Pitch Please: ‘Real’ music
On Monday, the Towerlight released its April Fools’ edition (which I found quite hilarious) in which there was a fabricated story of The Pussycat Dolls replacing Wiz Khalifa as the headliner for Tigerfest. The paper also inquired on Facebook which artist would students prefer — and the first answer I noticed was “Why not actual musicians?” I wasn’t bothered by the comment because to each his own, but then it made me think about the war between what people consider to be real music.
Let’s take a moment and look at the term “real music.” I never understood the concept of real music. People throw the term around when they want to talk about artists who don’t mainstream top-40 music or they discovered watching some cable network show like “Shameless.” Just because something doesn’t suit your personal taste, you shouldn’t discredit it as not being real music. All music, no matter how “bad” or “good” you think it is, music is music. If it isn’t real music, then what is it then? Are you saying that there is such a thing as fake music? That doesn’t make much sense does it? As the years change, so do the styles in music. Now if someone said what happened to music with meaning, that would be a different story (one that I may discuss in another column).
It isn’t just consumers of music who do this but other artists who do it as well. For example, Jake Bugg an alternative artist in the UK, took shots at One Direction, referring to them as terrible and brushing them off because they don’t write all of their own music. Some of the most successful artists of all time have other people write their tunes for them. I would have used The Beatles, but from what I can gather, they did write their music, even the One Direction-eque lovey-dovey pop songs they did before all of their prolific stuff. But I digress. If you don’t like a song or a genre of music, you have that right, but don’t throw your hands up and declare that real music is dead.