Wiggle Room

Priscila Llaverias — Nov 13, 2008 — Category: Moral Philosophy — Tags: Feature

Poor Sally Mae

Beyonce Knowles walks onto a silver stage in Las Vegas, Nevada¹ wearing little less than what normal people would call a bra and a mini skirt. Not only that, but she prides herself in shaking (or “dancing” as some may call it) so vigorously that more than half of the cameramen at the show are ready and aiming their cameras at exactly the right angles so as to catch any “extra skin” that might find its way outside of the glorious contraption Beyonce’s stylists call an outfit- oh, it was a wondrous day for these cameramen when Janet Jackson let them have it.

Sadly enough, the audience loves the show. Most men twelve and older think that they have found heaven in the prime goddess, who unlike many of the women they meet on a daily basis, has no problem with “shaking her stuff” right before their eyes. After all, some law only dictated by her paycheck seems to give her a higher status than other women who also wear little-to-nothing and swing their hips in front of people they do not know for money. Meanwhile, young Sally Mae and Lucy Lee stand in front of their TV sets trying to imitate the artist’s moves while chanting “won’t you get me bodied, you want my body” in the hopes that one day they too will be idolized. Little do they know, theirs dreams will only come true if they desecrate their bodies for the sake of popularity. Of course there are decent people in Hollywood, put those who spend the most time in the limelight of controversy and sexuality are the ones who are most popular

The real trouble is that with each generation, this perverse situation continues to worsen. Nevertheless, it is important to consider the fact that not even the seemingly obvious culprit at this point, Beyonce Knowles, is actually the one at fault. At one point in her life, Beyonce also stood in the same pit of vulnerability as Sally Mae. What then is to blame for this phenomenon? Some people might say that the answer is the depravity of popular culture. Yet, this answer only caresses the surface of the problem. The true roots of this issue are deeply entrenched in the beginnings of a certain type of music; one that began the liberalization of American culture: Rock ‘n’ roll. This is not to say that rock will be at fault when eventually Sally Mae’s parents will not be able to tell the difference between her shorts and her underwear. Instead, the point to be understood is that rock’s role in this web of moral corruption was simply that of introducing a new way of thinking which over time has snowballed into an avalanche of perversion, not because rock is evil, but because people are instinctively prone to havoc. Consider, if you will, what John Locke wrote in the second book of his Two Treatises of Government²: without restriction and regulation, man would live in an eternal state of chaos. So just imagine what happens when something as free-spirited as the rock movement gives mankind a little “wiggle room.”

The Transition: War against Tradition

“I love rock-n-roll. I think it’s an exciting art form. It’s revolutionary. Still revolutionary and it changed people. It changed their hearts,”³ said singer-songwriter Nick Cave.

Rock ‘n’ roll did change people. It changed people to an even greater extent than Nick Cave’s statement implies mainly because rock was born into a conservative America which was not yet ready to rid itself of tradition. People love holding on to tradition because it gives them a sense of security and moral structure. This is why it is so difficult to break the bonds of the conventional philosophy of a nation without creating a cultural revolution. Sure enough, rock is renowned for the controversy it caused between young and old in the 1950s and onward. Decades have passed since its birth, and yet rock continues to influence and change the way people of all ages think and live. Not only that, but rock became a catalyst by affecting little less than all of the music genres the United States has embraced to the present day. Notably, and most importantly at this point, the liberal mindset stimulated by rock ‘n’ roll has come to influence and change conventional morality through R&B and Pop music.

The Rebel

From Madonna’s True Blue:
“Papa don’t Preach”

“Papa I know you’re going to be upset
Cause I was always your little girl
But you should know by now
I’m not a baby”⁴

In 1986, rock ‘n’ roll hall of famer Madonna released her True Blue album in which her song “Papa don’t Preach” became its own controversy ⁵. Even in her music video, Madonna seemed to be the sole embodiment of rebellion. She symbolized exactly what conservative America was fighting against: promiscuity and the modern day “baby mama”. However, what really made Madonna so terrifying-other than the fact that at this point she was like Marilyn Monroe’s crazier half- was that a part of America began to love the new face of entertainment. Young people had found a new way of self-expressionism. Waiting until you got married to “have fun” was now out. Wardrobes changed. Make-up was revolutionized, and the “bad girl/bad boy” look was in. Only God knows how many fathers chased their daughters around pleading that they would cover themselves up a bit more- No Lucy Lee, waistlines were not made for show-and-tell.

Highly indicative of the outrage this change in morality caused is the line “I’m not a baby” from “Papa don’t Preach.” After all, how many parents have heard that line after arguing with a stubborn, hard-headed, will-never-understand-the-good-old-days teenager? Madonna’s line is one of the utmost signs of a change between the ways of the father and the ways of a child. This correlates with the fact that America’s youth became independent from the ideology of their predecessors during this cultural revolution. Not only that, but these youngsters became the source of cultural creed for all generations after them. This is precisely why, according to conservatives, the perversion of popular culture will only continue to increase with every new generation.

At first glance, many people would think that this assumption is bizarre, but let us be honest: Will there ever be a time when America will stand up, say “No More!”, and tell Britney Spears to put her clothes on? Will anybody ever tell Rihanna that she could hurt herself by standing (or whatever that was) in the same position as the one she was in on the cover of her album Good Girl Gone Bad? Will anybody ever tell Beyonce that what she was wearing on the cover of Dangerously in Love could not possibly qualify as any variation of a top (a top should not look like a gigantic necklace)? The answer is no, because the truth is that many people are attracted to virtually everything that in one way or the other is related to sex and promiscuity. In essence, these sexual idealists have ruined American morality. Nowadays, even cartoons and movies which are meant for very young children are filled with sexual innuendo (Disney being one of the masterminds behind this disaster).

However, the morality in question is extremely difficult to generalize since America is composed of a vast majority of people which differ in moral and philosophical standards. Despite differences in morality, it is obvious that the glorification of rebellion and sexuality has changed American popular culture. Are there really people who think that Britney Spears’ latest music video for her song “Kill the Lights” has absolutely nothing to do with sex? Some people will deny this claim even though they enjoy the controversy of the matter precisely because their conscience knows that there has to be something morally wrong with half-naked women dancing on poles. Thus, this is how an infant develops into an adult: bonds are broken, new ideologies are formed, and America is forever changed.

The Ideal Pop Star Is…

1. Sexy

2. Controversial

What makes an ideal pop star? Has it ever crossed your mind? First of all, the pop star must be “sexy” (although most people do not even know what the poor overused word means anymore). This not only means that the star must be physically attractive, but that they must be able and willing to exploit their attractiveness by either being outspokenly promiscuous or by acting the part of the “mysterious and provocative” type. If a star is neither of the two options, then chances are they will not be as popular as one who otherwise follows the pillars of the idealistic star. This is why a dangerous number of the greatest pop singers of all time were never as popular as their talent demanded.

The problem with the emphasis on “sexiness” is that is sends the wrong message to people who canonize pop stars and other celebrities almost as if they were a different breed of mankind. It is almost incredible to believe that virtually all of popular culture revolves around the lives of these elite few. Fashion trends are drafted from their wardrobes. Millions of makeovers all over the country are designed to make people look like their favorite pop stars. Take Miley Cyrus as an example of an icon of fanaticism. She is currently the Britney Spears of the all those less than 15 years old in America- this meaning all people who are still entranced with everything Disney has to offer. Little kids idolize Miley Cyrus. They buy Hannah Montana (her Disney persona) shirts, shoes, pants, socks, notebooks, back-packs, and make-up. These little kids dress up like her and they buy blond wings, and every night they wish upon a star that they will wake-up and be just like Miley Cyrus. This is the epitome of obsession, and although the older generation has not realized it yet, they are just an older and more mature version of the Hannah Montana fanatics.

“In the history of mankind, fanaticism has caused more harm than vice,”⁶ said Louis Kronenberger, and American author and critic.

Man is ambitious. That certainly is no secret. Yet, although this is not always a bad thing, it truly becomes a disgusting habit when ambition turns into vanity and when vanity turns into fanaticism. In here lies a very important difference between current ideology and the ideology of our forefathers: nowadays most people are not happy with who they are. The Barbie doll image has been burned into the American mindset. More people now more than ever have become anorexic or bulimic for the sake of keeping up with the times. It should not come as a surprise that over 40% of newly identified cases of anorexia are in girls 15-19 years old. Furthermore, over the past forty years, anorexia in young women in America has tripled ⁷. “Sexiness” is confused for the plastic façade brought on by none other than mother Hollywood.

An ideal pop star must also be controversial- meaning someone that dares to defy convention by being promiscuous, and in essence, morally dangerous. One person comes to mind: the one and only Britney Spears. During the 1990s, Britney Spears was virtually the hottest thing in popular culture. She symbolized what half of America wanted and what the other half longed to be.

”Britney Spears is not so much a person as she is an idea, and the idea is this: You can want everything, so long as you get nothing,”⁸ wrote Chuck Klosterman after interviewing the marvelous Britney Spears.

Although most people under the influence of the idealization of Britney Spears would disagree with this statement, it is evident that what people really love about her is what she represents: false perfection. She is, in fact, the sole embodiment of the individual American Dream- one that is solely based on vanity and not happiness. Sadly, apart from the few that still think that she is completely hollow, too many Americans admire what she represents.

The Bottom Line

Rock ‘n’ roll certainly was the catalyst for this long chain of moral putrefaction. Sure, it seems harsh to make mountains out of mole hills, and to blame such a monumental movement for the corruption of our modern day. Some people also think that calling popular culture corrupt is radical. Yet, the truth of the matter is evident in the changes our nation has endured over the past fifty to sixty years. Looking back, people may see the YouTube video of Madonna’s song “Papa don’t Preach” and think that it really is not the bad. This is precisely because they are comparing it to the kind of music videos pop stars make today-for example, consider the music video for “Kill the Lights” from Britney Spears’ latest album Circus. Comparing the two videos could help anybody see how much music and morality has changed over the past few decades. The only reason that old music videos do not seem scandalous now is that America has adapted to an environment of corruption and depravity. The things people saw in music videos in the 60s are nowhere near as bad as the things people see today. Yet, at the time when “Papa don’t Preach” was released, this nation still maintained a conservative ideology and people were definitely shocked by the lyrics of the song and by Madonna’s image. The fact that people now accept the type of music videos like “Kill the Lights” with less resistance says a lot about the metamorphosis of American moral philosophy. With each coming year, American popular culture continues to adapt itself to the false image of physical perfection and the moral corruption represented by the pop star elite. What then will happen to the self-esteem of the middle class? How will the Sally Maes and Lucy Lees of tomorrow be able to live with themselves? The aftermath of the continuation of this process will only hurt the masses if some sort of moral purity is not restored. Yet, this return to purity seems distant and impossible because of man’s attraction to chaos. After all, Madonna is still “sexy” and controversial. She is dangerous, and people love her for it.