As a Black person who is into different music genres, mostly pop-adjacent styles of rock, R&B and female rap, the racialization of music has been obvious and so frustrating to me.
Some double standards in music include the fact that white people have historically been free to claim any genre they set their sights on, while Black people are relegated to R&B, hip hop and ‘urban’ genres. The following artists: Demi Lovato bouncing from Emo-Nite to R&B influenced album Tell Me You Love Me; Miley Cyrus going from Disney princess to Bangerz (an album I actually love), and “rapping” on 23; and Machine Gun Kelly going from rapper to pop-punk saviour, are all examples of said freedom. Meanwhile, a Black person who expresses their love for [insert rock band] is met with “oh, do you actually listen to them?”, or even better yet, “you must hate being Black.”
As a ‘free spirit’, a person who likes to follow my ear and taste rather than subscribing to cultural scripts, I’ve always found it interesting... not necessarily how strongly tied ethnicity and genres are, because there is a socio-historical basis for this, but rather, the fact that somehow, everyone is supposed to stick to ‘their kind’ of music, everyone, except for white people, of course. And recently, I’ve been coming to terms with the idea of authenticity as a social construct.
Well, for this piece, I want to get into the first journal article I’ve read from start to finish (well, at least of my own volition), while interjecting with my thoughts. But, to begin: race has no bearing on musical taste.
According to theconversation.com, genre preference is unrelated to genetic makeup, (if race is considered genetically determined). In early anthropological history, as humankind spread out from the African continent, cultures travelled along. Cultures diversified around the globe, losing touch with their original birth place. Therefore, the existence of various music genres is reflective of cultural diversity, rather than race, even though genre and race appear to be directly associated.
White is Right: Patterns of White-Washing Repeated Across The Globe
I won’t go too deep into the history of rock music, its trans-atlantic slave trade origins and relationship to the blues. Aurora wrote a great article about this which is absolutely worth a read… after you finish this one, of course :). But, to provide a little context on this history:
Elvis Presley was the face of rock ‘n’ roll, a genre pioneered by the likes of Sister Rosetta Tharpe and Chuck Berry, to name a few. However, of course, record labels weren’t interested in promoting Black artists to a white audience. Black rock ‘n’ roll was associated with moral decay, working-class culture and viewed as primitive, “rebellious noise”.
What I found interesting is that white washing, specifically in the rock genre, also happened in Europe. Rock emerged in the Netherlands during the 1950’s. This was the product of Indonesian and Moluccan immigration, after the Indonesian War of Independence (1945-1949).
From 1956 to 1964, bands such as the Hap-Cats and the Crazy Rockers were staples of Dutch dancehalls and the Indorock scene. Interestingly, these bands were initially legitimized as authentic rock, as evidenced by white Dutch musicians who painted their faces darker in order to meet the ‘standard’. However, these acts ended up commercially unsuccessful, because industry gatekeepers were uninterested in investing in a scene of young immigrants with ‘attitudes’. Sound familiar?
Eventually, tensions rose between these migrant youth and White Dutch audiences. This included name calling (being called poepchinezen, poo-Chinese), as well as riots in the late 1950’s. Once white bands started playing rock music in the mid 60’s, Indorock was forgotten.
Once again, rock took on a white face.
Cultural Struggle, Symbolic Violence and Tribalism
According to French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, cultural struggle is the object of power struggles among social groups. The classification of culture, or cultural products, is “a political process that involves negotiations among various self-interested parties”. As part of this cultural struggle, symbolic violence, a psycho-social rather than physical form of violence, is used to reinforce the social dominance of those who hold power, resulting in hegemonic beliefs about culture that reinforce and legitimize this power, while obfuscating historical truths.
The result is miseducation. This is how rock starts out as Black and degenerate, and ends up white, and badass (and maybe still degenerate depending on your religion or political affiliation, I mean, you can never really win...).
Symbolic violence can be institutional in nature and complicity among dominant and racialized groups happens either through willful ignorance, or intentional compliance. In either case, racialized groups can end up acting against their own interests.
This part reminds me of the fact that most popular female artists of the last couple of decades happen to pass the ‘paper bag’ test. This is an issue of colorism, colonialism’s child, as well as gender discrimination, because Black women are the most negatively affected by colorism.
Marginalized groups act against their own interests when they ignore the issue, subscribe to colourist/racist ideals, or even give up the pursuit of their passion because ‘they do not meet the standard’. White people and other people of colour are inadvertently (or maybe not) complicit when they choose colour blindness, painting music as a raceless art, ignoring real systemic issues.
Even within genres, race aside, there is strong evidence of tribalism. Don’t get caught wearing a band tee if you don’t know their discography. ;)
And I guess some tribalism is understandable, I mean, as a non-dilettante, my connection to an artist feels earned, I know their work, there’s sentimental value… watching the person next to you claim to be a fan when they really don’t know or care for an artist as much as you feels like:
And yes there is the issue of power, ethnicity and being respectful of culture. However, when the determining factor of a product’s - let’s be honest - viability is skin tone, I think that’s pretty fucked up. Why does skin tone matter so much?
The Different Forms of Authenticity
I used to think that authenticity was something that comes from within, that is, acting in alignment with one’s genuine taste. However, I have come to learn that to some extent, authenticity is a social construct. Schaap & Berkers (2020) cite three different types of authenticity:
Agentic authenticity: This falls under “being true to oneself”, “following your heart” and the search for one’s true self through introspection.
Dispositional authenticity: This is “acting in line with” one’s social position, socialization, or social group. This kind of authenticity could be used to describe the reason why an upwardly mobile person may feel a sense of dissonance with their new identity.
Discursive authenticity: In this case, one’s authenticity is established by whether a person (due to their socio-cultural status) fits the narratives around music established by those in positions of power. This type of authenticity is reflected in statements that challenge a Black person’s interest in a genre that is considered white.
So. While rock represents liberty, anti-establishment sentiments, and encourages self-realization (agentic authenticity), it also “has been racialized as white” excluding those who aren’t (dispositional authenticity), which is the result of genre boundaries established by those in power and their discourse (discursive authenticity).
The following is a discussion on the different ways of contending with this issue. To better understand how individuals in different rock scenes navigate its whiteness, 27 interviews were conducted in Atlanta, Georgia and Rotterdam, South Holland (Netherlands), in the spring-summer of 2016. Interviews resulted in three different coping strategies: complying, amending, and replacing.
On complying:
The study found that for most white participants, rock’s whiteness remains unexamined. These participants don’t pay attention to race, one respondent explaining:
“No, that’s something I don’t pay attention to at all. No, no, it really isn’t of any interest to me” - Johan, white male.
A non-white respondent, despite often being the only POC at a show said:
“... you really shouldn’t pay attention to that [race] in music.” - Naresh, Indian Dutch, male
Another one said:
“No one cares. In a good sense, no one cares” - Jeffrey, Colombian American male
Having been to a handful of rock shows and being the only Black girl in sight, I can actually say that I have experienced the sense of solidarity that comes with singing along, jumping to the beat of the drum, and catching a glimpse of eye contact with the (white) person singing along next to you.
I understand not wanting to go down the dark rabbit hole of slavery and work songs triggered by a blues scale played by the white male guitarist in front of you, at a concert where you’re supposed to be having fun. However, colourblind attitudes silence the voices of those who have been harassed or faced discrimination in any rock scene.
I wonder how much of the absence of Black people at rock concerts is due to a lack of interest within the community as opposed to reflecting the hostility of the scene. And then, of course, when observing racial patterns, as you move up the industry, the room becomes less colourful.
Those interviewed, who hold an attitude of compliance, explain a non-white person’s interest in rock as authentic when they have experienced “white” socialization. Black music fans, in this case, are beneficiaries of dispositional authenticity. So, their socialization makes them “white”, despite having Black skin, rather than being a person who happens to have dark skin and happens to be into rock music. Their affinity for rock is co-signed by whites who “know” and/or grew up with them.
Interestingly enough, during discussions, white research participants “typically” ridiculed white people in Black scenes, while holding ‘colourblind’ attitudes in alternate situations. If this is the case, I feel like respondents weren’t really honest about their colour blindness, especially considering the dominant, although I would argue changing, narrative around rock music.
“Being perceived as discursively inauthentic [being left out of the conversation], people of colour often only feel authenticated after harsh albeit tacit scrutiny.”
This statement is exemplified by a great example of symbolic violence, related to islamophobia, in the following story:
“I saw everyone around me – I was the only person there wearing a headscarf – looking at me like ‘what is she doing here?’ And I felt so… You’re so close together [at shows], but I could really do [makes a wide gesture] with my arms. No one was next to me…. Then after they saw me singing along, then they all came up to me and we started talking and it got close again. Because I think they think, like, ‘she doesn’t belong here’”. - Berna, Turkish-Dutch female
So, Black people and other POCs have to prove themselves, while white people get an automatic pass (with exceptions, considering within-group tribalism). But, tokenizing isn’t the solution either. Backhanded validation is just as good as none at all. So no: “you’re the coolest Black person I’ve ever met”-s either please.
On amending:
This strategy involves changing the dominant rock paradigm by adding Black and other POC experiences to it.
Following up on her experience of wearing a headscarf to a show, Berna also expressed:
“If I look back at the last two years, then I’m really happy that I did it [wearing a headscarf] because it helped me gain so many good experiences. And I’ve changed the minds of so many people. And that's what I like most about going to rock shows: that people go home thinking ‘oh, so that’s also possible!’ you know?
However, Jennifer, a biracial respondent feels:
“I also don’t think it’s my obligation to tell you that you don’t have any black people here”
On replacing:
This is a “fuck compliance, fuck trying to prove that rock can be non-white, I’ll create my own space” attitude; new spaces are a site of innovation.
This mindset is based on the desire for immediate change, rather than waiting for dominant (white) society to get the message. Having to justify your humanity is exhausting, demoralizing and leads to “racial battle fatigue.”
The process of “replacing” may involve reclaiming rock music’s anti-mainstream and rebellious ideals as well as it’s African American roots.
From this perspective, marginalized groups have more reason to rebel through rock than white people. “Replacing” solves the paradox of rock music’s rebellion against (white) mainstream society and, it’s own whiteness.
Final Thoughts
My motivation for writing this article is not just that I came across a journal article that is so reflective of my past experiences. It is also to say:
Know your music history
Give credit (while artists are still alive)
Don’t let no white boy/man tell you that rock music is white (and implicitly male).
I definitely acknowledge cultural exchange and I can’t advocate for the segregation of genres by race. However, whether you care or not about race issues, there is absolutely a power imbalance that gives white artists the freedom to explore and succeed in various genres, while Black (and POC artists) are either relegated to stereotypically Black genres. Or, they have to ‘pass the test’ before being accepted into white scenes.
While racial fatigue may compel a person to create their own space, that does not negate potential sources of conflict that aren’t tied to race.
Somehow, the dance is rejecting colour-blindness, while doing away with race fixation.
References
“You’re not supposed to be into rock music”
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2332649219899676
Why culture, not race, determines taste in music
https://theconversation.com/why-culture-not-race-determines-tastes-in-music-46639
Emo Nite
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og9NKaSageo
Aurora’s article
The pigeon holing of Black artists
PRMBA Racism in the metal scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlQ-KxS5xUs