Deadlines/Brief

Music videos are so 80s/90s, right? They belong with the era when MTV screened wall-to-wall vids instead of 'reality' TV? Try telling that to the millions who bought Gangnam Style; were they really simply loving the music? 1.6bn (and still climbing) have viewed the video on YT, not to mention the many re-makes (school eg, eg2), viral ads + celeb link-ups (even political protest in Seoul) - and it doesn't matter how legit it is, this nightmare for daydream Beliebers is making a lot of money, even from the parodies + dislikes. All this for a simple dance track that wouldn't have sounded out of place in 1990 ... but had a fun vid. This meme itself was soon displaced by the Harlem Shake. Music vids even cause diseases it seems!
This blog explores every aspect of this most postmodern of media formats, including other print-based promo tools used by the industry, its fast-changing nature, + how fans/audiences create/interact. Posts are primarily written with Media students/educators in mind. Please acknowledge the blog author if using any resources from this blog - Mr Dave Burrowes

Sunday, 17 October 2010

Early History1: Panorams

I'll be adding some detail on the history and development of the music video format in due course - you can of course start reading up for yourself using the book suggested: "Dancing in the Distraction Factory: Music Television and Popular Culture" by Andrew Goodwin
The video embedded below showcases an early archetype of video jukebox (one of several that emerged and disappeared many decades before MTV was even thought of), the Panoram...
Many of the suggested links alongside this video on YouTube point to clips from 'soundies' - sound in the movies was still a new, emerging phenomenon in the early 1930s, with musicals swiftly emerging as a key format/genre for Hollywoods industrial-style studios.

Try some simple research to discover in what year sound was first used in the cinema and the first 'talkie' or 'soundie' released - it does involve music, and a 'blacking up' process which wasn't controversial at a time when the US segregated the races but which is considered unquestionably racist today...

No comments: