Roland Barthes wrote an essay during the 1970s called “The Death of the Author”. It was a postmodern idea on how readers can selectively ignore the pleasure of reading an author’s text by making judgments on the writer himself. When reading, different people generate a variety of interpretations that were either intentional or non-intentional from the writer. Language is the carrier of these meanings itself and the impressions that it lays on the reader… may it be cultural connotations, the evolution in parlance, and from the reader’s background and current interests.
Barthes was writing about language, but this is also a place where a lot of great artists brew. You hear the words and lyrics of Saul Williams and it strikes a chord in your soul, desiring for you to tease out different ideas embedded into a single poem, with which it was embodied in a form so lucid that it can only be grasped intuitively. Who the person is is irrelevant, for he is just like everyone else – a cultivation of one’s experiences which is derived from a cultural frame in time. And also on a side note of Williams, knowing oneself is also to know of other people. It is and act of bringing together to progress human understanding. So what is with the modernist media, its need to divide people and create personalities to subscribe to?
Say you are watching a music video on MTV, there is a certain language in video production – scenes, body gestures, and imagery. A commercial-styled video would have modernistic trends embedded in it. Guns and Roses (Sweet Child Of Mine): big hair, big production, and big amps to name a few elements. Then you have Marilyn Manson, who is just a big “freak show” reaction to the production of glamour. Well, you also have the one in between, such as Red Hott Chili Peppers (the one that goes, “California rest in peace/pieces”): using modernistic elements to deconstruct the language itself; they’re still pretty while they’re doing it.
The thing that makes something commercial is the idea of a singular identity. And when you consider the complexity and diversity of a person’s identity, you will find that in the business world, there will be a lot of products to sell. A lot of the modern rock musicians on MTV today sport the hair, the clothes, the moshing audience, and other things that defy pop music and the conventions of the conservative 50s. If they said, “get off my lawn!” the reactionaries would say, “we’ll trash your lawn!” But upon examination, such musicians were created in the same factory as Britney Spears or Avril Lavigne… which the three are supposedly completely different ideas. Or at least marketed as such.
You have those who like guitar-playing Michelle Branch because they denounce talentless Britney Spears, or you have those who like virginity-intact Jessica Simpson because they denounce the slutty Christina Aguilera. But you know what? The four sing about the kind of love that appeals to 12 year olds who are just about to meet their first Prince Charming. People tend to buy what they can identify with or wish to subscribe to. Although I do not have statistics to back this claim up, one can guess from watching a few mainstream music videos, its perpetuation, and being aware of the arts that are outside of this box. You don’t even have to watch mainstream videos, even commercials on most corporate products pretty much try to appeal to a certain strand of our identity.
Who is Saul Williams?
