This book is about some pretty big issues: modernism and postmodernism, innovation and continuation, popular music's past and its potential future. Perhaps above all else it is about the prospects for Marxist revolution or, in other words, the fate of humanity. Not a bad start.
More specifically the book wishes to examine both the role of innovative (popular) music in revolutionary activity and the role that music might play in a post-revolutionary society. Dale wants to discover whether newness is a necessary precondition of pop's revolutionary potential or, indeed, essential to the medium in general. Of course, he is shrewd enough to know that ‘there is nothing new under the sun’ and that we all stand on the shoulders of giants. As he suggests, to expect totally new music is, to say the least, somewhat difficult (p. 13), so it is a question of what is ‘felt to be new’ (p. 3, emphasis mine). So the question becomes one of any music's relative novelty and its political potential. Dale sets himself against those who argue that pop's golden age is in the past, finding a great deal of contemporary music which excites him and looking optimistically to the future. (We Marxists tend to need such optimism.)
Dale's main objective is to find whether novelty in popular music has any political importance. As he puts it: ‘I want to ask: should popular music aspire to being new in order to contribute to resistance to the current ideological and societal structure (capitalism, that is …)’ (p. 3). In order to do this Dale begins with what are effectively a series of case studies – of Scott Joplin and ragtime (which is compared with music hall), the 1960s (including a discussion of the relative politics of The Beatles’ ‘Revolution’ and The Rolling Stones’ ‘Street Fighting Man’) and punk (wherein it is suggested that punk's feeling of being Year Zero both gave it its power and simultaneously made it impotent (p. 74)). If these give a sense of disjuncture, then Dale is adept at showing the significance of each in terms of musical novelty. Moreover his pluralistic view of popular musics, rather than a singular popular music (p. 2) obliges him to address a suitably diverse range of music.
The fourth chapter deals with postmodernism, which Dale treats more leniently than some of the Marxist critics he examines. A lot of theory is taken on board throughout the book – Marx, of course, but also Badiou, Lukács, Derrida and Deleuze. Clearly Dale is not scared to take on big issues and big theorists. This is to the good and the book is certainly a good example to show students in terms of how to critically engage with texts. However, the big issues are dealt with in ways which can make it appear as if popular music is not the centre of attention. The problem with providing a lot of context is that it can detract from the actual texts. This is perhaps most true of Chapter 5, which Dales himself described as ‘challenging’ (p. 7) and deals with Badiou. Here music is often absent and while Dale's arguments are never less than persuasive, the casual reader might sometimes struggle to make the connections between high theory and aesthetic practice.
One theorist who, oddly to my mind, does not make an appearance is Jacques Attali whose book Noise (Reference Attali1977), echoes many of the themes here. Like Dale, Attali is concerned with the relationship between sound and power and I would have welcomed a discussion of him here. Meanwhile, I must admit to finding some of the texts – both literary and musical – referenced in the book a little obscure, but it is perhaps at the margins that interesting, even innovative, ideas are most likely to be found.
Chapter 6 ends the book with some considerations of pop's future role. Here Dale answers his own question by concluding that it is not necessary to have a radical novelty in popular music to kindle radical change in society (p. 178). Not necessary, but perhaps desirable nonetheless.
Overall, this book is highly ambitious and it is not surprising, therefore, that it doesn't always work. However, it is never less than challenging (to use Dale's own term) and thoughtful. Students might find the book hard going. I'd argue that it is difficult – but worthwhile. It challenges the reader and makes them think – and that's always a good thing. If not always providing the right answers, it certainly benefits from asking the right questions. Dale certainly wants to make the world a better place – and in writing this book he has made his own, distinctive, contribution to that.
