Should Artists Combine Music With Politics?
People broken down from years of oppression
Become patriots when they way of life is threatened
It's a hard conversation to have
We lost kids, moms and dads, people ready to fight for the flag
Damn, when did […] get this bad?
America kill the innocent too, the cycle of violence is sad
Damn! Welcome to the world, we here
We've been at war for years but it's much [more clear]
We got to face what lies ahead
Fight for our truth and freedom and, ride for the dead (“The Proud,” Talib Kweli).
Somewhere in the poverty-stricken areas of the far-east region, explosive weapons are killing thousands of innocent men, women, and children. Their music is a discordant mix of drumfire and cries of the injured and the dying, not to forget the deafening sound of heavy metal bomb blasts and other deadly weapons of warfare. Lethal “instruments” collide with these people, sending their arms and legs in different directions, turning untold number of children into orphans and multitudes of parents, childless. Societal ills and political unrest such as the on-going war in Iraq constitute a major source of concern to humanitarians, human rights activists, and many socially conscious musicians. Yet, many consider it irrational to combine music and message, expecting artists to ignore the cries of innocent children begging for emancipation. The marriage between music and politics is a harmonious one; it gives birth to social change, creates solidarity, enhances the participation of youths in the voting process, and allows musicians to positively exercise their freedom of speech on political issues.
The relevance of this "musi-political" wedlock is often evident on the influence of one on the other, with musicians and song-writers across the globe applying their talents to the service of social causes and echoing the plights of the repressed (Cloutier 1). From the emotion-laden voice of Bruce Springsteen on his rendition of "Born In The USA" and "This Land Is Your Land" to the protest songs of KRS-1, "Stop The Violence", Talib Kweli, "The Proud" and Public Enemy, "Son of A Bush", and the emotion-evoking voice of John Lennon when he sang " Give Peace A Chance," artists across various genres have sometimes combined the powerful forces of music and politics amidst harsh criticisms. Although the political songwriter is an endangered species in the society, their positive contributions make them invaluable to the world.
Social change is a vital consequence of the fusion of music and message. Using their art and appeal as instruments of change, political artists often create awareness on issues that are dying for attention, thus prompting a change of heart. Issues like segregation against minority groups, neglect of the underdeveloped "ghetto" areas of America, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and high taxes are some of the themes of political songs. When people hear the genuine pleas for emancipation on such songs as Talib Kweli's "The Proud" , a transformation of mentality follows, often towards the direction of optimism. One author identifies this “emancipatory” significance of music: “Through history, music has often been fundamental to such an emancipatory process, reinforcing exercise of such human abilities to subvert and transform existing systems” (Pratt 14).
Also, the partnership between music and politics creates solidarity among artists of different musical backgrounds, ranging from hip-hop to rock 'n' roll. The solidarity effect of this coalescence is evident on the antiwar statement signed by "Musicians United to Win Without" war, a group of about one hundred musicians, most of whom have never met one another, but are in a remarkable agreement on their positive stance that war is not the answer (1). When diverse artists who differ in race, nationality, music genre, and in many other aspects, come together with one voice and occupy the same room in the political spectrum, they definitely deserve to be heard. Such sense of solidarity not only strengthens the artists, but also the listeners, uniting even more individuals. The collaboration of 25 pop artists, including Michael Stipe, Nas, Gwen Stefani, Destiny's Child, Eve, etc on the remake of Marvin Gaye's classic antiwar hit "What's Going On," as a part of an effort to stop global AIDS, produced a tremendous feeling of solidarity that reached out and touched the hearts of millions of people. Artists such as Jay-Z and Bono of U2 donated millions of dollars to the victim of 9/11, not to mention the hundreds of patrriotic songs that turned the tragedy into a source of strength and solidarity. No other type of music has the ability to unify different people in the face of adversity, in such a positive manner.
Another positive outcome of the marriage between music and politics is reflected in the voting process. A significant evidence of this political use of music is the recent effort by hip-hop artists in conjunction with wrestlers to help register 2 million young people to vote in the 2004 elections. Hip-hop mogul, Russell Simmons believes that the youths are likely to heed voting advice from their favorite rap stars than from the President of the United States (DePledge 1). And by encouraging young people to take advantage of their freedom to vote, musicians are also getting them involved in the decision-making process of the society.
Speaking out on political issues further endangers the species of the political songwriter. It might be argued that the fusion of music and politics gives rise to unpatriotic utterances by musicians. For instance, the Dixie Chicks were recently "scapegoated” as the epitome of "un-American" for speaking out against the war in Iraq. Desultory monikers were directed at the Chicks for their honest opinion in a "free" society. However, expecting artists to always speak positively on political matters forces one to seriously question the freedom of speech that America preaches to other countries. This obvious attack on freedom was confirmed by a politically outspoken artist, Bruce Springsteen:
The pressure coming from the government and big business to enforce conformity of thought concerning the war and
politics goes against everything that this country is about - namely freedom. Right now, we are supposedly fighting to
create freedom in Iraq, at the same time that some are trying to intimidate and punish people for using that same freedom
here at home (Nichols 2).
By lending their vocals to issues such as the forthcoming elections, antiwar protests, and frantic calls for equality among the races, musicians are only using their fame as a constructive vehicle of free speech. When a tragedy occurs, they organize non-profit concerts to uplift the embittered American public, and ease the tension of the moment with touching renditions. However, when it comes to speaking out on societal ills, these same artists are expected to keep their opinions to themselves as if they are not part of the society.
Political songwriters are doing well by looking past the façade of entertainment and echoing the plights of the oppressed. Whereas love and relationships are the predominant themes of other types of music, political songs represent pain, despair and hope, key elements of the human experience. They attack the maladies of human existence, unite a variety of people in their fight against social injustice, serve as a source of motivation to youths, and raise social consciousness for a people immersed in turmoil and tragedy. It is the political function of music that makes it the most powerful vehicle of human expression. Therefore, if political leaders would heed the voice of reason that sings tolerance to them, then a new song of hope and happiness would replace the gruesome war tunes that are killing thousands of people in Iraq.
yes, music should reflect reality, it should be a voice that can be used by people who may not otherwise be heard to express their views and the way they feel about the world, music displays what goes on in the world be it good or bad and thats what I love about it
:type: ^^ I totally agree. You should be able to express your opinion on whats going on in the world today.
Just Just That, Yet Also To Have A Say In The Positive And Negative Occurences That Plague Us Today, Yeah But We Should Be Able To Also Fight For What We Believe In And The Rights We Have As Citizens.
i agree with Ill, what ever way you can speak your mind and have people hear and understand what you have to say you should use it, and it might be an easier way to have them see your side than having an argument or even just talkin.
