In the last 10 years or so a new phrase has crept into the jargon of music education, "Commercial Music." I have wrestled with a definition for "Commercial" music for a number of years and have explored the following explanations:
But with due consideration, each fails for lack of completeness. And in fact, collected into a single definition they fall short of sufficiently describing commercial music. I was, therefore, driven back to the dictionary to discover the "true" meaning of the phrase. When examining the tenor of the following definitions of the word "commercial" in the light of musical aesthetics, I found they portray a pejorative context -
And equally disturbing were many of the synonyms of "commercial" including: materialistic, investment, mundane, prosaic, profit-making, money-making.
In addition to these meanings perceived as negative in a musical context, there has also been an unfortunately American negative twist to the meaning of commercial music - racial intolerance. For about 50 years, roughly between 1930 and 1980, commercial music almost always contained elements of Afro-American rooted music, and I will touch on specific examples of these elements as the article progresses. For reasons located at the heart of American consciousness, and too numerous to discuss in detail in this article, this association has caused "commercial" music of these described generations to be ghetto-ized, it's riches stolen and it's creators dismissed.
The problems associated with these literal and hidden meanings of "commercial" caused me to consider applying the literal definitions of "commercial" to all types of music in an effort to determine if there were any musical factors that distinguish the "commercial" music that is being taught in our musical institutions today.
For those impatient readers, you may cut to the chase.
As a tool to understand contemporary commercial music I would like to investigate two aspects of music that I believe exist irrespective of genre or style:
It is important to note here that like most other aspects of human achievement, music is a cumulative experience... adding attributes and conditions as opposed to replacing them. Additionally, these categories influence each other, sometimes to the point of being indistinguishable as separate categories.
There is a long history of music that was created for reasons in addition to its aesthetic qualities. From humankind's earliest records to contemporary news articles we find evidence of music that is intimately associated with religion. This association ranges from chanting that is seamlessly integrated into religious ceremonies of pre-historic cultures, to elaborate contemporary musical works specifically created for religious ceremonies.
Music also has a lengthy associated with entertainment. Though this is obviously how we appreciate "commercial" music, this view is not exclusive to the contemporary era. The broad range of examples of the association of music and entertainment include troubadours, vaudevilles, and "arena" rock concerts.
Many times music has been used to support dramatic narratives. The Greek chorus, while not the type of chorus we expect today, was present to expedite and enrich the interplay of characters within a play. Incidental music has been composed for dramatic events to assist in setting the correct mood. "Music drama" was a concept that used music expressly to support and expand the dramatic narrative. And the American Musical form has been fabulously successful because of it's adroit combination of theater, dance, and music.
And finally, music has been used to purport and support particular social and political theories. Notable in this category is the Soviet censure of Prokofiev, music dramas of Wagner that were later used to support German Nationalism, the psychedelic rock movement, and most recently, contemporary rap artists.
Viewed with the jaundiced eye of this writer, all of these extra-musical reasons for the existence of music can be interpreted to be selling something... religion, entertainments, and socio-political values. That is not to intimate that the aesthetic value of these musics is the least bit diminished. I am only suggesting that music of any period, style or genre, very rarely exists in a vacuum, and therefore should be acknowledged for it's complete contribution to human culture.
The second aspect I would like to discuss is the methods and means by which music is delivered to an audience. This aspect is of particular interest to me because I feel that music must be experienced by someone to truly exist. Music is like an electrical circuit, power must flow from a point - to a point - and back again for it to exist. Without an audience this circuit is unclosed, and the power in music is unrealized. Therefore, I feel it is very important to understand how music is delivered to an audience. It is also important to anticipate how changes in the delivery of music may change our very concept of musical possibilities.
It appears as though the delivery of music to an audience follows similar lines as the progression of music history. That is to say that there are quantifiable differences in the way music is delivered that have direct correspondence to the "common practice" of various periods of music history. Again, this is a cumulative situation... for instance, just because music in the Classical Period was heard at court, does not exclude music of the same period being heard in churches.
Below I have provided a brief list correlating periods of music with how that music was commonly disseminated.
Early Music: At religious ceremonies and work
Medieval Music: Organized church services, markets, and work
Renaissance Music: Organized church services, markets, work, and "entertainments"
Baroque Music: Organized church services, markets, work, "entertainments," at court
Classical Music: Organized church services, markets, work, "entertainments," at court, and in concert halls
Romantic Music: Organized church services, markets, work, "entertainments," at court, in concert halls, and in chambers
Though this is a highly simplified list, it does adequately demonstrate two important items:
Since the early years of this century, and with growing strength, there has been a crucial development in how music is distributed - that being the development of electronic conveyance. Since the inception of dissemination of music by electronic means corresponds roughly to the end of the Romantic period of music history, and the demise of Western Art Music as "popular" music, it is now appropriate to talk about how "commercial" music fits into the picture.
Before discussing some specific examples of contemporary "commercial" music I need to touch on a crucial effect of electronic means of disseminating music. Stated quite simply, instead of going to the music, you can bring the music to you. This simple change has had enormous effects on the very perception of what and why music is. For instance, before radio, the audience was much smaller and much more knowledgeable about musical intricacies. The need to take an active role in all aspects of decision-making about music was much greater when the audience had to make a greater effort to hear it. This resulted in the average listener having a much deeper experience of listening. And conversely, as music has been much easier to hear, the average listener has a much more shallow (though arguably, much wider) experience of listening (or at least hearing!). Let's look at an example of how that issue may relate to the contemporary listener.
The experienced listener will recognize themes from a Brahms symphony as easily as the theme from "I Dream of Jeannie." But this alone does not make the Brahms work a lesser quality, or elevate the television theme to the inspired artistry of Brahms. However, it does mean that they both contain essential musical elements that make both of them attractive and memorable. If a listener recognizes the television theme but not Brahms, it does not hold that the former is a better musical statement than the latter, only that the listener has not experienced enough of the music of Brahms!
Interestingly, more listeners are becoming acquainted with "serious" music through film scores. The music of Vivaldi, Mozart, Beethoven, and Tchaikovski, is being appropriated by the film industry just as fast as the music of Gaye (Marvin), Franklin (Aretha), and Greene (Al).
Having already touched on two types of "commercial" music, music for television and films, let's now look at another - music for dance.
As I have noted, commercial music has long been associated with Afro-American rooted music. The Swing Era bands were no doubt commercial ventures that borrowed heavily from a number of sources, primary in this mix being blues and early jazz roots. Music for the stage, by way of the "musical" borrowed from the same sources with much success. The trail is still quite warm here, and we can easily follow it forward from the Swing Era, though Rock and Roll, and to contemporary dance music. All of these styles are rooted in Afro-American musics, because those musics were so heavily centered in rhythm.
Other examples of contemporary "commercial" music include: Compact Disks (of all styles and genre), Radio, Music Videos, live performances for various concerts and events, and DJ/Dance parties, the list stretches as far as your experience (consider, for a moment, the shopping mall).
Commercially successful music has also combined a variety of styles and genre. In the last 15 years or so, the breadth of commercially successful musical appropriation has exploded. Imagine the 1940's personality equivalents of Yo-Yo Ma and Bobby McFerrin combining to create recordings that sold in the hundreds of thousands! In fact, such collaborations did occur 50 years ago. For instance, Igor Stravinski and Woody Herman collaborating on the Ebony Concerto, and with even more musical success, Aaron Copland and Benny Goodman collaborated for the wonderful Concerto for Clarinet. However, those collaborations were not commercially successful, regardless of the collaborators intent (try arguing the case that these artists did not want to make money and see how fast you find yourself talking in circles!).
OK, I'll come to the point:
Contemporary "commercial" music does not differ from any other types of music in the two crucial areas of
And I cannot draw any other conclusion than there are no musical distinctions for "Commercial" music... that all styles, genres, and periods of music are, or have been "commercial" music.
Now, having disabled most all rational arguments for musical descriptions of commercial music, what may the "commerce" of music mean for musicians of the 21st Century?
It seems to me that while we retain our traditions of music making, there is in effect at this moment a crucial change in the "commercial" nature of music - the multitude of possibilities provided by digital technologies. These technologies, reduced in price due to their increasing acceptance, promise an aesthetic and economic democratization of music that may change (again) our perception of the what and why of music. And while we may all profit from this change, we must guard that this change does not exacerbate the increasing "dumbing" of the listening audience. In other words, we must make more careful musical choices so that the music we disseminate will enlighten, not just provide more sound!
Below is a brief list of some of new technologies and their commercial possibilities:
Remember, since these are dissemination and creative technologies, they do not have any boundries of style or genre. It will be just as possible for a composer of contemporary chamber music as a rap artist to take advantage of these technologies, just as possible for the symphony orchestra as the jazz quartet. And after looking at the new opportunities for the commerce of music, and using your imagination to discover other possibilities in this changing soundscape, it is obvious that successful musicians of the next century will have rigorous training in both music aesthetics and music technology.
We are facing exciting new developments that will broaden all perspectives of music, expanding any one philosophy to the point of explosion. And it will be acknowledged that, in the end, attempting to define a genre of music with the phrase "commercial" music was simply an unfortunate choice of words.
© Malcolm Lynn Baker, 1997
Malcolm Lynn Baker is the Director of Admission and the Director of the Jazz Studies and Commercial Music Program at the University of Denver's Lamont School of Music.