Tag Archives: music

Idol Worship Misplaced in Canada

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

Melissa O’Neil may have walked off this week with the title of Canadian Idol, but the new female vocal talent that we should be worshipping got dismissed from another show last night.

While Canadian Idol stumbles through another season that will propel its winner to a 15 minutes of spectacular mediocrity, another show that hasn’t had nearly the following, Rock Star INXS, has showcased Canada’s true undiscovered talent. Two Canucks were firmly entrenched in the final four candidates to front the Australian band, J.D. Fortune and the just-dismissed Suzie McNeil.

The difference between the Michael Hutchence wannabes and O’Neil? Refined talent, stage presence, and excitement.

The problem with any of the Idol shows is that they generally crown the most inoffensive and mildly pleasing of the group. By offending the least amount of people they’re able to make their way through the show. But while they’re pleasant performers, they don’t incite the passion that true successful artists need to fuel their careers. Rock Star’s performers have shown what music’s supposed to be about: dynamic stage presence, powerful performances, and – most importantly – passion.

In fact, watching the performances on the INXS show, it’s painfully obvious that any of these performers could blow Canadian Idol’s participants off the stage with just one vocal. And the main reason for this disparity? Age.

Sorry to say it, but Idol’s restrictions to a mid-20s age limit means that there are a number of performers in this country who aren’t eligible for no other reason than a birth certificate. Fortune and McNeil, aged 31 and 28 respectfully, don’t fit into this cookie-cutter mould of Idol prospects.

But what the Idol producers haven’t figured out is that young doesn’t necessarily mean fresh. Sometimes it takes time for performers to discover who they are and to find themselves musically. And with the notoriously short career of today’s pop stars, hitting 30 doesn’t preclude them from burning just as bright and fading away just as quickly as Kalan Porter and that Buddy Holly wannabe from year one – OK, his name is Ryan Malcom, but admit it, you forgot too! And, given their age and experience, perhaps they’d make more of an impact on the marketplace.

Our pop idols don’t have to be disposable – but we set them up to be by hosting annual shows. As soon as one idol is crowned, many are eagerly anticipating the arrival of the next season, for their next object of affection to be revealed. And the very thing that makes INXS’ singers appealing – their more-polished performances and finished edges – is exactly why there’s an Idol age limit. Younger singers are more malleable and can be shaped into whatever image that the producers want after the voting audience has its say.

The INXS concept is something different. The audience has a voice in defining the bottom three, but it’s the band that makes the final decision, based on who they think is right for them. And perhaps that’s the way it should be. Perhaps the judges and the people who make their living in the music industry should have more of a voice

I admit, I came to the INXS show late. Not being a big fan of the band, I resisted watching despite my wife’s insistence that the performances were good. In fact, when I found out the members had to memorize 20 INXS hits, my first thought was, “they had 20 hits? Well, I guess if you’re number-one on the Canadian Top 40, the Billboard Chart, or the Mumbai Hot 100 it’s all the same.” I enjoyed a few of their songs, but not enough to warrant any investment of my time in their future.

But what has made me a fan over the past few weeks has been the power of the performers. Their on-stage presence has been riveting. Their power, passion, and understanding of what it means to be a musician has made me care about who wins, even if I didn’t care about the band before this.

What is clear that despite McNeil’s departure from the show, she has what it takes to take it to the next level with or without INXS backing her vocals. And even if Fortune doesn’t become INXS’ front man next week, he and his Pretty Vegas breakout track should be rocketing up the Canadian charts very soon.

The latest Canadian Idols have been crowned. Unfortunately, they didn’t come from the show with the same name.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

The Soundtrack of Our Lives

Leave a reply

By Jason Menard

They say that music is the soundtrack of our lives, but why should we restrict ourselves to repeating the same song over and over in perpetuity?

Music takes us to a time and a place that may never have existed. It lets us imagine our lives in a different context and helps to define the person we envision ourselves as being – the true inner self manifested through a horn section.

We look at the music of the past through rose-coloured glasses, embracing its ideals and purity, without being tainted by the day-to-day reality of life. That’s why, on a long drive, I spent the better part of an hour swinging with the Rat Pack, Louis Prima, and their contemporaries, being transported to an idealized hipster lifestyle. And, yes, I lament the loss of the fedora (I did try, unsuccessfully, to bring it back into vogue during my high-school years).

Music’s also the reason why I want to walk down the street with a 70’s blaxsploitation groove in the background. My inner funkster demands to be set free. And think of how cool it would have been to woo my wife with a four-man Temptations-style band in the background, echoing my sweet words of inspiration!

But music is more than just a representation of who we want to be, it’s an indicator of who we are.

In our early youth, we want to conform and be like the others – and that’s why teen pop has and always will be so popular. Yet, what the critics don’t understand is that teen pop is a necessary evil. It’s an introduction into music based on conformity that forms the foundation for individuality. And many of us cynics tend to forget that we, once, were young and passionate about music – appreciating it for its ability to move us, not stand up to scrutiny.

In our insecure youths, we all have a need to fit in, which is why we’re drawn to the music of our peers. And because music is such an integral part of our self-validation, we defend it with fiery passion and vigour. Try reproaching a teen or a pre-teen about their music and the response you’ll get is akin to an emotional wound – and that’s because, in a way, it is.

By questioning a youth’s music choice, we’re – in essence – questioning who they are and where they fit in this world. When you define yourself by your musical taste, having it called into question also calls into question your sense of self.

Eventually youthful passion burns away and a desire for exploration takes hold in all of us. That desire to conform to the masses fades away and is replaced by a desire to assert our individuality. And the best way to broadcast our newfound emancipation from the masses? Music!

Of course, the irony of all of this is that we move from conforming to one set of norms to another – but on a smaller scale. As we age, we are defined by our musical affiliations: rockers, punks, skaters, hippies, artsy types, etc. We move in smaller circles, embracing a new sense of self that’s reflected in the lyrics. We wear our musical tastes as a badge of honour and use them like secret handshakes into a private club.

In a rejection of the music of my youth and in an attempt to set myself apart from the crowd, I embraced the music of the 50’s, particularly that of Elvis Presley. And as I moved through the halls, I encountered little musical cliques, ranging from the Led-Zeppelin retro-rockers, the CSNY-influenced modern-day hippies, the Cure and Smiths-fed melancholic popsters, and the various members of Public Enemy’s Nation (please remember I was a child of the 80s…)

Of course, university was no different. Despite the increasingly diverse collective of people, the basic need to affiliate to a style of music remained the same. Except now we increasingly encountered the Hipper-Than-You Brit Poppers, the Smarter-Than-You College Rock fans, and the Drunker-Than-You Frat Boy/Tragically Hip collective.

But what meeting all these people throughout our lives enables us to do is to search out new styles and genres, learning from our musical history and appreciating what came before us. Like a musical buffet, we’re able to sample the flavours of each and every style – embracing what we like and rejecting others as not suited to our tastes.

It’s then when we learn to appreciate all the genres, styles, and forms music takes. Ask most teenagers to listen to Bach and you’ll get indifferent stares back for your efforts. But find those same people 20 years later and they’ll be more receptive to the idea.

I may be a child of the 80s, but I’m by no means defined by that musical era. However, that music is why I can spend an enjoyable morning passionately discussing with a friend of mine soul/funk music that predates both of our births. It’s why I can feel my frozen Canadian blood warmed by Latin and Brazilian beats. And it’s why I’m now able to appreciate music for what it is – an expression of life.

No matter when we’re born, our contemporary music gives us the foundation from which we are able to build a varied and diverse appreciation of music. Eventually we outgrow our youthful passion and zealousness and learn that one style of music doesn’t define us completely.

We are, by nature, rich and diverse people that move – and are moved – by different beats at different times. And that’s truly the soundtrack of our lives.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved

Do We Say Beat It to a Thriller?

2 Replies

By Jason Menard

Is it still OK to like Michael Jackson? That decision will probably be made once a jury of his peers renders a verdict on allegations of inappropriate activities with children? But the question is should a guilty or innocent decision make a difference?

To a large extent in our society celebrities are given a get out of jail free card, cashing in on the goodwill generated by their various talents. Our admiration for their abilities also seems to foster an exaggerated gift of the benefit of doubt.

We live in a society where one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But, let’s face it, if the average guy showed up on TV, proudly boasting that he sleeps with young boys – but there’s nothing untoward about it, chances are we’d be avoiding this guy like the plague. And I know that my son wouldn’t be having any overnighters at the guy’s house.

And that’s the general reaction we’d have for the average Joe. Not the eccentric, changes-his-face-more-often-than-Paul-Martin-changes-his-mind, former child prodigy that is Michael Jackson.

But, behind the trial, behind the eccentricities, behind the media furor lies an artist and his art. And it’s the appreciation of this art that may be irretrievably lost in all of this, if it hasn’t already been damaged beyond repair.

Is it still OK to like Michael Jackson? The difficulty of this question is magnified by the simple fact that there are two ways to read it. Are we discussing Michael Jackson, the man, who is alleged to have personal demons that are reprehensible to society as a whole? Or are we looking at Michael Jackson, the industry, and a body of work and expressed talent that has rarely been seen.

I’ll admit it — I own Thriller. And I know there are at least one or two of you out there that do to, seeing as he’s sold about a kagillion copies of this album. As a child of the 80’s I grew up listening to his music, watching his talent manifest itself in ways that I had never seen. Listening to his work with the Jackson Five introduced me to the wonderful world of Motown. His performance at Motown’s 25 th – where he unveiled the Moonwalk and tossed his hat into the crowd – is an image I’ll never forget. Heck, I even owned a Glitter Glove!

But will that legacy of music, the influence he’s had on a generation of performers who followed, the innovation he displayed in his music videos, be tainted should a guilty verdict be rendered? Do we retroactively diminish superhuman achievement in light of less-than-human behaviour?

A case can be made in the affirmative when we look at O.J. Simpson. Not guilty criminally, but found culpable in a civil court, The Juice is looked upon as a pariah as he continues his search for The Real Killers in the bunkers and on the fairways of North America. And, while it’s easy to dismiss his talents on the Silver Screen, we accomplishments on the gridiron are now in question. Undoubtedly one of the great running backs of his time, it takes a brave sportswriter to acknowledge his talent in a public forum.

However, our celebrity worship also takes us to the other extreme. When rape allegations against Kobe Bryant were first brought to the fore, thousands of ravenous supporters rallied to his side. These people knew nothing more about Kobe than what they saw on the court, or what his public relations consultants and advertising contracts showcased, but they were willing to throw their wholehearted support behind him! I don’t think these people would do the same for the average guy in their community charged with rape – in fact, they’d probably trot out the old “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire” adage and presume guilt.

As our society is increasingly exposed to the trials and tribulations of celebrity justice, so too will this issue have to be addressed. If Robert Blake is convicted of murdering his wife, does that change how we view his performance in In Cold Blood? Yet, modern rap artists gain welcome street cred for behaviour that we’d vilify in the general public.

When it comes to art, should it matter whether or not we approve of the artist? Does singing along to Bad mean that I tacitly support alleged pedophilia? Were my childhood attempts at doing the Moonwalk the subconscious modern equivalent of goose-stepping in time with a malevolent leader? Is all the good brought about by We Are the World lost by allegations of reprehensible behaviour?

I’d argue that’s not the case. It is not a case of the ends justifying the means. In fact, one should have nothing to do with the other. If Michael Jackson is convicted, then he should be locked up and left to dance his way around the general population of Cell Block 1. And the only singing we should hear from him is at his parole review. But regardless of the outcome, our appreciation of his past musical achievements shouldn’t be coloured by our opinion of the man. The art should be separate from the artist – but I have a feeling that won’t be the case.

Perhaps the Jackson trial will set the benchmark for how future popular opinion will be defined. And, in the future, we may have to hold off on our appreciation of our favourite artists until enough time has elapsed to ensure that there are no skeletons waiting to fall out of their closet.

2005 © Menard Communications – Jason Menard All Rights Reserved