Est-ce que “La nouvelle star” tue le rock ?

Parfois j’ai l’impression que j’en fais un peu « trop ». Je suis trop vindicatif, trop énervé, car un peu déçu, rempli de désillusions…mais que voulez vous, ma passion pour la musique me dévore !
“Restons vrai” et disons vraiment ce que nous avons sur le cœur, pas de compromis, de langue de bois ou de caresses dans le sens du poil, voilà ma démarche. La bonne musique est trop rare et me manque.

Et finalement, je me rends compte que je ne suis pas le seul dans ce cas.

Je suis tombé sur un article assez intéressant sur un site américain, une sorte de courrier des « lecteurs ».

le voilà --> http://www.billboard.com/#/column/chartbeat/ask-billboard-is-idol-ruining-rock-1004072914.story

Alors pour faire simple, un internaute pose la problématique de : « Est ce que American Idol a tué le Rock aux USA ? » (problématique que l’on peut éventuellement translater en France, en élargissant même à la qualité ‘globale’ dirons-nous. Le paralléle est intéressant je pense d'autant plus que le marché du Rock est beaucoup moins important en France, donc l'effet est sensé être encore plus vrai.)

Le journaliste/éditorialiste ‘maison’ répond à l’internaute. Il tente de le persuader que American Idol (l’équivalent de la Nouvelle Star) n’a rien à voir avec ça, de manière méthodique, carrée, structurée, et un peu démago … Grosso modo, il explique que les tubes Rock n’ont jamais vraiment été présents dans les classements TOP 100 US (HOT 100), que le clivage ‘artistes-fabriqués-lancés-via-tremplin-pour-faire-du-chiffre’ versus ‘artistes-qui-ont-galéré’ ne date pas d’hier (les fans des beatles et de Barbara Streisand pourraient en débattre pendant des heures), qu’aujourd’hui de nombreux « sous-genres » ont vu le jour et que du coup ça a bouleversé la donne globale, notamment en terme d’homogénéité ‘musicale’ sur les ondes US (mille sous genres = mille artistes n°1 dans chaque genre, donc moins de rock).
Mais que le rock est en train de revenir en force dans American Idol…(Ahh Merci American Idol)

Bref, à méditer.
Mais on est pas sorti de l’auberge…



(voilà la question-réponse ci dessous)

question :
''AMERICAN IDOL' IS DESTROYING REAL MUSIC TALENT'

Hi Gary,

What is going on with the charts of today?

There are not enough alternative or rock songs charting high on the Billboard Hot 100. Instead we are seeing more and more music from television, such as songs from "StarStruck" and "Glee."

Where has all the real talent gone? I can tell you that there are so many good artists out there, such as Billy Talent, Metric, Them Crooked Vultures, Flyleaf, Chevelle, Cavo, Crash Kings and Vampire Weekend.

Since the launch of "American Idol," we have seen more manufactured artists. Let's go back to the '80s; there was lots of good music then.

Real, raw musical talent is slowly dying unless someone does something about it soon.

Regards,
Anil Husse in London, England

reponse :

Hi Anil,

For all the success of the "American Idol" franchise since its launch in 2002, opinions like yours are not uncommon. And, I think you make some valid points.

First, though, let's clarify why the Billboard Hot 100 often sports rhythm over alternative rock in its upper reaches. The chart reflects the most-heard and most-purchased (with a smaller percentage of most-streamed) songs in the U.S. America's tastes simply tend to lean more pop/rhythm than rock. It's rare that Plain White T's or Coldplay tops the Hot 100. When Owl City's "Fireflies" hit No. 1 in November, the song became just the 11th Hot 100 leader of the 2000s - of 127 total (9%) - to climb to No. 1 and spend time on the Alternative Songs list.

That doesn't look to be attributable to "Idol." Of the 141 No. 1s on the Hot 100 in the '90s, a comparable seven (by Sinead O'Connor, EMF, Right*Said*Fred, Lisa Loeb & Nine Stories, Seal, Barenaked Ladies and Santana) drew ink on Alternative Songs. (Four more reached No. 1 on Radio Songs/Hot 100 Airplay, but were not eligible for the Hot 100 at the time, since they were not commercially available).

The rock acts you mention have all enjoyed success on our radio genre charts - Alternative Songs, Mainstream Rock, Triple A - but almost none have crossed over to pop radio (even though Vampire Weekend recently topped the Billboard 200 album chart). And, none has scored mass-appeal hits on the Digital Songs chart. Thus, they've been unable to impact the Hot 100 with as much success as pop acts.

It's clear you favor rock over pop in your tastes, so you might be a bit predisposed to wishing that rock acts weren't being forced to compete with manufactured, to use your word, acts. I can appreciate that; ever since "Idol" began creating fast-rising singing stars, critics have pointed out the longer roads that rock bands have taken to achieve success. And, it can be easier to want to give credit to a group of musicians that plays instruments and writes its own songs over a vocalist that interprets the compositions of others.

I don't think that battle is new, however. Over the last half-century, you could argue that similar arguments have existed: fans of the Beatles and fans of Barbra Streisand might have debated the same in the '60s.

Overall, I'd hope that there's room for any artist that the public deems worthy of attention. "Idol" has spawned superstars in many genres: Kelly Clarkson (pop), Carrie Underwood (country), Daughtry (pop, rock), Jennifer Hudson (R&B). Ultimately, the quality of a song and artist, as judged by radio listeners and music consumers, will decide who occupies the charts.

As for rock cred, you might enjoy this season of "Idol" more than those in the past. Even though she was voted out last night, Michelle Delamor on Wednesday evoked Beyonce's recent riveting Grammy Awards reinvention of Alanis Morissette's "You Oughta Know" with her moody cover of Creed's "With Arms Wide Open." And, it's clear why Crystal Bowersox has become a favorite. When she played harmonica on her cover of Morissette's "Hand in My Pocket" two weeks ago, it became evident that her musical talents run deeper than singing. When artists showcase such an array of skills (and eventually go on to write their own hits), one of the judges' highest compliments - "artistry" - is justified.

As for your twinges of '80s nostalgia, we must have similar iPods. Pop radio featured great variety for most of that decade. In 1988, beyond pop, Hot 100 No. 1s represented rock (Def Leppard, Guns N' Roses), R&B (Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston), dance (Rick Astley, George Michael) and adult contemporary (Gloria Estefan, Phil Collins).

Since then, so many different - and, more importantly, less congruous - styles have emerged, most notably harder alternative/grunge and rap, and pop radio was, thus, less able to blend such conflicting sounds into one cohesive station, hence the birth of more niche genres (adult pop, rhythmic, adult R&B, triple A). Of course, hits still emerge from rock (Kings of Leon), R&B (Alicia Keys), dance (Lady Gaga) and adult contemporary (Michael Buble), so variety in pop still exists.

Overall, I'd encourage you to make like new judge Ellen and focus on the many positives that "Idol" has to offer.