Saturday, August 15, 2026

Phoebephobia

 "I wonder what Mark Fisher would have thought about the spread across all the end-of-year lists of what is effectively (regardless of genre or sonic specifics) a new singer-songwriter ethos...  recordings approached and analysed and felt largely as literary expressions... narratives of self, social comment, political stances and statements, representations of identity, thematic links  ....  the criticism surrounding it somewhat more attentive to sound and rhythm than Paul Nelson's purely literary appreciation of  Jackson Browne's The Pretender in Stranded, but fundamentally it's coming from the same place, the same understanding of how popular music works and what it's for.  

"Today, listening to and reading about this kind of album ... it feels like what's going on between artist and critics is a performance of  Importance and Seriousness - Masterpiece Theater you could call it - one that harks back achingly to a time when such major statements could be presumed to be of universal significance. In that sense, true retro rather than surface retro... "

Wheeling out these 2020 thoughts once again in honour of the new Phoebe Bridgers record....

I am not really a Phoebephobe. I saw her play a fundraiser for a Democratic candidate in 2018 in someone's back garden in Los Angeles. She was playing support to  - or sharing a stage with - Conor Oberst.  And she was fine. A pleasant sound. 

Just an up-and-comer then:  I had no sense she would become such a figure, taken oh-so-seriously by the bigwig critics. 

(Boygenius is about as milquey sounding a group as imaginable, though)

It does kind of amaze me that folks have gone back to this way of treating popular music: as literary effusions set to sound .... 

So in one of the current pieces on Bridgers there's a reference to "the line-after-line sense of surprise".

Another talks about her "filmmaker’s eye for a cold open. Sometimes her songs disorient from the jump, dropping you into an alien landscape or the middle of an argument. Other times she draws you in with a dreamy establishing shot—and then snaps it into sharp, unsparing focus.... seemingly effortless lines, lines that take a small shard of experience and hold it up to the light, .... has honed one of the most distinctive songwriting voices in indie rock today—wryly observational, ruthlessly introspective, downcast but never wallowing.

There are parts of these pieces that deal with sound in itself - the use of vocoder, the fact that she's been listening to ambient music and it shows.... but in the end, the sonic is always in service to the literary-poetic. 


Bruce Springsteen, 1974


It threatens to make me even more Jankelevitchian in my stance

But then I remember I too enjoy the "words" part of  "words and music"

In fact, it was the words that originally pulled me into rock music - Johnny Rotten's and Ian Dury's.

As a bookworm, already writing constantly, this was my entry point, the thing that hooked me.  The clever, funny, provocative or thought provoking lyrics. The frolic of language, the wordplay, the mischief with meaning. 

The most recent example of that kind of enjoyment would be the first Dry Cleaning album, where it's the words above all, the cadence of delivery, and the tonal affect, that get me - and I do really treat the music as a pleasing and apt support, a literal vehicle for what's being said. 

So I don't dismiss the idea of the singer-writer as a poet, or a story teller

I just think it's not the whole story.

You shouldn't - couldn't - reduce In a Silent Way, or Music for 18 Musicians, or Tago Mago, or Another Green World, or Solid Air to a meaning. 

(Or Led Zeppelin or AC/DC for that matter. Or Chic. Or "It Takes Two"). 

(But nor should you do that even with text-forward works like The Hissing of Summer Lawns that seemingly invite the record to be read.) 

The instrumental or near-instrumental forms of music cannot be boiled down to semantic-expressive content....  this kind of music works as motion, as space, as immersive medium, as abstract passion play of intangibles and impressions... something to be experienced not interpreted 

The experience of time within a piece of music is not analogous to narrative (this is something the lyrics adapt themselves to....  most pop songs are not story-songs, the lyrics work through repetitions and loops that would seem like you'd lost the plot - literally - if you uttered them in conversation rather than song).

Critical formulations involving verbs like "says" when used in reference to an album or a song create the mistaken sense that a piece of music is trying to communicate something - when it might be more the case that it's trying to make you go through something.  An experience.

The experience itself is what it's about, rather than an alleged "fruit of experience"

Not a gleaned meaning, something you come away with. 



7 comments:

  1. First and foremost, critics are writers. That means that they have a familiarity with and sensitivity for the word above all. That doesn't mean that they can't stretch themselves to analyze nonverbal/textual media through words, but for a lot of critics, that remains the comfortable default.

    This state of affairs mirrors similar issues in film and comics, where the writer, the person who contributed the words, is often implicitly or explicitly considered the primary if not sole important author. Understandably, directors and cartoonists have pushed back against this; a good example that pops to my mind is this 2013 piece by the cartoonist Eddie Campbell: https://www.tcj.com/the-literaries/, but you could also see the fracas over the authorship of Citizen Kane as equally illustrative

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In Hip Hop Is History, Questlove gets into this a little bit, because he says it's the main division/productive tension between him and Black Thought: the former is interested first and foremost in the sound and the production, and the latter the lyrics. He admits to not being entirely comfortable or secure with this, especially in a lyric driven genre like hip hop

      Delete
  2. Yes I think that’s all true. I also think it is a category mistake to attempt to understand Phoebe Bridgers and similar artists by focusing on the music. The real art-work being created here is the public persona, built up from social media, interviews, videos, fan appearances, relationships with friends and romantic partners, etc, etc. In that context, lyrics are particularly important because they can be used to lead (or mislead) fans, to create the parasocial / conspiracy theoretical engagement that generates revenue. Taylor Swift has been the undisputed champion of this mode for many years, but as she has been stepping back out of the spotlight, she has created a gap in the market for others to fill.

    I guess you could say this was a mode created - or at least perfected - by the Beatles, with their active fan clubs, fan theories, fan obsessions. But they were a one-off, the biggest rock band there ever was, or will be. Very few bands have been able to build even a small fraction of that community.

    Of course, album covers, clothing styles, song titles, etc, were massively important for Miles Davis and Can. John Martyn had a tragic and terrible personal story. But those were secondary to the music they made. Even Joni Mitchell, who put her life into her art, was creating music, not a reality show. She fiercely rejected the crass attempts by Rolling Stone to reduce her to a soap opera character. But things are different now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So what would the status of that model of artwork be in 100 years' time? Yesterday was the 49th anniversary of Elvis' death (and I'd say the phenomenon began with the King). Yes, the public persona of Elvis as perceived by latter-day Elvis fans like me (born in 1984) is a hefty reason why we got into the Big E, but clearly the principal reason is the music, the voice (and of course the music and the persona are hardly in opposition to each other; a main appeal of both is the Pelvis' charisma). But what will future generations say about Taylor Swift's (unconscious?) persona-as-art? I guess we'll never know. But the legend of Elvis was at least curious. Maybe it's my middle age talking, but what exactly is singular about Swift's persona? Isn't it based on her relatability, her accessibility, her ordinariness? Would that foster an epic for the ages?

      Speaking of which, Beethoven, Liszt and Wagner all benefitted from their personae of artist-as-Romantic-hero: visionary, uncompromising, difficult, indomitable.

      Delete
    2. Yes you are right - Phoebe is not just a return to the days of Jackson-Browne-as-poet. There's a whole fan driven para-text.

      Although in a way that makes the lyrics even more important, just in a different way. My youngest is a Phoebephile and a lot of the fandom involves spotting the references to relationships and veiled digs at rivals in love.

      It's not like this has never been part of pop music - "The Ballad of John and Yoko" ,or the swipes traded between Lennon and McCartney in song. Or going back to the first singer-songwriter era: who is "You're So Vain" about?

      Delete
  3. That’s a good point about Beethoven, Liszt, etc: personality and image have been important to the music business, and to the experience of consuming music, for a long time. But I do think that the internet and social media have created a fundamentally different environment for music today.

    In answer to your question, I think Swift’s persona-as-art is entirely conscious. In fact I think it is her main focus, and the music is subordinate to that larger project. Her brilliance and staggering success in building that persona, and the fan engagement that goes with it, is by far the most interesting thing about her.

    While the music may not show much evidence of innovation, she has been right at the frontier in terms of understanding the potential of the online world. To take one example: the gamification of fandom. The lyrics are important because they set puzzles for fans to solve, or at least interpret, and form a single continuous narrative that can go on forever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. …which means, I should have added, that Swift as an artist has more in common with QAnon than she does with Joni Mitchell or Emmylou Harris.

      Delete