|
What
Can We Learn From Janet Jackson's Breast?
By Aaron Minsky a.k.a. Von Cello, MusicDish.com
Recently,
in a performance during half time at the Super Bowl, one of Janet
Jackson's breasts was released on national television. That is a
simple fact, but it has caused a massive controversy from coast
to coast. You may wonder what is the big deal, but Janet Jackson's
breast is a very big deal! In fact, her breast is just the tip of
the iceberg!
I
don't wish to comment on the morality of her display of nudity.
The fact that there were children watching at that moment is not
my concern. I'll leave that debate to the spiritual leaders and
the politicians. What concerns me are the musical implications of
her few seconds of infamy. What does Ms. Jackson's breast say about
the state of music in America in 2004?
There
was a time when being an expert at playing an instrument would lead
to fame. This was particularly true if you could compose and play
your own compositions. In this category we think of Chopin, Liszt
and Paganinni. In more modern times, musicians who could not compose
but who were great instrumentalists became famous worldwide. The
names Casals, Heifitz, and Horowitz come to mind. In the field of
jazz, one had to be an expert improviser, and a good tunesmith,
to win fame. In this category, we think of Dizzy Guillespie, Miles
Davis, and John Coltrane.
With
the birth of rock n' roll, all that changed. To be fair, for the
most part, in the early days of rock, to get noticed you had to
be a decent instrumentalist and have some kind of a distinctive
sound. But very early on, a man rose to prominence in rock who became
so influential he was dubbed "the king." That man was Elvis Presley,
yet Elvis could barely play the guitar! What Elvis did was not so
much about being a trained musician as it was about being a performer,
creating an image, and stirring up controversy. The main buzz about
Elvis was the way he shook his pelvis. Though he was quite a good
singer, it was his sensual persona that brought him his fame. In
this, he set the pattern for many who would follow in his footsteps,
people who were not really musicians, but musical entertainers,
or performance artists, commonly known simply as "artists."
A
decade after Elvis hit it big, the rock "artist" was still looking
for a way to be noticed. In the sixties, the way to be noticed was
to do drugs and get wild on stage. A good example of this was Jim
Morrison. He happened to be an excellent singer, but his image -
that of an out of control drunk, liable to do anything - helped
earn him his fame. In fact, Morrison was arrested for indecent exposure.
His antics created a constant stream of publicity, but it also took
a toll. The attacks on him by the police and the press, not to mention
the lawsuits and court appearances, became overwhelming. It was
not long before Morrison was found dead of an overdose of drugs,
a disease that also afflicted Elvis and many other artists.
Around
the time of Morrison, rock had matured to the point where there
were some excellent musicians on the scene. Jimi Hendrix was considered
the greatest rock guitarist of the time, yet even Hendrix had to
do more than ply his craft to get noticed. Hendrix used to set his
guitars on fire as he kneeled sensuously over the flames. Other
rock groups would break their guitars, smash amplifiers and keyboards,
and commit other acts of violence to get noticed. Ozzy Osborne distinguished
himself by biting off the head of a bird, and routinely biting the
heads off of rubber bats on stage. This trend, of the violent musician,
reached its zenith with the Plasmatics, a band that I actually played
with for a short while. (They added a string quartet to their madness
for some reason.) Admittedly marginal musicians, they became known
for chain sawing guitars and chairs, smashing televisions with sledgehammers,
and ultimately blowing up whole cars on stage!
Back
on the solo artist side, performers kept trying to push the envelope.
In the 1980s, Madonna burst upon the scene. Like a female Elvis,
she was a decent singer, but became known for her sexuality. In
concert, Madonna would hump on a bed or on the floor as if she were
masturbating. She also brought in a heavy S & M presence to her
stage act, including spankings, whips and chains, and the treating
of her dancers as sex slaves. With each CD she pushed further, attacking
sexual taboos involving race and religion. She also included nudity
in videos and in a coffee table book that bordered on pornography.
Madonna
seemed to spawn the next generation of female artists who were even
more determined to use sexuality to the fullest. Artists like Brittney
Spears and others played on taboos such as the naughty schoolgirl,
and the wild girl. They showed as much skin as they could without
actually becoming naked, and they made a practice of using the most
suggestive dance moves imaginable. On the Hip Hop side of the track,
images of guys with multiple girlfriends in hot tubs or in expensive
cars or homes became popular. Grinding dance moves with girls in
skimpy outfits became standard video fare. One artist, Snoop Dogg,
actually crossed over to porn, becoming a player in the "Girls Gone
Wild" videos of late night TV fame.
Which
brings us back to Janet Jackson's breast. The whole nation was treated
to a view of Janet's large round breast, with her nipple surrounded
by some type of jewelry piece that looked like a star. With the
removal of a little swatch of material, in a matter of seconds,
Ms. Jackson crossed a line that no one dared cross before. She was
naked on national television on prime time during a family entertainment
event! No longer can hinting at sex be considered pushing the envelope:
the envelope is open!
Is
what she did pornography? Perhaps one could argue that one breast
is performance art, but two breasts would be porn. Perhaps one could
argue that even two breasts are performance art, but exposure underneath
would be porn. Perhaps one could argue that full frontal nudity
is where this is all going. Maybe we are going back the days of
vaudeville, the days of Gypsy Rose Lee, when an "act" consisted
of a woman singing while stripping. Janet certainly opened the door
to this possibility. Of course, Gypsy did not strip on television
during prime time, but maybe that is what is needed to finally bring
this trend to its conclusion.
Breasts
and other parts of the female anatomy will always be a source of
fascination, but I would like to know one thing: where's the music?!
What happened to practicing hours a day, studying music theory,
harmony, counterpoint, performance practice? What happened to spirituality,
to expressing deep, meaningful ideas through sound? What happened
to becoming famous because you are a really great musicianS¹even
if you don't shake your pelvis, smash your guitar, or show your
bosom?
It
is possible that with Ms. Jackson's highly public performance, we
are beginning to reach the end of sexuality replacing musicianship.
Perhaps the pendulum will swing back to the time when a highly trained,
dedicated musician can become famous just for being a great musician.
It is with this hope and with this dream that I have been promoting
my cello fronted rock band, Von Cello.
If
you agree that the trend toward performance "art" has gone far enough,
and it is time to reintroduce musicianship to the world of popular
music, please support those bands and soloists who are out there
trying to make it happen. I am not saying that there is no room
in the musical world for Janet Jackson's breast, or any other body
parts that she may choose to show us in the future. What I am saying
is that there should also be room in the musical world for those
who choose to excel at playing their instruments and singing their
hearts out!
Provided
by the MusicDish
Network. Copyright © Tag
It 2004 - Republished with Permission

Return
to Hybrid Studios MAIN NEWS page
|