Race and Boy Bands
April 8th, 2008 by AbbyOpening disclaimer: I’m not entirely sure where I’m going with the post–mostly I was hoping to put something out there and hope that other people can figure out what to say about it.
So, one of things that didn’t come up today, but that occured to me during our discussion, is how incredibly raced the music industry and music fandom is. Boy bands and girl bands and their followings seem to especially embody this theme. Off the top of my head, I can’t name one multi-racial boy band. New Kids on the Block: all white. Boyz II Men: all black. New Edition: all black. Menudo: All latino. *NSYNC, Backstreet Boys, 98 Degrees, LFO, O-town: all white. Furthermore, when rivalries are constructed, the racial frontiers are maintained. Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera (and to a lesser extent Jessica Simpson and Mandy Moore) were all constructed as rivals to each other, but Brandy and Maya weren’t considered in the bracket, even though they were young, hot women producing PG to PG-13 boy-centric pop music for a similar demographic. The only counterexample that I can think of right now is that the Spice Girls had one black member. And I think it’s pretty telling that she was “Scary Spice.”
I just had a few observations based on these samples. The first is the obvious statement that the music industry reproduces and perpetuates social cleavages. Especially since all of the above music is targeted at pre-teens and teens, it’s somewhat sinister that the expectation/stereotype that people of different races won’t have similar tastes is being reinforced in the next generation. The other, slightly less boring, but related observation I had was that I think a lot of this is bound up in the sexual and homosexual subtext of pop icons. Girls aren’t only supposed to find a member of *NSYNC to identify with (“The Sensitive One”; “The Young, Hip One”; “The Wacky One”), they’re supposed to want them sexually. And it’s still seen as threatening for the stereotypical boy-band consumer–a 13-year-old white girl–to sexually want a black man. And it is especially threatening if she discovers her sexuality through wanting a black man, entirely possible given the middle-school target age of a boy-band consumer. The homosocial dynamic of boy bands also seems to be similarly raced/racist.
I guess a way to end this post would be ask: how does this relate to what Brandon was saying in class about what people stand to gain or lose through particular music fandom identifications? And is this mostly constructed in the fandom (i.e., a black person who likes Jessica Simpson won’t get respect from black peers), constructed in the industry (the industry tells black people to like Beyonce and white people to like Christina Aguilera), or both? Hopefully someone else can say something coherent, because I’m just not entirely sure where I’m going.
Posted in Fandom, Industry, music, race | 10 Comments »
Well, going to your first point, I believe it’s telling as many of these bands are constructed by music producers to appeal to a specific subset of the population. They are meant to be as inoffensive as possible and not rock any sort of cultural boats. By grouping each boy band together through one ethnicity this is maintained. No boats are rocked, no one (at least in the target audience of 10-14 year old girls) is offended, and none of their parents care. It’s perfectly tailored image and that is a reflection of how intrinsically fake each band really is.
Hmm… is this surprising, though?
Not to me. And it’s probably (and hopefully) not surprising to many other people either. It’s just like many of the other cultural/media products made throughout this country that reflect/perpetuate our nation’s race relations. There are white tv shows, Hispanic shows and black shows (and tv channels for that matter). I’d argue that predominately white television programs and movies – and white casting in general – are the default in the production process; while Black and Hispanic programs are created to target a neglected but large audience as an afterthought. I think that one of the only reasons that there are a few “diverse” casts is because of the producers’ conscious decision to make some kind of sociopolitical statement about equality or the lack thereof – i.e. Grey’s Anatomy and Crash – or to capitalize on the fame of a specific stars – i.e. Jennifer Lopez and the string of movies she has starred in.
I also think that this missing need to make a political statement through heterogeneous music groups is complicated by the history of music styles and fan tastes and their connection to racial musical styles as Abby mentions. But is it sinister or just reality? I feel like it is easier to justify Boys II Men as an all black male group due to their style of music and the tradition from which it is based. (Plus, I think their story includes something about growing up in Philly together…) Plus, even though it would be a beautiful picture to see a rainbow of people creating R&B, I think there is a cultural knee jerk reaction to discredit an artist who partakes in a style not usually associated with his/her own ethnicity. (I’m completely deviating from the group model, but I have people like Eminem, Vanilla Ice, and Marky Mark in mind but I’m sure there are more examples.)
Now, I’m treading in uncertain waters and I can’t really back up these thoughts with anything grounded. But my perception is that much of music is targeted to niche consumer groups more so than films and television, so it is “okay” to divide (or dare I say: segregate) people because it is simply about the musical style and tastes of the artists actually creating the music.
But I don’t really know about the second part of Abby’s post about sexuality, because while the groups are homogenous, the groups you have mentioned are all mainstream and have been consumed by all types of people – I think. This makes me think that mixed race groups don’t exist not so much because of problematic sexual consumption/iconography… but more of setting the members equal to each other. Once again, I think of pop stars like Michael Jackson, Usher and Beyonce, who are loved by all as solo artists (or in their former groups) but it’d be interesting to see what happens if they were thrown on stage with prominent white acts. Actually- this just raised a new question: (since many of the groups we have talked about have come and gone) if there were prominent pop groups today, how would that look? The only example I can think of is the Pussycat Dolls – that does indeed have some (not much…) diversity. Also, Justin Timberlake transcends genre with his style that is a bit R&B and hip-hop and his continuous collaboration with Timbaland.
Okay. I think I’m done – for now. I hope there was something valuable within this rant…
I completely agree with you, Loretta. As we discussed today in class, boy bands are pretty phoney and almost comletely constructed and almost scripted. As you say, usually multi-racial casts are used only to make a sociopolitical statement. Using a boy band as a platform for such a statement is probably 1.) not profitable and 2.) not all that effective since boy bands are generally not taken all that serious outside of their target audience.
Also, as Brandon said in class, it is easier to enjoy a fan object if you are able to somehow identify with it. Taking this into consideration, it makes sense to me that it would be profitable to sign a white rapper such as Eminem. Eminem made it easier for white fans of rap to identify with a musician. I’m not really familiar with their music, but I’d imagine that the Beastie Boys had a similar effect the 80s.
To address Abby’s point about Britney and Christina being compared to each other while Brandy and Maya are compared to each other, I definitely think there is a problem with comparing people almost soley on race rather than content or ability. This is one thing that has always driven me crazy about sports, particularly basketball. Every single white player it seems, at one time or another, will be compared to Larry Bird. Since the recent history of the NBA is overwhelmingly composed of black players, it seems rather likely that there is a black player who has a more similar skill set to Dirk Nowitzki than does Larry Bird (I think its Bob MacAdoo, but that’s not really important). Similarly, aside from both being white and blonde (most of the time), I don’t see very much similarity in the singing styles of Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera. I think the comparing solely along racial lines is one of the more obvious signs that race and to an extent racism still plays a tremendous role in both popular culture and sports.
I don’t think racial sexual taboos should be discounted too quickly. These pop bands are targeted at young kids (girls?). With children of this age, their parents will play a prominent role in purchasing the music and merchandise.
While perhaps young teens of our (and the next) generation would not have any problem with having a boy-band crush on someone of a different race, I can imagine many parents would. The marketing teams of these pop bands surely realize this as well.
Exactly what Ben said. I also think, that as more teens gain independent purchasing power through stuff like itunes and we more towards a more post-racial America (hopefully), boy bands and other created musical groups will begin to become more racially mixed.
I, too, agree with Ben. Boy bands and sexuality are inextricably linked because they are marketed as sexual objects to female “tweens”. These girls have either just reached sexual maturity or haven’t yet, and probably aren’t able to understand many elements of sexuality. Similarly, at such a young age they will not be able to understand matters pertaining to race nearly as well as they would when they’re a few years older. I think that parents feel that if you put the two 2ge+her (get it?), it might create some confusion for their 10 to 14 year-old daughters. They’d rather their children be taught these things separately, so that they may gain the greatest level of understanding of both of these issues.
I really disagree that parents (or producers) are trying to be more “responsible” by keeping pop bands segregated. Where is there any indication that this practice is maintained so that values of integration and diversity can be taught in a more “serious” context? And isn’t it a little bit alarming that you think that young children would be confused if they found themselves sexually attracted to someone of a different race? That sort of thing doesn’t just happen–it’s because society tells people to only consider members of their own race as sexual partners. And society tells us that through messages the media sends. Look at film, where people of color are only coupled with people of color and white is paired with white and it’s a matter of serious comment when something is done differently. (My favorite example is Will Smith’s movie “Hitch,” a romantic comedy in which tons of people are finding love everywhere, and he and Eva Mendes, the only two non-whites in the film, end up together. And Smith is the most mainstream, least threatening black actor on the market. Compare that with Black Snake Moan, which is all about the fear of black men controlling white women.) And it happens in music, when boy bands are segregated. Eradicating racism doesn’t just happen when parents have deep discussions with their kids about race; it happens when you don’t see evidence of racism in everyday society, including (perhaps especially) in entertainment media. You can’t just banish media to a separate sphere and say, “Oh, that’s too frivolous for us to use it to buck social stigmas, kids will just be confused.” I think that the point Ben was trying to make is that parents are likely uncomfortable with multiracial dating and so producers, recognizing this, keep music pitched at young kids as racially “safe” as possible. I think that’s a good point. But let’s not pretend that this is somehow a good thing.
A lack of diversity in music groups isn’t limited to just pop groups. It exists in most groups I know. It’s not like there is a black member of the Rolling Stones. In fact, the only three multi-racial rock groups that come to mind are the Association (mid 1960s) the Jimi Hendrix Experience (which is totally eclipsed by Jimi Hendrix himself) and the Chamber Brothers (1970s). Motown groups were all black, and most British and American rock groups were all white. Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think that’s changed much.
!!Rant alert!!
My thing is this: the fandoms one subscribes to are deeply rooted to something more than just the act of self-identification; rather, and i think more importantly, one’s fandoms encourage others to make judgements about the fan, pigeonholing them into the broad category in which their fan object is perceived to reside. Fans of star trek, star wars, doctor who and the like are all seen as nerds by the mainstream, whereas certain music and sports fandoms are seen as far more acceptable, and fall into their own, socially constructed categorizations. I would even go so far as to say that there are constructed hierarchies within these categories, but that is beyond the point.
In spite of all natural inclination, this system of judgement and stereotyping is not necessarily a bad thing. Because people, in my opinion, often use others’ judgement to their benefit, in efforts to gain cultural or social capital, or “legitimacy” within communities of varying scale. So with that said, I feel like fans themselves are just as culpable as TPTB in exploiting the labels associated with particular fandoms.
So to make my ramblings a little more coherent, a translation: Just as likely as record labels are to appeal to a certain demographic, fans utilize their fandoms as claims for their legitimacy within that particular group.
To bring this back to a question of race, I am of the belief that a large part of ethnic identity is the element of performance. It is a performance based on the ideological syncretism of what is truly informed by culture and history, and what is expected by members of that community (which, confusingly enough, is often motivated by what non-members commonly expect).
So, when a label markets someone as a “black artist,” i think that the phenomenon that is most poignant is that black people will flock to them moreso because that’s what black people like (or ar expected to like, by each other and others), and their identity and legitimacy within the black community is less likely be questioned. Whereas with a black fan of Jessica Simpson, certain questions are raised that wouldn’t necessary be if the same black person were a fan of Beyonce.
But, like I said earlier in this post, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. People gain access to certain social and cultural circles based on their fandoms. I feel that this happens a lot more than people are willing to admit, because it challenges the motif of autonomy and freedom that fandom so often embodies. However I disagree with that claim, because (as I said in class) I think that the act of personal identification is just misplaced in our accepted model of fandom. Instead of a fan becoming a fan based on their identification with the fan object itself, it is the fan community with which they readily identify themselves that paints a more accurate picture of that particular fan.
A more specific example: In Hollywood, there has been the growing phenomenon where executive deals in the entertainment industry are moving from the golf course to the X-box. From executive producers to writers, the online community of exclusive gamers shoot enemies and blow up things while simultaneously hashing out distribution deals and screenplay pitches. Just as golf was a fandom that gained certain individuals entry into professional circles, Halo has provided the same utility. Now, I’m not a big gamer or golfer, but seeing as I’m a film major with interests in advertising and marketing, I admit I have the lingering itch to practice my swing and buy an x-box. I feel like saying that is no different than me saying that I watch BET (Black Entertainment Television), or that I love houston rap. Each of those fandoms potentially grant me legitimacy and, consequently, access professional, ethnic, and regional communities, respectively.
I guess it seems pretty pessimistic to think that fans are fans just because they want to make friends. But I just feel that’s more the case than we’ve wanted to believe. I do acknowledge that these imposed generalizations have less influence in a homogenizing world where globalization, mass communication, and the remnants of post-modernism blur the lines of distinction that allow for such prejudice. but i also feel that there is a long way to go until those mechanisms alter our perceptions of race.
I really agree with what Brandon is saying in his post about the affiliations that come with fandom. I feel like we have recently strayed from what we spent so long on earlier this semester– the fan COMMUNITY. I was still pretty green in the ‘know’ of fandom at the beginning of the semester, so most of the initial lessons made a large impact on me, and I remember getting the impression that the fan community was a huge aspect of many fandoms. The practices, exculsivity, friends and common ground shared by fan community members was a significant drawing point for many of the original fandoms we studied in Jenkins. (“fandom encourages a public exchange of information” p.77) Fans seemed relieved and empowered in locating others who shared their passion. In many cases we studied, the community and fan practices within it keft the fandom alive long after the object of the fandom has been discontinued (ex: Beauty and the Beast). While the world of fandom has really changed with technology and the internet, we should not forget how and where the motivations behind its origins began.