Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

“We Are Interrupted by Your Noise”: Heckling and the Symbolic Economy of Popular Music Stardom

2009; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 32; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/03007760802207734

1740-1712

Mark Duffett,

Media, Gender, and Advertising

Abstract Heckling has rarely been examined in popular music studies. The argument of this piece is that audience members heckle in an attempt to alter the balance of power in live musical performance. To understand this I introduce the idea of the "symbolic economy," a framework of assumptions and interpretations held by audience members that gives stars their social value. My argument is that each musician's aura is perceived when his or her performance is both recognizably popular and emotionally meaningful to each fan. Heckling can potentially damage the aura by shifting attention away from the star, condemning the content of his or her performance, and forcing him or her to make an impromptu response. Drawing on theory from sociology and literary studies, the article supplies examples to help us understand the potentials of this process by creating a typology of different heckles. Finally, it explores the ways in which musicians have carefully managed any threats posed by cries from the audience. Notes 1. Journalist's reviews at the BBC and Manchesteronline websites offered concertgoers a facility to post follow‐up comments afterward. Available at: ⟨http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/arts/2004/03/08/words_and_music_review.shtml⟩ and ⟨http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/entertainment/music/livereviews/comments/view.html?story_id=83418⟩ (accessed 7 July 2004). 2. The current article is designed to raise the issue of heckling and its place in the symbolic economy of performance, rather than discuss existing traditions of cultural theory. Such theory offers some starting points, however: sociology has long included the study of live events and their audiences, and critical theory has taken many of its central metaphors from them. If heckling can be seen as a special moment within everyday life, then two diverse theoretical traditions mentioned by Hesmondhalgh Hesmondhalgh, David. 2002. "Popular Music Audiences and Everyday Life.". In Popular Music Studies, Edited by: Hesmondhalgh, David and Negus, Keith. 117–30. London: Arnold. [Google Scholar] are relevant. The first he calls "empirical sociology" as it understands the everyday as a set of self‐evident, grounded practices. The next, "Neo‐Marxian philosophy/social theory," as Hesmondhalgh Hesmondhalgh, David. 2002. "Popular Music Audiences and Everyday Life.". In Popular Music Studies, Edited by: Hesmondhalgh, David and Negus, Keith. 117–30. London: Arnold. [Google Scholar] calls it, politicizes daily life by considering how mundane activity reproduces or disrupts power relations. I draw on both traditions. 3. See Clayman Clayman, Steven. 1993. "Booing: The Anatomy of a Disaffiliative Response.". American Sociological Review, 58: 110–30. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] (114) and Mintz Mintz, Lawrence. 1985. "Stand Up Comedy as Social and Cultural Mediation.". American Quarterly, 37(1): 71–80. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] (79). 4. Following the anthropologist Victor Turner, Cavicchi Cavicchi, Daniel. 1998. Tramps Like Us: Music and Meaning amongst Bruce Springsteen Fans, New York: Oxford UP. [Google Scholar] frames this power of being part of the audience as communitas. 5. See Bloomfield Bloomfield, Terry. 1993. "Resisting Songs: Negative Dialectics in Pop.". Popular Music, 12(1): 13–31. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]. 6. For example, Keith Allen Allen, Keith. 2005. Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory, London: Sage. [Google Scholar] says, "All of us have had these kinds of experiences, some more than others. Some have experienced it at a Grateful Dead concert" (120). 7. Elsewhere I have used the terms "vertical" and "horizontal" to describe this economy. A movement of power from mass audience through performance and back to individual fans can be described as taking place as a vertical cascade. The star's performance itself can be understood a horizontal gateway midway down this that connects with specific audience members. 8. By "performance in its widest sense" I mean much more than recorded songs or live renditions, although these usually take priority. Drawing on Goffman's definition of "performance" as activity which serves to influence others (which I discuss here at the start of the section on condemnatory heckles), we need to expand attention to include things like the star's photographic image, publicity, biography, and perhaps even what is known about their home, family, and death. In this sense performance can be planned or accidental, singularly masterminded or co‐created by outside agencies. A hatchet‐job biographer like Albert Goldman Goldman, Albert. 1982. Elvis, Harmondsworth: Penguin. [Google Scholar], for instance, clearly co‐creates Elvis Presley's "performance" to readers, especially if those readers have never heard Elvis sing. We have to pay attention to which performance(s) ordinary people know and choose to consume. 9. Elsewhere, at a recent conference in Turku, Finland, titled "The History of Stardom Reconsidered" (9–12 November 2006), I have conceptualized this economy in two dimensions. The power movement from the mass audience through the individual performance to the fan could be called the vertical dimension. The way in which the performance mediates this flow could be called the horizontal dimension. I would argue that only by paying attention to the intersection of both dimensions can we understand the value of musical performance, or, to put this a different way, performance must always be contextualized within its social relations. 10. See Aguirre Aguirre, B. E., Wenger, Dennis and Vigo, Gabriela. 1998. "A Test of Emergent Norm Theory of Collective Behaviour.". Sociological Forum, 13(2): 301–20. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar] et al. for a full discussion of emergent norm theory. 11. For instance, see the work of Kurt Lancaster Lancaster, Kurt. 2001. Interacting with Babylon 5, Austin: U of Texas P. [Google Scholar]. 12. Jenkins Jenkins, Henry. 1993. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture, London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] (25) and Frith Frith, Simon. 1996. Performing Rites, Oxford: Oxford UP. [Google Scholar] (17) constitute examples of such studies. 13. Writing on remixes, Steve Lindeman Lindeman, Steve. 1998. "Fix It in the Mix.". Popular Music and Society, 22(4): 91–100. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar] compares the modern pop song to Guernica with a very different argument which could also apply to performances: "Does someone, even the original artist, have the 'right' to alter a previously issued work of art? Leaving aside the issue of legal title or ownership, would Picasso have had the right to walk into the Museum of Modern Art in New York and paint over Guernica because he had changed his mind about how it should look?" (94). 14. This is a complex move in relation to the symbolic economy as it can actually enhance a performer's reputation in the long run. 15. Mayhew Mayhew, Emma. 2006. "The Booing of Sinead O'Connor: Bob Dylan 30th Anniversary Concert, Madison Square Garden, New York, October 16, 1992.". In Performance and Popular Music: History, Place and Time, Edited by: Inglis, Ian. 172–87. London: Ashgate. [Google Scholar] provides an academic analysis of the response to O'Connor at the Bob 30th Anniversary tribute concert. 16. Songs from this show, although not "Nice & Sleazy," were released on their EMI live album Live (X Cert). 17. Taken from the comments posted after the review, "Words & Music @ Bridgewater Hall," on Manchesteronline's live entertainments review page. Available at: ⟨http://manchesteronline.co.uk/entertainment/music/livereviews/comments/view.html?story_id=83418⟩ (accessed 7 July 2004). 18. The "Judas shout" may have punctured Dylan's immediate symbolic economy (see Marcus Marcus, Greil. 1997. Invisible Republic: Bob Dylan's Basement Tapes, Basingstoke: Macmillan. [Google Scholar] 36), but by adding a note of tragedy to his wider myth it acted to reinforce his general stature. A full discussion of this incident is beyond the scope of this introductory theoretical paper. Mike Jones Jones, Mike. 2004. "Judas and the Many 'Betrayals' of Bob Dylan.". Unpublished paper[Crossref] , [Google Scholar], however, provides an advanced discussion of the incident. 19. Liner notes from Bob Dylan, The Bootleg Series, Vol. 4. 20. See Marshall Marshall, Lee. 2006. "Bob Dylan: Newport Folk Festival July 25, 1965.". In Performance and Popular Music: History, Place and Time, Edited by: Inglis, Ian. 16–27. London: Ashgate. [Google Scholar] ("Bob ") for further discussion of Dylan's famous 1965 Newport set. 21. The opposite is also true: because loudness has now become an expectation, turning the sound down low can actually encourage heckling. See Petridis Petridis, Alex. 6 April 2002. "Charmless Pop: Belle and Sebastian, Brixton Academy, London 2/4.". The Guardian, : 21 [Google Scholar] for a good example. 22. The list included Party by the Beach Boys, Chuck Berry on Stage by Chuck Berry, Recorded Live on Stage by the Four Seasons, Live in Mexico by Haggard, London Swings by Jimmy James and the Vagabonds, Live & Lively by Joe Tex, The Bay Area Thrashers demo by Metallica, the eponymous Charles Mingus presents Charles Mingus, Submerged by Morlock, Cummin' Atcha Live by Rampage, Raw and Alive by the Seeds, Live Undead by Slayer, Live from Jerusalem by Torn Amico, Live '67 by the Thirteenth Floor Elevators, and The Origin of Feces by Type O . Arena by Duran Duran, Alive by Kiss and Live As It Gets by the Temptations were also widely rumoured to be fake live recordings. 23. Taken from "Charles : 1960–1964." Available online at ⟨http://www.furious.com/perfect/mingus.html⟩ (accessed 8 July 2004).