100 Greatest Rock Albums

Nevevnind lIe BealIes, Heve's ExiIe 61 and Nico 'TIe Top 100 Becovds oJ AII Tine' A Canon
oJ Fop and BocI AIIuns Jvon a SocioIogicaI and an AeslIelic Fevspeclive

AulIov|s) BaIJ von Appen and Andv BoeIving
Bevieved vovI|s)
Souvce FopuIav Music, VoI. 25, No. 1, SpeciaI Issue on Canonisalion |Jan., 2006), pp. 21-39
FuIIisIed I Cambridge University Press
SlaIIe UBL http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877541 .
Accessed 28/12/2012 0109
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Popular
Music.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Fri, 28 Dec 2012 01:09:10 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Popular
Music
(2006)
Volume 25/1.
Copyright
@ 2006
Cambridge University
Press,
pp.
21-39
doi:10.1017/S0261143005000693
Printed in the United
Kingdom
Nevermind The
Beatles,
here's
Exile
61 and
Nico: 'The
top
100
records of all time'
- a canon of
pop
and rock
albums
from a
sociological
and an aesthetic
perspective
RALF VON APPEN and ANDRE DOEHRING
Abstract
For this article the authors
analysed thirty-eight
lists
of
'The 100
greatest
albums
of
all time'
type.
As the
findings
demonstrate,
a canon
of popular
music has evolved which shows
strong
tendencies
towards
stability
in
featuring
albums
from
the late 1960s
(especially
those
by
The
Beatles),
while
only
a
few
albums
from
the 1990s have
gained
'classic' status. The canon's contents and
exclusions are
explained by
the social
dispositions of
the
participants, predominantly
white males
aged twenty
to
forty. Influenced by efforts of
the cultural
industries,
these actors also evaluate
certain albums
for
the
purposes of distinguishing
themselves
from
the
'mainstream'. Furthermore,
aesthetic and artistic criteria
underlying
the esteem
of
the 'masterworks' are
identified by
analysing
reviews. The authors
suggest
that
future
research on canonisation should interlock
sociological
and aesthetic
perspectives. Findings from
such an
approach might
initiate
reflection
among
music
fans
about their own
exclusions,
and result in an
opening up of
the
meaning
and
significance of
the canon.
Introduction
Among
the diverse forms of
canonising pop
and rock
music,
compiling
lists like
'The
100
greatest
albums of all time' is one of the most
prominent
and influential. For about
thirty years,
critics and fans alike have been
electing
their favourite
'rock-classics'
in
music
magazines,
on radio stations or on the Internet.
By analysing
these
votes,
based
on a
large
number of lists and a broad
sample
of
participants,
one can obtain an
insight
into the level of esteem in which certain
pop
music records are held. In the first
part
of
this
essay,
we document the
existing
canon
using
data extracted from a collection of
international lists and then
compiled
into a meta-list. In this
way
we can demonstrate
historical
development
and
change
in the
canon,
as well as
stagnation
and
stability
in
the choices of certain albums and musicians over the
years.
Next,
taking
two different
approaches,
we discuss
why
these
specific
albums have been elected. In the first
place,
we outline a
sociological approach, then, by analysing
reviews of the
top
albums, we
characterise an aesthetic
perspective
on the canon. As we shall
argue,
it is
only by
21
22
Ralf
von
Appen
and Andre
Doehring
integrating
both
approaches (the
sociological
and the
aesthetic)
that canons like the
one discussed can be
thoroughly grasped,
and thus
gradually opened up.
Documentation of the canon
Since the
emergence
of rock
journalism,
both writers and readers have been
annually
making up
their minds about which albums were the
year's top
releases.
Beyond
that,
this
constituency
has been
contrasting
the value of these new releases with older
records
by voting
for the
'best albums of all time' at
irregular
intervals. In these
lists,
new records
replace
albums that do not
pass
the test of time.
Indeed,
those records that
do the
pass
the
test,
and also
appeal
to
young
listeners,
are labelled
'masterworks'.
The desire reflected here for
orientation,
and the need to
distinguish
between
records worth
remembering
and worth
forgetting,
were
highly
evident around the
Millennium. In
1999,
the authors
began collecting twenty-two
of these all-time-
greatest-lists
for
analytical comparison (Appen
and
Doehring 2000).
Since then it
seems that the
widespread
need for
reading
and
compiling
lists has
continued,
allowing
us to collect sixteen more lists from the last five
years.
For this
essay
all
thirty-eight
were
compiled
into a meta-list
(see
Table
1).
The first column contains the
position
an album reaches if we sum
up
all lists from 1985 to
2004,
the second column
holds the results from the list we
compiled
in
1999,
and in the third column
only
the
results from the last five
years
are
shown.1
To
begin
with,
it is
significant
that voters have a
high
level of
agreement
about
the canonic
inventory
stock. Out of the 950
possible positions (thirty-eight
lists
multiplied by twenty-five ranks),
only
273 are
occupied
in our meta-list. The
higher
an
album is
positioned,
the
stronger
the consensus
gets.
By way
of a
preliminary survey
it is
important
to state a few trivial but nonethe-
less essential features of the records on the list. These can be considered as
require-
ments of admittance: all our
top thirty
albums contain
songs
that have a four-four
time,
very rarely
exceed the time limit of four
minutes,
were
composed by
the
musicians
themselves,
are
sung
in
English, played by
a 'classical' rock-formation
(drums, bass,
guitar, keyboard instruments)
and were released on a
major
label after
1964. The fact that
nearly
all musicians are white males from the USA
(43 per cent)
or
Great Britain
(52
per cent)
is
striking.2
Among
the
thirty
'best' albums,
a
'golden age'
of rock music can be identified.
The
period
from 1965 to 1969 contains
forty per
cent of all albums in Table
1;
furthermore,
as much as
thirty-four per
cent of all
points given (12,350) go
to records
released in those five
years.
About
thirty per
cent of the albums were recorded in the
1970s,
twenty per
cent in the 1990s. In contrast to the late
1960s,
the
years
from 1980 to
1984 must have been
quite
desolate
(musically speaking)
-
not more than 3.7
per
cent
(466
points) go
to these five
years.
Moreover,
in the 1980s
(in
total twelve
per cent)
predominantly
British rock music seems
musically significant
as it is
represented by
three
repeatedly
mentioned albums
(which,
by
the
way,
are
anything
but
represen-
tative of the music of the
1980s):
The
Queen
is Dead
(The Smiths),
The Stone Roses
(The
Stone
Roses),
and The
Joshua Tree
(U2).
Of utmost interest is The Beatles'
striking dominance, as four out of the ten
top
records are
by
them. In total
they
collected a sixth
(2,021)
of all
given points
for seven
albums which were elected into the list.
Compared
to other musicians
generally
referred to as 'heroes of rock' -
e.g.
Bob
Dylan (four albums; 705
points)
or the
Rolling
Nevermind The Beatles 23
Table 1. The
meta-list,
compiled from thirty-eight rankings.
Album
Musician(s)
Sum Year
1 2 1 Revolver The Beatles 566 1966
2 1 3
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely
Hearts ... The Beatles 541 1967
3 8 2 Nevermind Nirvana 469 1991
4 5 4 The Beatles The Beatles 435 1968
5 4 6 Pet Sounds The Beach
Boys
409 1966
6 14 7
Abbey
Road The Beatles 342 1969
7 12 8 Dark Side
Of
The Moon Pink
Floyd
336 1973
8 6 12 The Velvet
Underground
& Nico The Velvet
Underground
327 1967
9 7 18 Blonde On Blonde Bob
Dylan
295 1966
10 25 5 OK
Computer
Radiohead 290 1997
11 3 31 Astral Weeks Van Morrison 268 1968
12 11 13 Exile On Main St.
Rolling
Stones 263 1972
13 9 24
What's
Going
On Marvin
Gaye
249 1971
14 13 19 Never Mind The Bollocks ... The Sex Pistols 242 1977
15 10 23
Highway
61 Revisited Bob
Dylan
241 1965
16 23 9 The
Joshua
Tree U2 236 1987
17 17 10 The Bends Radiohead 222 1995
18 16 17 The Stone Roses The Stone Roses 201 1989
19 29 11 London
Calling
The Clash 185 1979
20 21 20 Blood On The Tracks Bob
Dylan
163 1975
21 15 34 Are You
Experienced? Jimi
Hendrix
Experience
160 1967
22 24 21 The
Queen
Is Dead The Smiths 158 1986
23 19 35 Automatic For The
People
R.E.M.
154 1992
24 38 14 Rumours Fleetwood Mac 131 1977
25 33 22
Achtung Baby
U2 129 1991
26 46 16 Ten Pearl
Jam
121 1992
27 27 36 Born To Run Bruce
Springsteen
120 1975
28 51 15 Rubber Soul The Beatles 118 1965
29 18 80 Let It Bleed
Rolling
Stones 116 1969
30 22 61
(What's The
Story) Morning Glory?
Oasis 110 1995
Stones
(six albums;
527
points)
-
The Beatles still receive the most adulation. Note-
worthy
also are the results for Nirvana
(three albums;
516
points)
and Radiohead
(two albums;
512
points).
Their musical work has met with unanimous
approval
in
only
a few
years
and
gathered
more
appreciation
than the works of Pink
Floyd (473
points)
or U2
(415
points).
With
just
one record in the
meta-list,
the Beach
Boys (409
points)
and The Velvet
Underground
(327 points)
came in
respectively eighth
and
ninth in the
ranking
of the most
popular
album-artists.
The Beatles'
portion
of
points
has increased from 16.6 to 19
per
cent in the last
five
years'
lists.
Accordingly,
their status as 'classics' has not
only
been maintained but
has become even more evident. On the other
hand,
Bob
Dylan,
the
Rolling
Stones, Jimi
Hendrix,
Marvin
Gaye,
and Van Morrison lost
significantly
in their
reputation
(Astral
24
Ralf
von
Appen
and Andre
Doehring
Weeks even
dropped twenty-eight positions). By comparing
old and new
lists,
it is
obvious how the
comparatively
new albums of
Nirvana,
Radiohead and U2 could
gain
consent
among
the
participants.
This cannot be accounted for
by
the
logic
of our
method
because,
as we have
shown,
the
general
lack of
recognition
for music of the
1980s remains
unchanged throughout
the
years.
Additionally,
it is
important
to note a
high
state of
stability
in the canon: thirteen
albums are
among
the
top twenty
both in columns two and three. What is
more,
five
of our current
top
ten albums had
already
been voted into the list
by
New Musical
Express
critics from
1974.3
Further information can be
gained by comparing
this canon
to a list of
best-selling
albums
(see
Table
2).4 First,
there is a
striking
lack of
congru-
ence between Tables 1 and 2.
Only
The Beatles
managed
to reach
higher positions
in
both lists. Some of the albums
highly
valued in Table 1 were
selling relatively poorly
(Pet
Sounds 1.6
million;
Highway
61 Revisited 1.5
million;
Astral Weeks
500,000;
The
Velvet
Underground
& Nico
311,000),5
while most of the best
selling
albums are
completely ignored
in the canon.
Furthermore,
the contrast with the sales
figures clearly brings
forth other
exclusions from the
canon,
apart
from those
particular
to the 1980s. While one can find
some female musicians in Table
2,
the canon contains
only
five albums recorded
by
women
among
the first one hundred albums and
only
one in the
top fifty (Horses
by
Patti
Smith)!6
The small role black musicians
play
in the canon is
equally noteworthy.
Only
sixteen out of the first one hundred artists are
persons
of
colour,
and
only
two of
them are to be found
among
the
top thirty, although
musicians like Michael
Jackson
or
Whitney
Houston are
commercially
successful
(see
Table
2).
African-American music
styles
like
soul,
blues or
hip hop hardly appear
in the canon.
Likewise,
hard rock and
country,
both
very popular according
to Table
2,
are
ignored
in Table 1.
The
'greatest
albums' from a
sociological perspective
Following
Max
Weber,
Kurt
Blaukopf (1984, p.
18)
proposed
that a
sociology
of music
should
explain
musical action
causally
in its
process by interpreting
it as social action
referring
to others.
Regarding
the above
presented
results,
the
following questions
arise for a
sociological perspective:
Which
group
of
persons
has made the choices that
yield
these lists?
Why
are
they making
such
choices,
if we
interpret
this behaviour as
musical action in the above sense? We
present
some
thoughts
on social characteristics
and
strategies
of the
participants
in three subdivisions:
(a)
common
dispositions, (b)
identity
-
distinction and
(c)
influences of culture industries. We believe that this
perspective
on the canon allows causal
explanation
of
why
The
Beatles,
Nirvana and
The Beach
Boys
-
or even more
specifically
the albums
presented
in Table 1 -
are held
in
high
esteem
by
the voters.
(a) Common
dispositions
Following
Pierre Bourdieu
(1987,
p.
98),
common sets of
dispositions
for a collective
are formed
by
the conditions of existence. These
dispositions
consist of a
commonly
held and
experienced habitus, which acts
subconsciously
in
regulating patterns
of
practical
behaviour and cultural
consumption. Thus, a
group
that was socialised in
the same class is
expected
to
develop
similar tastes. Feminist or
postcolonial theory
drew attention to other
categories
of social
inequality
like
gender, race, regional
Table 2.
Best-selling
records,
according
to
US
sales
figures
and estimated worldwide sales.
Album
Musician(s)
Year Sales USA Sales world- Position in our
(Mio)
wide
(Mio) meta-list
1 Their Greatest Hits 1971-1975 The
Eagles
1976 28 41 -
2 Thriller Michael
Jackson
1983 27 54 40
3 The Wall Pink
Floyd
1979 23 20 32
4 Led
Zeppelin
IV Led
Zeppelin
1971 22 30 39
5 Greatest Hits Vol. 1 & 2
Billy Joel
1985 21 15 -
Back in Black
AC/DC 1980 21 42
7 Come On Over Shania Twain 1997 20 35 -
8 Rumours Fleetwood Mac 1977 19 30 24
The Beatles The Beatles 1968 19 18 4
10 Boston Boston 1976 17 18 -
Bodyguard
O.S.T. Various Artists 1992 17 37 -
12 Cracked Rear View Hootie & the Blowfish 1994 16 17 -
Greatest Hits Elton
John
1974 16 20 -
Jagged
Little Pill Alanis Morissette 1995 16 28 55
The Beatles 1967-1970 The Beatles 1973 16 20 -
No Fences Garth Brooks 2000 16 16 -
Hotel
California
The
Eagles
1976 16 26 82
26
Ralf
von
Appen
and
Andrd
Doehring
descent or
age,
which have an effect on one's taste and value
judgements.7
Accord-
ingly,
the task for our
study
is to
identify
a common
disposition
for the
group
of
participants.
Yet,
almost
immediately
it seems that the
empirical investigation
is doomed to
failure as the
participants
cast their votes without
giving
information
about
age,
sex,
race,
etc. One
possible way
of
accessing
this kind of data is
by using
the
readership
surveys
the
magazines
themselves
carry
out for the
advertising industry.
Data for the
German edition of
Rolling
Stone
magazine
show,
for
instance,
that the characteristic
reader is
male,
aged twenty
to
forty
and has a
higher
educational level
compared
to
the
average
German
population.8
In
addition,
these readers are termed
'financially
independent'. Upon
the basis of this data the
following thoughts
can be
developed.
As the readers of German
Rolling
Stone
magazine
resemble one another in at
least three
respects (gender, age,
educational
level),
the conclusion can be drawn that
they
have a more consistent taste than
people
who differ from this.
Opposing
Bourdieu,
the
sociologist
Gerhard Schulze
interprets
taste as an instrument for estab-
lishing
social networks across classes.9
People
with common behaviour and values
link
together
in
'milieus'
(Schulze 1992),
where
they
communicate about central
topics
and aesthetic concerns without
being locally
bound.
Following
Schulze,
we
might say
that readers of German
Rolling
Stone form a
'milieu' because
they
have,
and
then further
develop,
a distinct taste in
comparison
to other
groups. By making up
lists
they
reduce their aesthetic
insecurity
that is
arguably
caused
by
the
large
amount
of music released. For the music
papers,
this is the
'key ideological
moment',
as Simon
Frith
(1996,
p. 84)
terms the readers'
polls.
The
polls
serve 'as
public display
of the
magazine's
success in
forging
a
community
out of its
disparate
consumers'. The
arising
canon,
perpetuated
over the
years, represents
their consensus.
Now,
as we can
see,
the diverse
readerships
of music
magazines
do not mark-
edly
differ from one another on the whole since
they
show a common
preferential
treatment of certain
albums,
musicians and
periods: apart
from
eight
albums,
our
top
twenty-five equal
the German
Rolling
Stone list from 1997. This
suggests
a
hypotheti-
cal
similarity
of the audiences.
Constructing
a Weberian
Idealtyp
('ideal
type'),
the
group
of
persons participating
in the canon consists of
predominantly
white males
from the western
hemisphere, aged
between
twenty
and
forty, having
a
higher
educational level. The
marginal appearance
of Others
(female,
minority
and non-
western
musicians)
then follows from the structure of this
ideal-typical group.
The
category
of
age among
canon-constructors can
only give
us an indirect
understanding
of the
preferential
treatment of late 1960s'
albums,
as the characteristic voter is too
young
to have been a music fan in this
period.
But without doubt his habitus is
influenced
by
former canons.
Usually,
such
preceding
selections are not
easily
over-
come.
Following
Niklas Luhmann
(1990,
p.
236),
who
speaks
of an
'anchoring
effect',
the former
generation
that once
participated
in the
canon,
men around
sixty, may
not
be
actively
involved in the canon
any
more. But
they
were the first to define its
requirements
and
standards,
i.e.
they
have thrown the canonic anchor into the ocean
of music.
Furthermore,
a
higher
educational level reinforces the cultural
capital
used in
the social action of
evaluating pop
music. While for Bourdieu cultural
capital
was
restricted to the field of fine arts, in this case it also
comprises popular
culture. Hence,
Bethany Bryson (1996, p. 888)
renamed it 'multi-cultural
capital',
because she dem-
onstrated how
high
status individuals act on diverse cultural fields. The
group
of
'omnivores'
(Peterson 1992)
at stake here differs from low-status
groups by selecting
a multitude of musical
styles
across
highbrow/lowbrow
barriers,
whereas 'univores'
group
around
single genres
like
country
or
easy listening.
On the other
hand, the
musical tolerance of omnivores is not
infinite,
as
Bryson
showed. Their musical taste
is indeed broader than the
average,
but the
genres
least
preferred by higher
educated
status
groups
are the ones that lower status
groups
favour
most,
namely heavy
metal,
rap, country
and
gospel (Bryson
1996,
p. 894).
This means that as soon as a
genre
conveys
a flavour of lower social
prestige,
tolerance will come to an end and the wish
for distinction over-determines the musical choice. Such studies can
explain
the actual
exclusion of these
genres
from the canon.
Of
course,
reflection of this sort must remain
hypothetical
until
thorough
empirical investigation
is carried out. Some of the
assumptions
involved have to be
clarified. For
example,
is it the case that the
participants
are actual omnivores or
just
a
'little
group
of nerds' obsessed with the music of the late
1960s,
and will the data from
American or
English magazines
alone allow similar
conclusions,
etc?
Nevertheless,
the Weberian construction of the canon's
participants
could
help
us to understand its
rules,
strategies
and exclusions. For
instance,
The Beatles are
preferred
as
they
are
male and
white,
come from
England (and not,
say,
Namibia)
and were
present
in
former editions of the canon.
Further,
their music does not have a flavour of lower
social
prestige. Just
the
opposite,
it has an
'arty
touch',
which rewards
using
one's
multi-cultural
capital
on it.
However,
since all this is true of David Bowie as
well,
who
is not
placed
that
high
in the
canon,
we have to look out for further
explanations.
(b)
Identity
- distinction
For Alois Hahn
(1998)
the
deeper
function of canons lies in their fictional
symbolic
representation
of a
group's identity
that establishes itself
by processes
of distinction.
Bourdieu has
structurally explained
this volition to
distinguish
ourselves from others.
Each class condition is
defined,
simultaneously, by
its intrinsic
properties
and
by
the relational
properties
which it derives from its
position
in the
system
of class
conditions,
which is also a
system
of
differences,
differential
positions,
i.e.
by everything
which
distinguishes
it from what
it is not and
especially
from
everything
it is
opposed
to;
social
identity
is defined and asserted
through
difference.
(Bourdieu 1984,
pp. 170-2)
It is not
only
the
group
of
people participating
in the canon as a
whole,
but also
different
parties
within this
group,
who use
processes
of distinction to mark off their
specific positions
and roles. The differences between readers' lists on the one hand
and lists made
up by
critics on the other are due to these
strategies:
a
critic,
who cannot
present
a list that
discernibly
differs at least in
part
from their readers'
taste,
will lose
his
expertise.10 Certainly,
he must not make
up
a
totally
dissimilar list because that
would show that he did not
belong
to this
group.
He has to
prove
his musical
knowledge by
subtle differences.
Following
Bourdieu
(ibid., p. 229),
the
exceptional
knowledge
of
(musical) experts legitimates
the value that an album holds for distinc-
tion.
Therefore,
'musically
omniscient' critics
praise
uncommon
albums,
and
by doing
so establish their role and
opinion-leading position
in the
group.
In
addition,
the results show exclusions
by
which the
group
as a whole can be
described. For instance, one can find neither
greatest
hits
compilations
nor sound-
tracks in the meta-list. It can be
argued
that
participants implicitly
claim that an album
has to be the 'work' of an
'author'.11 Apparently, compilations
or music
composed
for
accompanying
a movie are
published
more for commercial than artistic reasons. The
group similarly rejects best-selling
records.
By clearly showing disapproval
of these
28
Ralf
von
Appen
and Andre
Doehring
albums,
group
members
distinguish
themselves from
ordinary
listeners. The reasons
are
quite
obvious:
people
who are involved in
making up
lists invest a lot of time in
music. It can be
reasonably
assumed that music means a lot to them and
plays
an
important part
in their construction of
identity. They
invest their cultural
capital,
their
knowledge
of
music,
and
change
it into social
capital
on the
market,
which the canon
represents
to them. As
they regard
themselves as
'experts',
the esteem of
specific
records serves to raise them above the
'lay
listeners'. From the assumed artistic
hierarchy
of the records
emerges
a social
hierarchy
achieved
through
distinction from
the mainstream.
By
now we are able to
explain why,
for
instance,
The Beatles'
'red'
or
'blue'
albums are not
present
in the canon and
why
Pet Sounds has been voted for
despite (or
possibly
due
to)
its low sales. Yet it still remains unclear
why
Bowie,
who has not sold
too
many
records either
(while
being widely critically
acclaimed),
is not
placed
as
high
as The Beatles.
(c)
Influences of
the culture industries
If the
operation
of a
system
of distinction is
key
in
explaining
the taste of our
particular
group,
it would nevertheless be
wrong
to deduce from this that the
group
is immune
to the
marketing strategies
of record
companies.
For one
thing
has to be said in
advance: without the concerted action of the music
industry
and the media it would
not be
possible
to reach a consensus
covering
the western
hemisphere
as
represented
in our meta-list.
Only
music that has been
recorded,
distributed and advertised has a
chance of canonisation.
Specific strategies
of the media and the record
companies keep
certain musicians
and bands
present
in the
participants'
minds.12
Ideally,
artists are treated like
brands,
as a
survey
of the
past
activities of The Beatles demonstrates. Their
compilation
1 was
a worldwide best
seller;
Yellow Submarine
(1999)
and Let it Be
(2003)
have been
re-released in
digitally
remastered
versions;
George
Harrison's
death,
both
McCartney's
and Lennon's sixtieth
birthdays,
as well as the twentieth
anniversary
of
the latter's
death, led
to
coverage
on
TV, radio,
and in the
press
and
certainly
resulted
in much media
presentation
of Beatles
music;13
the Beatles'
Anthology, encompassing
TV
broadcasts,
three
double-CDs,
a
book,
a video- and
DVD-edition,
provided
'new'
material for fans around the world for several
years.
Similar
branding
can be seen in the cases of Nirvana and The Beach
Boys:
Cobain's iconisation was intensified
by
the
publication
of his
journals;
anniversaries
like
'ten
years
since Nevermind' or 'ten
years
since his suicide'
gave
rise to articles in
music
magazines,
which had an effect on the albums' sales.14 The music of The Beach
Boys
has been re-released in stereo versions and luxurious box-sets
-
which shows
that the
imagined target-group
consists of
people
with
enough disposable
income to
spend
on them.
Generally,
for all of these bands we can observe that none of their
records are sold at a lower
price
level. Indeed the reverse seems to be the case. In
Germany,
The Beatles' albums are sold at
higher prices
than other records. The
economic value
supports
the
symbolic.15
By integrating
these influences into our
perspective,
we can
explain why
The
Beatles are more
present
in the canon than
Buddy Holly,
for
example.
He has not had
ongoing coverage
like that of The Beatles; although
he died
early,
he has not become
an icon like Lennon or Cobain; his records are sold at 'nice
price'
and have not been
improved
in sound
quality;
after the
Buddy Holly
film
biography,
the
Buddy Holly
stage
musical
finally
threw discredit
upon
him in the
eyes
of the canon's
participants.
From the aforementioned we can see how the
branding
of a musician
may easily
fail if the culture industries do not care for the
target group's
demand for
authenticity.
To
get
back to
Bowie,
on the one
hand,
he has
always kept
himself
apart
from
the
mainstream,
but on the
other,
he never wanted to meet listeners' claims
for
authenticity (for example by turning
down collaborations with the culture
industries).16
On the
contrary, doing
commercials,
earning money
with his website or
issuing
shares in his future
operations might
have cost him canonical
reputation.
And
finally, maybe
he is
just
too much alive for
higher appreciation.
To
put
it in a
nutshell,
the
pop
canon can be
interpreted
as the result of the social
action of a
group consisting
of
higher
educated white males of the same
age group.
As
they
have common
dispositions
and
tastes,
they
form a milieu around
magazines
or
radio
stations,
in which
they distinguish
themselves
quantitatively
as well as
qualita-
tively
from those who consume mass
products
and
genres
of lower social
prestige.
The
preference
for The
Beatles,
Nirvana or The Beach
Boys
is
causally explained
at
least in
part
-
these bands conform to the canon's rules that we inferred from the
common
dispositions
of the
participants; they
broke
up,
their
'heritage'
is adminis-
tered
by
cultural industries and
they
sold few
enough
records to
distinguish
them
from mainstream chart music.
However,
what the
cannot
answer is the
question concerning
the
preference
for certain albums.
Why,
for
instance,
does the
group
favour Revolver above Let it be?
The
'greatest
albums' from an aesthetic
perspective
Judgements
on the value of music and the canon that follows from them are con-
ditioned
by many
different social
factors,
but cannot be
fully
reduced to them
(see,
for
example,
Wolff
1993,
p. 84).
To
give
reasons for the esteem in which the acclaimed
albums are
held,
traditional aestheticians would
try
to
present
the
qualities
which
they
believe to be immanent to the music.
Instead,
we want to understand which
qualities
the listeners attribute to their favourite records. To find
out,
we collected as
many
reviews
concerning
the albums in Table 1 as we could find in
print
and on the
Internet,
and
analysed
them in relation to the criteria
by
which their aesthetic value is
understood. The results can be illustrated
through
case studies of three
especially
successful records from our list: Revolver
(The Beatles, 1966,
position 1),
Nevermind
(Nirvana, 1991,
position 3),
and Pet Sounds
(The
Beach
Boys,
1966,
position 5).
(a) Revolver
In their reviews of Revolver
many
authors
point
out the innovative character of the
album.
They
look
upon
the record as an
important step
for the historical
development
of
popular
music,
mostly
because
they
consider The Beatles to have been the first to
enrich their
arrangements
with the sound of backward
tape
and other studio tech-
nology ('I'm
Only Sleeping',
'Tomorrow Never
Knows'),
with added
samples
of
noises and voices
('Yellow Submarine'),
with Indian instruments
('Love
You
To'),
classical
strings ('Eleanor Rigby')
or soul-like horn-sections
('Got
To Get You Into
My
Life').
In
comparison
to earlier releases, they
rate the
lyrics
as more diverse, more
serious, and more unusual. This
palette
of
styles
with its
'daring
sonic adventures' is
not
only praised
for innovation, but also for its
versatility.
In
spite
of
many surprises,
the
recipients
do not feel the
songs
to be difficult, but to be formed and
kept together
30
Ralf
von
Appen
and
Andrd
Doehring
by 'consistently stunning songcraft'
(Erlewine [n.d.]A).17 Although
the authors do
refer to the
catchiness,
beauty
or
prettiness
of
many
melodies and
harmonies,
they
do
not
give
more concrete reasons for the
compositional qualities they frequently
claim.
Another
aspect they
often
appreciate
is The Beatles' emotional
expressiveness
both as
composers
and
interpreters:
'it's
hard to think of
many
other bands that could imbue
such a
song
with such emotional
power.
["Here, There,
And
Everywhere"]
still sends
shivers down
my spine
[...]. [Revolver]
packs
far more
fun, sadness, love,
despair,
dreaminess and
thoughtfulness
into its half hour than the
great majority
of albums
twice its
length' (Davidbuttery). Apparently,
The Beatles
managed
to control this
versatility
and to
arrange
a coherent and
homogeneous
album,
which is
reputed
to be
highly original
with
regard
to both The Beatles' and other
contemporary
bands'
output:
'Revolver
has its own distinct
flavour,
and it
proved
that when
properly
conceived albums could be
greater
than the sum of their
parts'
(Jlennonfan4).
(b) Nevermind
In the
critiques analysed,
Nirvana's Nevermind is
acknowledged
as a
prototypical
record that stands for the
beginning
as well as the climax of
grunge
and
through
which
'alternative rock' found acclaim in a 'mainstream'
audience. As with
recordings by
The Beatles or The Beach
Boys,
it is considered an
'essential
work' for its influence.
Nevermind
passes
for
being
innovative,
although
'Nirvana isn't onto
anything
altogether
new'
(Robbins).
Rather than
celebrating
an
approval
of diverse
'progres-
sive' musical
possibilities,
the authors
appreciate
the reduction of the creative
means.
This can be identified as the innovative combination of
hard,
punk-influenced stylistic
markers
('frenzied
screaming
and
guitar
havoc'
[Robbins])
with the
typical
charac-
teristics of
pop
('a
shiny
surface'
(Erlewine [n.d.]B)
and
'catchy
hooks and riffs
[that]
can
easily
be loved
by anyone
with a music taste'
(Jeffrey).
Those
memorable,
'haunting'
melodies and
easily recognisable
formal structures lead to an outstand-
ingly positive appraisal
of the
song writing:
'a
dozen
great songs,
that are fantastic
even without so much
ragged
feedback,
for
melodies,
voice
leading
and all that
crap
are
argh!,
if not even better'
(Sikora).
While The Beatles and The Beach
Boys
are
admired for
compositional complexities,
Nirvana's
strength
is
recognised
in their
simplicity:
'The
musicianship
of the album isn't
complicated
for the most
part,
as
"Smells Like Teen
Spirit"
and "Come As You Are" are
typical songs
for the
early
guitarist,
but the
song writing
and
arrangements
are so well done that the need
for
anything profound
and
complex
is
immediately
thrown out'
(A
music fan
from
Cleveland).
Simplicity
is rather considered a
requirement
for the band's two
most essential
qualities, expressiveness
and
authenticity,
or
'passion
and
honesty'
(Vascdan).
What listeners find
conveyed
in
voice,
lyrics,
sound and
tempo
is,
above
all, 'tremendous,
unbridled
power'
(Erlewine [n.d]B),
and
'raw,
angst-ridden energy'
(Samhot),
which is
being
combined with the
expression
of
negative
emotions,
with
'anguish' (Erlewine),
with
'pain,
hurt and
misery' (King).
This
emotionality
in the
music and the
lyrics
is felt to be
very
intense and
(knowing
the circumstances of the
singer's life and death) to be an unalienated, honest reflection of Cobain's
personality:
'This album is real. In a world where shallow, factory
bands control the air waves,
Nirvana was a
shining
beacon of emotion, angst,
and artistic
integrity
that
gave hope
to
people everywhere' (Redcrosse27).
Because of this
intimacy, many
listeners
describe the music as
important
for their
personal
life or even for the lives of their
whole
generation:
'This is the most influential album of
my generation:
it
[.. .] gave
a
voice to the frustrations and
feelings
of all
young people' (Redcrosse27).
(c) Pet Sounds
Although
it achieved
relatively
little success at the time of its
release,
critics and fans
nowadays
rank Pet Sounds as Brian Wilson's
personal masterpiece,
as the zenith of
The Beach
Boys' discography
and as an influential milestone in the
history
of
popular
music. It is
supposed
to have been
'way
ahead of its time'
(Dean
M
Dent)
for its
'daring arrangements' (Opalsuns) using
unusual instruments like
accordions,
bicycle
bell,
bongos, string quartet,
flutes,
french
horn,
harpsichord,
theremin and ukulele.
'The
group
here reached a whole new level in terms of both
composition
and
production, layering
tracks
upon
tracks of vocals and instruments to create a
richly
symphonic
sound'
(Unterberger). Along
with the
idiosyncratic production
and some
'brilliant vocal harmonies'
(Grandegi),
reviewers
praise
the
song writing, referring
once
again mostly
to the melodies:
'a collection of the most beautiful
pop
music
ever assembled on one album. Studio effects add ambience and a
slight
touch of
the avant
garde,
but the
songs
themselves are the true
gems.
"Wouldn't It Be Nice"
with its
impeccable
harmonies and
melody
is one of the
greatest songs
ever'
(Scott
Hedegard);
'it is undeniable that Brian Wilson is
among
this
century's
most talented
pop songwriters' (Publius).
The
lyrics,
that all deal with the
problems
of
growing up,
are
regarded
as
serious,
introspective
and
expressive
('heartfelt'):
'the
best
represen-
tation of troubled late adolescence
captured
on disc'
(Gill).
And
expressive
and
moving
is what
many recipients
once
again
consider the music: 'there is a balance of
mood and emotion here that is
unsurpassed
in rock music'
(ibid.);
'
"Head On
My
Shoulder" and "God
Only
Knows" make me
cry' (Lovely).
An aesthetics of rock?
To sum
up
the
results,
we revealed a network of
values,
in which the
appraisal
of
innovation,
expression, authenticity
and
song writing
are of
major significance
for the
final
judgement.
Other criteria such as
originality, versatility, homogeneity,
com-
plexity, simplicity,
or
(the
hardly definable)
beauty
are of further
importance,
while
instrumental
virtuosity
seems to be an
aspect
that is
neglected. Among
these
values,
a
hierarchy
of universal
validity
cannot be found.
Authenticity,
however,
seems to rank
as a
key
factor,
one which is decisive in the case of Nevermind's
high regard.
Reviewers
of Revolver and Pet Sounds do not
bring
it
up expressly
-
they probably
take its
fulfilment as a
given
fact,
thereby confirming
Frith's
(1987, p.
137)
notion of the
'myth
of
authenticity'
as 'one of rock's own
ideological
effects'. Musicians who do not create
an
impression
of
making
music that matters
personally
to them have no chance to be
successful in the lists we document.
Among
the
thirty
records in Table 1 there is not
a
single
one that was not written and
composed
in the main
by
the musicians
themselves.18
Taking
into account the aforementioned
criteria,
the status of our
top thirty
albums can be
fairly
well
explained,
since the
people
who
publish
reviews on the
Internet are
by
and
large
the same as those who take
part
in
making up
the lists
we
compiled. However, these results must not be
generalised
towards a universal
aesthetics of
pop
and rock music for two reasons. First, (a)
a
very particular sample
that is
by
no means
representative
for the common listener has been examined: a
32
Ralf
von
Appen
and
Andrd
Doehring
group
of
people
who listen to a lot of music and who
engage
in
spreading
their
opinions
on music via the
Internet,
be it as a
profession
or as a leisure
pursuit.
Second,
(b)
we collected the valuations in a
very particular
condition: for
pragmatic
reasons,
the reviews that have been
analysed
were not
historic,
but
mainly
current ones.
Thus,
the authors were in a situation to
already
know about the album's
standing
as a classic
and its
widespread
esteem. Let us look at these factors.
(a) The
particularity of
the
sample
Referring
to the
findings
from the
it can be assumed that the
particular group,
whose reviews we have
examined,
present arguments
to
prove
the artistic value of their favourite records. This
explains
the
weight they lay
on
the criteria of
innovation, influence,
compositional quality (song writing)
and
authenticity,
since these criteria can
only
be
judged
with
corresponding
amounts and
kinds of
background knowledge
or cultural
capital.
Furthermore,
these are the
quali-
ties
traditionally
established in
evaluating
works of art
(cf. Regev
1994).
The
frequent
use of terms like
'masterwork', 'milestone',
'genius'
or
'true art/artist'
indicates such
an attitude. It is also
likely
that
authenticity
-
the
impression
of a musician's
personal
investment and self-disclosure in his
work,
image
and career
- will be vital to those
people
who
identify
and
present
themselves
by way
of their music
preferences.19
(b) The
influence of
the
particular
situation
The
retrospective
reviews of records that are
already reputed
to be classics rather
point
to the aforementioned 'artistic values',
and are
frequently
written in a
slightly
advisory, introductory, opera guide-like
tone that tries to show
competence.
Valuations in
everyday
situations,
though,
like
rating
new releases or
recommending
commercially
successful music on the web
pages
of online
shops
are
mainly
based on
more
sensuous, therefore,
'aesthetic values' in a narrow sense.20
Reviewing
albums
like
these,
listeners care much less about whether the
recordings might
be of
any
lasting
value.
They
want to know if
they
can
get
a kick out of them
right
now,
what
situations
they might
be suitable for or if
they
are
good
for
dancing.
To
point
out more
distinctly
the characteristics of the
above-depicted
'aesthetic
of the
canon',
we
briefly
go
into this difference
by
means of two
examples.
First,
for an album with a
large degree
of commercial success which
many
fans have commented on
(at
www.amazon.com),
we can note Come On Over
by
Canadian-born
country-pop
singer
Shania Twain
(see
Table 2 for details
).21
Instead of the values that are decisive
for the evaluation of Revolver or
Nevermind,
we find
fun, entertainment,
emotional as
well as
physical
motivation and attractiveness to be criteria of
major significance.
To confirm their
appraisal, people
refer to
personal feelings
and
experiences:
'The music is
uplifting, energetic,
and makes
people happy
(that's
what music is
supposed
to do
anyways)' (Richard Kwong);'
"That Don't
Impress
Me Much" has
you moving
while "Man! I Feel Like A Woman!"
just
has
you rocking
and
singing
to
the
song' (A
music fan from Los
Angeles);
'And
not
only
does Shania
sing
with
heart
-
she
sings
with fun and
joy,
and these emotions are
clearly
evident
through
all
of the
songs, helping
them become
extremely pleasant
ear
candy. [.
.
.]
Come On Over
ranks as one of the most
enjoyable
and fun albums'
(Troy Hartle);
'The music that will
sustain forever are
songs
that are
simplistic
in
meaning,
have an
uplifting beat, and are
positive
in nature. Her music shares these characteristics which means that she has
made a
permanent place
in music
history.
Other artists
catering
to the
negativity
and
hatred of life will find their music
forgotten.
Did I fail to mention that she is
absolutely
gorgeous
also?'
(Steve McFalls).
Although
these criteria are
by
and
large ignored
in the above
analysed
retro-
spective
reviews of canonic
albums,
they
are
applied
whenever amateurs
judge
prototypical pop
music.
They
are also used
by professional
critics who review current
releases
by
out-and-out rock bands. To
verify
this,
contemporary descriptions
of Is
This It
(2001),
The Strokes'
highly
acclaimed debut album
may
serve as a second
example:
'You'll turn it
up
as loud as it
goes
and
sing along.
You'll think about it and
hum the tunes to
yourself
when
you're
at work or can't listen to it. You'll scream
along
to "Take It Or Leave It"
-
in front of the mirror
even,
and
you'll
look forward to the
next time
you get
to hear it
again.
These are the tell-tale
signs
that
you're listening
to
a
great
album.
[...
.] you
won't be able to control
yourself
when
you're
under it's
spell'
(Greenwood);
'Track
two is a brilliant
song
called "The Modern
Age"
that will
have
you grinning
and
bobbing your
head
along
without a second
thought' (Desrosiers);
'the music leaves no doubts
-
more
joyful
and intense than
anything
else I've heard
this
year' (Levy);
'there's a real sense of fun on this
album,
and whenever I feel the
need to smile a little
more, it's the first album I reach for'
(Finch).
This
considerably
more
widespread
aesthetic should not be marked
inferior;
it is
merely
less
suitable,
if
you
want to
distinguish yourself by displaying
cultural
capital.
Arguably,
it is close to the core of aesthetic
perception
as it has been conceived in the
European
tradition,
that is if we understand it as a
special
kind of
perception
that we
engage
in
just
for the sake of
it,
and that can reward us with intense encounters with
our
very presence
and the world that surrounds us
(see
Seel
2002,
p. 343). Conversely,
the work-based aesthetic which
emerges
from the
analysed
reviews of
'classics'
is
orientated
by
the discourse of art as elevated
symbolic
form. As such it rather loses
track of the
exciting joys
of sensuous and
bodily experiences.22
Nevertheless,
we can
surely
infer that listeners of Pet Sounds and Nevermind are able
(or
at least were once
able)
to
enjoy
their music
just
as well in a sensuous
way
as Shania Twain's fans. The
issue here bears on the attenuation of aesthetic
experience
over time: it seems that the
aesthetic thrill offered
by
albums like Revolver or Nevermind when
they
were first
released cannot be revitalised after hundreds of
repeated hearings
-
and this effect is
even reinforced when an album influences
many
others
that,
consequently,
sound
alike. In other
words,
the
subjective appraisal
of an aesthetic
appeal
soon wears
off,
whereas the evaluation of artistic merit
(unlike
subjective appraisal always compara-
tive and based on
steady principles)
does not
change
as
quickly (Gracyk
1999,
p. 206).23
Interestingly,
there is a kind of feedback at work here:
by being
declared as
prototypes,
as
perfect
embodiments of all the
ideals,
older works set the standard for
current releases which can then do
hardly anything
but fail. In this
way,
esteem for the
masterpieces
increases even more.
To sum
up,
we have seen that listeners of
pop
and rock music almost
exclusively
refer to aesthetic and artistic criteria when
giving
reasons for their estimations
and,
as
a
result,
their canon.
Evidently,
social
aspects
like distinction
(and, supposedly,
identification)
are of
major importance
-
but
they
are not broached in the
public
discourse of music criticism. Future research should therefore not focus on
sociologi-
cal
aspects alone, but
analyse
the attribution of aesthetic values and their inner
relationships
as well
(see,
on this issue, Kneif 1971; Frith 1987; Wolff
1993). By
the
same token we would
hope
that the
attempt
to show that one
(namely
one's
own)
aesthetic is more true or valuable than other aesthetics
(see,
for
example,
Scruton 1997,
34
Ralf
von
Appen
and
Andrd
Doehring
pp. 497-506) belongs
to a
declining
tradition. No doubt it is this tradition which has
been
responsible
for the minor interest which
popular
music studies has
developed
in
issues of aesthetics.
However,
as we have
seen,
aesthetic
theory
that is
interpreted
in
a
descriptive,
rather than in a normative
way,
can
help
to understand the
processes
of
evaluation and canonisation.
Conclusion
Any
kind of canonisation
inevitably
entails exclusions that can be traced back to the
social
dispositions
of the
participants. Accordingly, any
canon should be examined
and
critically questioned
as it
implies
latent claims to
power
and
authority.
In the
present
case,
it reduces the
unimaginable versatility
of
popular
musics from all over
the world to a small collection of albums within
very
narrow
stylistic
bounds,
and
defines
pop
and rock music
by
the standards of late 1960s rock.
Still,
on the other side
of the
argument,
canons
may
serve well as an orientation within the vast
offering
of
music we are
exposed
to in our
lifetimes,
and as a
guide
for
people
who wish to
understand
popular
music's
history. Admittedly,
this
guide
is
biased,
partial
and
middle-of-the-road;
but
then,
which
guide
is not
partial
in some
way?
The task of
future research
is, hence,
to uncover the internal rules and
taboos,
values and
motives,
and to
impart
this
knowledge
to listeners with the aim of
having
them reflect
upon
their
'personal'
ideals as well as
exclusions,
and to let them find their own
ways
off the
beaten track. This
requires
a
position
that
recognises
and
analyses any important
factor of influence on the
resulting judgement.
For that
purpose, sociological
and
aesthetical
approaches
need to be interlocked. As Simon Frith
puts
it,
'the
sociological
approach
to
popular
music does not rule out an aesthetic
theory
but,
on the
contrary,
makes one
possible' (Frith
1987:
133).
Aesthetic research can
help
us understand the
rewards that
listening
to music can
give,
and
thus,
more
concretely,
it can show the
sensuous and artistic values our estimations are based on.
Sociology,
on the other
hand,
throws
light
on
why
we follow our
particular
aesthetic
by considering
relevant
data external to the music.
Moreover,
results of
(social) psychology
should be inte-
grated
for a more extensive
comprehension
of the
processes
described above.
Of
course,
no matter what
transpires
in the
academy, people
will continue
making up
lists that
perpetuate
the canon even as
they slightly
alter it. Based on our
results,
a future canon
might
look like this. The Beatles will further extend their
standing
as
'classics',
while Radiohead will
keep
on
moving
towards the
top
as
long
as
they keep up
their
image
as an
artistically
advanced band. Current musicians
who seem to be authentic and suitable for
distinction,
who
produce
records that are
judged
as
innovative,
original, expressive,
diverse but also full of
'well-written
songs',
will be canonised in about five
years (by
white males of
higher
education
and
income,
aged mainly twenty
to
forty).
If a famous
musician,
for
example
a
Rolling
Stone,
should
die,
a media and
industrially
enforced wave of
(re)canonisa-
tion will set in which will result in
higher
sales of 'best of'
compilations
and
higher
list
positions
for the
prototypical
album. Records
by
Youssou
N'Dour,
Faith Hill or
Missy
Elliott will not enter the 'dominant canon of the dominant'
(pace Bourdieu)
due to the
'wrong' sex, genre,
colour or
regional
descent of the artists in
question.
However, it is
just possible
that
by
then research in canonisation
might
have
imparted
its
findings
to listeners and, as a result, we
might
see instead tolerance,
plurality
and the
opening
of the canon.
Acknowledgements
We are
grateful
to Daniela and
Maryam
for their
patience
and
understanding,
and are
indebted to Sean
Albiez,
Theodore
Gracyk
and Kristina Krause for valuable
help
with
some
English
formulations. Dietrich
Helms'
critical comments
helped
to
sharpen
our
argumentation.
Appendix
1. Sources of the
analysed
lists
S.
Strajnic (ed.)
2004
Int.
Web visitors
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/strajnic/list.htm
(6 February
2004)
Radio 2 2003 NL unknown
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Top100's/2003Radio2.html
Studio Brussels 2003 BEL Listeners
http://www.xs4all.nl/~
fsgroen/Topl00's/
2003StudioBrussel.html
New Musical
Express
2003 UK Critics
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Topl00's/2003NME.html
Rolling
Stone 2003 USA Critics
http://www.xs4all.nl/
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/
2003RollingStone500.html
Radio 3FM De Hemelse 2002 NL Listeners
http://www.xs4all.nl~ fsgroen/Top100's/
2002Radio3FMhemelsehonderd.html
Q
2002 UK Readers
fsgroen/Top100's/2002Qreaders.html
Radio 90.5 The
Night
2002 USA Listeners
http:/
/www.xs4all.nl/ -
fsgroen/Topl00's/
2002Radio90,5TheNight.html
Rolling
Stone 2002 USA Readers www.xs4all.nl/ -
fsgroen/Topl00's/
2002RollingStoneReaders.html
VH 1 2001 USA Critics
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Top100's/
2001VHlMusicRadio.html
Radio Max Music 2001 USA unknown
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ -fsgroen/Topl00's/
2001RadioMaxMusic.html
M. Boeren
(ed.)
2001 Int. 50 Web-visitors
http:/ /martijn-2000.tripod.com/visitors20thcentury.htm
WFPK 2000 USA unknown
-
fsgroen/Top100's/
2000WFPKradioLouisville.html
Virgin Megastores
2000
Int. Critics, fans,
http://www.rocklist.net/virgin_1000_v3.htm
(ed.
C.
Larkin) experts
Melody
Maker 2000 UK unknown
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ -fsgroen/Top100's/
2000MelodyMaker.html
Spex
1999 D Critics
http:
/
/rz-home.de/~
tommi.s/spex20jh.htm#alben
WBER 1999 USA Listeners
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Top100's/1999WBER.html
Virgin (ed.
C.
Larkin)
1998
Int.
'Music
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/
enthusiasts'
1998VirginColinLarkin.html
Studio Brussels 1998 BEL Listeners
http://www.xs4all.nl/ -~ fsgroen/Topl00's/
1998StudioBrussels.html
BXR 1998 USA unknown
http://www.bxr.com/best_index1998.html
(not
online
anymore)
Q
1998 UK Readers
http://www.xs4all.nl/ ~ fsgroen/Top100's/1998Qreaders.html
Rolling
Stone
(ger.)
1997 D Critics
http://www.rocklist.net/rstone.html#100
Virgin Megastores
1997 UK Customers
http://www.rocklist.net/virgin.htm
Guardian 1997 UK Critics
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/
1997Guardian.html
Juice
1997 AUS unknown
http://www.rocklist.net/juice.html
Channel
4/HMV
1997 UK 36.000
http:/ /www.xs4all.nl/~
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/
record
buyers
1997Channel4HMV.html
BXR 1996 USA Listeners
http://www.bxr.com/best_index1996.html
(not
online
anymore)
Mojo
1996 UK Readers
http:/
/www.xs4all.nl/ -
fsgroen/Topl00's/
1996MojoReaders.html
Mojo
1995 UK Critics
http:/
/www.xs4all.nl/ -
fsgroen/Top100's/1995Mojo.html
Guiness, (ed.
C.
Larkin)
1994
Int. Experts http://www.xs4all.nl/ -fsgroen/Top100's/
1994GuinnessColinLarkin.html
New Musical
Express
1993 UK Critics
http:/
/www.xs4all.nl/
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/
1993NMEwriters.html
Musikexpress/Sounds
1993 D Critics
http://rz-home.de/~ tommi.s/mesl00.htm#100m
Times 1993 UK Critics
http:/
/www.xs4all.nl/
-
fsgroen/Topl00's/1993Times.html
Zounds 1992
Int.
Critics
http:
/
/rz-home.de/~
tommi.s/zounds.htm
Spin
1989 USA unknown
http:/ /www.rocklist.net/spin100.html#25
36
Ralf
von
Appen
and Andre
Doehring
New Musical
Express
1988 UK Readers
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Top100's/
1988NMEreaders.html
P. Gambaccini
(ed.)
1987
Int. Critics
http://www.xs4all.nl/ -fsgroen/Top100's/
1987PaulGambaccini.html
Sounds 1985 UK unknown
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ fsgroen/Top100's/1985Sounds.html
Appendix
2. Sources of the reviews cited
(authors'
names are often
pseudonyms)
'A music fan from Cleveland'
(3
October
2002). 'Accept
it or
not,
it moulded the 90's'
Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews:
Nevermind,
27
April
2004:
<http://www.amazon.com>
'A music fan from Los
Angeles' (10 September 2003). 'Too
great!'
Amazon.com:
Customer
Reviews: Come On
Over,
06
May
2004:
'Davidbuttery' (06 August 2002):
'Give it a twirl'
Dooyoo.
Music Records:
Revolver,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.dooyoo.co.uk/music/music_records/revolverthe_beatles/_review/385912/>
'Dean M Dent'
(2
November
2001). 'Just
wasn't made for it's
time,
but ahead of it'
Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews: Pet Sounds
[Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered],
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
Desrosiers,
M. 2001. 'The Strokes. Is This
It', Pop
Matters,
16
September
2003:
<http://www.
popmatters.com/music
/reviews /s/strokes-isthisit.html>
Erlewine,
S. T.
[n.d.]A.
'Revolver
(U.K.)'
All Music
Guide,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.allmusic.
com/cg
/
amg.dll?p
=
amg&uid
=
UIDSUB020404271002500473&sql
=
A2q4tk6dx9krd>
Erlewine,
S. T.
[n.d.]B.
'Nevermind' All Music
Guide,
27
April
2004:
<http://www.allmusic.
com/cg/amg.dll?p= amg&uid= UIDSUB020404271002500473&sql= A8wa9qj3bojha>
Finch,
A.
[n.d.].
'The Strokes. Is This It' Garbled
Communications,
16
September
2003:
<http://
www.garbledonline.net/thestrokes.html>
Gill,
A.
[n.d.].
'Beach
Boys.
Pet Sounds'
Q-Online,
14 December 1999:
<http://www.qonline.
co.uk/reviews
/server/asp?id
=
5945&ss
=
pet
+ sounds&cs= title&st =
cn&stars
=
0&cp=
1>
'Grandegi' (21 February 2004).
'A
masterpiece,
based on vocal harmonies and orchestration'
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Pet Sounds [Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered],
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
Greenwood, E. (7
October
2001).
'The Strokes. Is This It' Drawer B New Media
Reviews,
16
September
2003:
<http://www.drawerb.com/01/1002496835.htm>
'Jeffrey' (10
April 2004).
'Defining
Album of the
90s,
not the
defining
album of Nirvana'
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews:
Nevermind,
27
April
2004:
'Jlennonfan4' (8 April 2004).
'Greatest Album Of All Time
By
A Mile!' Amazon.com: Customer
Reviews:
Revolver,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
King,
S.
1991.
'Nirvana:
Nevermind'
Q-online,
27
April
2004:
<http://www.xs4all.nl/
~ fsgroen/Albums-N/NirvanaNevermind.htm>
Levy, J.
2001. 'The Strokes. Is This
It',
Rolling
Stone, 879,
16
September
2003:
<http://www.
rollingstone.com/reviews/cd/review.asp?aid=2043129&cf=
>
'Lovely' (10 February 2004).
'One of the best
EVER!!' Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews: Pet Sounds
[Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered,
27
April
2004:
'Opalsuns' (2
March
2004).
'Let's Break it
down,
coming
from a musician ...'
Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews: Pet Sounds [Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
'Publius'
(28 Febuary 2004).
'One of the
very
best
pop
albums' Amazon.com: Customer Reviews:
Pet Sounds
[Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered],
27
April
2004:
<http://www.
amazon.com>
'Redcrosse27'
(7 April 2004).
'Ten Years and No
Replacement
...' Amazon.com:
Customer
Reviews:
Nevermind,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
'Richard
Kwong' (6
March
2004).
'Now
I know who Shania is!!'
Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews:
Come On
Over,
27
April
2004:
Ritchie,
A.
[n.d.].
'The Strokes. Is This It' The
Daily Page,
16
September
2003:
<http://
www.thedailypage.com/going-out/music/cdreviews/managedit.php?intcdrevid=238>
Robbins, I.
1991. 'Nevermind. Nirvana'
Rolling
Stone, 618,
pp.96-8.
'Samhot'
(18 February 2002):
'Great Collection!'
Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews:
Nevermind,
27
April
2004:
'Scott
Hedegard' (31
March
2004):
'Brian
Wilson's
Masterpiece
(Until
"Smile" is
released)'
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Pet Sounds [Extra Tracks]
[Original Recording
Remastered],
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
Sikora,
M. 1991. 'Nirvana. Nevermind'
Spex,
10,
p.43.
'Steve
McFalls'
(3 August 1999). 'A
very dynamic
and well recorded CD!' Amazon Amazon.com:
Customer Reviews: Come On
Over,
27
April
2004:
'Troy
Hartle'
(21 April 2003). 'Why
Can't More Music Be as
Enjoyable
as This
Album?'
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Come On
Over,
27
April
2004:
Unterberger,
R.
[n.d.]. 'Pet
Sounds' All Music
Guide,
27
April
2004:
<http://www.allmusic.
com/cg/amg.dll?p= amg&uid= UIDSUB020404271002500473&sql= Ajsrp286c052a>
'Vascdan' (12 April 2004).
'90's
Masterpiece'
Amazon.com:
Customer Review:
Nevermind,
27
April
2004:
<http:/
/www.amazon.com>
Endnotes
1. The exact sources of the
rankings,
their
original
medium
(magazine,
book, radio, Internet),
their
country
of
origin
and who has
participated
(readers, listeners, critics)
are listed in
Appen-
dix 1. In order to be
selected,
each list had to
fulfil several criteria. We
only
admitted lists that
graduated
in at least
twenty-five
hierarchic
steps.
Lists that were confined to a certain sub-
genre (e.g.
'100 black metal albums
you
must
hear before
you die')
or to a
single
nation
(e.g.
'The 100 best
Belgian
records of all
time')
were
excluded. Albums
placed
first
got twenty-five
points,
albums
placed twenty-fifth got
one
point. Only
lists from the last
twenty years
were
taken into
consideration,
because the admit-
tance of older lists would have been a
preferen-
tial treatment of older records.
Moreover,
because we saw
intersubjectivity
as a factor
likely
to boost
representativeness,
we did not
include lists that had been constructed
by only
one
person.
We cannot estimate the overall
number of
participants
due to
missing
infor-
mation. That
said,
just
one
list,
that
compiled
by 'Virgin Megastore/Colin
Larkin'
(2000,
Appendix 1)
is said to be based on the votes of
more than
200,000
people. Ultimately,
we con-
sider that the selected lists are
representative
of
this
special
form of canonisation in that no fur-
ther lists could be found which met with our
above-mentioned
specifications.
2. We counted The
Jimi
Hendrix
Experience
(mixed)
as
American,
Fleetwood Mac
(mixed)
and Van Morrison
(Northern Ireland)
as be-
longing
to the UK. U2 constitute the
remaining
five
per
cent,
as
they
are Irish.
3.
Naturally
we did not
integrate
the NME critics
poll
into our list due to its
age.
The results ran as
follows: 1.
Sgt. Pepper's
...,
2. Blonde on
Blonde,
3.
Pet
Sounds,
4.
Revolver,
5.
Highway
61
Revisited,
6.
Electric
Ladyland,
7. Are
you experienced?,
8.
Abbey
Road,
9.
Sticky Fingers,
10. Music
from Big
Pink,
Source: 27
April
2004:
<http://www.rocklist.
net/nme_writers.htm#100_74>
4. Source for the
US-figures
is the
Recording
Industry
Association of America: 21
July
2005:
<www.riaa.com/gp/bestsellers/topalbums.
asp> (last update
June 2005);
source for esti-
mated worldwide
figures:
27
April
2004:
<http:/ /top40-charts.com/chart.php?cid=
25&compag=38>.
One has to consider that
not all American record
companies report
their sales numbers to the
Recording Industry
Association of America. The absence of Stevie
Wonder,
for
example,
is thus
explained.
The
RIAA counts the sale of a double-LP or CD
twice,
whereas in column six
they
are counted
as one unit.
By taking
this into
account,
the
comparatively high figures
for double-albums
in column five are
explained. Accordingly,
the
best-selling
Beatles album would be
Sgt.
Pepper's
...
(eleven
million in the
USA,
esti-
mated
thirty-two
million
worldwide)
and 1
(nine
million
USA,
estimated
twenty-seven
mil-
lion
worldwide).
Accurate worldwide sales
data seems
impossible
to come
by
for the album
market. But even if we had official data,
it would
be
meaningless
for the Asian markets,
consider-
ing
the
high
number of
bootleg copies
traded
there. Plausible
figures
for the UK are listed at
<http://www.everyhit.com/recordabl.html>.
5. Source: 27
April
2004:
<http://www.
rollingstone.com/features/coverstory/
featuregen.asp?pid
= 2164>
6.
Apart
from female band members of Fleetwood
Mac and The Velvet
Underground.
7. The lists used for the meta-list stem from the
western
hemisphere. Split up by
countries,
only
small differences
emerge.
For the
UK,
a nation-
ally
favoured artist would be Elvis Costello;
for
the
USA,
Bruce
Springsteen;
or for
Belgium,
dEUS
-
in German lists these national
particu-
larities do not exist.
8. Source: 27
April
2004:
<http://www.asymh.
de/downloads/Objektprofil_Musik.pdf>
9. For Schulze,
the
present
time is characterised
by
an
over-supply
of cultural
possibilities
with
which to define a
personal style.
Besides,
mod-
ern
society
increases the
feeling
of
insecurity
for
its members due to the level of differentiation
and individualisation: 'Unsicherheit
erzeugt
ein
disthetisches
Anlehnungsbediirfnis,
das sich in
Mentalitditen,
Gruppenbildungen, typischen
Handlungsstrategien
und neuen Formen der
Offentlichkeit
niederschliigt' ['Insecurity
calls
forth a need for aesthetic orientation,
which
is reflected in mentalities,
the
forming
of
38
Ralf
von
Appen
and
Andred
Doehring
groups, typical patterns
of behaviour and new
forms of
public appearances'] (Schulze 1992,
p. 62).
10. For
example,
in the German edition of
Rolling
Stone
magazine,
two lists made
up by
readers
and critics are
published monthly.
The critics'
list shows a faster turnover of
albums,
which is
explainable
as much
by
the
large
amount of
music
they
have to
cope
with as
by
the effort
expended
in
establishing
their role.
11.
Indeed,
in one of the
compiled
lists,
compila-
tions were not even admitted for this
very
reason. 'We do not allow them
[compilations]
to
be counted because the idea is for the album to
be a showcase of
songs put together by
an artist
at a
particular
time'
(Source:
27
April
2004:
<http://www.rocklist.net/virgin_1000_v3.
htm>)
12. We refuse
decidedly
the thesis
according
to
which the canon could serve as a
society's
collective
memory. Following
Hahn
(1998,
pp. 460-1),
in modern
societies,
consisting
of
differentiated
subsystems,
a consensus about
the content of such a canon is
impossible.
Thus,
a canon has
only
sectional
validity
and its
power
becomes effective
only
where it is
accepted
and
meaningfully integrated
in
practical
action
(cf.
Heydebrand 1998).
13. The death of a musician is an indicator for his
forthcoming
canonisation. As a
consequence,
his records are idealised.
'Totsein
ilberhaupt
ist
giunstig. Je
toter der
Kanon,
desto
endgiiltiger'
['Generally, being
dead is
propitious.
The more
dead the canon
gets,
the more definitive it
is']
(Ullmaier 1997,
p. 209).
14. For
example,
the sales of Never Mind the Bollocks
Here's the Sex
Pistols, which was released
twenty-seven years ago,
went
up
due to former
lead-singer Johnny
Rotten's
swearing
on the
English
TV
show,
'I'm a
Celebrity
-
Get Me Out
of Here' in 2004. Source: 27
April
2004:
<http://
www.intro.de/index.php?nav=
10&con= /
news /news&einenews
=
1075923600&>
15. Of
course,
empirical
research on these
thoughts
has to be
done,
because the influences of the
culture
industry,
their efforts for certain
artists,
may
be
largely responsible
for their
presence
in
the
participants'
collective
memory.
With refer-
ence to theories of
reception,
for
example
in
cultural studies where a
one-way-model
of
top-
down-communication is
rejected,
it
may,
on the
other
hand,
be doubted that these
strategies
can
be
interpreted
as the
only
determinant.
16.
'I
have never been convinced
by
the
importance
of
authenticity. [...]
I have
always engaged
in
the idea of an entertainer who
performs
authen-
ticity. [... .] Yes,
I think one cannot be authentic'.
David Bowie in Venker
(2003, pp. 42-3).
17. For details of Erlewine, and all
subsequent
reviews,
please
see
Appendix
2.
18. The
only objection
would be that
Tony
Asher
wrote most of Pet Sounds'
lyrics.
19. The
authenticity
that is demanded here is to be
understood in the context of a 'rock
sensibility'
as Frith
(1988)
describes it. Musicians like
David Bowie or the Pet
Shop Boys,
who rather
follow a
'pop sensibility',
for
example by bring-
ing up
the
artificiality
and the commercial func-
tion of their role as stars, cannot be found in our
top thirty. They
devote themselves to a
post-
modern
aesthetic,
which is above all
typical
of
the 1980s and
under-represented
in our list, not
to that
romantically
influenced rock aesthetic of
the late 1960s and
early
1990s which dominates
in our meta-list
(cf. Appen
and
Doehring 2001).
20. For this
distinction,
see
Gracyk (1999).
Of
course, some artistic values are based on aes-
thetic values
eventually.
21.
'Country', 'pop',
'female', and
'large
commer-
cial success':
according
to the results of the so-
ciological perspective,
these are four
weighty
reasons which
explain why
this album does not
appear
in
any
of the lists we collected. Further-
more,
Twain would not be considered authentic
by
our
particular spot-check,
as she releases
various versions of her albums for different
groups
of consumers. This is
regarded
as
'chumming up'
and contradicts the idea of the
album as a 'work'.
22. This is
exactly
what Tibor Kneif
(1978, pp.
16-
17) reproaches
traditional art music
with,
while
acknowledging
rock music to be free from such
a
sterile,
cultivated middle-class
style
attitude.
23. The British novelist and music critic Nick
Hornby pleads
for the
joys
of
listening
to
pop
music if one can
only
focus on its
presence
with-
out
making heavy
demands on it: 'The
song
that
has been
driving
me
pleasurably potty recently
is "I'm Like a Bird"
by Nelly
Furtado.
Only
history
will
judge
whether Ms Furtado turns out
to be
any
kind of
artist,
and
though
I have
my
suspicions
that she will not
change
the
way
we
look at the
world,
I can't
say
that I'm
very
both-
ered: I will
always
be
grateful
to her for
creating
in me the narcotic need to hear her
song again
and
again.
[
..
.] Sure,
it will seem thin and stale
soon
enough.
Before
very long
I will have
"solved" "I'm Like a
Bird",
and I won't want to
hear it
very
much
any
more - a three-minute
pop song
can
only
withhold its
mysteries
for so
long,
after all.
So,
yes,
it's
disposable,
as if that
makes
any
difference to
anyone's perceptions
of
the value of
pop
music. But
then,
shouldn't we
be sick of
"Moonlight"
Sonata
by
now?'
(Hornby
2003,
pp. 19-20).
References
Appen,
R.v.,
and
Doehring,
A. 2000.
'Kanonisierung
in der
Pop-/Rockmusik-
oder: Warum
"Sgt.
Pepper"?
Zur disthetischen
Beurteilung
von
Pop-/Rock-LPs
in
100er-Listen',
in
Populiire
Musik
im
kulturwissenschaftlichen
Diskurs,
ed. H.
Rising
and T.
Phleps (Karben, Coda), pp.
229-49
2001.
'Kiinstlichkeit
als Kunst.
Fragmente
zu einer
postmodernen
Theorie der
Pop-
und Rockmusik', in
Popullire
Musik im
kulturwissenschaftlichen
Diskurs
II,
ed. T.
Phleps (Karben, Coda), pp.
13-33
Blaukopf,
K. 1984. Musik im Wandel der
Gesellschaft. Grundziige
der
Musiksoziologie (Miinchen/Kassel,
dtv/Bdirenreiter)
Bourdieu,
P. 1984. Distinction. A Social
Critique of
the
Judgement of
Taste
(Cambridge,
MA, Harvard
University Press)
1987. Sozialer Sinn. Kritik der theoretischen
Vernunft (Frankfurt
a.
M., Suhrkamp)
Bryson,
B. 1996.
'"Anything
but
Heavy
Metal":
symbolic
exclusion and musical
dislikes', American
Sociological
Review, 61,
pp.
884-99
Frith,
S. 1987. 'Towards an aesthetic of
popular
music',
in Music and
Society.
The Politics
of Composition,
Performance
and
Reception,
ed. S.
McClary
and R.
Leppert (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press),
pp.
133-49
1988. 'Art
ideology
and
pop practice',
in Marxism and the
Interpretation of
Culture,
ed. C. Nelson and L.
Grossberg (Houndmills, Macmillan), pp.
461-75
1996.
Performing
Rites. On the Value
of Popular
Music
(Cambridge,
MA,
Harvard
University Press)
Gebesmair,
A. 2001.
Grundziige
einer
Soziologie
des
Musikgeschmacks (Wiesbaden,
Westdeutscher
Verlag)
Gracyk,
T. 1999.
'Valuing
and
evaluating popular
music', Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 57/2,
pp.
205-20
Hahn,
A. 1998.
'Einfiihrung',
in Kanon Macht Kultur. Theoretische,
historische und soziale
Aspekte
dsthetischer
Kanonbildungen,
ed. R.V.
Heydebrand (Stuttgart/Weimar,
Metzler), pp.
459-66
Heydebrand,
R.V. 1998. 'Kanon Macht Kultur - Versuch einer
Zusammenfassung',
in Kanon Macht Kultur.
Theoretische,
historische und soziale
Aspekte
iisthetischer
Kanonbildungen,
ed. R.V.
Heydebrand (Stuttgart/
Weimar, Metzler), pp.
612-25
Hornby,
N. 2003. 31
Songs (London, Viking)
Kneif,
T. 1971.
'Musikisthetik',
in
Einfiihrung
in die
systematische Musikwissenschaft,
ed. C. Dahlhaus
(Laaber, Laaber), pp.
133-69
1978. Sachlexikon Rockmusik.
Instrumente, Stile, Techniken,
Industrie und Geschichte
(Reinbek
b.
Hamburg,
Rowohlt)
Luhmann,
N. 1990. Die
Wissenschaft
der
Gesellschaft (Frankfurt
a.
M.,
Suhrkamp)
Peterson,
R.A. 1992.
'Understanding
audience
segmentation:
from elite and mass to omnivore and
univore',
Poetics, 21,
pp.
243-58
Regev,
M. 1994.
'Producing
artistic value: the case of rock and
popular
music',
The
Sociological Quarterly,
35/1,
pp.
85-102
Schulze,
G. 1992. Die
Erlebnisgesellschaft. Kultursoziologie
der
Gegenwart (Frankfurt
a. M./New York,
Campus)
Scruton,
R. 1997. The Aesthetics
of
Music
(New York,
Oxford
University Press)
Seel,
M. 2002.
'Ein
Schritt in die
Asthetik',
in Falsche
Gegensditze. Zeitgendssische
Positionen zur
philosophischen
Asthetik,
ed. A. Kern and R.
Sonderegger (Frankfurt
a.
M.,
Suhrkamp), pp.
330-43
Ullmaier, J.
1997. 'Letzter Aufruf nach Walhalla.
Bemerkungen
zur
Popkanongenese
im kulturindustriellen
Aquarium',
Testcard, 5,
pp.
204-18
Venker,
T. 2003.
Ignoranz
und
Inszenierung.
Schreiben fiber
Pop (Mainz,
Ventil
Verlag)
Wolff, J.
1993. Aesthetics and the
Sociology of
Art,
second edition
(Houndmills, Macmillan)

100 Greatest Rock Albums

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

100 Greatest Rock Albums

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Nevevnind lIe BealIes, Heve's ExiIe 61 and Nico 'TIe Top 100 Becovds oJ AII Tine' A Canon

oJ Fop and BocI AIIuns Jvon a SocioIogicaI and an AeslIelic Fevspeclive

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi