|
| |
Christopher Taylor
Labeling of music is an issue that is ripping through our contemporary
American society. According to Tipper Gore, in her article "Rock Music
Should be Labeled," many people "are extremely troubled by the
sexually explicit and violent language of some of today’s songs" (478).
On the other hand, Danny Alexander, in his article "Labeling Rock Music
Leads to Repression," feels that it is wrong to "stigmatize a record
because of a word someone may deem explicit without also discussing the
musicianship, the context for the word choice or the themes that dominate the
record" (486). Both authors bring up excellent points on both sides of the
debate. However, after contrasting their issues of language, censorship, and
suppression, we will see that labeling music actually leads to indirect
censoring of very important issues in society.
Recording companies have agreed to put warning labels on albums deemed
explicit to help parents identify songs and groups with explicit lyrics. The
debate on whether music should, or should not, be labeled has raised very
important issues. Gore’s article is from her book, Raising PG Kids in an
X-Rated Society, which was published in 1987. Gore claims that labels are
not a form of censorship and their only purpose is to help parents identify the
context of the albums and to restrict accessibility for children. Alexander’s
article was taken from his monograph, Targeting the Street: The Truth About
Record Labels, published in 1994. Alexander claims that record labels are
promoting censorship and that artists are being prematurely judged by their
labels.
Language is an important factor in determining whether or not an album should
be labeled, and both authors have contrasting opinions. It was because of
language that Gore became aware of the graphic nature of some popular groups and
artists. After watching music videos with her kids, Gore felt that the
"graphic sex and the violence were too much for [them] to handle."
Moreover, they were "embarrassed" by the "vulgar lyrics" on
Prince’s album, Purple Rain. Due to the nature of the language and
"mature themes" (476-77) of most rock groups, Gore decided to form
Parents’ Music Resource Center (PMRC). PMRC is a non-profit organization,
organized to pressure record companies to put a warning label on albums that
contain explicit material.
While Gore claims that labels only caution children and parents about the
vulgarity and adult themes of modern song lyrics, Danny Alexander feels that
labels restrict the artists’ abilities to speak out about society. According
to Alexander, "labels have targeted primarily heavy metal and rap music,
the two most politically uncompromising forms of commercial art in
America." These artists speak out about society. In particular, they speak
out about the problems with society. They use strong, graphic, and violent
language because that is the way they express themselves in their culture. The
language these groups use does appeal to younger teenagers, but instead of
trying to prevent kids from listening to this music, when they ask questions, we
need to educate and socialize them about the different aspects of society. Given
the current conditions of abject poverty, racism, and economic inequality in
this country, Alexander is exactly right when he says, "Many equate a
record like Ice-T’s Cop Killer with yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded
theater" (487). This music has the potential of causing mass confusion
among those who do not understand the cultural characteristics it speaks out
about. Labeling an album because of adult language and themes can have the same
effect as censoring important issues in society.
Although labels are not directly censorship, they do cause indirect
censorship. Gore contends that warning labels do not "infringe on the First
Amendment rights." She is exactly right; warning labels are symbols that
advise the consumer about the contents of albums. In fact, she claimed that PMRC’s
approach was the direct opposite; they "called for more information, not
less" (479-80). This is fine, but the way Gore uses the First Amendment is
disturbing. Gore says, "In a free society we can affirm the First Amendment
and also protect the rights of children and adults who seek to avoid the twisted
tyranny of explicitness in the public domain" (481). Adults have the choice
to decide what they want to listen to; parents have the choice to decide what
their children can listen to. The First Amendment does not make that
decision! What is even more disturbing is the way Gore uses the word
"tyranny." Historically, when the public speaks out about tyranny, it
is about a tyrannical government and not the other way around. Although the
label is not directly censorship, according to Alexander, it does cause
censorship. One example of this is when a mother [in a music store] held up a
copy of rap group Boogie Down Productions Edutainment and asked why it
had a sticker. The sales clerk said it probably had some curse words on it. The
woman said, "Oh, well I don’t want that!" She promptly slammed one
of the most uplifting, sophisticated expositions on Afrocentricity and
contemporary society ever recorded back into its slot, mentally lumping this
record in with the likes of 2 Live Crew. (486-87)
In this case, the label caused censorship in the sense that the mother based
her decision solely on the label. Therefore, she is missing out on the issues
that are present within society.
Another type of censorship caused by labels is "Corporate
Censorship." Recording companies are refusing to distribute the music,
radio stations will not broadcast the music, and cities are banning concerts of
labeled groups. According to Alexander, corporate censorship "is driving
even mainstream rap artists underground." Labels are ultimately making it
harder for fans to hear their favorite music, "that which speaks of their
anger, hopes, and fears." One of the most devastating aspects of labels is
that "racist anxieties and other bourgeois family values are being used as
a means for determining what music is suitable for public consumption"
(488). By applying this view to labels, it becomes apparent that labels not only
lead to censorship, but even worse, they lead to suppression: suppression of the
issues that are tearing this country apart.
Suppression can be the most dangerous effect of labels. By suppression, I
mean suppression of social issues relevant to the lower social classes, like
racism, abject poverty, political, and economical inequalities; suppression of
these issues is dangerous. Like censorship, in a literal sense, labels are not
suppression. However, after seeing how labels are influencing some opinions
within society, it becomes apparent that suppression can be directly related to
labels.
Gore’s article does not mention suppression at all. This can be for two
reasons: either she did not expect that labels would have so much influence, or
suppression was her ultimate goal. Gore’s position within society is unique;
she is the wife of the former senator, and now vice-president, Al Gore.
According to her socioeconomic status, she lives in an upper class society. Gore
first became aware of graphic music through her children and claims that the
"vulgar lyrics embarrassed [them]" (476). Due to the fact that Gore’s
awareness was raised by her children, and that instead of educating her children
about the issues behind the music, she pushed for labels to "advise the
consumer about explicit lyrics" (481), it becomes conceivable that Gore’s
intention was to suppress the music that spoke out about our society. That
notion is Alexander’s point. While there may not be a direct connection
between labels and the Los Angeles crisis, the rising tensions that lead up to
the riots can be related to the suppression of those issues inherent to the
lower class. Alexander concludes that the "lesson learned from the LA
rebellion is, if this art form can sensitize the American people to a volatile
situation, rather than encourage open discussion and possible revolution, we
better shut it down" (488). Unfortunately, shutting it down does nothing to
improve the situation--it only makes the situation worse.
Even though the labeling of music is not directly censorship, it can lead to
censorship and then to suppression. Musicians are artists, and like artists they
express their opinions of society through their art. These musicians target the
younger generation simply because it is this generation that will be in the
position to make society better in the future, but they must be aware of the
issues and all aspects of society. We cannot, nor should we, attempt to shield
our children about these issues. In general, when children ask questions, they
deserve an educated answer. If we teach them to discuss and learn about abstract
art forms and the issues behind them, rather than to try to avoid them, we will
make progress.
Works Cited
Alexander, Danny. "Labeling Rock Music Leads to Repression," Living
in America: A Popular Culture Reader. Ed. Patricia Y. Murray and Scott
F. Covell. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1988. 485-89.
Gore, Tipper. "Labeling Rock Music Leads to Repression," Living
in America: A Popular Culture Reader. Ed. Patricia Y. Murray and Scott
F. Covell. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1988. 476-83.
|