribute to passivity, brutality, dumbing down, stereotyping, and standardization. From liberal systems theorists to social democratic educators to socialist or radical democratic representatives of cultural studies, many directions have tried to prove this. Obviously the aesthetic persuasion and scientific arguments got caught; not a few pop artifacts - not only from Andy Warhol, Jean-Luc Godard or Frank Zappa, but also from the early Elvis Presley to today's forms of electronic music - can currently be found in the upper range of the cultural hierarchy (see Chapters 34, 47) . Some arguments for this high rating are now firmly anchored at least in the feature sections of the major daily newspapers and news magazines (or their websites): individuality, ambivalence, sophistication, alienation effects, avant-garde charms, cultivated minimalism, forms of intertextuality and hybridization, the tendency towards the total work of art, one Subversive, creative use of everyday and cultural industry objects can also be found in pop scenes and their works. In some cases, these arguments and valuation methods even receive institutional, state recognition: Museums are now also holding exhibitions on punk and David Bowie, hip-hop and rock photography, and universities sometimes not only focus on pop art and pop literature, but also pop videos and queer subcultures Lecture schedule.
Pop demarcations All of the actors, directions and institutions mentioned have an intuitive or express idea of what falls under “pop culture” or what the shape of “pop” should look like. The Pop Culture Handbook does not want to evade these guidelines, significant uses of terms can be found in many individual chapters or already shape them
Title and thematic selection of these chapters: The second main chapter, »Genres and Media«, adopts established categories (a separate section is dedicated to Pop Art, there are longer explanations on pop literature in the »Literature« chapter); the numerous genres - rock, disco, new wave, reggae, techno, etc. - which in everyday communication as well as in scientific texts are often grouped under the umbrella term ›pop culture‹ or ›pop music‹. In the fourth main chapter of the manual there are also numerous references to the ›pop‹ understanding of relevant research work in many scientific disciplines. This continuation of an established linguistic usage takes into account the character of a handbook, which should offer summarizing analyzes of important historical tendencies and terms, which are based on the current state of deliberations and research. Nevertheless, in the sense of its further task of providing orientation, the manual would like to justify an independent conceptualization beyond this information. It is not intended to override all other definitions, but rather to represent a meaningful reconfiguration of some other theories and concepts. A look at history is helpful for this. After 1920, ›Pop‹ is only used sporadically, only since the 1960s often as an abbreviation for ›popular‹: ›pop songs‹ for ›popular songs‹, ›pop culture‹ for ›popular culture‹, etc. with ›popular‹ ( and in the German-speaking area since the 1960s with ›popular culture‹), different speakers and authors focus on very different characteristics: the sensual, the simple, the authentic, the manipulated, the vulgar, the base, the commercial, the resistant, the mass, the mass media, the communal , Everyday, ethnically pure, successful or directed against the rulers. Regardless of which of the above-mentioned features dominate, there is at least agreement that the term ›popular‹ refers to phenomena of a larger number or community: widespread use, strong reception, mass reproduction, attitudes and views shared by many. There are numerous theories and analyzes on popular culture (see Chapter 47), and there is also no shortage of overviews and manuals (e.g. Maase 1997; Hügel 2003; Storey 2003; Warneken 2006; Hecken 2007). If ›pop‹ were just the abbreviation for ›popular‹ or for ›popular‹, there would be no
A reason to publish a manual on pop culture. Such a company can only be justified if there are convincing reasons for the independence of pop culture. These reasons must not be limited to a periodization that sees pop as a contemporary section of popular culture (a popular or folk culture that is consistently characterized, for example, by standardization, simplicity, strong stimuli, narrative-semantic closure). If pop culture was just a modernized, technologically advanced variant of popular culture, one could leave it with the term “modern popular culture”. Nevertheless, of course, a look at history helps to recognize differences that are of categorical importance. An important historical moment is the establishment of rock ’n’ roll, which will remain the exclusive property of teenagers for a long time and which has partly overcome the “race” separations. ›Pop music‹ thus detaches itself from that powerful meaning of the popular, which extends to the undivided lower people, the numerical majority or the hegemonic core of the nation. With the beat and rock music of the 1960s, which is increasingly appreciated by the middle and upper class in their twenties, the dimension of pop is solidified as a stubborn youthful culture that consciously sets itself apart from the preferences and behavioral requirements of the older generation. Because of this innovation, which in the mid-1960s was increasingly addressed with the short Anglo-American word ›pop‹, ›pop culture‹ gained sufficient distance from the philosophical and political discussion of the phenomenon, which in many attempts was about questions of the people, about division and delimitation this people as well as the limits and possibilities of its (democratic) abilities and its (cultural) understanding. The term “pop” often signals a considerable amount of sociological and socio-psychological continuation of such questions, which (under the title of “mass culture”) for a long time resulted in the diagnosis of atomized, irrational, easily manipulative members of society Distance (see chapters 46, 47, 48). A good example of this is provided by the first use of the word ›pop‹ in intellectual circles (see Chapter 45). In the writings of the loose association and debating group of some young English theorists and visual artists, the London Independent Group, ›pop‹ has a positive sound, the term
is used by them in the sense of a positive variant of ›mass culture‹; they expressly point out that the products of contemporary mass production are not appropriated in a uniform and standardized manner. In some cases, the Independent Group provides attributes that have often been critically attached to the products of popular and mass culture, the products of 'kitsch', 'junk' etc. - that they are dubious, fleeting, determined by effects - , simply with a different accent: The fleeting, decorative, effective is given the highest praise by the Independent Group. However, new features such as “young”, “shiny”, “funny”, “technically advanced” are positively emphasized. Members of the Independent Group are particularly fascinated by the technical quality of American cars, magazines, Hollywood films and advertisements; From their point of view, they mark the current state of design and production innovations (see Robbins 1990). It quickly becomes clear when looking at the 1960s that the descriptions and classifications of the Independent Group are forward-looking classifications. From now on, ›Pop‹ is used internationally as a term for the superficial, artificial, glaringly colorful, condensed into an image, playfully meaningless and unessential, provocative, technologically contemporary. Partly because of the Pop Art dimension, Pop is already losing its exclusive relationship with the teenage group, and adults are quickly becoming part of the artists as well as the audience or listeners. However, these pop phenomena are not necessarily associated with large numbers, with the mainstream, with mass production, with a class-specific or cross-class popular culture. One recognizes it since the 1960s that ›Pop‹ is not infrequently used by underground and subversion advocates (see Chapter 49), also by the importance of ›Pop‹ for intellectual and avant-garde camp and postmodern strategies ( detailed on Hecken 2009). We want to adopt this basic trait: In our opinion, a pop phenomenon is one even if it does not become popular. Sometimes pop actors even pretend their intention is not to gain popularity at all. They favor a formal language that is either borrowed from or related to modern-autonomous art, shaped by the means and processes of fragmentation, ambiguity, ironization, self-reflexivity, meaning.
emptying, increasing complexity as well as the attitude of a creative, anti-commercial disappointment of the expectations of a presumed ›mainstream‹ audience. Even if they occasionally achieve success with a large audience, perhaps even in different social spheres, the claim differentiates them from followers of popular culture, whose highest ideal is to reach many or to unite them into a people or class. With this method of differentiation, which separates ›pop‹ from terms that are sometimes used by others as synonyms of ›pop‹, in addition to the decisive dissolution of the identification of ›popular‹ and ›pop‹, other distinctions must be made: (1) that of pop and youth culture, (2) pop and the capitalist market economy, (3) pop and mass media, (4) pop and rock. (1) A distinction must be made between pop and youth culture because pop itself has become historical. Even if it may not have reached maturity, pop is also one of the preferences of older people. The devotional objects and works from the time of rock 'n' roll, pop art and the beat have long been in museums and other collections, not a few of their musical successors - be it on the producer side, be it on the recipient side - for example from ranks of Soul, techno, indie rock refuse to pursue “more adult” professions and hobbies at an advanced age. The claim to only want to rise in the present moment becomes an empty phrase as soon as stylistic and biographical routines and continuities are established and maintained. Pop has meanwhile become a cross-generational socialization agency that not only functions as a lifelong biography companion, but can also be described as a lifelong pop culture educational process. With the expansion of pop following from teenagers and then into their twenties to the age of retirees, pop and youth culture are increasingly diverging. Pop culture has long ceased to be just a culture of boys for boys, even though teenagers and twenties still play the leading role in presenting pop artifacts in everyday life and sometimes creating them themselves or converting them into combinations that are not only made by the Producers were given. (2) For a long time it made sense to classify pop as the epitome of capitalist entrepreneurship in the field of art and entertainment; after all, there was no such thing as
ne state-sponsored pop culture, its performances and productions rather served commercial interests. This has changed to some extent, and now, to a small extent, state subsidies are reaching individual actors in pop culture (in addition to pop academies, there are now pop culture festivals funded by individual countries as well as opportunities to perform in state institutions such as the Goethe Institutes). In comparison to high-cultural formations, however, pop culture is not yet seen as an equal, equal and generally eligible culture. That is why pop cultural products and productions have to be financed primarily through sponsorship, advertising and sales, as shown by the different financing of classical and pop or rock festivals. The main reason for not seeing pop entirely as a product of capitalist economy lies elsewhere and precedes state cultural policy; it consists in the deep, everyday anchoring of pop culture. Even regardless of profit targets and the need to prove oneself as an employee or (bogus) self-employed person within the context of cultural-industrial exploitation, works and events of pop culture arise - as a hobby, in ›free time‹ and with your own resources. From grabbing scissors and a blow dryer to style your hair, to recording music in your own small studio, there is a wide variety of options. (3) Of course, many pop phenomena are mass media products. Because of the basic distinction between ›pop‹ and ›popular‹, not all successful mass media formats and content are automatically part of pop culture: the »Tagesschau«, the »Tatort«, a great many blockbuster films, best-sellers, reality shows and blogs belong to our ›Pop ‹-Definition and our catalog of criteria (see below) are not included. There are also an extremely large number of pop products that are offered in small editions or by niche channels; In view of the independent labels, special magazines and websites for surfing scenes, dub-step rarities, rockabilly fans etc., which are run by one or two people full-time or on the side and are received by a few hundred or thousand people, one can hardly speak of ›mass media‹. The separation has another important reason: Because of the partial anchoring
From pop in everyday material culture, some pop objects (hairstyles, clothes, toys, etc.) are not just perceivable in two dimensions on screens and displays. Certainly, many of these things can also be seen on frequently clicked pages on social networks, in magazines, films, etc.; in many cases they know their users first or for a long time even exclusively from such mass media. Often, however, they not only know them from magazines, radio, TV and the Internet, but also see them on other people's places in the subway or in the shopping mall, wear them on their own bodies, touch them in the boutique, bleach and paint them yourself, decorate it in your own apartment, etc. Pop plays a role in everyday life in a very tangible way and in many other sensual ways, from special tattoos and perfumes to motorbikes and cars that are selected or based on a pop attitude or a pop style have been designed. (4) The distinction between pop and rock was well established in the late 1960s. It consists not only in the stylistic distinction between pop and rock music, but also in a number of other distinctions associated with it, which are almost always associated with serious value judgments (see Chapters 5, 6). Pop music is then in the bad sense as commercial, standardized, undemanding, deceptive, rock music with a positive sound as individually expressive, collective, authentic, involved in battles with managers and entertainment groups. For this reason, rock is mostly preferred to pop in aesthetic, moral, psychological and political terms, but there are also reviews in which pop is given preference as the drive and form of the apparent, machine, openly inauthentic, mediatized and superficial. Seen as a whole, the distinctions apart from the ratings are questionable or simply wrong. Of course, rock music, too, is often subject to demands for profit, makes use of standardized genre specifications and therefore in no way arises from the highly personal inner being of an unadulterated person who, through his undisguised appearance, contributes to a sincere, closely linked community. In addition, it does not make analytical sense to speak purely of authenticity and artistic expressivity in the case of the ›human being with defects‹, who can only form their own convictions and attitudes in the course of suggestions and specifications from others. That is why the distinction ›Pop / Rock‹ should only be used here as a claim
and evaluation criterion come into play: Purist rock supporters, in contrast to staunch pop apologists, are characterized by the fact that they (more or only) push for the undisguised, deep, honestly expressed and uncommercial. The distinction between affirmation and subversion is also connected with the pop / rock distinction. Sometimes, especially among columnists and academics in the German-speaking area, this distinction is introduced into the pop area itself (see Chapter 46). On the one hand, pop is seen as transboundary, subversive, subcultural, provocative; on the other hand, pop is associated with consumption, party, entertainment, lifestyle, mainstream and is declared as a branded article that contributes to the continued existence of liberal capitalist society in terms of both aesthetic and commodity forms. Since this differentiation separates two sectors or variants of pop culture from one another, it is a matter of course for a fundamental ›pop‹ definition that separates pop from non-pop. It would be different if pop were fully identified with an affirmative and rock (or art or avant-garde) with a subversive attitude. However, this should be avoided here - not because pop had a high potential for subversion in liberal capitalist states (see Chapter 49), but because rock, autonomous art, and avant-garde contribute little or nothing to the lasting infiltration or even termination of Western liberality. They can all develop subversive power with certain fashionable, hedonistic and non-conformist manifestations only in authoritarian and / or planned-economy-directed states.
Characteristics of pop culture With the denial that pop is completely absorbed in the popular, youth cultural, capitalist, mass media or subversive, it is of course by no means determined what categorically characterizes pop. Since ›pop culture‹ as a general term encompasses various genres of art, such a positive statement must be highly abstract. The determination can be a little more specific if only the commonalities of individual pop genres are named. Then the question is: What are the characteristics of pop music styles, what are pop art, what are pop videos, what are pop fashions, what are pop literature, and so on? In the back and forth between
Between empirical generalization and definitional limitation, determinations can arise here that appear realistic and informative at the same time (see Chapter 6). In return, the question of what is meant by ›Pop‹ can be rejected - a concise answer to it inevitably has to be pale, diffuse or overly restrictive. It is also impossible or meaningless because pants, novels, hairstyles, tweets, dances, paintings, photos have little or no material and shape in common. Nevertheless, or precisely because of this, a handbook on pop culture must state what it understands by its central term; it must, figuratively speaking, show the outlines of its object, even if it cannot be grasped with hands. The possible objections outlined are therefore an incentive, not the end of the line. The second objection mentioned can even be taken up without the attempt to come up with a convincing and stimulating definition of “pop” having to come to an early end. The reference to the problem of defining common product characteristics across many sectors becomes an occasion to bring other dimensions into play, especially those of reception and the relationship between objects. Taken as a definition (as an indication of our decision on how to use the term): Pop culture (abbreviated: Pop) is a superficial, functional, artificial, consumeristic culture of the style association that focuses on externals. However, not much is gained with this determination, because the individual elements of the sentence are by no means self-evident. After all, the reference to “terminological decision” (Pawlowski 1980, 13) already makes it clear that this is not a question of essence, but merely an explanation of the meaning with which the present introduction speaks of “pop”. So everyone is completely free to use “pop” in a different sense. In a scientific context (and when asked in everyday conversations) they just have to explain how to use the word. This explanation then binds you, it guides your own use of the word. If you z. For example, if ›pop culture‹ were to be understood as a standardized culture, they would consequently have to include not only some hard rock songs and telenovelas, but also Catholic masses, the theater of
surden, short stories with open ends, etc. m. under ›Pop‹. If, on the other hand, they wanted to address commercialized culture with ›pop culture‹, they would also have to include the events run by concert promoters and media companies and the sound recordings of classical music produced. Such definitions of terms make sense because they direct the view and the analysis on very specific phenomena in their entirety and lead to empirically well verifiable results. If you put z. If, for example, the definition of ›pop culture‹ states that its representatives are very well received in the media and are extremely popular, it is essential to think about the audience rating, the survey results and / or the sales figures etc. from which the reception Should be called ›strong‹ and what distinguishes ›popularity‹. If it is z. If, for example, it was enough to be popular in a numerically large group and to be well received in the media, the pop protagonists probably included Beyoncé, Angela Merkel, Vladimir Putin, SpongeBob, AnneSophie Mutter. The 'pop' definition proposed here does not differ in principle from the three definitions last worked out, but it turns out to be more complicated because it includes more characteristics. The effort to explain these elements is consequently greater, as is the effort to assign the definition to phenomena which they meet. Overall, our definition brings together six ›pop‹ features: (1) superficiality, (2) functionality, (3) consumerism, (4) externality, (5) artificiality, (6) style association. (1) superficiality. This criterion is intended to bring two things and methods into the focus of the ›pop‹ definition. On the one hand, the elaborately designed packaging for even the cheapest goods. What began with groceries at the end of the 19th century and which took on a particularly impressive shape in the 1940s with the replacement of brown sleeves with printed record covers, is nowadays practically indispensable in an area. On the other hand, decorative and meaningful surfaces are meant that get their character regardless of the technical function of the object, be it houses, cars or vacuum cleaners. The process has of course been in use for a long time for clothing (decorative patterns do not contribute to protection from the cold and the durability of the material), the more extensive pop variant here consists of
To print slogans, portraits, motifs on T-shirts, caps, jackets etc. - and also on all sorts of other objects of daily use. (2) functionality. One of the pop goals is to provide stimulation, to excite pleasantly, to temporarily set the body in motion, to increase attractiveness and to bring about a nice, cheerful mood or a cool posture. Pop functionality is measured by whether this succeeds. It's not about an intensity that radically disrupts the familiar. Identity-dissolving, lasting consciousness-expanding intoxication is considered to be an important task demanded of it in the context of the distinctions made here. that transgression that seeks to break through well-established, conventional distinctions (between stage and audience, everyday life and festivities, etc.), the 'avant-garde'. According to the definition proposed here, a pop fan can be recognized by the fact that at best it expresses the goal of intense transgression in catchy party slogans and song refrains, but by no means in ideological programs. He is satisfied with the non-revolting effects of his artifacts and events, even if occasional "kicks" mean something to him; for the vast majority of rock fans de facto the same applies, even if they may look down on the harmless pophedonists. The ecstasy is only temporarily part of the pop world - as a Friday and Saturday night phenomenon. Only the uncontrollable consequences of drug consumption sometimes speak against it when the party and club frenzy turns into life and dependence. Hedonism is much less risky in the area of everyday art. The pop fan rejects the notion that it is unworthy of a work of art to be judged by whether it proves to be functional to achieve the stated goals (animation, coolness, temporary 'kicks'). The popular recipient does not share the conviction that one is not an artist if one expressly wants to bring about such conditions. (3) consumerism. Pop is closely related to consumption. Being entertained is worth at least as much as active life. This does not have to be done on the way to the purchase of goods, no pop fan shy away from YouTube or Instagram. Pop is certainly not subject to the law of demonstrative consumption, the purchased pop objects do not have to be expensive. Pop consumers contribute to the increase in the consumption of goods by fleeing boredom; fast,
They are not averse to fleeting, fashionable changes.This practice could only meet ecological and capitalism-critical requirements if the changes were largely based on the historical inventory of flea markets, social media archives and streaming services. (4) Appearance. Pop reception is characterized by giving preference to what is externally and sensually given. The sound of the voice is at least as important as the statement. With the text, the focus is on the manifest message, not possible dimensions of meaning that a biographically, mythologically or ideologically inspired interpretation would have to bring to light with some additional expenditure of time. The photo portrait is valued because of the attractiveness of what is depicted, not because of the assumption that the photographer has discovered the personality or soul of the person portrayed. At the level of the individual artifact, due to the priority of externality, effects and structures also (but not only) belong to the pop area, which hardly or not at all contribute to a developed, motivated and completed narrative: glamor, aimless flirtation, sounds, repetitions. (5) artificiality. Pop cannot do anything with the natural except to imitate or modify it with technical means. On the horizon is the complete abandonment of natural substances and triggers. Plastic, recording and playback devices, microphones, cutting rooms, sound studios, mixing consoles, spray cans, keyboards, spotlights, make-up, silicone, dildos, Photoshop, synthesizer and sampler software, digital devices and displays are therefore among the most important instruments and materials in pop . Pop artists or supporters take this into account intuitively or consciously: They behave cautiously, skeptically, ironically, indifferently or openly rejecting the pretensions of the depth, the true, the authentic, the genuine, the original. (6) Style association. The pop object not only includes the imprint and the packaging (if it is a tangible thing), a certain object must also be brought together with at least one phenomenon from another genre in order to meet the criterion of the ›stylistic association‹. A style of music e.g. B. is associated with a hairstyle, a pair of trousers, an attitude (see Chapters 11, 37). This is what distinguishes pop from most other cultural directions. Nowadays, opera goers sometimes dress differently when attending an "Aida" performance than they do at work, but this is in line with the conventions of work and evening wear.
owed, not to a specific Verdi fashion. The style association in the pop area does not depend on the conception of an author or director who wants to create a ›total work of art‹. It is not infrequently the pop fans themselves who consciously and at least partially independently cultivate such relationships without any major requirements from marketing campaigns or designers. If they merely imitate guidelines, they transfer them into new contexts: The basic condition for adding a style association to the pop sector lies in its everyday performance (sometimes beyond the leisure area even to the workplace); it is not enough if it can only be seen on the big show stage or on the catwalk of a fashion house (see Chapters 41, 48). It is also not enough if it only appears on special festive occasions. Before, when the production and distribution costs for it were still high, one could have added: if it can only be seen in a film or a commercial. Thanks to digitization and the expanded network infrastructure, this passage no longer exists. In addition to links, there are now videos with which laypeople can make links between very specific images, words, actions, movements and sounds and show them publicly. So much for the list of features. These six characteristics together define 'pop'. As should be emphasized once again, it is not a question of a definition of the essence, but of a terminological definition with which we want to state as precisely as possible how we use the terms “pop” and “pop culture” in this introduction. The language sometimes makes you forget that this is a disambiguation and not a platonic idea show. In the context of our definition, however, formulations such as ›Pop reception means preferring what is externally and sensually given‹ or ›Pop is intimately connected with consumption‹ only mean: When we use the term ›Pop‹, we mean, among other things, receptions who prefer to focus on the external and attitudes that are not averse to consumerism. Since we do not act as pop apologists, this definition has no polemical or affirmative tone: Our definition says nothing about whether the pop culture defined in this way is a welcome or reprehensible culture as a whole or in certain places. It also leaves open whether pop culture is popular culture, folk culture
ture, high culture, avant-garde culture, mass culture, national culture, etc. is to be preferred in principle or in part - or whether it falls short of them. It should also be noted that the listed features are not individually sufficient to force the specification ›Popkultur‹ (or, for short, ›Pop‹), but must all be fulfilled. A large number of pop culture phenomena have therefore only been encountered since the 1960s; During the wedding of rock ’n’ roll, there are some to be observed beforehand (see Chapter 48); Forerunners in jazz scenes, around individual film, radio and magazine stars since the 1920s, cannot be ruled out. In view of the features mentioned, it is reasonable to speak of ›pop culture‹ because they do not constitute a mere ensemble of objects or works of art. Since modes of reception, usage practices, patterns of action and taste principles are to a large extent included in the determination, the term ›culture‹ is appropriate. The features can be recorded individually as pop characteristics, just as colorful, unmodulated colors, B-movie effects or ›funky rhythm‹ have been recorded as ›poppy‹ - so that, in a vague sense, objects with one of these features dominating could be called pop objects. In this introduction to the handbook, however, this is not intended to happen. Rather, it is proposed here to reserve ›pop culture‹ or ›pop‹ for phenomena that meet all six points in different configurations and ways of connecting. Pop Art images In this sense, for example, in a certain period of time they are only part of pop culture if some people not only look at it, but surround and decorate themselves with accessories in the style of the respective images; they only count if they have found viewers who do not only recognize allegories about violence and transience in them and present corresponding interpretations; they only belong to pop culture if they not only contribute to the demonstrative consumption of a collector, but experience a fleeting reception thanks to cheap reproductions in magazines and on displays - or one that is (repeatedly) enthusiastic about certain color effects and motifs after these in the Hope were used to achieve a preferred mood (again). Since our definition of ›Pop‹ includes various features, it does not only contribute to ›pure‹
Identify pop phenomena. It also offers the option of marking gradations and, in some cases, mixtures. For example, one can speak of ›2/3 pop‹ if there is a lack of style and artificiality - or of ›pop forerunners‹ if you accentuate the temporal dimension. One can speak of ›PopAvantgarde‹ when, when other elements are fulfilled, certain protagonists urge that the boundary between stage and parquet should be radically dissolved. Of course you can also find crossovers of ›pop‹ and ›rock‹ in the sense suggested here, as well as pop and show, pop and romanticism, pop and festival culture etc .; one would only have to state beforehand what one understands by show, romance, festival culture, etc. Finally, it should be noted that the criteria mentioned were selected in such a way that they agree with many individual basic features of other ›pop‹ definitions so that they have historical weight and cannot be dismissed as the result of an idiosyncratic, authoritarian determination. For this purpose, often rather vaguely cited criteria (above all superficiality and externality) were specified; this is intended to facilitate the use of the term and its verifiability. The provision presented is therefore not only to be understood as a definition that provides clarity about the use of the term “pop”; it should also serve to work towards a more differentiated, more precise observation of processes in the cultural field with the help of the features mentioned. The possible combinations in the previously often diffuse field of speaking and writing about phenomena outside of ›high art and culture‹ alone contribute to such differentiation. If ›pop‹, ›popular culture‹, ›simplicity‹, ›standardization‹, ›cultural industry‹, ›commercialism‹, ›entertainment‹ and ›mass suitability‹ do not completely merge, space opens up for more diverse distinctions, overlaps and references. What falls under the heading of “pop” or “pop culture” according to the “pop” definition presented here can then be popular or unpopular, entertaining or unpleasant, schematic or original, successful or a big bad investment, from large, dispersed audiences, from homogeneous subcultures , are received and valued by small, local scenes or media networked specialists, make an important contribution to the achievement of cultural hegemony or not - depending on the properties of the object, depending on the range and
The nature of the reception, depending on the ideological, political, economic situation, depending on the level of efforts for publicity, consensus, power. It is the task of science to investigate this and to arrive at specific, historical results.
Pop history The Pop Culture Handbook aims to contribute to the history of pop culture itself. So far, pop culture historiography has mostly taken place in the field of music. The manual aims to open up the perspective beyond a purely musicological analysis for cultural and social-historical co (n) texts. The history of pop culture (with the starting point of important pop music genres) is therefore supplemented in the manual by science stories on pop culture research and historical overviews of important genres and media in which pop is (re-) presented. A pop historiography in the field of pop would have to be conceived on the one hand as part of social, cultural and media / technological history (foreign stories). On the other hand, from an intercultural perspective too, one would have to work on their own history of their media, products, aesthetics, actors, institutions, etc. (own stories). The manual aims to provide a basis for historical research into pop cultures, but does not see itself as a comprehensive historical review of the social, cultural, and media / technical history of pop culture. Important observation points for such a historiography of pop culture that have yet to be performed are the following in the three areas mentioned: (1) Social history is about viewing history from a socio-historical perspective (often in connection with economic history). It deals generally with social structures, processes and actions, with the empirical analysis of the peculiarities of historical phenomena - especially with the history of social formations, institutions, relationships, inequalities, mobility or urbanization. Central questions of a social history of pop would be when and how pop cultures developed in different societies and to which social actors and institutions their emergence and expansion were tied.
(2) A cultural history that is not defined by its object but by its perspective requires that theoretical-methodological approaches be adapted to the respective objects and specific questions. Different approaches have a special meaning for the cultural historiography of pop: hermeneutic (text analysis - texts represent past and present realities, e.g. ascriptions of meaning to pop in texts of pop cultures); discourse theoretical (e.g. knowledge, reality and rationality structures of pop cultures); praxeological (actions of individuals and collectives in mutual relation to superordinate structures and institutions - i.e., among other things, the concrete connection between pop cultures and dominant cultures or social realities); performative (language and action, pop cultures between execution and performance) and media culture studies (medializations of pop cultures). (3) Media history, as a sub-discipline of media studies, describes the entirety of historical representations of media developments and media upheavals. The mediation that is part of media historiography, i.e. the creation of a specific historical image, takes place under the conditions of these media themselves. Media history should not reduce the history of media to the (chronological and factual) sequence of technical inventions. Rather, the connection between cultural, aesthetic, structural, social and technological upheavals should be described and discussed. The same task is faced by the historiography of pop culture as well as its medializations and media. It would be constitutive for all three fields of historiography (s) on pop cultures to highlight the stubborn pop culture as a special historical reality on the one hand and to describe this stubbornness in its historical and (inter) cultural manifestations and changes close to the material on the other. Despite a large number of journalistic articles (there are now thousands of such books on Mods, Beatles fans, Warhol's Factory, Trekkies, Hamburger Schule, Nashville etc.), there are almost all essential genres, scenes and "art worlds" (Howard S. Becker) to carry out such extensive historical investigations of pop culture.
Pop and science There are already important (partial) studies on many pop phenomena - above all on artists and their works, individual labels, local communities and clubs, clothing fashions, magazines, technologies - which as a rule arise from individual projects and not larger research networks. Pop culture research or pop culture studies is not yet an integral part of academic research at universities. That is why (inter) disciplinary scattered analyzes of individual pop fields or pop phenomena currently represent the majority of (international) pop studies. In the manual chapters of Section IV on the individual scientific disciplines, the respective experts will briefly present and systematize many of these contributions . Therefore, in this subchapter, only important subject areas of the individual disciplines should be listed - and books or essays that have achieved a greater response in the individual subjects and sometimes beyond and / or a good orientation as well as an excellent starting point for term papers and theses as well Present research projects from other subjects (on the cartography of the field of pop and science and a subdivision of the essential scientific theories and subject complexes for researching pop culture see Kleiner 2008). Cultural studies have contributed a lot to pop research in the formation of theories, their content focus is, among other things, on the research of media (sub) cultures, youth culture research and the analysis of the globalization of pop through the medialization of pop cultural styles. Seen as a whole, however, there are not many studies that specifically relate to the pop area and today can still claim more than historical interest. These include Paul Willis' study of Profane Culture, which is also methodologically important, and Dick Hebdige's essay book Hiding in the Light. On Images and Things, which offers important conceptualizations and analyzes of pop culture. Research in musicology is already well advanced, here you can find your way around the theory and history of pop music, commercial organization and medial communication processes in many monographs and anthologies, also in manual form, such as in Peter Wickes pop and rock music or Simon Friths , Want
Straws and John Streets The Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock. In musicology, approaches from queer, gender and Afro-American studies are already being taken into account more frequently. In addition, there are many works in these fields that come directly from or are committed to cultural studies, e.g. B.Sheila Whiteleys and Jennifer Rycenga's anthology Queering the Popular Pitch as well as Maren Volkmann's Women and Pop Culture and Mark Anthony Neal's Soul Babies. Black Popular Culture and the Post-Soul Aesthetic. Sociology started relatively early to record phenomena of pop culture in the course of sub and youth culture research as well as studies on the relationship between social situation and lifestyle. A good overview of the more recent research in the field of scene, subculture and youth sociology can be found in Andy Bennetts and Keith Kahn-Harris' After Subculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture as well as in Brian Longhurst and Danijela Bogdanović's Popular Music & Society. In recent essays on lifestyle research, Gunnar Otte has carried out fundamental considerations on sociological tradition (Otte 2011) as well as an empirical study in the pop area on "Body capital and partner search in clubs and discos" (Otte 2007). In economics, studies of the production conditions under which pop music is made and the marketing of related goods are relevant. Andreas Gebesmair chooses an approach that is also based on cultural sociology in The Fabrication of Global Diversity. Structure and logic of the transnational pop music industry. Media and communication studies focus, among other things, on the media theory of electronic and digital sound cultures (e.g. Kleiner / Szepanski 2003; Volmar / Schröter 2013), on the relationship between pop and politics (e.g. Nieland 2009; Kleiner / Schulze 2013) or the connection between pop and performativity (including Kleiner / Wilke 2012). In German studies, a great number of studies on the German-language genre specialty of pop literature have emerged over the past 15 years (see Hecken / Kleiner / Menke 2015). She has not yet commented on texts that come from pop contexts (such as scene blogs or selected texts from fan fiction), apart from sporadic analysis of the lyrics. In English studies, on the other hand, at least the employment
a bit more common with chick and lad lit. Claus-Ulrich Viol's jukebooks offer a broader approach to the relationship between narrative literature and pop music. Contemporary British Fiction, Popular Music, and Cultural Value. Art history has so far dealt with well-known PopArt artists in a highly detailed and nuanced manner. The connection between their works and those of pop cultural actors and scenes was presented much less differently than the connections between pop artists and other well-known names, e.g. B. from the ranks of abstract painting. But that is changing now, for example Cécile Whitings Pop L.A. Art and the City in the 1960s is worth reading. In the sense of ›visual studies‹, more works on pop culture are to be expected in art history. Philosophy did not discover pop for itself until late, but in the context of aesthetic studies there are now considerable works that contain some fundamental - Noël Carroll's A Philosophy of Mass Art - or specific points of contact - Theodore Graczyk's Rhythm and Noise. An Aesthetics of Rock - with pop culture and talk about it.
Problems of Pop Research There are three main problems that pop research has been confronted with so far: (1) Hermeneutical problem: »The question› What is pop? ‹Can only be asked meaningfully if many things are subsumed under the term pop Appearances are presumed to have something in common «(Walter 2004, 48). But this is not the case, as a look at the different main categories (subculture, mass culture, cultural industry, consumer culture, etc.) on which the pop studies are based shows. (2) Prerequisite problem: When dealing with the pop field, already established theories or theoretical traditions of the respective disciplines are usually used and these are superimposed on the investigation of the matter itself. A search for a stubborn, object-oriented theory base takes place too seldom. (3) Methodological problem: In the context of pop culture research, there has so far been hardly any method debate (cf. Kleiner / Rappe 2012), nor has there been an explicit reflection on the paths of pop culture research as an inter- and transdisciplinary project - apart from cultural studies. The following are key questions for dealing with methods of pop culture research
four: Which quantitative and / or qualitative methods can be used for the idiosyncratic analysis of Pop or for its empirical measurement? Is the existing arsenal of methods in social, cultural, communication and media studies suitable for working out the stubbornness of popular and pop cultures? Or has pop culture so far only served as one of many test fields for discussing the analytical competence of certain methods? Which forms and practices of interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity can be specifically identified in the context of popular culture and pop culture research? In order to answer these questions, different methods and research perspectives have to be tested in a strictly case-oriented and practice-oriented manner, i.e. the possibilities and limits of the methodological debates with regard to pop culture research have to be explored.
Pop and University Outside of the universities, the question often arises in discussions whether pop research makes sense at all. Scientists are countered that they should not unnecessarily value pop discursively and should refrain from associating sense, meaning and historical explanation with pop, because that way the 'essentials' of pop cannot be grasped. The necessity and importance of analytical and hermeneutical pop research is regularly denied when it is about more than sympathetic descriptions and pseudoscientific celebrations of creativity and subversion. Pop culture is mostly seen as a culture of redundancy or spontaneity, not a reflexive culture. Discussions with pop journalists, people from the music industry, artists and fans almost always result in the same negative attitude: Pop doesn't need science, but science does pop. This would still be halfway routinely recorded as part of the ignorance of cultural and sociological analyzes often encountered in artistic, journalistic and private business circles, if one did not frequently encounter a condescending attitude at the university itself. It is true that many scientists, especially younger ones, like to write an essay on a pop topic at the moment; That is why there will be a founding phase of university institutionalization of pop research in the next few decades
could, but remains only a vague idea. The basic prerequisite for this would be that the university open up to pop research in the long term and recognize it as an integral part. At the moment, there is hardly any sign of this. Pop research remains mostly exotic in the perception of the university and the academic funding institutions. In any case, pop research was not and is not a means of promoting a career in Germany - at present not in America or England either. Even if there has been an increased scientific (interdisciplinary) discussion of pop culture since the 2000s and a correspondingly increasing number of scientific pop publications, there is still a clear discrepancy between the ubiquity of pop culture and the scarcely existing institutionalization of pop culture research. The marginal university institutionalization severely limits pop research. Research that wants to gain academic recognition, regardless of how controversial it is, can ultimately only take place successfully in the context of the university. This situation is not fundamentally different in academic teaching either, albeit partly for different reasons. Those who study literary and cultural studies nowadays, for the most part, have no fundamentally different tastes than those who are enrolled in the social, economic or engineering sciences. Most would not read Goethe or Thomas Mann voluntarily (by Stefan George or Hugo Ball, but also not to mention Rolf Dieter Brinkmann and Rainald Goetz), their private reading extends to crime novels, guides, realistic novels, fantasy - if they read books because TV series, rock music, dance and party music, well-known films, comedy, football broadcasts, videos and articles via social media dominate her free time. Events on such topics in the media, history, literature and cultural studies therefore meet with great interest. Pop topics are mostly only popular until it becomes clear that the investigation of pop cultural phenomena also means intensive study and reflection work and that pop is not characterized by direct evidence - and can in no way be dealt with exhaustively by talking about one's own experiences and tastes . In contrast to many other topics and areas, the approaches are
Seniors and important historical assessments are not discussed in basic courses either, so basic ways of speaking and observing pop culture may not be familiar. The Pop Culture Handbook would therefore like to show from an interdisciplinary perspective which milestones in pop research have already existed since the 1950s - and at the same time create the basis for a stronger institutionalization of pop research, at least offer a changed academic view beyond the individual discipline to pop culture. We would therefore like to thank the authors involved in the Pop Culture Handbook for making it possible. Literature Bennett, Andy / Kahn-Harris, Keith: After Subculture: Critical Studies in Contemporary Youth Culture. London 2004. Carroll, Noël: A Philosophy of Mass Art. Oxford 1998. Frith, Simon / Straw, Will / Street, John (eds.): The Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock. Cambridge 2001. Gebesmair, Andreas: The fabrication of global diversity. Structure and logic of the transnational pop music industry. Bielefeld 2008. Graczyk, Theodore: Rhythm and Noise. An aesthetics of rock. London / New York 1996. Hebdige, Dick: Hiding in the Light. On Images and Things. London / New York 1988. Hecken, Thomas: Theories of popular culture. Thirty positions from Schiller to Cultural Studies. Bielefeld 2007. Hecken, Thomas: Pop. History of a concept 1955– 2009. Bielefeld 2009. Hecken, Thomas / Kleiner, Marcus S./Menke, André: Popliteratur. An introduction. Stuttgart 2015. Huegel, Hans-Otto (ed.): Handbuch Popular Kultur. Terms, theories and discussions. Stuttgart / Weimar 2003. Kleiner, Marcus S .: Pop fight Pop. Life and theory in conflict. In: Dirk Matejovski / Marcus S. Kleiner / Enno Stahl (eds.): Pop in R (h) einkultur. Surface aesthetics and everyday culture in the region. Essen 2008, 11–42. Kleiner, Marcus S./Rappe, Michael (ed.): Methods of popular culture research. Interdisciplinary perspectives on film, television, music, the Internet and computer games. Münster 2012. Kleiner, Marcus S./Schulze, Holger (ed.): Sabotage! Pop as a dysfunctional international. Bielefeld 2013. Kleiner, Marcus S./Szepanski, Achim (eds.): Soundcultures. About electronic and digital music. Frankfurt a. M. 2003. Kleiner, Marcus S./Wilke, Thomas (ed.): Performativity and Mediality of Popular Cultures. Theories, aesthetics, practices. Wiesbaden 2012. Longhurst, Brian / Bogdanović, Danijela: Popular Music & Society. Cambridge et al. 32014. Maase, Kaspar: Limitless pleasure. The rise of mass culture 1850–1970. Frankfurt a. M. 1997.
Neal, Mark Anthony: Soul Babies. Black Popular Culture and the Post-Soul Aesthetic. New York 2002. Nieland, Jörg-Uwe: Pop and Politics. Political ›pop culture‹ and cultural politics in the media society. Cologne 2009. Otte, Gunnar: Body capital and partner search in clubs and discos. An inequality theory perspective. In: Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung 2/2 (2007), 169–186. Otte, Gunnar: The explanatory power of lifestyle and classic social structure concepts. In: Cologne journal for sociology and social psychology, special issue 51 (2011), 361–398. Pawlowski, Tadeusz: Concept formation and definition, Berlin / New York 1980. Robbins, David (ed.): The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty. Cambridge, Mass./London 1990. Storey, John: Inventing Popular Culture. From Folklore to Globalization. Malden et al. 2003. Warneken, Bernd J .: The ethnography of popular cultures. An introduction. Vienna and others 2006.
Viol, Claus-Ulrich: Jukebooks. Contemporary British Fiction, Popular Music, and Cultural Value. Heidelberg 2006. Volkmann, Maren: Women and Pop Culture. Feminism, cultural studies, contemporary literature. Bochum 2011. Volmar, Axel / Schröter, Jens (ed.): Auditory media cultures. Hearing techniques and sound design practices. Bielefeld 2013. Walter, Harry: She said yes. I said pop. About saying yes, enlightenment and hanging around. In: Walter Grasskamp / Michaela Krützen / Stephan Schmitt (eds.): What is pop? Ten attempts. Frankfurt a. M. 2004, 43-68. Whiteley, Sheila / Rycenga. Jennifer (ed.): Queering the Popular Pitch. London / New York 2006. Whiting, Cécile: Pop L.A. Art and the City in the 1960s. Berkeley / Los Angeles 2006. Wicke, Peter (ed.): Rock and pop music. Laaber 2001 (= Handbook of Music in the 20th Century, Vol. 8). Willis, Paul: Profane Culture. London / Boston 1978.
Thomas Hecken / Marcus S. Kleiner
II genres and media
A Music 1 Rhythm & Blues Rhythm & Blues (also: Rhythm and Blues, R&B, more rarely: R 'n' B, RnB) is a collective name for popular music in the USA, which is played or sung by African-American musicians and singers and for one predominantly African American audience was produced. In 1949, "Rhythm & Blues" replaced the names "Harlem Hit Parade" (1942-48) and "Best-Selling Race Records" (1948/49) for charts based on record sales as well as jukebox and disc sales in the US music industry organ Billboard -Jockey playlists were determined in predominantly African-American neighborhoods. ›Rhythm & Blues‹ is thus initially a collective term from music marketing for various Afro-American styles of music within US society, which is characterized by racial segregation and racial discrimination. At the same time, the expression ›Rhythm & Blues‹ refers to the special importance of rhythmic design and the relation to the blues; Following on from this, the expression became the style name for urban Afro-American dance and popular music of the 1940s and 1950s. During the 1960s and 1970s, “Rhythm & Blues” was replaced by “Soul” and “Funk”; the Billboard charts were renamed "Soul" in 1969 and "Black Music" in 1982. In 1990 it was renamed "Rhythm & Blues". Since then, ›Rhythm & Blues‹ has once again acted as a collective term for popular music by Afro-Americans, which also includes soul and funk as well as Afro-American disco and pop music (also: ›Contemporary Rhythm & Blues‹); sometimes R&B and hip-hop are included in the same charts. Occasionally, an attempt is made to describe overarching design elements of all the popular music styles mentioned of Afro-American provenance. Richard Ripani identified between
1950 and 1999 numerous overarching peculiarities of a ›blues system‹: blue notes, typical patterns and riffs (these are short melodic or chordal characters), peculiarities of harmony (major-seventh chords on the first and fourth levels), a cyclical design with a tendency towards harmonic statics, aspects of rhythmic design (including offbeat accents), improvisational components and tonal or vocal design elements that emphasize the individuality of the singers or musicians (Ripani 2006, 16–60).
Blues The immediate forerunners of rhythm & blues lie in the various varieties of blues. Blues originated in the late 19th century in the southern United States, among other things from Field Hollers and Work Songs, and was the music of the first generation of freedom raised, but still dispossessed and uneducated Afro-Americans. In contrast to older folk ballads, the focus in the Blue Texts is shifted from the third to the first person. The singer (seldom the singer) sings about the mostly painful experiences in life and the disappointments in dealing with the opposite sex (›having the blues‹, ›feeling blue‹). The lyrics of blues songs are usually three lines, the first line is repeated and at the end of the lines space is left for instrumental additions (call and response); It is not uncommon for text modules to be put together to form a song during the performance. The melody lines are often based on contour models that fall in pitch and are given a special quality by pitch ranges, the so-called ›blue note areas‹, especially with the third, fifth and minor seventh, which are intoned particularly flexibly (cf. Titon 1977). Dominate the instrumental accompaniment
T. Hecken, M. S.Kleiner (Ed.), Handbuch Popkultur, DOI 10.1007 / 978-3-476-05601-6_2, © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, 2017
1 rhythm & blues
certain playing patterns (patterns); the harmonics are often reduced and deviate from the European functional harmonics. In the 1910s, blues compositions appeared as sheet music and were initially recorded on records by Euro-American singers. Several thousand recordings with Afro-American singers were made in the 1920s especially for the newly developed Afro-American record market (“Race Records”). There are roughly three stylistic areas: In Vaudeville Blues, professional singers (including Bessie Smith, Ma Rainey) sang accompanied by a pianist or a small jazz ensemble. The country or downhome blues recordings made since 1925, on the other hand, document various styles of blues from the southern states of the USA, especially by singer-guitarists (including Blind Lemon Jefferson, Charley Patton). This can be distinguished from recordings of urban Hokum Blues or City Blues (including Tampa Red, Leroy Carr), which are characterized by a faster pace and often humorous or frivolous lyrics. While the vaudeville and city blues were standardized to a 12-bar blues form, the recordings of the down home blues testify to a flexible design. In addition to the blues, sermons, gospel and jazz recordings have also been published as "Race Records" since the 1920s; In the years that followed, there was a close correlation between the three styles in terms of musical and vocal design.
Rhythm & Blues of the 1940s and 1950s Rhythm & Blues ties in seamlessly with the stylistic developments of the blues of the 1920s and 1930s. The influence of swing was new, which was particularly evident in the line-up (wind instruments and jazz rhythm section) of the blues combos. The resulting dance or party music, a fast city blues with boogie-woogie bass figures and swing arrangements, was called ›jump blues‹. Fast tempos and optimistic, humorous and sometimes slippery texts that are associated with the post-war mood in the USA were predominant, for example in "Let The Good Times Roll" (1946) by Louis Jordan and His Tympany Five, but also in blues- Recordings of swing big bands like that of
Lionel Hampton, among others with the ›Blues Queen‹ Dinah Washington, or Count Basie with the singer Jimmy Rushing. In the 1940s, Los Angeles developed into a center of the blues with smaller ensembles, in which e-guitarists (TBone Walker et al.) Or saxophone ›Honker‹ (Big Jay McNeely, Illinois Jacquet et al.), Which the tonal possibilities of the Maxed out the saxophone, stood in the center (›West Coast Blues‹). In New Orleans around 1950, a direction of piano blues was created that was influenced by Cuban rumba (including Fats Domino, Professor Longhair). Vocal groups (e.g. the Ink Spots), whose music tied in with both gospel vocal groups and jazz singing, were also popular. Due to economic, technological and legal upheavals in the American entertainment industry, numerous small record companies were founded in the 1940s and early 1950s, often operating on a regional level and for a narrowly defined market. Many of these companies specialized in an African American audience and produced different varieties of rhythm & blues, such as B. Aladdin, Modern and Specialty in Los Angeles (from 1945), Apollo and Atlantic in New York (from 1942 and 1947), Peacock in Houston (from 1949), Chess, Chance (from 1950) and Vee-Jay (from 1953) in Chicago or Sun in Memphis (from 1952); some labels served different types of music (e.g. jazz for Atlantic and Alladin or rockabilly for Sun). The record companies were supported by the first advertising-financed local radio stations, which were also aimed at an urban African-American audience. In terms of style, the music of the new R&B labels is multifaceted and ranges from blues guitarists such as B. B. King and ballad singers such as Charles Brown to gospel groups. The blues shouters published by Atlantic Records such as Big Joe Turner or Big Mama Thornton, which are characterized by powerful vocals (shouting) and a driving rhythm of the accompanying studio band, with backbeat emphasis on the snare drum, were extremely popular. The songs were arranged at Atlantic by producers Jesse Stone, Ahmet Ertegun or Jerry Wexler; many R&B hits of the 1950s were penned by the songwriting team Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller. In contrast, Chess Records in Chicago transferred the tradition of the Mississippi Delta Blues into an urban context with electrically amplified guitars, harmonica and backing band. Both the rough, unpolished
II Genres and Media - A Music
The vocal styles of singer-guitarists like Muddy Waters or Howlin ’Wolf, as well as their guitar riffs, had a strong pull on the London rhythm and blues revival scene of the early 1960s and were a key factor in the development of rock. The lyrics of many R&B songs thematize love relationships, often with coarse humor and sexual innuendos. In the R&B hit "Sixty-Minute-Man" (1951), for example, the singer Bob Brown of Billy Ward and his Dominoes boasts with a quarter of an hour each of "kissin '", "teasin'", "squeezin '" and finally "blowin'" my top «to satisfy yourself and your beloved. As the historian Brian Ward writes, the lyrics of many R&B songs were about the demonstration of male power: “Mastery over the black woman could compensate for the black man's lack of social, economic and political power, it's inability to control many of the crucial circumstances of his life "(Ward 1998, 79). Blues singers like Ruth Brown or Etta James countered, like vaudeville blues singers of the 1920s, with their own songs in which they demanded their (also sexual) self-determination as women with a similarly high level of emotionality and comparable wit. Atlantic Records achieved its greatest sales success in the R&B market of the 1950s, however, not with blues shouters, but with vocal groups such as The Clovers, The Cardinals and The Drifters, whose music and lyrics differed from the themes typical of blue. Not misogyny and macho, but the romantic transfiguration of love shaped the music, which was particularly popular among teenagers and was later referred to as ›Doo Wop‹. Influenced by jazz and gospel vocal groups of the 1930s and 1940s, a street culture of vocal groups developed among Afro-American (male) adolescents around 1950, singing ballads and dance numbers for several voices, with the vocal melody being sung on vowels by bass lines and chords (›blowony ‹) Was accompanied. According to Ward, the extraordinary success of the Afro-American vocal groups after 1950 is due not least to the fact that they presented an alternative to “r & b’s dominant vision of opportunistic, predatory, distrustful and often destructive black sexual politics” (ibid., 80). The small record labels that geared their R&B productions to the Afro-American market were surprised by the success even with white youths. The crossover to the Euro-American
The market segment (readable from the Billboard PopCharts) was initially often based on so-called ›cover songs‹, i.e. through reinterpretations by Euro-American singers (which were common at the time). For example, "Shake, Rattle And Roll" (1954) in the version by blues shouter Big Joe Turner reached number 1 on the R&B charts, but only number 22 in the pop charts, while the version by Bill Haley and his, recorded shortly afterwards Comets came to number 7 on the pop charts. Again, it was mainly vocal groups that took their songs to the top of both the R&B and pop charts, such as The Chords with »ShBoom« (1954, R&B, number 1, and Pop, number 5) and finally The Pretenders ("The Great Pretender," 1955, R&B, # 1, and Pop, # 1). Conversely, in the second half of the 1950s, the Euro-American rock ’n’ roll singer Elvis Presley also achieved high positions in the R&B charts. With the expression “Rock’ n ’Roll”, a new style was introduced from the mid-1950s that broke away from the decidedly Afro-American references and took into account the emergence of a US youth culture that tended to transcend the various ethnic groups. Several African American singers were now primarily marketed as rock ’n’ roll singers, such as Chuck Berry (under contract with Chess) or Little Richard (with Specialty). In turn, Atlantic tried from the mid-1950s with African-American singing groups such as The Drifters and The Coasters using song lyrics on teenage topics (school, first love, etc.) to produce hits for the crossover market for young people. The stylistic transitions between Afro-American singing groups and the pop of the girl groups around 1960, the surf bands on the American west coast and the early recordings of the soul label Motown Records are musically fluid. While rhythm & blues increasingly moved away from rural blues in the 1950s, it was precisely these archaic roots that were celebrated by the folk revival movement in the early 1960s; for example, guitarist John Lee Hooker had to perform at the Newport Folk Festival in 1963 with an acoustic guitar - and not the usual electric guitar.
Adaptation in England, FRG, GDR In Europe, blues, rhythm & blues and gospel music were still often perceived as sub-areas of jazz in the 1950s and, above all, by jazz
1 rhythm & blues
fans appreciated. The British Dixieland star Chris Barber brought various blues singers, including Muddy Waters and Otis Spann, to concerts in Great Britain from 1954 onwards. Under the impression of an (electrified) appearance by Muddy Waters in 1958 in London, Alexis Korner and Cyril Davies broke away from the local skiffle scene and founded the British rhythm & blues revival with the band Blues Incorporated, through which numerous rock bands and - musicians such as The Rolling Stones, The Yardbirds, The Graham Bond Organization and The Kinks as well as Jeff Beck, Eric Clapton, Peter Green, Manfred Mann and Jimmy Page. In Germany, the first blues concerts were organized by hot club fans, such as Big Bill Broonzy's appearance in Düsseldorf in 1951. The tours of the American Folk Blues Festival, which were organized annually from 1962 to 1966 and then at irregular intervals, made various varieties of Downhome Blues and Rhythm & Blues known to a larger audience. When selecting the artists, the two organizers, Horst Lippmann and Fritz Rau, relied primarily on Willie Dixon, the main producer and musical director at Chess Records, so that numerous artists from Chicago came to Europe in the years that followed. Contrary to the great stylistic range of the blues varieties presented - it ranged from rediscovered downhome blues musicians and vaudeville blues singers to swing-oriented jump blues to the rhythm & blues stars of the 1950s - the entire festival was called » Documentation of the authentic blues ", the folk music of the" underprivileged Afro-American minority in the USA "announced (cf. Rauhut 2016, 99–159). As Moritz Ege proves, the “blues paradigm of authentic expression” (Ege 2007, 52) shaped the German reception not only of rhythm and blues, but also of soul; it is linked to vocabulary like ›expressive‹, ›earthly‹, ›vital‹, ›physical‹, ›rousing‹, ›authentic‹, ›simply-straight‹ and ›seething‹, which denote the »semantic fields of authenticity, life, Earth, Blood, Heat and Feeling «(cf. ibid.). On the other hand, currents of R&B that the Afro-American listeners in the USA praised as ›mellow‹, ›smooth‹ or ›easy‹ were regularly assumed to have commercial intentions in the German reception and rejected as ›smooth‹, ›diluted‹ or ›sterile‹. The question of how a ›white‹ person could play authentically ›black‹ music was answered with reference to performative qualities: ›black-
sein ‹was not understood as essentialist, but as a primarily performative achievement, which - regardless of skin color - could succeed with the right› feeling ‹while dancing, making music or singing. The social marginalization of Afro-Americans, which European blues fans projected onto their own social and political circumstances, was also emphasized (ibid., 68 ff.). Not least due to the influence of the American Folk Blues Festival, which made guest appearances in numerous Western European countries and in 1964 also in the GDR, a lively blues scene with clubs, smaller festivals and acts such as the Frankfurt City Blues Band emerged in both West and East Germany or The Third Ear in the FRG and Stefan Diestelmann or Engerling in the GDR. In the GDR in particular, blues and blues-rock were stylized as the "soundtrack of silent resistance" and the "cipher of an unadapted youth" in the 1970s. The GDR youth scene of the ›bluesers‹, ›hitchhikers‹ or ›customers‹ could refer to the political oppression of Afro-Americans by the imperialist USA, but nevertheless came under Stasi surveillance (Rauhut 2016, 267 ff.).
Renaissance of Rhythm & Blues In the USA, in the course of the 1960s, blues and blues-oriented rhythm & blues increasingly became the music of an older generation, while the younger generation identified with the mentality and emancipatory values of the African-American civil rights movement and soul, which is what expressed in a more engaged, less fatalistic stance towards US society and a changing relationship between the sexes. From a musical point of view, however, the transitions between certain currents of rhythm & blues and soul are fluid. The soul of Motown Records tied in seamlessly with doo wop and pop around 1960, and the southern soul of Stax and Atlantic Records carried on numerous characteristics from rhythm and blues. From the late 1980s onwards, the expression “Rhythm & Blues” experienced a renaissance as a collective term for music by and for Afro-Americans, with the discussion about R&B now being in the context of more recent Afro-American identity politics. This is how the American journalist and cultural critic Nelson George speaks in his 1988 under the
II Genres and Media - A Music
provocative title The Death of Rhythm & Blues published study on Afro-American music in view of the prevailing tendency to crossover into the Euro-American pop market in the 1970s and 1980s - from disco to pop by Michael Jackson - of a loss of the »racial identity« of the Afro-American, which equates to a »cultural suicide« (George 1988, 200). According to George, African-American artists should rather free themselves from the comfort of assimilation and “fight for the right to exist on their own terms” (ibid.). George sees this demand for cultural self-determination fulfilled both in hip-hop and in a generation of younger singers who are newly appropriating the musical tradition of soul and funk (e.g. Anita Baker, "Rapture", 1986). In general, different Afro-American identity designs were now possible, which could be playfully developed and combined with one another (cf. Neal 2002). Accordingly, since the 1990s the term ›R&B‹ has been used again as a collective term for different currents of popular Afro-American music, whereby both musically and lyrically the historical reference points of soul and funk for younger stars like Mary J. Blige (“What The 411”, 1992) , D'Angelo ("Brown Sugar", 1995) or Lauryn Hill ("The Miseducation Of Lauryn Hill", 1998), whose music was sometimes referred to as ›Neo Soul‹ or ›Nu Soul‹, were more important than the Rhythm & Blues of the 1940s and 1950s or the older blues. In addition, the connection to rap music - Lauryn Hill z. B. first became known as the rapper of the Fugees - and the collaboration with rappers as well as self-determined music production using the means of modern studio technology now play a central role. Stylistic features remain on the one hand a specific, 'groovy' rhythm design, which is not infrequently linked to funk, and on the other hand the use of soul-typical vocal design elements; Both stylistic devices focus on the physical and emotional involvement of the listener. Mainly due to the use of vocal melisms and the targeted use of vocal timbres, including a rough voice and head voice / falsetto, an emotional intensity is generated that is perceived as ›typical R&B‹ - so that, in a broad sense, the pop ballads of Whitney Houston, Janet Jackson or Mariah Carey can be assigned to the Rhythm & Blues; Furthermore
white singers such as B. assign Amy Winehouse to the newer rhythm & blues due to her performative, especially vocal qualities.Literature Ege, Moritz: Become black. "African Americanophilia" in the 1960s and 1970s. Bielefeld 2007. George, Nelson: The Death of Rhythm and Blues. New York 1988. Groosman, Stuart L .: Group Harmony. The Black Urban Roots of Rhythm & Blues. Philadelphia 2005. Guralnick, Peter: Sweet Soul Music. Rhythm and Blues and the Southern Dream of Freedom. New York 1986. Keil, Charles: Urban Blues. Chicago 1966. Neal, Marc Anthony: Soul Babies. Black Popular Culture and the Post-Soul Aesthetic. New York 2002. Rauhut, Michael: One sound - two worlds. Blues in divided Germany, 1945 to 1990. Bielefeld 2016. Ripani, Richard J .: The New Blue Music. Changes in Rhythm & Blues, 1950–1999. Jackson 2006. Shaw, Arnold: Honkers and Shouters. The Golden Years of Rhythm and Blues. New York 1978. Titon, Jeff Todd: Early Downhome Blues. A Musical and Cultural Analysis. Urbana 1977. Ward, Brian: Just My Soul Responding. Rhythm and Blues, Black Consciousness, and Race Relations. Berkeley 1998.
- Is the government part of the public service?
- How do I delete this account 8
- How will Instacart expand its product catalog
- How did Steven Seagal get so fat
- Which dress is best for the party
- How can I forget my bitter past
- Hamilton was a good father
- Physicists really hate electricity
- Who is the President of Vietnam
- Where should I stay when visiting Phoenix
- How would you build a better bookstore
- What is your most bizarre habit
- Where can I find SharePoint 2013 tutorials
- What is the meaning of a timeline
- Are pyramid schemes illegal
- Why is Kylo Ren sexist
- Game hunting should be allowed
- Who am I in another universe
- BEL and BHEL are the same
- Are greenhouse gases a problem in Australia?
- Indonesians are lazy so poor
- Has government regulation actually contributed to the creation of monopolies?
- Was Rembrandt of the Warriors gay
- How do Tanzanians see Julius Nyerere at the moment?