The Future of Rock: Discourses That Struggle to Define a Genre

Author(s): Johan Forns

Source: Popular Music, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Jan., 1995), pp. 111-125
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/853345
Accessed: 21-12-2015 16:46 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Popular Music.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PopularMusic (1995) Volume 14/1.Copyright(

1995 Cambridge UniversityPress

The futureof rock: discourses

thatstruggleto definea genre
JOHAN FORNAS

Time shiftsincrease our sensitivityto birthand death, to the rise and fallofcultural
epochs, by drawing attentionto all sorts of changes. When years, decades or
centuries turn, there need not necessarily be any corresponding great shiftin
society and culture. What does 'real' historycare about dates and years? But our
way of measuring time produces a sort of numericalmagic thatsometimesmakes
us extrasensitiveto collectiveculturalmobility.In aestheticalproductionand cultural debate, each time turninduces a wish to reflectupon where we stand and
what is happening. This sharpened timeconsciousness may accelerateor consolidate certain changes, if sufficiently
many and strong social forces engage in the
reflectionto transformprophecies into effectivemechanisms of change, by the
materialpower of self-definitions.
All this reflexivepreparedness is particularlysharpened as we now, after
some decades of speculations about post-industrialismand post-modernism,are
to leave a whole milleniumand enter a new one. This millenialfinalemakes the
long accelerating erosion of traditionsevident, and may also make it easier to
formulatesomethingof the era whose introductionis already fadingin.
It is principallyimpossible to foreseethe future.The only prophesy thatcan
be made is to calculate the consequences of tendencies that can already be discerned and extrapolate them forwardin time. The creative opportunityis then
only to choose which of the contradictorytendencies of the present to bringinto
the calculation. I will here take part in this play by discussing some aspects of the
possible tomorrowof rock music in relationto how rock is discursivelydefined.

The rock/pop-field
Like all othergenre concepts, rock is veryhard to define. A genre is a set of rules
forgeneratingmusical works.' Using such conventionalsets of rules in producing
or interpretingmusical pieces can give rise to classifactorysystems, but actual
musics do not in themselves fall unambiguously into any simple classes. It all
depends on which rules are used, and this choice is situationallybound. Genres
are, however, more intersubjectivethan subjective phenomena. In each temporal
and spatial context,there are certaingenre definitionsthat are relevantand used
by the most importantgroups of actorsin the musical field:musicians, producers,
marketersand audiences.
There are innumerablepossible ways to define rock, but not all of them are
meaningfulin a given context.On the other hand, thereis no consensus around
111

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

112

Fornis
Johan

one single definition.I see rock/popas one single, continuous genre fieldrather
than as distinctcategories. This field contains a wide and open range of subgenres, moving within certainsimilareconomical and social framesand circuits.
Common, ideal-typicalmusical featuresare oftenelectronicsound manipulation,a
clear and steady pulse, even times,certainsyncopationsand back-beat,songs with
lyrics, and settings within relatively small ensembles with some soloisticimprovisatoryelements within a broadly collectivelycomposed form.There are
innumerable variants here. Some artists emerge as individual soloists, like
Madonna, Prince,Sinead O'Connor or Bruce Springsteen,backed by more or less
anonymous musicians. Others appear as small and tight ensembles, from girl
metal bands - particularlybut not exclusivelyat the
groups to black/death/trash
rock end of the spectrum.
Music-making necessarily involves co-operating human beings in certain
institutionalsettings and with specific subjectivities. Rock is, therefore,also
defined through social and psychic aspects determiningits production and use.
The musical genericsystemis spun like a web of aestheticrules undissolvablytied
to social and psychicfactors.In discourses where rock is defined,various aspects
can be stressed. Some focus on the strictlymusical aspects of how the sounds are
organized, while others stress the social aspects of how theirorganisingis structured. In fact,both sounds and human beings (both musical and social factors)
are possible and indeed necessary elements of any genre definition.
Another polarityconcerns process versus structure.Some definitionsstress
historicaltraditionlines while others employ structuralcategories. Again, both
diachronicand synchronicaspects should be relevant. Diachronic processes produce synchronousrelationsbetween elements,thatin theirturnget theirmeaning
throughinterpretationsrelyingon those historicalprocesses.
A thirdpolarityis between wide and narrowdefinitions.The wide definition
outlined above is inclusive and imprecise.The narrow definitionis strictlyexclusive, and constructsrock as a definitivetraditionwith certaincentral actors and
key works in a chain from early rock 'n' roll through Britishbeat to punk.
Springsteen,Guns 'n' Roses and grunge. All else is non-rock,or maybe semi-rock,
livingon the marginsof truerock. This view is veryimportanttoday, and it exists
withinand outside of rock. But it is not the only one. Variationsabound, and rock
actuallyseems to be more of a familyof genres than a homogeneous category.
is a contestedcontinuum.Authenticityis frequentlyused
The rock/pop-field
from
rock
to distinguish
pop, as rock ideologists defined the values of the folk
and/orart genuine against commercialsubstitutes.Since the 1960s, a networkof
institutionalisedvoices (critics,journalists,writers,media people and producers)
have asserted and administeredthe sincerity,legitimacyand hegemony of rockin
opposition to the vulgarityof pop. Some criticsof this rock establishmenthave on
the other hand turned the same dichotomy upside-down while allegedly dismissing it, as they deride the authenticityillusions of the rock establishmentand
elevate the honest constructionof the pop machinery.In both cases, authenticity
is debated, but in different
ways. To value the sincerityof artists,the social roots
of the genre, or the bodily presence expressed or experienced in the particular
performance,are some of the possible criteria.
There seems to be a continually regenerated need for such distinctions,
resultingin an ongoing strugglein discourses on musical aesthetics. Still,I think
it is impossible to uphold any clear dichotomybetween rock and pop. The shifts

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefutureofrock

113

of the meanings of these termsbetween countriesand timesbear witness to their

ideological character.Rock/popis a spectrumwitha range of focalpoints in highly
complex relationsto each otheras well as to other (super) genres of (more or less
popular) music. The relevance of certain forms of authenticityarguments is a
common feature.Rock/popis basically a music conceived in and fora mass media
context,with a group of electrifiedinstruments,vocal song and lyrics,and identifiable artistswith carefullyconstructedpersonae, images and culturalidentities.
There are importantdifferenceswithin the rock/popworld, but there are also
fundamentalcontinuities.
Rock/pop thus contains a historicallyand institutionallyanchored tension
between rock (in the most narrowsense) and somethingelse, like pop, rap, house
or other subgenre labels. Sometimes these othergenres are accepted withinrock,
sometimestheyare excluded. Rock is a 'supergenre'whose totalityis not delimited
to any specificsubculture. Some of its subgenres are subculturallyrelated (punk,
heavy metal), othersare much more diffuse.Sometimesthese subgenresare separated in record catalogues, radio programmesor journal reviews. Sometimes rock/
pop is instead treated as a unity, associated with modern youth culture (i.e. as
culturalexpressions of and/orforall young people, not only youth subcultures).
A continuous definitionalstruggleis going on among the interpretivecommunities
of listenersand musicians. As long as this struggleis not settled,it seems reasonable not to exclude any ofthe participants,but treatrockas an open and unfinished
category.

Transformations
Since almost its very birth,rock has been haunted by judgements of its occurred
or imminentdeath. Fans of classical music, folkmusic or jazz now and then hail
the rumours of pop's allegedly diminishingsales figuresor of young musicians'
rising interest in their own respective genres. Young spokesmen of 'newer'
subgenres like rap or house may also be heard to rejoice at the death of ageing
parent-generationrock and claim the new hegemony of their own genre. Also,
withinthe rockworld itself,debates are sometimescarriedout around the technological, economic, social and aesthetic changes that seem to threatenwhat rock
used to be. Older puristsdespair of shallowness and shatteredideals, while more
dynamic voices long fora deeper change.
With the milleniumturn in sight, invitationsto celebrate the death of rock
have become a standard theme in popular music disclosure. There are certainly
many historicalchanges thatmake such a celebrationplausible. Simon Frithmentions some of them:
In thelasttenyearsor so theorganization
ofpopularmusicproduction
and consumption
has changedsufficiently
to invalidatemostoftheassumptions
on whichrockculturerests.
Commercialpopularmusicno longerdependson the sale of records;
it can no longerbe
understoodin termsofa fixedsoundobject;
itis no longermadein termsofa particular
sort
ofaudience,rebellious
In short,therocksystemofmusicmakingno longerdetermines
youth.
(Frith1989,p. 129)2
industry
activity.
The transformations
concernmany different
aspects and levels of music and
music-making. I will in turn overview some technical, economic, institutional,
affective,social and aestheticaspects.

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

114

Fornds
Johan

Technologies, marketsand institutions

of instruments,studios,
One of music's 'external'conditions is the technology
and
media.
the electricguitar,
distribution
Rock
used
to
circle
around
recording,
the electricbass, the drum kit and the singer. Suddenly, synthesizersand computershave invaded the scene, and induced similarreactionsto rockfromits own
camp as formerlyfromthe jazz camp. If the authenticmusicalityof the saxophone
was then contrastedto the brute machineryof the electricguitar,the same guitar
has now come to symbolisethe livingauthenticcore of rock,in opposition to the
technocraticartificiality
of the synthesizer.In both cases, musical technologyhas
been seen as a killingthreatto authenticexpressivity.
This polarityhas been well refutedby Simon Frith(1986), who has shown
thattechnologyis a prerequisteforauthenticity,ratherthan its enemy. It is microphone techniques that have enabled us to listenintimatelyto artists'voices. And
the interestin live performanceshas not diminished;in Sweden, a risingconsumption of media music has been paralleled by a likewise risinglevel of concert-going
as well as of amateur music-making.3Finally,as much musical competence (if of
another type) is needed to be an MC or a DJ at a hip hop jam as to sing or play
the guitarin a rock band.
It is interestingto note that digital technology has hithertomostly been
absorbed within a general rock aesthetics. The importance of studio work has
grown, as has the range of available sounds, and the symbolicrole of the guitar
has been somewhat lessened. But even purelycomputerisedgroups like Kraftwerk
have chosen framesof group image, song structuresand musical texturesthat do
not differthat much fromtraditionalrock. The narrow rock traditionmay have
has got yet wider creative
been somewhat broken, but the wide rock/pop-field
possibilities.
The musical use of computers,synthesizers,sequencers, sampling and MIDI
has enabled experimentswith montage techniques, with wide-ranginglegal, economic and aesthetic implications(c.f. Goodwin 1988/1990,1992, 1992; Redhead
1990; Reynolds 1990). Again, techniques of traditionalrockand late modernbricolage have more oftenbeen mixed than opposed to each other. 'Live' musicians
oftenplay togetherwith pre-recordedsounds, and the new montage genres have
in fact made it possible to re-use jazz and other older genres in hyper modern
pop, therebyofferingthem a sort of new life.
As for the media channels for the distributionand consumption of music,
their digitalisation may increase active audience interactionwith the media.
Karaoke is but one early example of this. Video, cable and satellitechannels have
already increased the scope of visual formsof expression. And people will probably have much easier access to music thatwas hard to reach before.But it seems
prematureto state thatrecords have lost theirimportance.The single musical act
and its starartistwill not cease to fascinate.There will be changes in how musical
creationis organised and mediated, and most certainlyin the ways in which it is
commented and reflectedupon in music journalism,but again, this seems more
to affectthe narrowrock genre than the wide one.
Another set of 'external' conditions for the music use of individuals and
groups are produced by the twin systemsof the capitalistmarketand state institutions. Marketeconomymechanisms have continuouslyacceleratedmonopolisation,
concentrationand centralisationtrends. Through strategiesof 'narrow-casting'in

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefuture
ofrock

115

phonogram industriesand broadcasting media, these trends have lately broken

the law of increasingstandardisationand homogenity(Burnett1990). New, large
media conglomeratesoperate in new formsof symbiosis with small, sectoralised
units. This makes it hard to revitalisethe clear polaritybetween dominatingmainstreamand subversivealternatives/indies
thatwas earlierso predominant.As rock
has lost its marginalityand enteredthe main-streamof late modern popular music,
these marketchanges may be problematic.But it has to be rememberedthat rock
has never as a totalitybeen rebellious and that its culturalcentralisationdoes not
necessarily diminish the importance of its radical fringes. As in other genres,
among the increasinglydifferentiated
pluralityof subgenres in rock, new niches
for subversion can always be reconstructedas the old ones are co-opted. As for
the economic effectsof sampling, the fiercebattles around copyrightlegislation
show that here new technologyis shaped by profitinterestsbut at the same time
threatensthe private ownership rules that are the basis of capitalistcommodity
production. These effectsare not specific to rock, but apply to all popular
genres.
The other large system, the stateand its political-bureaucraticinstitutions,
has traditionallybeen rathermarginalto rock,but not anymore.Formalinstitutions
have entered the arena as a thirdpole, beside the music industryand the youth
cultural peer groups. Local authorities, established youth organisations, social
workers and schools have been increasinglyactive in this field, offeringnew
resources (localities, gigs, instrumentsand education) but also advancing new
demands. At least in the Nordic countries, rock playing has become more
formalisedand institutionalised,resultingin ambiguous tendencies. Firstly,there
is an increasingbureaucratisation,where rockplayinghas become partof hierarchical and formalised institutions close to the state apparatus instead of just
depending on the market.Secondly, thereis a continuous pedagogisation, a new
apparatus forrockeducation, which makes rocklearningmore similarto the learning processes at school than youth culturalactivitiesused to be. Thirdly,through
new formsof instrumentalisationthe pleasures of rock are used forvarious extramusical - political,social or therapeutic- purposes, like keeping young people off
the streetsor counteractingdrug use (c.f. Forndiset al. 1990, forthcoming;Forndis
1990b, 1993).
There is also an increasinginterdependenceof the two systems,marketand
state. The days when state support was a weapon against commercialisationare
gone. All these systemicchanges have certainlychanged the conditions of rock
use, but itis too earlyto conclude thatit has been destroyed.Instead, new alliances
and oppositions are shaped, opening otherpossibilitiesforidentityand resistance
in music.

Subjectives, communities and styles

There are also internal,subjectiveconditionsformusic use: individual desires produced by processes of socialisation,care and education. The rise of rock has built
upon certainnew psychic structures,emphasising narcissistdesires throughthe
in peer groups, audiences and sound/beat-webs.Later developself-mirrorings
ments have ratherexpanded than abolished these desires, as can be heard in the
intense play with devotion and distance in house and techno music. The history
of rock passes througha series of phases of gendered identityforms,where the

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

116

Fornids
Johan

relationshipsbetween adolescent individuals and peer groups are continuously

modified. In an early phase, oedipal rebellionagainst authoritarianfather-figures
seemed to be surpassed by
was important;in the 1960s, the id/superego-conflict
of the ego and the self.
the
first
formation
to
dilemmas
related
narcissistic
deeper
have
met
desire
structures
and
need
changing aesthetic
Changing subjective
forms,related to the formationof a gendered personal identity.Experimentswith
new gender roles and images will continue to be of great importancein future
popular musics. But the fixedmale peer group may be mobilised and partlydisrelations. This may be one reason
solved into a floatingclusterof differentiated
forthe looser artistconstellationswithinsome rap and house styles.But the small
group collectivitydoes not lose its fascinationjust because it becomes more
composed (less male and
dynamic(more mobile and open groups) and differently

misogynist).
These subjective conditions are closely connected to socialaspects like intersubjective norms and group relations. Here, late modernityhas accelerated the
of the modern epoch.
individualisationand reflexivity
mobility,multiculturality,
have
been
identities
Individual and collective
increasinglyproblematisedthrougha
textsand images. When norin
cultural
a
and
self-mirroring
higherdifferentiation
difficult
to be deviant. The
it
is
also
more
and
diffuse
more
open,
malitybecomes
diffusestylemarkor
less
more
mess
of
a
in
dissolve
subcultures
of
borders
complex
that
of
the
subversive
of
This
some
erodes
ideology marginality has been central
ings.
to some partsoftherocktradition.IfMadonna can be on top ofthechartsat thesame
timeas advocatingsexual perversity,what is thennormalityand what is opposition?
But therehave in factalways been subgenresthatless rebelliouslyhave played with
normality,and thereis stillroom forresistanceagainst certainnormalisingforcesin
themarket,publicinstitutionsand privatespheres (family,religion,etc.). The static
dichotomiesbetween the normalsand the rebels may dissolve, but the resultis not
subany homogeneous mass, but rathera wide spectrumof shiftingand conflicting
culturalalliances, and interpretivecommunities.It is yet hard to say if this will
increase or diminishthe scope of rock,i.e. how the loss of absolute dichotomiesis
balanced by a widened fieldof collectiveidentity-offers.
A second subaspect of this intersubjectivelyshared level consists of the culturalgenres and formsof expressionthemselves,the networkof genres and styles,
images, words and music. New aesthetic conventions develop new expressive
forms.Some examples of such new aesthetictools are speech song and sampled
sound collages in rap, deep male chantingin death metal,and post-tonalharmonic
structuresin pop. New stylisticmeans produce new sounds and new narrative
forms.But again, only certainphases and subgenres of rock have been bound to
fixedformaland stylisticmodels, so this can be as much a sign of transformation
as of death. Similar ambivalent conclusions can be drawn fromthe crossing of
historicalepochs, genre boundaries and the high/low-distinction
through samIt
retro
or
and
music'
styles. is particularly
nostalgicpastiche, camp
pling, 'world
has problematisedmore naive versions of
importantthat a heightened reflexivity
authenticitydiscourses. Authenticitycan hardlybe defended as a pure and natural
originanymore,but this does not mean that this concept has lost all relevance.
There can still be a thematisationof 'social authenticity',i.e. an anchoring of a
voice (work,style,genre) in a collectivecommunity,and a 'subjectiveauthenticity',
i.e. a legitimationthroughreferencesto individual bodies and minds. But these
formshave been increasinglyoftenaccompanied by a thirdone, 'culturalauthenti-

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefuture
ofrock

117

consciousness of one's place

city',as a meta-honestythatstressesthe self-reflexive
withina symbol-makingprocess. Authenticitycan remain as an importanttheme,
but only if it is de-naturalisedand demystified,reconstructedas a socio-cultural
and mediated construction,ratherthan as a simple and immediate destiny. Not
all music use makes authenticityan importanttheme,but it can always be activated
again in reflexivediscourses (cf. Grossberg1993; Forndis1994).

Use values
It is not possible here to make any complete presentationof all the aspects of
rock's transformation
that have been under debate, but it mightbe useful to sort
out the arguments along the mentioned dimensions. The conditions of rock are
changing,on many levels. Peer groups have been opened and dynamised,identities have become more individualised and heterogeneous, the body has become
more problematic, and authenticitydiscourses have been reconstructedby an
On the otherhand, importantstable structurespersist.
increasingreflexivity.
The relative quantity and prosperityof young people may decrease, and
youth subcultureshave been radicallydisplaced and modified,but this should not
lead us to any too quick conclusions. First, these demographic, economic and
subcultural factorsare very differentoutside of NorthernAmerica and Western
Europe. In great parts of the world late modern youth culture has only recently
began to flourish,and it is hard to foresee its futuredevelopment. Second, the
particularopenness of adolescence is not so easily dissolved - filledwith intense
learning,separation,individuationand identitywork. I thereforedoubt thatyoung
people will lose theircentralityin the culturalfield. It is simply not a product of
conjucturalcoincidences,but a structuraleffectof verybasic socialisationpatterns
and the continuing processes of modernisation, none of which will disappear
tomorrow. And the use values of rock foryoung people seem also to be reproduced. These can be summarisedunder threelabels: collectiveautonomy,alternative ideas and narcissisticenjoyment(c.f. Fornaiset al. 1990, forthcoming;Fornas
1990b, 1993; Roe and Carlsson 1990; Berkaak and Rund 1992).
As forcollectiveautonomy - doing somethingon your own, with your best
friends- it is obvious that both collectivityand autonomy are stillsought. While
individualisationhas to some extentdissolved the experience of being born into
natural collectives, there are lots of examples of how people long for and seek
occasionally constructedcollectiveexperiences,on dance floors,in rave-partiesor
at giant gigs (cf. Hebdige 1990). If the fixedpeer group is being differentiated
and
mobilised, rock bands may also do likewise, crystallisingeither around looser
constellationsor close friendshipdyads, hiring other musicians at special occasions. And while the intrusion of state institutionsand the educational sphere
may threatenthe autonomy of rock, this autonomy has always been foughtfor
against systemicmarketforces.It may even become an advantage now to be able
to play with both the systemic poles, using them against each other in more
complex types of resistanceagainst dominationand goal-rationality.The problem
with systemicdemands in institutionsof socialisationwill not melt away with the
old millenium, and there will still be a need for cultural formsto handle and
counteractsuch demands. Rock has never been a pure non-systemicforumfor
communicativeaction - instead, its verymixtureof manipulationand communication is what keeps it moving.

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

118

Johan
Forni's

The second type of use value concerns the alternativeideals rock offersits
users, opening up the immediatecontextof parents,teachersand neighbours. As
the normality/deviance
polarityis becoming slightlyblurred,the need foralternative ideals are ratherincreasing than diminishing.Instead of being grouped in a
single polarity,they formcomplex clusters.And basic social differencesthat fuel
and directthis search for alternativesalso persist. Gender roles and dominance
patterns are changing, but far fromdisappearing, and the same can be said of
class and ethnicdifferences.
Thirdly,rockoffersmany opportunitiesfornarcissisticenjoyment,temporarily dissolving fixed ego-boundaries and touching deep, pre-verbalpsychic levels
of experience. This is effectedby the power of volume, beat and sound, as well
as by the intersubjectivemirroringswithin and between bands and audiences.
Nothing implies that these desires are diminishing,it would be more reasonable
to suggest that they are more and more general in the population of late modern
societies.
On many levels, the argumentsabout the conditionsof rock do not come to
any clear conclusion. New culturalformsmay fillits functionsand it must surely
change, but no univocal evidence appears to prove thatit has to die fromvanishing
external,internalor socio-culturalprerequisites.Some conditionsare prettystable,
others have been radically transformed,but it seems hard to conclude that any
necessary requirementis definitelybeing lost today.

A genre and its 'Others'

The futureof rock may, however, not be a question of objective, subjective or
intersubjectiveconditions. It might be more fruitfulto study its discourses. Its
futureis influencedby developments in technology,economy, institutions,subjectivities,social norms and aesthetic styles, but it is decided by the ways its
meanings are negotiatedby various discursiveagents in the musical field.
Three of the contested borders of rock are with the genres of pop, rap and
house/techno.In all cases, some thinkof them as differentfroma more narrow
None of
definitionof rock, while others include them in a wider rock/pop-field.
these definitionissues are as yet resolved, but I want to make a proposal, as a
stake in this struggleof interpretations.
The happy or sad statementsof the death of rock seem to me to be based on
a very narrow genre definitionand to hide a certainessentialism. Genres are not
fixedessences that can evaporate. They are dynamic sets of genericrules forthe
shaping of musical works,and as such theyare continuouslytransformed,according to the contextsand conditions that framethem, and the interpretationsthey
are given. If rockis not an essence livingits own life,but a set of authorisedrules
for the constructionof music, then how can it die, as opposed to develop and
transform?
If what is called rock changes so much that no importantstructuralessence
binds new rockto its predecessors,thenonlyan essentialistgenredefinitionwould
claim rock to be dead. A more constructivistview would instead claim that a
'familylikeness' - an historicalcontinuityand a clusterof interrelatedbut varying
elements - is enough. This would then be in line with the actual praxis in music
discourses, but it implies a break with essentialist notions that seek a definite
'ethos' of rock. It is this constructivist
genre definitionthat leads me to preferthe

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefutureofrock

119

wide rock definitionto the narrow one, and yet accepts both as two interacting
discursive labelings that togetherformthe dynamics of the genre.
However, ifthe same genre developments instead lead its actorsto leave the
label 'rock' in exchange foranotherone, then rockmightdisappear, however little
the sound differencebetween the new pop and the old rock. Has thathappened?
Historically,this is not the firsttime the death of rock has been prophesied.
When the pioneers of the 1950s suddenly leftthe scene to softerteenage pop idols
and girl groups, many believed that rock 'n' roll would only be a parenthesis in
music history.Similar fears or hopes appeared when glam and disco seemed to
have won the battlewith rockin the 1970s. On both these occasions rebuttalssoon
came in the Britishbeat wave and in punk/metal,respectively.And in both cases,
as now in the years around 1990, it is interestingto note that it was an advance
of 'feminine'and 'black' elementsand subgenres thatmade the old rockdefenders
despair, while the subsequent triumphantdiscourses of a rock 'recovery' were
oftenbased on young white males recapturingthe initiative(even if othervoices
were in realitystrongeven at the peak of these revivals).
It is truethatsome protagonistsof recentdance music, notablywithinhouse
and techno, have explicitlydefined theirmusic as non-rock.House music is often
seen as part of the same camp as rap and hip hop music, and there are parallels
in the sampling techniques, rhythmicbeats and generationalsettings.But in many
ways house/technois musicallyand aestheticallymuch furtherremoved fromthe
conventionalrock/pop-field.
Moore (1993, p. 60) mentionsthathouse music is not
its
fans
as
rock, which is supported by many interviewsand articles
accepted by
fromwithinthis scene, while rap is much more ambiguous in this respect. Bloomfield(1991, p. 77) writesthatyoung dance music sees 'the whole point of the new
technologyas challengingthe ethos of "guys and guitars". A new Swedish dance
music journal, NU NRG, introduces itselfin the summer of 1993 by asking: 'Do
you want not to have read about r**k?',and then writesat lengthabout precisely
that
(the presumed and wished death of) rock - again a gesture of father-murder
as such bears witness that the label of rock at least carries life enough to make
people want to kill it.
From the other camp, rock musicians defend their separateness frompop
and dance music. When Guns 'n' Roses - togetherwith Nirvana and Seattle
'grunge' the praised flagshipof a recentmale whiterockrevival- were interviewed
at the MTV awards event of 1992, Axl Rose finishedby declaring'This has nothing
to do with Michael Jackson!'They could as well have mentioned Madonna.
'Rock'is art.Madonna,in contrast,
is 'pop' - juvenile,formulaic,
artificial,
shallow,selfcommitted
to makinga profit.
Madonnais a commodity
centred,escapistfantasy,
produced
by industry.Clearly,pushingMadonna to the bottomrungsof the pop culturalladder
makesa space at thetop forpop music'art'.Furthermore,
despitethefactthatMadonna
is locatedin oppositionto femalesinger-songwriters,
itis Madonnaand pop thatarefeminized. ... A numberof musiccriticslinkMadonna,pop, and 'feminine'qualities(using
a transcodedversionoftheartversus
adjectiveslikefluffy,
coy,bubbly,etc.) to construct
mass culturedistinction
withinthedomainofpopularmusic.(Schulzeetal. 1993,p. 18)
relatedto age, gender,
Rock/popis a genre-fieldof conflictinginterpretations,
ethnic and class conflicts.Young generations have a need to define themselves
against parents and their tastes, but can also be fascinated by the styles of
yesterday.Male and female positions are confrontedand exchanged. 'Black' and
'white' cultural traditions meet and interplayby means of identificationsand

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

120

JohanFornds

delimitations.Working-classlife styles are colliding with those associated with

economic or culturalcapital. Distinctionswithina genre are oftenmade in efforts
to excommunicateothers fromit. Some restrictrock to a male white canon of
or othergroups and subgenres
heroes, marginalisingwomen, African-Americans
as deviant Others. Some respond by avoiding the rock label, while others fight
forthe rightto rock. Such discursive strugglesover the definitionand borders of
a genre are a sign of its creativelife.5
While some house, rap or pop voices distancethemselvesfroma narrowlyconceived rock genre, others fightfortheirrightto take part in the wider rock field.
Hence themanycrossoversbetween subgenres.On thepartlygenderedrockborder
withpop, forexample,itis interestingto notethatin theSwedish tourpackage called
'Rocktaget'(theRockTrain),thefamouspop singerEva Dahlgrenwas the 1992main
between groups nomattraction.It is harderand harderto see the precisedifference
inated as best 'rock' bands and best 'pop' bands of the year.
On the more ethnicallyencoded borderwith rap, many black hip hop artists
have worked with hard white rock bands, as when Run-D.M.C. and Aerosmith
made 'Walk This Way', or when Public Enemyused Anthraxon 'BringTha Noize'.
Ice-T's move fromrap to hardcore punk with the band Body Count in songs like
'Cop Killer' is another example of the continued attractionof rock on its margins.
Like rock, rap depends on a vocal performancebacked up by instrumentsoften
played by an ensemble ofmusicians and/orDJs. Sectionswith song mightalternate
with the rhythmicalrap speech. There is today a sortof continuumbetween hardcore rap/metal,puristrap, toastand pop/soul-rap,partofit loosely associated with
hip hop subculture.It is reallya sign of heterogeneitythattwo musics so close to
each other in sound and spirit as the L.A. rage against the machine and the
Swedish/NorwegianClawfingerhave put opposite claims on theirlatest releases:
'No samples, keyboardsor synthesizersused in the makingof thisrecording'(rage
againstthemachine,1992), and - ironically- 'This record is loaded with samples,
loops, and no guitaramps' (Deaf Dumb Blind,1993). This opens up a verycomplex
discussion around the relations between ideologies, genres, instrumentsand
technologies.
In a book about rappers as 'a generationof black rockers' (!), the following
statementcan be read:
aboutpissing
Thenagain,rapis rock,afterall,and rockhas alwaysbeenat leastincidentally
of
offtheold folks.. . . Of course,all ofthisis predictedon an Afrocentric
understanding
who programAOR radio,youbelievethatrock
ofrock.If,likethewhitebreads
thehistory
proceedsfromElvisto theBeatlesand theWhoto Led Zeppelinand EltonJohnand finally
of rock,it
Bon Joviand PhilCollins,thenrap is not onlynot goingto fityourdefinition
likelywon'tevenqualifyas music.On theotherhand,ifyourhalloffamerunsfromLittle
Richardand Bo Diddleyto JamesBrownand JimiHendrixand Sly& theFamilyStone,to
and finallyto Princeand theheroesofhip
Kool and theGang and Parliament/Funkadelic
inthetradition.
is
that
to
understand
then
(Alderand Beckman
rap strictly
you'regoing
hop,
1991,p. xviii)6
Here genre definitionsappear as arenas of a culturalpower struggle,where
oppositional agents mobilise alternativecanons against a dominating position.
Each such reconstructedchain is problematicin tryingto establish a single, clean
and unitarytraditionline instead of acceptingthe hybridityand crossingsthatgive
a genre life.A series of genealogies coexist,pointingout quite different
legitimate
'origins' (in countryor blues, America,Africaor Europe; cf. van der Merwe 1989).

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefutureofrock

121

All such genealogies are stakes in a power game, where theircoexistenceindicates

that none of them alone can be more than locally correct.
'I've seen the futureof rock and it sucks', sings Graham Parkeron 'Love is
a Burning Question' (on BurningQuestions,1992). This can be read as a general
pessimisticrock-prophesyor a specificironic referenceto the famous statement
about Bruce Springsteenas the incarnatedfutureof rock.7A more optimisticinterpretation,might,however, say that rock will continue to attractinterest,or that
its sucking in of various new and non-orthodoxtendencies is indeed what will
keep it alive into the next millenium. Its hegemony as youth music might be
broken, but the present fragmentedpop music field will probablynot again rise
to one single heir to its throne, and neitherwill rock die just because it is not
alone or has become reflexivelyaware of its history.8
The effortsofa strongrockestablishmentto claimhegemonyforone tradition
line covers and hides various sub- and side-traditionsthat compete within the
genre and in factgives it dynamics and life. Periods of increasingopenness (the
explicittransgressionsof gender, sexuality,age, class, ethnic and genre borders
by artistslike Madonna, Michael Jackson or Prince) may alternatewith phases
where dominantforcestryto reinforcestrictboundaries. It is then thatthe definition strugglesintensify,as threatenedpositions defend theirlegitimaterights.But
no such purist movements can avoid late modern flexibilityand reflexivity:
it is
essential to grunge, heavy metal and trad rock as well, as these subgenres foster
new types of hybridityin styleand identity.In beat, punk and grunge-metal,the
claims of white male bonding were in fact immediatelycrossed by other lines:
black sounds in the 1960s, female voices in the 1970s, complex crossovers in the
1990s.
Rock will die (petrifiedinto a cliche) if its hegemonic line is strongand stiff
enough to repress all Others in its effortsto establish a pure originand canon. If
and when rock can be unambiguously defined, then it will be dead. But as long
as various Others ('Afro-American'soul, reggae and rap, 'female' pop, non-AngloAmericanvoices, etc. fightstylisticwars withthe male, white,Westernrockheroes
for the rightto rock, the genre will survive as an open and unpredictablefield.
No one yet knows the result of its discursive struggles.They are decided by no
single actor,but in a polyphonous process among unpredictablealliances among
listeners,subcultures,musicians, journalistsand music industryprofessionals.
Late modern tendencies have problematised one rock ideology, that which
formulateda bohemian, male fatherrebellion through ageing images of lonely
marginalityand raw naturalness. The space may have shrunkforsuch melancholian macho-rebels.But whateverits claims, thisideology has never been the whole
truthabout the 'essence' of rock. Its currentweaking - in spite of the recurrent
effortsto revive it - may open a largerscope forother subcurrents,other definitions. Importantconditions still exist for some sort of aesthetic activitywith at
least some of the functions,use-values and characteristicsof rock. What name it
will have is not decided by whether this futuremusic-makingwill adhere to or
deviate fromany once-and-for-allgiven rock-essence.It is instead the result of as
yet undecided strugglesof genre definitionsand rightsof interpretation.
This constructivist
view is also congruentwith a general problematisationof
earlier ways of looking at subcultures and other cultural phenomena, in which
'homologies' were sought. Looking forregularpatternsmay be necessary forany
theoreticalunderstanding,but theydo not have to be homogeneous and univocal.

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

122

JohanFornds

Instead, culturalstudies have become more and more interestedin what can be
called 'heterologies': contradictionsand tensions within cultural phenomena.9
Applied to rock and pop music, we might today preferto see these genres as
internallycontradictory,carryingimportanttensions that definethem and propel
theirdiachronous developments. Instead of tryingall the timeto pinpointa single
and uniformessence, ethos, foundation or homology within rock as a genre
(emphasising consistencies between various subgenres; between musical parameters;between musical, verbal and visual levels of styles;and between cultural
formsand social formations),I would now preferto look forthe most important
sets of internalcontradictionsand fracturesthat drive the genre forward.
I would formy part bet that come the milleniumno single label will be able
to claim to stand foryouth music, the way rock once did. That way, rockwill lose
its hegemony - which is not the same as its life. I expect to experience a more
or whateverthe new subgenres will be called. In
open fieldof rock/pop/rap/house
such a situation, it may be better to returnto 'popular music' (or, once again,
'pop') as the unifyingconcept.
But my reluctanceto leave 'rock' behind derives froma beliefthatthe specific
will be relevantand interesting
dialecticsaround the narrow/widerock-definition
If
is
the
of
rock
to
come.
ethos
for
interpretedas white and male,
enough
years
its disintegrationcould be welcomed. But is it reallynecessary to surrenderto the
hithertodominatingideology of rock?If the genre is instead constructedas a more
open field of tension between differentpositions, it can be understood and used
not only to express but also to thematiseand problematisethe complex formsof
hegemony surroundinggender, ethnicityand class. And this is exactlywhat has
been happening in what I perceive as the most interestingdevelopments within
rock,where the male white position has been turnedinside-outin the confrontation with various Others.
Rock has fromits very beginnings developed througha young male white
position meeting and breaking throughthe prisms of a series of 'others': blacks,
women, homosexuals or older tradition-bearersfromother genres (blues, jazz,
music-hall,rai and various otherpopular genres). Much traditionalrockand young
white male cultureis certainlysoaked with romanticmisogyny,and a longing for
a unisexual homosocial world where mothers are kept away, or for lost, fixed
patriarchalnorms in what is perceived as a too chaotic and floatinglate modern
world. But the historyof rock has also always been nourished by inflows from
Afro-American,female and otheralternativeexpressions.
It may be possible to thinkof the narrow rock concept as a semi-subcultural
and socially defined stream within the open, fluid and more clearly musically
defined wide rock/popfield. Maybe, then, it is rock as a socially and functionally
definedgenre with certaininstitutions,values, etc. thathas come to an end, while
rock as a musical genre is stillusable. If rock was once a leading rebellious genre
with almost a subcultureof its own, it is now not much more than memories of
that era and a fragmentedprism of various stylisticelements. But then, the talk
of its death can only resonate in those who once believed in the highesthopes of
its proponents. Like the death of the subject, of the author or of history,the death
of rock can only be perceived by those who have formerlyshared an exaggerated
beliefin rock as a super-fetish,carryingthe load of being the high-roadto revolution, freedomand utopia. To others,who do not share the disappointmentover
the disenchantmentof this subculturalideology, the present state of the genre as

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefutureofrock

123

one among othersmay only appear as a highlyreasonable and even fruitful

form
of necessarilycontingent,hybridand contradictorylife.20
Whatever,I predictthat the dethroningof rock will not be at all like its first
break-through,when in some ways it seemed to replace jazz. It will be, rather,a
diffuseprocess of fragmentationand hybridisation,in which rock will in factnot
die (anymorethanjazz died in the 1950s),but become one of several elasticthreads
in the increasinglymotleyweb of popular music.

The futurewill be
What has changed within rock/popis ambivalent. New technologies may have
threatenedolder formsof music-making,but have also enabled a growing global
communicationand plurality,as well as an increasinginteractivity
in media forms
like karaoke or digital sound systems.11Sampling and eclecticismhave not only
expanded commercialmarketsbut also questioned the foundations of capitalist
of media in
production in private ownership. The expansion and differentiation
life
has
increased
the
of
both
and
resistance.
everyday
potential
power
All these ambivalentdevelopments vibratein the discussion of the futureof
rock. Metamorphoses are continuous and the past lives on in undercurrentsof the
present. Nothing will become either totallynew or totallythe same in the year
2000. The metaphors around death and birth,fall and rise, hide many different
motives. Ageing rock journalists mourn their lost youth. Young generations
emphasise the decay of parental genres in orderto open spaces fortheirown new
beginnings. At the bottom, there is a fundamentalhuman desire fornarrativity,
to understand life as a (hi)story,with a beginning, a climax and an end.12 The
metaphysical discourse of lost innocence, departed glory,a passed Golden Age,
a vanished Eldorado - all this is not limitedto the rock discourse, to the 1990s or
to the already obsolete 'post-isms' (headed by postmodernism). It is instead a
particularlystubbornline throughhuman history.
By our prophecies, we shape the milleniumshiftas a mega-event. It might,
therefore,be strategicallyimportantto formulateself-reflective
counter-visions,in
spite of all doubts of theirvalidity.I do not hope forany new uniformityor strict
dichotomies. What I hope for is a growing space for differencesand pluralities,
forcommunicationand creativity,forresistanceagainst systemicdemands and for
as domination-freedialogues as possible. I look forwardto musical currentsthat
dissolution of supexperimentwith the potentialsof modernityforself-reflection,
individualisation
of
life
choices
and
mobilisation
of identity,
traditions,
pressing
while at the same time resistingits negative risks for ecological collapse, social
control,commercialcynicismand the broken conversations of culturalconflicts.
Popular music can be predictedto findnew ways ofvoicing oppression and injustice on many differentfrontiers,of which the age and generationalone will be of
crucialimportancein the face of the ways in which young people are hitby ecological, psychological, social and culturalproblems in late modernity.The twentyfirstcenturyand our thirdmilleniumwill need broad and deep culturaldialogues
and music will be an importantmeans of communicationacross and underneath
borders: between people and deep under the level of verbal discursivity.Here is
a continuingmission forrockand its growingnumberof companions and competitors. The music of tomorrow- and futurerock as a rich subfieldwithinit - will

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

124

JohanForniis

hopefullybe anti-,poly- and heterophonic!Only then will the words of Princein

'The Future' (Batman, 1989) be applied to rock:
I've seen thefutureand itwillbe
I've seen thefutureand itworks
In any case, the futureis already workingin and on the present - through
our discourses on what will be.

Endnotes
6 Swedenburg (1992, pp. 55, 65) also stressesthe
continuitybetween rap and rock and sees
these genres as open discursivefields.
7 'I saw rock and roll's futureand its name is
Bruce Springsteen',wrote JonLandau in Rolling Stonein 1974.
8 Moore (1993, p. 179) underlines that selfreferencesand pastiche formsare not necessarily signs of decay, but ratherof continued
vitality.
9 The concept of 'heterology' derives from
phonograms.
Michel de Certeau (1986).
4 For example, punk obviously opened crucial
new spaces for female voices, but the early 10 '[W]hat has "died" is the ability of the discourse of "rock' to impose a unityin the form
comments of how punk had revitalised the
of the white,male subject/author
upon the hetdecaying rock fieldusually stressed the return
to male roots. Only lateritwas the new diverserogeneityof "other' racial, sexual and gendered identities and musics on which rock
ity of voices celebrated. Thanks to Hillevi
music itselffed' (Bradby 1993, p. 163).
Ganetz, who is presentlywritinga dissertation
on female Swedish rock lyrics,formaking me 11 Bloomfield (1991, p. 76) optimisticallyhopes
that 'the proliferationof a karaoke-style-do-itthinkabout these gendered historicalperspectives. Wise (1984/1990)discusses the repressed
yourselfrap may in the futureallow fora combined politicaland aestheticalbreak with comfemale aspect of Elvis Presley. Cohen (1991)
describes the misogynistelements of the indie
modityculture'.
12 Ricoeur (1983-5/1984-8,1991) discusses the
rock culture of Liverpool. Compare also how
close relation between life, time, historyand
Andreas Huyssen (1986) analyses literary
narrative.My view of the life of genres as an
modernism as a reaction towards the feared
openness towards conflictinginterpretations
femininityof mass culture.
are inspired by Ricoeur (1976). Compare
5 Middleton (1990) has a similarview of rock as
Fornas (1990a) on rock,youthand late modern
a discursively contested and dynamic field.
time experience.
Ricoeur(1981) discusses the necessityand productivityof conflictsof interpretation.
1 A styleis a particularformationof formalrelations in one single work, in the total work of
an artist,or in a group of works across many
genres (cf. Ricoeur 1976, 1981).
2 Cf. also Frith (1981, 1986, 1988), Grossberg
(1986/1990,1993) and Ihlemann (1992).
3 Figurescan be found in Roe & Carlsson (1990).
According to Gottlieb (1991), the US population spends more money on musical scores,
instruments than on
software and

References
ofBlackRockers(London)
Adler, B. and Beckman,Janette.1991. Rap! Portraitsand Lyricsofa Generation
Studieri samtidskultur
(Oslo)
Berkaak, Odd Are and Ruud, Even. 1992. Den pdbegynte
virkelighet.
Bloomfield,Terry.1991. 'It's sooner than you think,or Where are we in the historyof rock music?',
New LeftReview,190
Bradby,Barbara. 1993. 'Gender, technologyand the body in dance music', PopularMusic, 12/2
and Diversityin theInternational
industry.(Gothenburg)
Phonogram
Burnett,Robert. 1990. Concentration
Cohen, Sara. 1991. RockCulturein Liverpool.PopularMusic in theMaking(Oxford)
Discourseon theOther(Minneapolis)
de Certeau, Michel. 1986. Heterologies.
eds. P.
Fornds,Johan. 1990a. 'Tid, ord och ungdom', in Spelrum.Om lek,stilochflyti ungdomskulturen,
Dahlen and M. R6nnberg(Uppsala)
1990b. 'Moving rock: youth and pop in late modernity',PopularMusic 9/3

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Thefutureofrock

125

1993. 'Mirroringmeetings,mirroringmedia: the microphysicsof reflexivity',

CulturalStudies8/2
1994. 'Listen to your voice! Reflexivityand authenticityin rock, rap and techno music', New Formations,24
Fornis, Johan,Lindberg,Ulfand Sernhede, Ove. 1990. 'Under the surfaceof rock- Youth cultureand
late modernity',PopularMusic and Society,14:3
(London)
forthcoming.In Garageland.Youth,rockand modernity
Frith,Simon. 1981. Sound Effects.
Youth,Leisure,and thePoliticsofRock'n' Roll (New York)
1986. 'Art versus technology:the strangecase of popular music', Media, Culture& Society,8:3
1988. Music forPleasure.Essaysin theSociologyofPop (Cambridge)
(ed.) 1989. FacingtheMusic (New York)
Word(New York)
Frith,Simon and Goodwin, Andrew (eds) 1990. On Record.Rock,Pop, and theWritten
Goodwin, Andrew. 1988/1990.'Sample and hold: pop music in the digitalage of reproduction',in On
Record,Rock,Pop and theWrittenWord,eds S. Frithand A. Goodwin (New York)
1991. 'Popular music and postmodern theory',CulturalStudies,5:2
1992. 'Rationalization and democratizationin the new technologies of popular music', in Popular
Music and Communication.
Secondedition.ed. J. Lull (Newbury Park)
Gottlieb,Anthony. 1991. 'The music business', The Economist,21 December
Grossberg, Lawrence. 1986/1990.'Is there rock afterpunk?', in On Record.Rock,Pop and the Written
Word,eds S. Frithand A. Goodwin (New York)
1993. 'The media economy of rock culture: cinema, postmodernityand authenticity',in Sound and
Vision.TheMusic VideoReader,eds S. Frith,A. Goodwin & L. Grossberg(London and New York)
Hebdige, Dick. 1990. 'Fax to the future',MarxismToday,January
Hyssen, Andreas. 1986. AftertheGreatDivide. Modernism,Mass Cultureand Postmodernism
(London)
Ihlemann, Lisbeth. 1992. 'Fra rockkoncerttilmusikvideo- et opbrud i rockensbetydninger',MedieKultur,18
Middleton, Richard. 1990. StudyingPopularMusic (Milton Keynes)
Moore, Allan F. 1993. Rock: The PrimaryText. Developinga Musicologyof Rock (Buckingham and
Philadelphia)
Redhead, Steve. 1990. The End-of-the-Century
Party.Youthand Pop Towards2000 (Manchester)
Reynolds, Simon. 1990. BlissedOut. TheRapturesofRock(London)
Ricoeur, Paul. 1976. Interpretation
Theory:Discourseand theSurplusofMeaning(FortWorth)
1981. Hermeneutics
and theHuman Sciences.Essayson Language,Actionand Interpretation
(Cambridge)
1983-5/1984-8.Timeand Narrative(3 volumes) (Chicago and London)
1991. 'Life in quest of a narrative', in On Paul Ricoeur.Narrativeand Interpretation,
ed. D. Wood
(London and New York)
Roe, Keith and Carlsson, Ulla. (eds) 1990. PopularMusic Research(Gothenburg)
Schulze, Laurie, Barton White, Anne and Brown, Jane D. 1993. "'A sacred monsterin her prime":
audience constructionof Madonna as low-other',in TheMadonnaConnection,
PolitRepresentational
and CulturalTheory,ed. C. Schwichtenberg(Boulder)
ics, SubculturalIdentities,
Swedenburg, Td. 1992. 'Homies in the 'hood. Rap's commodificationof insubordination',New Formations,18
van der Merwe, Peter. 1989. Originsof thePopular Style.The Antecedents
of Twentieth-Century
Popular
Music (Oxford)
Wise, Sue. 1984/1990.'Sexing Elvis', in On Record,Pop and theWritten
Word,eds Frith& Goodwin (New
York)

This content downloaded from 200.16.89.152 on Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:46:23 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions