The Last Waltz

[Jupiter Beach]

Wow!

Thanks everyone for your input. You've all offered a great deal of insight, and given me a lot to think about!

My paper is due on Thursday, so once I've finished writing the part about Last Waltz, I'll run it by you guys.

Thanks again!

I wonder if I can cite the TDPRI as a resource...

[eryque]

Originally Posted by Jupiter Beach

I wonder if I can cite the TDPRI as a resource...

The answer is yes, if you get the specific author's opinion. Should you choose to do so, make sure that you use the right format. I've got the MLA manual if you need help with that.

[genelovesjez]

Originally Posted by Jupiter Beach

This is the essay question:
"Ideology can be understood as sets of ideas, values and assumptions that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations." How does this statement get played out in the world of popular music? How do different discourses operating inside the world of popular music perpetuate certain ideologically informed assumptions? Construct your arguments by using Horner, Keightley, Green and Scorcese (The Last Waltz).

Maybe I'm just a cynic, but am I the only one who reads between the lines and guesses that what the prof is really asking for is an essay describing how great The Band were, and what a great movie the Last Waltz is?

For the sake of higher education, I hope I'm wrong.

[Joel Terry]

Originally Posted by genelovesjez

Maybe I'm just a cynic, but am I the only one who reads between the lines and guesses that what the prof is really asking for is an essay describing how great The Band were, and what a great movie the Last Waltz is?

For the sake of higher education, I hope I'm wrong.

Yep--you're just a cynic, Peter.

:P Just kidding. You're probably spot-on correct about that professor seeking glowing reviews about The Last Waltz, all because it's his (or her) favorite movie...er, film. (Only riff-raff use the term "movie." How gauche! 8) )

Joel

[dean]

This is the essay question:
"Ideology can be understood as sets of ideas, values and assumptions that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations." How does this statement get played out in the world of popular music? How do different discourses operating inside the world of popular music perpetuate certain ideologically informed assumptions? Construct your arguments by using Horner, Keightley, Green and Scorcese (The Last Waltz).

Since I have the opportunity to teach some of this stuff at the high school level, this topic intrigues me. As I read the question (actually, reinterpret the question), it seems that it could be restated this way: "Why ain't there any new stuff out there?" Now, I could be way off base with this simplification, but the question does appear to deal with the impact of that 800 lb. gorilla, the status quo. In that respect, I suppose The Last Waltz is as good as any band flick as a reference point.

I often will bait students into defending their opinions on different bands (my favorite is Black Sabbath - the kids always want to place them on a pedestal. I usually get them pretty riled up before they begin making solid, educated, valid points about the group). The professor might be doing the same type of thing here - give the students a starting point and let them go from there.

If my present (at this moment in time :? ) take on this is way off, let me know.

Still a damn good thread! I check this one about 10 times a day.

Dean

[eryque]

Megan, I guess it isn't clear from your earlier posts whether or not you've seen the film, if you watched in class & discussed it, or what. And I'd be curious to know the context in which it was presented, too.

I wish I'd really known much about the band when I was 19. I had an English class that year that was all about Americana, and the professor gave me the assignment of presenting the history of rock 'n' roll. I knew only some of the Band's songs from the radio, nothing about "The Last Waltz" or the breakup, or anything. I did a reasonable job, having just fallen in love with the blues 2 years before and knowing a little about Ray Charles and Willie Dixon and Muddy Waters (though I didn't know that Dixon lived on the spot near my campus where there is now a Checker's). Kinda got stymied after I got to the Beatles, though, which was fine because I only had 10 minutes.

[Joel Terry]

Originally Posted by Jupiter Beach

This is the essay question:
"Ideology can be understood as sets of ideas, values and assumptions that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations." How does this statement get played out in the world of popular music? How do different discourses operating inside the world of popular music perpetuate certain ideologically informed assumptions? Construct your arguments by using Horner, Keightley, Green and Scorcese (The Last Waltz).

OK, we all know who Martin Scorsese is and about his film, The Last Waltz. Is Keightley Cyril, David, or Thomas? Who are Horner and Green?

There is less here than meets the eye. By that, I mean the essay question could stand to be simplified; fortunately, Peter and Dean have done a great job in whittling the question down to the gist.

Joel

[Jupiter Beach]

Keir Keightly is a professor at my university who wrote an article called "Reconsidering Rock" in a book called The Cambridge Companion to Pop and Rock. Lucy Green and Bruce Horner both wrote chapters in a book called "Key Terms in Popular Music and Culture". Those are the required sources for the essay. I'm allowed to use other authors, as long as the source is a text book or academic journal.

And yes, I have seen the movie!

[Bob Rogers]

Originally Posted by Jupiter Beach

This is the essay question:
"Ideology can be understood as sets of ideas, values and assumptions that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations." How does this statement get played out in the world of popular music? How do different discourses operating inside the world of popular music perpetuate certain ideologically informed assumptions? Construct your arguments by using Horner, Keightley, Green and Scorcese (The Last Waltz).
:?
I think I'm supposed to use the movie to talk about authenticity and value in pop music.

I may be giving your professor more credit than he or she deserves, but it seems to me the questions is, "What are the 'ideas, values, and assumptions' that tend to make a group like the band 'legitimate'?" The questions isn't "Is the Band 'authentic'?" but "What is the definition of authenticity that Scorsese is trying to sell?" Looks to me like you have a whole list of definitions to choose from.

A more interesting contrast with the Beatles would then be - "What's the difference between the way Bill Lester presented the Beatles in Hard Day's Night and the way Scorsese presents The Band in The Last Waltz? Do the differences reflect different ideologies?"

[Bob Rogers]

Another tack you could take would be to focus on the word "reify." in the definition of ideology. You could spend a good chunk of your essay on the ways that the abstraction "authenticity" has been treated as concrete in this thread and the similarities and differences with the way your main sources do the same thing. "The Reification of "Authenticity " in The Last Waltz" would be a good title. Again, HDN provides a good contrast. The Beatles are presented as fresh, young, and hip. Allowed inside the power structure, but able to maintain an ironic outlook. Being able to maintain their individuality and independence is Lester's definition of "authenticity." In TLW the band is presented very differently. Tied to long tradition - rootsy. A very different set of ideas and assumptions about what it means to be "authentic." If I were giving the assignment, I wouldn't care if you thought either assertion was true, just that you could figure out what was being asserted and what the unspoken assumptions were.

[DAK]

Back around '97, there was a book by Richard Peterson called, "Creating Country Music - Fabricating Authenticity." It was an examination of a genre many of us considered totally authentic and how - even in its early years - its most successful artists, writers and producers ultimately did concern themselves with image and mass acceptance and, yes, getting their music on the radio.

While I agree The Band was one of the best groups of its time, I also belong to the camp that considered the Beatles authentic. From what I read of the clubs they played as they began their careers, the guys certainly paid their dues. That they became teen idols didn't diminish their authenticity, particularly when you consider the continuing creativity of their studio output once that teen idol status subsided (which I figure was not long after they stopped touring).

[Bonneville Bruce]

Megan,

I don’t think the essay question has much to do with the question of authenticity, particularly as used in the sense of “street cred” endlessly palavered about in the realm of the Nineties Sub-Pop-real-flannel vs. reformed-hair-band-cloaked-in-flannel. Even though the concepts of street-cred-authenticity were bandied about in the Sixties, it was not necessarily a prerequisite to accepting or rejecting the music by any given band. Yes, most people with any sense outright rejected the Monkees and the Archies as anything other than Tinseltown constructs, yet some of their material was decent enough to have survived the test of time, e.g. “Daydream Believer” written by the very talented and “authentic” John Stewart. That path, concerning who’s authentic and who’s fabricated, quickly and necessarily leads to the conclusions that no one in pop music can be “truly really” authentic because the argument is a tautology from the outset. We are all varying degrees of being more or less authentic, rarely the truly authentic person emerges into pop culture, because one must compromise oneself to enter into the “star-making machine”. So you can only be authentic if you don’t ever compromise and get paid for what you do, because money is the root of all evil. Therefore, to be authentic is to be unknown outside the local bar or church group, or worse yet, one’s own bedroom, which is nowhere squared.

The authentic question in the “Last Waltz” was resolved when the program was formulated and the guests were invited, they were authentic because only authentic people were invited, including Neil Diamond, who has written some good songs.

I see the essay question in terms of the culture built around the ideals represented or reflected by the participants, “that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations.". The question is more about the creation of the (counter) culture from the common origins in the transitional Fifties culture. I see the Last Waltz as the consummate act of legitimizing their (our) culture, taking on the mantle from such (pre-Sixties) luminaries as Muddy Waters and Lawrence Ferlinghetti, who was the Emcee, and a seminal poet, bookstore owner, raconteur, free-speech figure in the Fifties/Sixties Beat Culture. Of course, Muddy Waters was a hell-of-a-player and an icon from the Forties and Fifties, who embodied the culture of both urban and rural blues from those times. In modern terms of authenticity, he was bonefide, from the ground-up writ-large authentic, perhaps one of the few in the building at that event. He was also one of the few of his contemporaries who sold lots of records and made good money at it, in part from the Sixties-on because of his association with people such as the Band and Johnny Winter.

It was a celebration of the legitimization of that culture that was by then well established. The fact that a Big Hollywood Producer like Scorcese could be enlisted, with adequate funding, to make this movie was a manifestation of the established Sixties culture. This degree of participation from the very conservative film industry would have been unthinkable four or five years earlier. “Woodstock,” “Easy Rider,” “Hard Days Night,” “Rainbow Bridge,” and other smaller films laid the groundwork and provided the track record for commercial ventures into, and acceptance of, the Sixties culture. It is ironic that such acceptance of the culture came with the demise of the Band, who threw this divorce party like an Irish wake. This program was surely seen more as an end of an era for the participants than a reification of a shared ideology. The ideology that was shared was the crazy idea that this type of coming together was possible and that it was based on the music and lyrics by the participants that was the ideology itself.

The concert was preceded by a thanksgiving diner for everyone, a communal offering and thanksgiving that was essential to understanding the reification and perpetuation of existing social relationships. What better way to go bow out of the scene than to have a thanksgiving diner for your closest 1,000 friends, then put on a world-class performance. (It was not the Band’s intention to break up at this point, but to end their concert performances, as did the Beatles when they no longer had anything to prove on the road. As it turned out, this was the last waltz with the five original band members. They just did not make the effort to reform once again, so they went their different ways.) At this point the Sixties culture was as entrenched as that of the Fifties.

It would be too neat and misleading to put all this reification and legitimization baggage on this event. I’m sure it was more casually conceived and created. Nevertheless, it is a significant milestone, an epistle to the Establishment that the Sixties culture had Access to all the artifacts of culture, same as them. So on that basis they were indeed “perpetuate existing social relations."

Good luck with the paper,

Bonneville Bruce

P.S. I was born in 1950 and was a witness to some of these events.

[Skully]

The fact that a Big Hollywood Producer like Scorcese could be enlisted, with adequate funding, to make this movie was a manifestation of the established Sixties culture.

Although Scorsese has produced films, he's primarily a director. His career has been up and down, but he's never been Big Hollywood, either. He's always been something of an outsider. At the time of "The Last Waltz" (which, btw, he didn't produce), he was coming off a big flop, "New York, New York," so he was on the "small" side at that point.

This degree of participation from the very conservative film industry would have been unthinkable four or five years earlier.

Five years earlier would've been 1973 -- smack dab in the middle one of the least conservative eras in the history of film.

“Woodstock,” “Easy Rider,” “Hard Days Night,” “Rainbow Bridge,” and other smaller films...

The scope of "Woodstock" is much bigger than "The Last Waltz."

It was not the Band’s intention to break up at this point, but to end their concert performances, as did the Beatles when they no longer had anything to prove on the road.

I believe it was Robertson's full intention to break up the band. BTW, he was sharing a Bel Air mansion with Scorsese around this time. He was horny to get into film.

[Robin Nahum]

... but I wish I did, nor am I able to articulate a definition for the term 'authenticity'.

I just wanted to observe that when I heard the Band at the peak of their popularity in the early 70s, their music sounded 'grounded' and 'robust' in the way that it spoke of the human condition. It seemed to draw in an interesting way on what we now call Americana, particularly the Civil War. The album covers, especially the brown one and 'Big Pink' reinforced this. Besides the lyrics, the overall style and arrangements were a radical change from the guitar and psychedelia bands that came just before, or were contemporaneous with, them - Cream, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Doors etc. The Band were not succeeded by anything similar of which I am aware. At the time, it seemed very much to be 'rock for the thinking person'.

Since those times however, I have become much more aware of the rich history of American music, including old time music and New Orleans jazz, and when I watched the Last Waltz again a few months ago and listened to 'Rock of Ages', I found that I had shifted to the view that these are rock musicians borrowing ideas but maybe not really building on them that much with the possible exception of the innovative arrangements. I understand that these were mostly the work of Garth Hudson - who I think deserves more credit.

For my money, the originals work better.

[Joel Terry]

Originally Posted by Robin Nahum

I understand that (the innovative arrangements performed by The Band) were mostly the work of Garth Hudson - who I think deserves more credit.

I agree, Robin. Robbie Robertson, as good a songwriter and storyteller as he was with The Band, often stole the credit for his bandmates' writing contributions, according to Levon Helm and other sources. Since this revelation, I've personally never looked at Robertson the same way; his reputation, to me, is a bit blemished.

And I'm sure Robertson cries himself to sleep nightly because of my opinion of him. :P

Joel

[Flipped Mustang]

quote="Jupiter Beach"]

"Ideology can be understood as sets of ideas, values and assumptions that tend to reify and legitimate their objects, and through this, to perpetuate existing social relations." How does this statement get played out in the world of popular music? How do different discourses operating inside the world of popular music perpetuate certain ideologically informed assumptions? Construct your arguments by using Horner, Keightley, Green and Scorcese (The Last Waltz).
[/quote]
Thanks, everyone! I haven't had a good brain burn since the LSAT years ago :D
As others have said, it seems strange to think of ideology as a perpetuator of existing social conditions (which it can be) when most of the time I think in terms of ideologists that seek to change the existing social conditions. Certainly, music in the 60's and early 70's was more concerned with breaking down the social standards than supporting them. I also don't see ideology as just a tool to legitimate pre-existing behavior. It's something to aspire to. The only link I see to popular music, is that the music business seeks to identify or create the popular youth ideologies so they can exploit them in order to sell records and make money.
The question can be simplified to:
"Ideology perpetuates existing social relations. How does it do this with popular music?"
Since the question didn't ask if you agreed with the statement or not, I assume you're just supposed to find reasons why it does and give support for those reasons. You might want to look at the social roles of the people in the film; The band members, audience and film maker. Try and identify the ideologies involved in the relationships and how they might support the relations, strengthen or weaken them.
* Rich's term paper hints* If you need to spice up the paper, you can use the term "diametrically opposed" or in a last minute crunch it's always good to quote a classic Greek or Roman philosopher. Usually, the more obscure the better. Juvenal would be a good place to look for quotes regarding popular culture in Roman times.

[Skully]

"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture."

I know you're trying to write a term paper here, but, to me, so much of this pointless, not-so-intellectual auto-eroticism. People bend facts, project ideas and ideals, slap a label on the round mass and then force it into the square hole that is their thesis, often without lubrication.

I remember back in college when a film professor asked, "In this scene, is the frame less than or equal to a window or a mirror." Whatever turns your crank, boss.

I always thought it was important to find out which school of b.s. my professor favored. Does he or she believe that ponderous, stilted writing sounds more intelligent. Give it to them.

[Hucklebilly]

If a professor expects his students to parrot back his own assumptions and ideologies he is a disgrace to the profession. Good teachers foster independent minds and critical thought. I don't think writing about music or any other cultural phenomenon is a waste of time. If it's done well it is just as creative and inspiring as your favorite guitar solo.

[Skully]

Well, there are a lot of disgraces. Truly good teachers do like to be challenged. But professors are human beings and they often have overinflated egos that cannot withstand questioning.

I don't think writing about music or any other cultural phenomenon is a waste of time.

Not if it's done well. But it's done often and rarely well.

If it's done well it is just as creative and inspiring as your favorite guitar solo.

While good criticism and analysis of art can be useful and important, I personally don't feel they are ever as inspiring as good art.

I would much rather read insightful biography or reportage that incorporates analysis or criticism. To me, this is much more entertaining and worthwile.

[Mickey]

but since you still have a few days (and maybe could use a few easy footnotes?) you could look at my book, which takes on the identical issue, but in another movie "the Jazz Singer" of 1927. the whole movie is about "what is the real american music"? and also "who is allowed to play it?" I think your prof is right to ask the same question bout "the Last Waltz" (I'd never thought of it before) -- it's totally about authenticity and 'the real american music'.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846

don't you dare buy it, i just linked to amazon because they give you all the bibliographic stuff you'd need for the footnote and give you a quick about whats inside. If you feel comfortable, could't you put a draft of your paper up here on tdpri? I think most of us would like to see what you come up with, and if the prof is at all cool he/she shouldn't mind. I guess I'd ask first.

Great thread.