Music videos are available on more channels, in more formats, and in more countries than ever before. While MTV-the network that introduced music video to most viewers-is moving away from music video programming, other media developments signal the longevity and dynamism of the form. Among these are the proliferation of niche-based cable and satellite channels, the globalization of music video production and programming, and the availability of videos not just on television but also via cell phones, DVDs, enhanced CDs, PDAs, and the Internet. In the context of this transformed media landscape, Medium Cool showcases a new generation of scholarship on music video. Scholars of film, media, and music revisit and revise existing research as they provide historically and theoretically expansive new perspectives on music video as a cultural form.The essays take on a range of topics, including questions of authenticity, the tension between high-art influences and mass-cultural appeal, the prehistory of music video, and the production and dissemination of music videos outside the United States. Among the thirteen essays are a consideration of how the rapper Jay-Z uses music video as the primary site for performing, solidifying, and discarding his various personas; an examination of the recent emergence of indigenous music video production in Papua New Guinea; and an analysis of the cultural issues being negotiated within Finland's developing music video industry. Contributors explore precursors to contemporary music videos, including 1950s music television programs such as American Bandstand, Elvis's internationally broadcast 1973 Aloha from Hawaii concert, and different types of short musical films that could be viewed in "musical jukeboxes" of the 1940s and 1960s. Whether theorizing music video in connection to postmodernism or rethinking the relation between sound and the visual image, the essays in Medium Cool reveal music video as rich terrain for further scholarly investigation.Contributors. Roger Beebe, Norma Coates, Kay Dickinson, Cynthia Fuchs, Philip Hayward, Amy Herzog, Antti-Ville Karja, Melissa McCartney, Jason Middleton, Lisa Parks, Kip Pegley, Maureen Turim, Carol Vernallis, Warren Zanes
Informations légales : prix de location à la page 0,1498€. Cette information est donnée uniquement à titre indicatif conformément à la législation en vigueur.
Extrait
Music/ teleVision/cultuRal studies
RogeR BeeBe
Jason Middleton
duke uniVeRsity pRess
Will stRaW
gilBeRt B. RodMan
gayle f. Wald
MediuM cool
MediuM cool Music Videos fRoMsoundies to cellphones
Kay Dickinson,MUSIC VIDEO ANDSYNAESTHETIC POSSIBILITY
Amy Herzog,ILLUSTRATING MUSIC: THE IMPOSSIBLE EMBODIMENTS OF THE JUKEBOX FILM
Jason Middleton,THE AUDIOVISION OFFOUNDFOOTAGE FILM AND VIDEO
Maureen Turim,ART/MUSIC/VIDEO.COM
Carol Vernallis,STRANGE PEOPLE, WEIRD OBJECTS:THE NATURE OF NARRATIVITY, CHARACTER,AND EDITING IN MUSIC VIDEOS
Pilip Hayward,DANCING TO A PACIFIC BEAT: MUSIC VIDEO IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA
Antti-Ville Kärjä,VISIONS OF ASOUND NATION: FINNISH MUSIC VIDEOSAND SECURED OTHERNESS
Pegley, Kip “COMING TO YOU WHEREVER YOU ARE”: EXPLORING THE IMAGINED COMMUNITIES OF MUCHMUSIC (Canada) AND MTV (United States)
Coates, Norma ELVIS FROM THE WAIST UPAND OTHER MYTHS: 1950S MUSIC TELEVISIONAND THE GENDERING OF ROCK DISCOURSE
Lisa Parks and Melissa McCartney, ELVIS GOES GLOBAL: ALOHA! ELVIS LIVE VIA SATELLITE AND MUSIC/TOURISM/TELEVISION
Cyntia Fucs,“I’M FROM RAGS TO RICHES”: THE DEATH OF JAYZ
vi
Warren Zanes,VIDEO AND THETHEATER OF PURITY
Roger Beebe,PARADOXES OF PASTICHE:SPIKE JONZE, HYPE WILLIAMS, AND THE RACEOF THE POSTMODERN AUTEUR
Bibliograpy
Contributors
Index
CO N T E N TS
Jason Middleton and Roger Beebe
n recent years it as become common to lament te disappearance of music videos from . Over a decade ago Andrew Goodwin ad flIseemed at first to be. In te decade since Goodwin’sow of videos tat it already noted in isDancing in te Distraction Factorytat was increasingly moving toward familiar televisual programming sced-ules and furter from a simple “radio wit images,” te twenty-four-our landmark text, as only moved furter in te direction tat Good-win describes, tereby confining (or condemning) music video to very specific programming slots, often in te “dead” parts of te daily sced-ule. In fact, by even finally acknowledged its abandonment of music video. hat year saw te release of a series of ads for , one of te Viacom-owned sister networks of te music television pioneer, tat proclaimed “: Were te music’s at,” tus conceding implicitly tat was no longermusicIronically enoug, witin monts television. of tis ad campaign, itself abandoned its all-video format, instead opting to devote a substantial portion of its daily scedule to rerunning programs from . Faced wit suc evidence of te disappearance of music video from te regular line-up of , it would at first glance seem strange to foist on te world a new collection of writing about music video. If music video is indeed disappearing from M[usic]T[ele]V[ision], ten wy turn our at-tention to it once again? Simply put, music video as in no way disappeared. Wile as increasingly focused on te over te M, music video as in actual-ity concurrently enjoyed a major renaissance by circulating in a number of oter places and oter media. Wile may not program twenty-four ours of video a day, wen we look at te amount of music video on
all television stations—, , Video Hits (), Fuse (formerly MucMusic ), Black Entertainment Television (), Country Music Television (), not to mention te Digital Suite, a package of tirteen digital cannels from Networks including Hits, Jams, Español, Classic, Hits, Soul, and Country—we cannot avoid te conclusion tat tere are, in fact, many, many more ours of music television available now tan ever before, even if itself as moved away from video as te staple of its programming. And wile we migt be encouraged by to confuse and “music tele-vision,” it seems tat suc confusion is no longer justified, if indeed it ever was. In fact, te separation of from music television is one of te primary goals of tis collection. Wile previous music video scolar-sip as always conflated te network wit te format, tis collection insists on te difference between and te broader array of music television(s). We migt also note tat tis lament about te “deat of music video” centered on te United States is furter undermined by taking even a quick glance around te world at te various music televisions spring-ing up in almost every corner of te globe. In Italy, for example, a similar proliferation of music television cannels can be seen; Italian viewers can get teir video fix on Italia, Brand New, Hits Italia, Matc Music , Deejay , Music Box Italia, Video Italia, and Rock troug Rupert Murdoc’s satellite television service as well as on oter cannels delivered troug local providers like Napoli Music, (te Italian Music Cannel), and Hit Cannel. Faced wit suc observa-tions (wic could easily be repeated from country to country and con-tinent to continent), te claim tat music television as come and gone seems even more untenable. But tis is only part of te picture, as we want also to insist on te per-aps even more neglected difference between music television and music video as a form tat can be disseminated troug media oter tan tele-vision. As important as te proliferation of cannels tat devote a sub-stantial part of teir programming days to music video may be, equally important is te proliferation of oter media venues for watcing music video. Music videos ave started sowing up in forms tat belie te confusion of music video (as a form) and music television (as a delivery tecnology for tat form): music videos now come to us on s and enanced s; on s, cell pones, and oter wireless communication
2
JA S O N M I D D L E TO N A N D R O G E R B E E B E
devices; and, peraps most importantly, on te Internet. In tis new mil-lennium nearly every band seems to ave a Web site, and vast numbers of tese sites are ome to music videos. Every record label—from indies like K Records and Matador to te music arms of multinational corporations like Arista—features videos on its site, were tey almost always are pro-moted on te front pages. And as gotten into te act, too, wit its ig-traffic Web site featuring literally tousands of video clips. here are dozens upon dozens of oter sites— including Launc.com (now part of Yaoo!), sonicnet.com (now owned by Viacom and branded by ), and Rollingstone.com—tat offer access to music videos in wic a model is used similar to te online model wit videos as part of a broad array of music information. he increasing availability of broadband coupled wit te difficulty of streaming longer videos troug te current Inter-net tecnology as been a real boon for sort films and videos generally, and te vast storeouse of music video as frequently been called upon to provide content for streaming or quick downloads. Given te rapid de-velopment of tecnology, music video as seen a tremendous explosion beyond te narrow limits of “music television.” hese tree canges—te proliferation of multiple nice-based ca -ble and satellite cannels sowing music videos, te explosion of music video production and programming globally, and te advent of alterna-tive tecnologies for te dissemination of music video—set te stage for tis collection. Togeter tese canges demonstrate a significant trans-formation in te culture of music video from tat in wic te extant body of scolarsip on te form emerged. his collection’s title is, of course, derived from te title of Haskell Wexler’s film, wic is itself derived from concepts elaborated in Marsall McLuan’s famous essay “Media Hot and Cold.” he prase carries a deliberately polysemic quality wen recontextualized as te title for a new collection on music video. It points to te “cooling,” de-scribed above, of te relationsip between music video and television as video as proliferated into oter exibition and display formats. Music video itself would ave been considered by McLuan a very “cool” media form, in tat its generally fragmentary and incomplete narrative struc-tures compel te viewer toward a greater interaction wit te text, fill-ing in te gaps im or erself. But its current dissemination on te Web takes us even furter in tis direction of interactivity, suggesting tat a media form wic as always positioned itself as “cool” in te terms of