#{ let's just say... I gained a newfound respect for songwriters lmfao- }

[macuilsung]

(gallant-gained) "Sing for me! Please."

@gallant-gained​​ via Send "Sing for me" for my muse to sing yours a song (closed!)

Result: . . . ?

“At once, milord!” With a lowly dipped bow to Prince Siegbert out of the way, Forwin already made to brandish his trusty instrument, testing with plucking and strumming to ensure that everything was in sound working order. For the future King of Nohr this eve, there would be no arrangement, not a borrowed tune with his added flair and whim providing new flavour... no, this next little ditty will be a Tyrell original. Time for Nohr’s esteemed court musician to do his job!

Key of G Major, for a jaunty prestissimo (200 beats per minute).  And a 1. And a 2. And a 1, 2, 3, 4...!

♪ “Well hey there, young master! Just another lov’ly day Birds a-singin’, flowers bloomin’ Won’t have it any other way

♪ “But wait there, young master! What’s got you feeling blue? I see your smile can’t reach your eyes My goodness, it’s all askew!

♪ “Could it be because you think of darkness way out there, Clouds casting doubt on whether you’re actually worthy?

♪ “Then here’s a secret with you I’ll share, my dear sweet little heir: His Royal Highness on the throne... We oft forget he’s just flesh and boooone~!

♪ “Though heavy be the head upon which the crown will rest Where every passing day puts your character to the test Don’t lose heart, young master, For your story’s just begun! Allow yourself some joy, good sir For you’re more than Xander’s son!”

Yes, Forwin wrote this number out of a sense of kinship he felt towards Siegbert. The rigid and demanding responsibilities of nobility, seeking a comforting gaze only to find expectations so heavy their weight could grind your soul to powder... these were the same troubles the bard knew all too well due to his own upbringing. Perhaps he would consider sharing his story with the prince over tea sometime...

...but for now, however, he would sing brightly and play on with vigour, his lyrics weaving in truths and lessons he wished he learned as early as his formative years.

[work-mikey-blog]

sex, age, & pop culture

I remember watching the 2012 Super Bowl halftime show in disgust. At age eleven, I had convinced myself that anyone over the age of 25 was to be considered “old.” Therefore, it only made sense that I should be confused by Madonna’s extravagant musical performance. Was anyone really interested in watching this elderly woman lip sync her way through a series of songs that were older than I was? I couldn’t understand who decided that Madonna was a wise choice, when Miley Cyrus and Kesha were clearly superior (though I had defined superior as “younger” and “more popular among my friends”). Obviously part of this preference was due to my lack of musical knowledge, but even as I’ve grown older and come to be a huge Madonna fan, I find myself still questioning her relevance.

5 years and 2 albums later, Madonna is the 3rd most listened to artist in my iTunes library. In the past year, I’ve spent over 70 hours listening to her songs and educating myself on her musical genius, which has in turn taught me to see the brilliance and dedication that supported her Super Bowl performance. There aren’t too many middle aged Americans who could organize and execute a 13 minute musical number of their greatest hits, let alone do so in front of 100 million viewers. For Madonna, this is only another check on her to-do list. In terms of live performances, Madonna’s done it all and done it well, as her tours have nothing but glowing reviews, but her halftime performance did not go over quite as well. The reviews were mixed. Most new outlets claimed that her attempt at a “comeback” was weak and watered-down compared to the Madonna of the eighties and nineties. They accused her of pandering, by using circus gimmicks and a surplus cameos in an attempt to gain relevancy in the younger generation. In some sense, this is true. Madonna had collaborated with Nicki Minaj and LMFAO, two artists who had recently achieved newfound stardom in mainstream media. Perhaps these collaborations would not have felt so forced if the world hadn’t so readily given away Madonna’s own relevancy. Perhaps Madonna wouldn’t feel the need to pander if the world hadn’t written her off because of her age.

As the first decade of the 2000’s unfolded, the media was sure that a new queen of pop would arise and was quick to redistribute Madonna’s title to newcomers like Britney Spears and Lady Gaga. The general public didn’t like the fact that their Queen of Pop had aged, and so they sought to replace her with someone younger. Even fellow music legend, Elton John had commented on Madonna’s age earlier that year, claiming that she looked like “a fairground stripper” and that “her career [was] over.”  On the surface, John’s comments seem petty and stupid, but the reasoning behind these comments say a lot more about ageism in the world of entertainment than it does about Elton John’s morals. If we look back on Madonna’s 30+ year career, she hasn’t changed much: she’s a songwriter with a knack for provocative dance melodies, most of which have become pop hits. In 2012, this fact reigns true. (In fact, she grossed another 300 million dollars from her critically acclaimed MDNA Tour that year) She just got older and unfortunately for Madonna, her age also jumpstarted a shift in public opinion regarding her sexually charged music career.

Time has also seemed to plague the careers of various other women in pop culture, Britney Spears and Lady Gaga included. Typically, a modern day pop artist takes about a year to record and release an album, followed by a year of press and touring (during which they begin to plan for the next era). That means that on average, an album cycle last about 2-3 years depending on the state of the artist’s personal lives. Even though this process is the norm for most modern day pop stars, the media often describes each new era as a “comeback,” a label that implies a loss of relevance prior to this new album announcement. There are certainly cases where this is justified (i.e. Hilary Duff releasing her first studio album in 9 years, Gwen Stefani releasing her first studio album in 10 years, Fergie releasing her first album in 11 years, etc), but when Lady Gaga released her 2016 album, Joanne, after 3 years of touring, acting, and charity work, it’s interesting that it should be billed as a comeback, when in reality she never left.

This concept of “album cycles” is often called into question when addressing older women in the industry, as though the future of their entire career lies within the success of one era. Once these women announce that they are focusing their efforts on a new album, the media assumes that they’re finally attempting to “return” to the mainstream, when in reality these have been the artists that have sculpted it. Pop music wouldn’t exist without Madonna, or Britney, or Gaga, or Mariah, or Janet, yet the media still continues to debate their longevity, impact, and relevance within a single album cycle.

Though most of these performers are considered “past their prime,” it's fascinating that their artistic value continues to be reevaluated given the current climate of pop music. These women launched careers in a time where success was determined by how many million albums an artist was able to sell in a single year. Nowadays, artists are lucky if their albums sell over 500,000 copies in a given era. Therefore, if Britney Spears (a 35 year old woman with 20 years worth of music under her belt) is fortunate enough to have her 2016 album, Glory, sell over 100,000 copies in its first week of release, why is that success called into question? Also, considering her maturation and shift in target demographic, is it fair to compare this album with the success of her first previous albums (two of which have sold upwards of 10 million copies in the United States alone), especially considering the shift in how the general public consumes music? Why is Britney considered a “flop” for selling upwards of 111,000 copies in their first week, when newer, “more popular” artists like Selena Gomez and Miley Cyrus are praised for selling a similar amount.

Nowadays, buying music is often the last thing the general public even thinks of doing, rather streaming services like Spotify and Apple Music give consumers the ability to listen to any song for a measly $9.99 a month. Granted, the music charts have addressed this influx of streaming when calculating album sales and have since decided to include streaming numbers in total album sales, though it takes 1,500 streams to even equal one album sale. While, the world has seemingly adjusted their expectations regarding album sales and the role of streaming in the careers of younger artists, they have not been as courteous to older artists so much so that this has become a phenomenon worth investigating.

Fortunately, female artists like Taylor Swift and Adele have been still dominate the music world, despite the drop in pure album sales over the last decade. They’ve also been lucky enough to have received support from the general public and have avoided the scrutiny and decreased sales associated with Madonna and Britney. Both women have been notorious for breaking sales records (Taylor selling over 1 million copies of 1989 in its first week, and Adele selling over 3 million copies of 25 in its first week), and both have won Album of the Year at the Grammys, twice. While both of these women are still younger than Britney or Madonna (Taylor is 27, Adele 29), age still doesn’t seem to play a role in their success. If anything, both Taylor and Adele have only become more successful with age, each era outselling and outpeaking the last, whereas over time, Britney and Madonna have seen a significant decrease in consumer popularity.

When analyzing the music and performances of Taylor and Adele and comparing them to the works of Britney and Madonna, the most apparent difference is the role of promiscuity in each woman’s career. An abundance of Britney and Madonna’s songs and performances have been motivated by and rooted in sex, whereas Taylor and Adele often embrace a more emotional approach to music. Granted, Taylor and Adele are certainly newer to the music scene than Britney and Madonna, but if we disregard ageism for a moment and examine the role of sex in pop culture as a single entity, it seems to be that artists who are prone to more provocative musical styles are also prone to more public scrutiny.

This raises the question of: what does it mean to be sexy in the American music industry? Why is it that sexy also means youthful and wrinkle-free? Scientifically, our bodies’ physicality peaks at age 30, so perhaps Americans have acknowledged this and therefore equate an increase in age with a decrease in desirability. Given the fact that we live in a society where tight skin and small waists are coveted, it makes sense that the physical side effects of age (i.e wrinkles and/or weight gain) are considered undesirable. This consensus (that Madonna’s age makes her a less desirable and respected artist) leaves the impression that the general public has accepted the idea that female sexuality in the music industry is only acceptable at a younger age. Why is it considered “silly” or “immature” for Madonna to release a song about the excitement of sex? What does the future hold for artists like Madonna and Britney, if they are no longer considered sexy by the general public?  

It seems as though it’s only when sex is involved that artists lose their credibility. Let’s consider what the media has said about Britney Spears in the four past years. The commercial success of her past two albums (both being the first to be released in her thirties) has been deemed “underwhelming,” which is surprising considering both debuted with over 100,000 units sold. The label that’s been placed upon these albums is also shocking, considering the fact that other female legends like Stevie Nicks (who has also released two albums following the shift in musical consumption) has barely sold 50,000 copies in her first week, yet no one has dare tried to discredit Stevie Nicks as a cultural icon. But again, is Stevie Nicks known for being sexually provocative? The answer is no, and so again it seems as though the only women who have been discredited, are those who have embraced their sexuality at every age.

Unfortunately for women in pop music, these stigmas, all of which stem from the ageist society we’ve cultivated, seem to have severely impacted the respectability of these women. Obviously there are thousands of other reasons for losing relevance (i.e. female artists prioritizing their children over their careers and ever-changing musical popularity), but it would be unfair not to acknowledge this trend in modern music and investigate what it says about the values of our society.