Moments Reign Supreme
In which Joe uses both the word smorgasbord and weltanschauung to talk about good ol' down home country music. Also a diagnosis for the modern era.
Time is a funny concept. Philosophical debate reigns over the very nature of time. Until Einstein determined that there was a physical construct of space-time, it was an open debate if time was even real. Perhaps, it was theorized, it was a made up human idea to make a semblance of order in the chaotic maelstrom of the universe.
One of the peculiarities of the human relationship to time is that we are limited to experiencing time only in the present. That which is behind us is revealed only by our memories, that which is in front of us is limited only by our imaginations. The only tangible reality is the nebulous moment of the present. Our memory defines the past for us in a series of interconnected vignettes. The obvious paradox of encapsulating the unlimited streams of the past via limited and defined moments of time is worth remarking on.
A mechanism for digesting the streams of the past is the assembly of collective stories into a history. Because of human limitations, until the internet age, history was limited. An up to date telling of historical narratives was only as current as the publishing date of the textbook. As a schoolchild of the most recent Bush administration, invariably all the history textbooks listed Bill Clinton as the most current president (Clinton 1992-?). The internet, despite being a game-changing technology that already was deeply implanted into society in the mid-oughts, was typically only a brief mention in the epilogue of the aforementioned history textbooks. “The World Wide Web and the Information Superhighway will be the future,” predicted the optimistic epilogues. To a young reader living in the early days of the internet with minimal, if no memories of the pre-internet 1990s, this naturally triggered an odd cognitive dissonance.
With age comes wisdom, or at least a modicum of understanding, and I soon realized how the constraints of print media made yearly updates to textbooks impossible. These limitations do have a positive benefit. If history starts 8-10 years ago, that gives society a decent amount of time to mull over the facts of history and see how things played out. As it turns out, our speculative ideas about near current events effecting the future is not nearly as effective as our ability to make sense of the past with a decent amount of hindsight.
The difference between the ideas of a visionary and the common knowledge available to the masses is usually only a few years. In the 1920s and early 1930s, Winston Churchill was nervous about the rising of Germany. As a noted opponent of the way the Treaty of Versailles dealt with the German economy and national psyche, he was concerned about the seeds of extremism being emboldened by the harsh sanctions on post World War 1 Germany. The way he saw it, as evinced from his large scale historical studies, was that oppression tends to breed opposition and that this cycle has been true since time immemorial. Treat the captives nicely and they will cooperate. Treat them poorly and they will rebel. Ensuing actions from Germany (military build up, certain political developments) throughout the 1920s and 1930s were veiled in ambiguity. To Churchill, with his inimitable vision, they were clear red flags confirming his deeply rooted fears. To other who didn’t share his pessimistic outlook, they simply were the standard convulsions of a complex modern nation. In the post-mortem 1950s, the Churchillian perspective on the roots of German aggression deriving from the Treaty of Versailles took hold, and was soon taught as basic fact to young schoolchildren.
One of the benefits of learning history is the long ranging perspective shows cyclical cause and effect dynamics that occur over and over again. Churchill didn't invent the idea of punished nations simmering in a seething yet quiet rage. He merely adapted his thesis from the annals of human history and a keen understanding of socio-political human nature.
One of the formative science fiction epics of the Golden Age of Sci-fi is Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. It is a phenomenal read. One of the unique quirks of the series, inspired in large part by Edward Gibbons famous The History of the Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire, is the magazine driven consumer habits of the time forced each “book” in the original trilogy to actually be compilations of 3 or 4 short stories apiece. Each short story describes a crucial moment, or “crisis”, occurring at that point in the “history” of the people and worlds chronicled. It is a profoundly human approach to digesting a fictional history taking place over hundreds of years with interlocking threads woven all throughout. The understanding of Time and History are especially unique for a work of fiction. The cyclical nature of history, the appreciation for the human categorization of time streams as singular moments, the concept of the educated visionary, and so much more are all deep and defining characteristics of the series.
Now that we have sufficiently rambled about a smorgasbord of lightly related philosophical topics, I would like to talk about Rascal Flatts. See, although I did not grow up in a country music listening household, we were a Pixar movie household. Cars was a favorite of the family. Life is a Highway was the only exposure to country music that I recall until I heard Cruise on pop radio in high school. Bro country was an era. Being a pop music listener in the early 2010s, my perception was that bro country was “real country”. Why on earth should I think otherwise? I hadn’t heard any of the previous 80 some years of country music to have any broad historical perspective. I was living in a moment and that moment encapsulated the totality of my experience. Based on my experiences, I made thoughtful conclusions and wrote off country as an empty genre. Totally understandable.
Eventually I turned the corner on the “anything but country” phase of my life and realized that the sound of what I now realize to be mainstream radio country is extremely malleable. Ironically, the slick and sophisticated foil to FGL’s brand of brash bro, Sam Hunt, was the catalyst. I was listening to contemporary pop or alt-pop and a Hunt song off of Montevallo appeared on the shuffle. I listened to it, thought it was cool, and saved the song. I soon realized that in fact this was considered to be country music. It was wholly unrecognizable to my Cruise and Life is a Highway paradigm. Between that and an impromptu summer sing along obsession with Darius Rucker’s Wagon Wheel, I realized that I clearly had misconceptions about the basics of the genre and probably ought to give it a fair shake. I did and now I am here.
The changing of my personal paradigm and the manner in which it ensued allowed me a perspective that I had experienced and observed but not reckoned with. Similar to our discussions above regarding moment vs. stream, my awareness of country occurred within a period most would regard as transitory. Bro country was a fad in country and no different then dubstep was in pop. The mainstream soon pivoted to the next hottest thing. The thing is, coming of age within the movement, I didn’t perceive the nature of the fickle world of popular genre. To me, all that was beforehand, even a song from the previous year was history. I was living in a moment and I perceived that moment as absolute.
Popular music is intentionally an exercise of the present. If I were not a historically inclined personality, I probably would not pay much attention to the history of the genre. The rat race of the next big song would be the driver for me, as algorithmically intended via carefully curated marketing campaigns, and I would slowly build up a personally experienced history from the early-mid 2010s until the present. Based on the lived experience, I would build assumptions and, as is my right as a presumptuous American with a half decent Wi-Fi signal, I would nonchalantly extrapolate those assumptions back to history. Preferably on Twitter.
This is common among internet discourse. Frequently, the moment du jour is perceived as a crucial tipping point. In country music discourse, this popularly manifests as either, “One more southern pop song from allegedly country singer X will ruin the genre forever”, or “This unprecedented foray into pop or rock will forever change the trajectory of the stick-in-the-mud genre of country and allow it to break free of its traditionalist shackles”. I am not disagreeing that change happens nor that tipping points don’t exist. I would however opine firmly that takes roughly composed like the above caricatures display an immature understanding of time.
Pinpointing existent “moments” within the time stream rarely proves accurate. The lack of adequate reflection time practically guarantees that. Singular moments can seem tremendously important and wildly upend paradigms based on other moments. The bro country moment lasted a few years and was soon blown open by a new synthetic pop moment. A historical perspective would tell you that these were not in fact seismic shifts, but merely the cyclical contortions of an industry adjusting its product to the popular trends of the times.
Taylor Swift was not a uniquely malevolent figure threatening to wholly change country music from within. Mostly, albeit perhaps on a grander scale then other comparable episodes, she was another example of an artist who initially fit within the tent and due to artistic changes no longer did. Examples throughout history include Elvis, Olivia Newton-John, BJ Thomas and many others. Unique outlier or modern manifestation? I lean towards the latter.
Similarly, bro counry did not introduce a culture of toxic masculinity into country. It was a weaker period artistically, but it didn’t tarnish the genre forevermore. The overwhelming popularity and mainstreaming of the sub-genre shook some to be sure. Considering the stark contrast it displayed with the sanguine and inoffensive soccer mom country era immediately previous, it is no surprise that the frat party bro subculture ascendance seemed both novel and overwhelming. Did it forever subsume the genre into a cesspool of roided-up, tattooed, beer swilling, toxically masculine, Dave Portnoy worshiping, redneck white dudes? Of course not. Trends are cyclical. Backlash was inevitable.
This leads us to the current hysterics. On one hand, we have suave, suburbanite, Calvin Klein undershirt models crooning overly sappy love songs to girlfriends, wives and pretty much any female vaguely within a 50 yard proximity (Single Saturday Night, I mean you). Nashville adores these chiseled jaw, manicured stubble, and tight t-shirt white boys. So long as the guy looks good holding a guitar, they’ll gladly program a drum loop and feed mad libs of adorably country tropes to be sung breathily by the latest and greatest anonymous singer rolling out of the factory gates. It only seems to be getting more and more popular in the aftermath of the almighty Sam Hunt perfecting the form in Montevallo. The only thing holding back the blissful southern pop future is the dastardly old heads with their finicky ideas about genre limitations. Don’t they understand that country music is simply music sung by country people?
On the other hand (iconic Randy Travis song fwiw), you have the defiant class. Typically more blue-collar then the urbane genteel Nashville acts (and they will certainly let you know, if it wasn’t obvious from the get-go), they proudly declare their animosity to the Nashville machine sellouts (usually until they get a record deal). The music is more reminiscent of country music of yore (old head things) with the only exception being the harsh electric guitar riffs which are somehow “Outlaw”. The burgeoning modern neotraditional artists are a big part of this group, but amongst this group can be found angsty Americana singer-songwriters and gritty southern rockers. Heck, even entrenched Nashville acts like to get in on the action and proclaim proud independence from the machine to throngs of adoring fans in arenas nationwide (brought to you proudly by Bass Pro Shops). We need a Moses or a Country Music Jesus to lead us to the promised land of Real Country Music™️ where everything sounds like Ray Price before he went all crooner pop on us. Those soulless executives in Nashville will run country music into the ground and forever ruin this sacred genre.
It’s a pitched battle and only one side will be victorious so it all deeply matters.
That is, if the zero sum narrative was actually true.
As time flows on, what was clouded clears up. With the sober minded gaze of history, we can look to the past and try to find precedent for what is going on in the last few years. Let’s hone in on the facts of what happened.
In 2016, Jon Pardi released California Sunrise. It was a massive hit spawning two number 1 hits and two top 5 hits. William Michael Morgan, then signed with a big label, released Vinyl and the leadoff single cracked the top 5. Mo Pitney, supported by Curb Records, put out Behind This Guitar. The following year, Midland burst onto the scene with On the Rocks and the hit single Drinking Problem peaked at number 3. Luke Combs exploded onto the scene in mid 2017 with his enthusiastic and muscular brand of ‘90s inspired country. By the end of 2017, even Blake Shelton seemingly acknowledged the neotraditional winds blowing and released a subdued pop-country project with distinctively less hip hop and bro influences. The old school country fans were on cloud nine. Finally, the tides were turning. Very real neotraditional influences were rearing their heads even in the mainstream.
Then, in quick succession, Body like a Backroad, Meant To Be, and Old Town Road happened and all that momentum seemingly crumbled to dust. The old heads wept and the progressive poptimists rejoiced. To quote Michael Scott “My my, how the turntables!” Now, the narrative momentum swept into the other direction. Tack on new trends of snap tracks and duets with genuine pop stars and things were looking bad for the purists. This also seems to be a genuine trend.
Squaring the circle is difficult. We tend have a harsh zero-sum outlook on these sort of things. This is brought upon by our many biases and cognitive limitations with moment based perspective chief among them.
Aiming for a Churchillian visionary perspective requires historical thinking to break the momentary paradigm. Looking back at history, many eras of country music have passing resemblances to the current age. In the giddy optimism of 2016 and 2017, the neotraditionalists pointed towards 1986 and 1989 as examples for comparisons to an old school revival quickly sweeping across the landscape and captivating audiences with fresh but clearly traditional music. Clearly, that has not come to pass. Many refer to that micro era as a false start when the traditionalists got way ahead of their skies. Heady with optimism, they overlooked the fact that momentum is not built with a handful of singles and a couple buzzy artists. Momentum is built with a long term goal and slow gradual changes for the desired outcome.
Zooming out a little, it isn’t all doom and gloom. With the exception of Jon Pardi and Luke Combs, none of the aforementioned artists have experienced much follow up success. However, they did lay the roots for more roots oriented artists in the early 2020s to really take off. Artists like Carly Pearce and Lainey Wilson are spearheading a new traditional leaning sound on mainstream radio. Cody Johnson, an import from Texas, is currently taking radio by storm with his powerful throwback song Til You Can’t.
At the same time, artists like Walker Hayes, Dan and Shay, and Gabby Barrett are turning even harder towards a strong pop based sound. Both of these archetypes seem to be flourishing. Unlike most eras of country music, this one doesn’t seem to have a dominant flavor. Neotraditionally influenced country exists and thrives alongside the more popular synthetic pop country and the hard “redneck” rock popularized by Jason Aldean and Hardy. All are thriving and growing. What era can we look back upon and glean insight into the current scene?
I would like to suggest the 1970s as the comparison for today’s scene. When you hear the 1970s, many names come to mind. Willie and Waylon spearheaded the Outlaw movement, a back to basics art form deemphasizing golden age pop influences for the grittier sounds of electrified honky-tonk and rock n roll, creating a thriving alternative sound to the standard Nashville Sound.
The Nashville Sound (lots of strings and harmonies) was doing great as well, churning out hit records and creating stars out of artists like Roy Clark and Glen Campbell. As the decade moved on, the Nashville Sound pushed even more towards pop and evolved into the “Countrypolitan” sound, pulling from late 1970s pop and mixing it with the 1950s lush orchestral sounds they had used to such success in the last two decades. Eddie Rabbitt and Kenny Rogers both emerged from late 1970s Nashville to great success.
A split emerged in the mainstream with artists picking a side as they drifted further apart. Johnny Cash was in the thick of the mainstream in the 1960s, but as time went on, he shifted into the outlaw persona of the Man in Black. Johnny Paycheck dropped the Nashville Sound, grew a beard, and joined the Outlaw club as well.
The divergence grew as the decade stretched on, but stars were formed regardless of which stream they identified with. It was an egalitarian moment stylistically with multiple different sounds capturing the country music zeitgeist. Even folk/soft pop artists like John Denver had a moment in the sun.
It seems something of the sort is brewing in the current day scene. As upper echelon pop-country artists swim deeper into pop, making duets with Hollywood pop stars and embracing modern electronic pop and hip-hop instrumental stylings, more traditionally inclined mainstream artists have taken to touring and recording alongside independent artists who share a similarly organic sonic template. A split is slowly emerging. Both sides of the aisle are finding massive audiences nationwide and are successful on radio, streaming, and touring. They exist in parallel, occasionally swap back and forth, and their stars are being created in multiple fashions and styles.
Nashville is beginning to embrace all forms. Crossover pop material is thriving, middle of the road pop country is thriving, redneck rock is thriving, and neotraditional and folksy country are thriving. This upcoming decade could be defined by its variety and diversity in a manner not dissimilar as the 1970s. It would be a shame if our limited perspectives would cause this potential reality to not happen.
Joe
Post-script
This one has been tough to wring out of my brain onto pixel. There was a jumble of ideas that all needed to be properly sorted and arranged. I hope you enjoyed the result. It wasn’t about a song discovery per se as my usual material somewhat revolves around, but more about a weltanschauung of perspective I personally discovered over the last couple years of music listening that I had this need to put into essay form. Sometimes it felt like pulling teeth to get through the writers block, but a few inspired moments really turned things around. When you have the momentary flash of creativity, you gotta take it. In my case, it meant that large portions of this were punched out on my phone in fits of inspiration.
Also y’all absolutely gotta listen to William Beckmanns new single Danced All Night Long. It’s an exquisite song. It’s a Texas country /Tejano song and it just zings with vitality. Absolute perfect delivery. A lovely song. Highest recommendations.
Much thanks to Tristen for helping tighten up the structure. Thank you to Grady Smith for an offhand comment on his podcast triggering this rabbit hole. Thanks to Cyrus Waugh for the discussion hammering out a couple bits of detail.
I’ve been keeping up with my monthly old artists listening and I’ve learned a bunch. Both about country music history and myself. Apparently I love Ronnie Millsap. Wouldn’t have expected that. I’m not a fan of a lot of that eras crossover material, but he is just such a powerhouse vocalist with infectious energy and I really liked his material. Randy Travis was amazing as expected. Absolute legend and the music backs up the legacy. Really didn’t like the Alabama stuff. Will have to unpack why. There’s shallowness in all facets of the music. Lyrics, production, harmonies etc….it just feels so surface level . Roll on was a good song though. Merle was really good. I found the instrumentals underwhelming. It’s his older material and he was working with a more stripped back style. Does his later stuff have more going on to emphasis the incredible storytelling? If anyone got this far in the postscript, let me know if there’s any specific albums that thread the balance nicely.
If you want to keep up with the schedule here’s the link.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EgqwFPPKAhKO9rOfG2RezlWAiTglvSp85c2Xsj-T2M