In the car a few days ago, I heard two songs on the radio,
back-to-back, that caused me to pause and reflect. The first song was “Little
Talks” by the Icelandic band Of Monsters and Men and the second was Mumford and Son’s new single “I Will Wait”. Making the experience all the more striking was
that these two songs were preceded and followed by pop artists like Nicki Minaj
or Katy Perry. Although it’s difficult to place bands like Mumford and Sons in
a genre, their sound certainly differs from the majority of pop musicians whose
work populates the airwaves. Some would classify these bands as “folk”, or
perhaps less definitively as “folksy”.
It is easy to see and hear something in these bands that
reflects the form, themes, styles, and aesthetics of folk music. Take, for
example, the instruments they use in their songs. In place of synthesizers or
electric guitars, we often hear what we consider “traditional” instruments,
those accessible to the “common man”, like the banjo, fiddle, and harmonica. Additionally,
these bands clearly attempt to take on a “backwoods” or “down country” persona,
wearing clothing that conveys simplicity, age, and wear—the fashion equivalent
of patina.
Song lyrics don’t reference cell phones or nightclubs, but
rather rural landscapes, manual labor, and, occasionally, passages or figures
from the Bible. The Head and the Heart, an indie/folk outfit out of Seattle
(shocking, I know), intone in their song “Lost in My Mind”:
How’s that bricklayin’
coming
How’s your engine
runnin’
Is that bridge gettin’
built
Are you hands gettin’
filled
Fellow Seattleites, Fleet Foxes, more explicitly demonstrate
these themes in the title track off their 2011 album Helplessness Blues:
If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm
raw
If I had an orchard, I'd work till I'm sore
And you would wait tables and soon run the store
Is there reason to believe we are in
the midst of a folk revival? Purists would argue no. They see folk music as
part of a largely oral tradition in which songs have been passed down for
generations. That continuity is the key. The bands described above are, for the
most part, performing music they have written and embodying styles they have
invented. They are creating novel cultural products with recourse to the past
(see Kirshenblatt-Gimblett’s work on heritage for more on this). In this sense,
today’s folk artists aren’t reviving anything. They are simply making a
statement in the present with the vocabulary of the past.
Regardless of whether or not we can
call the popularity of this “folk” music a revival, it is unquestionably
popular. What is it that makes songs harkening back to simpler times and
porch-front banjo picking so compelling to many people today? One possible
answer came to me while listening to the newest Mumford and Sons album. A
familiar song started playing, which I identified as Simon and Garfunkel’s “The
Boxer”. Here we had a contemporary folk band resurrecting a song from the 1960s
folk revival.
If we are witnessing a folk revival, it
certainly isn’t the first (or best example of) one. There was another moment of
folk consciousness in the 1930s and 1940s, epitomized in Woody Guthrie’s Dustbowl Ballads. The collection
featured traditional folk songs Guthrie learned from migrant workers, as well
as original compositions chronicling his travels from Oklahoma to California.
Guthrie is often cited among a list of folk artists from the 1930s and 1940s
that inspired a later generation of folk artists in the 1960s, including Bob
Dylan.
Serious fans of folk music would likely
cringe at even implicating that Mumford and Sons belongs to a lineage
stretching back to Woody Guthrie and Bob Dylan. For one thing, Woodie Guthrie
and Bob Dylan both used their music to promote social justice (with the former
supporting labor and the latter supporting the civil rights and anti-war
movements). Yet, there is a common thread running through the work of these
artists. All of them emerged in response to temporal demand for something
traditional, a connection to the past.
Much like the 1930s, we are living in a
period of economic crisis. And similar to the 1960s, our social world is
increasingly marked by rapid, sometimes jarring, change. In the words of Dylan,
“times, they are a changin’”. In the face of such crisis and change, we seek
solace in the past. Nostalgia for what has been replaced and remorse for what
has been lost take root. It is during times like these that folk music comes to
enjoy enormous currency. We might even think of folk music as a type of coping mechanism.
So the songs that struck a chord within
me as I listened to the radio may not truly be folk music. We know that many of
these bands are fabricated to meet the demand of the day. After all, Of
Monsters and Men is from Iceland, prompting questions about exactly whose folk
they are representing and celebrating. It is also clear that what I heard is
less a revival of pure folk music than a new creation with a folksy veneer.
Despite these truths, I took comfort in
the songs and sang along. For a brief moment, I could at least pretend to
commune with the world being left behind as I drove forward. Who knows how long
this folk moment will last, but if Woody Guthrie and Bob Dylan are any
indication, there’s staying power to music that forces us to look back in the
rearview mirror—music that reminds us to remember.
No comments:
Post a Comment