let’s impeach the president for lying
“I think that the time when music could change the world is past, I think it would be very naive to think that in this day and age. .. I think the world today is a different place, and that it’s time for science and physics and spirituality to make a difference in this world and to try to save the planet.”
Neil Young made the above statements recently at the Berlin Film Festival, as reported by Geir Moulson in an Associated Press article: Music Can’t Change the World.. Young was in Berlin in support of his documentary, DSNY Deja Vu, which he directed under the pseudonym, Bernard Shakey.
It’s a tour film, but not just that. The film (and tour) focussed on music with a message, but Young balances that message with unfavorable criticism of the tour. Here’s Young with co-writer and journalist Mike Cerre talking about the film at Sundance. A highlight here: singer/songwriter/soldier Josh Heisel (and I dig the guitar/cello combo)
I’d like to catch the film, but I’m posting because of the comment from Young that I opened with. What do you think? Can music still change the world? Could it ever?
categories: music, thought
tags: Josh Heisel, Neil Young, protest music
posted by what at 07:40 pm
Couldn’t agree with Neil Young more, those days are gone. People just aren’t as socially aware as they were in the 60’s. The politics in music today takes on more of a negative tone anyway. And music aside, people as a whole are just plain selfish. Just look at the impending U.S. election. It’s not about the killing in Iraq (ours and theirs), as it was even a year ago or any number of issues that need to be addressed. Seems now, it’s all about which candidate is going to do the most “FOR ME”. I think the remaining four are sincere in their convictions to make the world a better place (well one of them), but the typical voter is only interested in themselves. Well, getting back to the musical question posed, “For What It’s Worth”, “Yes We Can!”
Maybe it can’t change the whole world.. but I do think it can still change individuals worlds. Look what Taylor has done for a lot of people. I think it can still bring people together for a common cause.
As long as music is able to affect people’s emotions and stir passions, I think anything is possible.
MUSIC as ENTERTAINMENT! What an idea.
-and just when I was beginning to think that much of the music industry was really just a promotional front for the drug cartels.
First of all, let me second that motion!
And about the music, I don’t know that it ever was able to change the world, as much as reflect what is going on in the world. In the civil right movement, it was people’s courage, their ideas, their actions that changed the world. The music itself was a reflection of what changes were taking place. A Change is gone come, The Times They Are a Changing, Give Peace a Chance… gave voice to a movement, they didn’t initiate it. It was comforting though to have the music to make you feel like you were part of something bigger than yourself.
And East, what is making me hopeful right now, is that there seems to be a shift away from ME to WE, not I will do this for you, but together this is what WE can accomplish. I think this is what is resonating with a lot of people.
Impeach the president for lying about….. Illegal wiretaps? Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Being complicit in the outing of a covert CIA agent?
mamaforpeace, I agree music in the 60’s reflected what was going on in the world. The difference, I feel, between now and then…..then - radio stations played protest songs…now - stations rarely play them, if ever. Bruce Springsteen’s latest cd has well-written songs about war, fallen soldiers, etc., as does JBT’s latest cd. I’d be very surprised if I heard one of them on the radio. Instead, they play John Mayer’s “Waiting For The World To Change”…. I won’t get started on that one. I remain an idealist. I do believe music can help change the world. Sadly, the realist in me believes even if the music is made, we’re not going to hear it on the radio.
Sadly, I don’t think music can change the world; how nice it would be if that would be true. Music is more of a mirror of the state of the world - or perhaps a hopeful reflection of what some would like the world to be. In my opinion, that is why so much bubblegum stuff is out there - for the most part we don’t want to see the grim reality of life; at least not in our entertainment. Personally I see that as necessary; how can we change what we can not see? And I agree with Trixi, music can and does change individuals. In that sense, yes, music can change the world incrementally with baby steps. But we have to hear it. (And not on the radio, whatever/whomever the entity behind the radio, they don’t want us to hear it.)
I guess I figure that any way people are exposed to new ideas has the potential of moving them to action: that can be music (well, lyrics mostly), books, speeches, etc. It’s the communication that moves the mind and heart. Where music has an advantage is that the emotions can be touched making it easier (or harder) to hear the message. And it’s pretty clear that this kind of music is not widely played on the radio (though i do hear “Punish the Monkey” almost everyday)
What I’m wondering, trying to remember, though, is whether it really was so different in the 60s. Being a kid then and growing up in fly over country, I just remember standard top 40s pop and country being played. I was aware of the war and civil rights protest music, but I think I heard it more on TV: news broadcasts, variety shows, etc. Am I remembering wrong? I may be. I remember singing Blowing in the Wind at school or church or something, which, thinking of my conservative community, kind of surprises me now.
Oddly, the only “message” song I distinctly remember hearing on the radio was “I’m Proud to be an Okie from Muskogee” - I remember howling with my friends and mocking it.
So I guess I’m wondering, was the radio ever a major player in this? It seems like maybe the music came out of the movements, it didn’t create them.
Sad to say, What, but the difference is that protest music was very profitable in the 60’s. “I think that the time when music could change the world is past” just means that anti-American government and anti-war music doesn’t make you as rich as in the 60’s. Perhaps it has something to do with 9-11, no more draft, and a few decades of very real social changes.
I don’t think music did nor will change the world but I do think it can raise awareness, heal, unite, and emotionally charge/join a group of people.
I agree that in today’s society people appear to be very self centered but is that really any different than what was going on in the 60’s?? It was all about what felt good, what was anti-establishment, celebrated the individual, and was all about here and now….in the moment.
I think you’re on to something, what, when you talk about what was on the radio in the sixties. I’m just old enough that the first popular music I paid attention to was about then, and I also don’t remember much political music on the radio. I remember a dreadful song called “Eve of Destruction” and Edwin Starr’s “War,” but that’s all that comes to mind. Dylan had lots of political music, obviously, but the only songs of his I remember hearing often on the radio were “Like A Rolling Stone” and “Rainy Day Women.” If you didn’t buy the albums, you were never going to hear the more political music. And you were certainly never going to hear more overtly political singers like Pete Seeger or Phil Ochs on the radio.
I listen to lots of political musicians now, but they’re not on the radio. But that’s really not any different from the sixties, is it? Pop radio has surely gotten worse over the decades, but it was never very good at encouraging thought.
If you’ve got some time, you might be interested in this article on political art in general, and one of my favorite political artists - Steve Earle - in particular.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/18/01827/2229/834/458844
Don’t think music can change the world, but it sure can help us survive in it. Personally, I’m not into protest songs…but I may have to change my tune given the lousy candidates for this coming election….looks like I’ll be listening to a lot of blues as well.
Then there were people who listened to the beat, to the melody, to the instrumentation; the words were irrelavent. Unless a listener makes music personal it is just their to be enjoyed. None of the songs of the 40’s, 50’s , 60’s , 70’s, 80’s , 90’s or now meant or mean anything to me; but I love much of the musicality.
Call me strange, but call me genuinely unmoved by lyrics. Sorry..