Is popular music a mass produced commodity or a genuine art form?

Adorno positions ‘the popular music industry as an all consuming production line that churns out mass produced inferior commodities’ and while modern popular music is comparable to traditional factories, with ‘part interchangeability’ streamlining costs and the idea of ‘Pseudo Individualisation’ suggesting “new” music is essentially this, standardisation isn’t unique to popular music; for example; Jim Connell’s 1889 ‘The Red Flag’ was significantly influenced by ‘My love was Born in Aberdeen’ (18thcentury folk song), a single illustration of standardisation in an alternative genre, suggesting Adorno is fundamentally erroneous because of his specification to popular-music.

On the other hand Adorno may have limited accuracy, as Gendron’s theory suggests a Universal and a Particular. Universal equals the song, while the particular refers to the c.d. suggesting the music itself is art, though the record is the mass produced commodity. In conclusion, my opinion is original recording are art, mass produced c.d’s are not.

How useful is a production of culture perspective in understanding the birth of rock and roll?

Richard A Paterson’s six key factors discusses and describes the social and economic factors that produced a platform for ‘something’ new to emerge, in this instance rock and roll, and how and why this new music genres emergence was possible.

Although Paterson first appears to cover all bases in depth, after further analysis, one key and almost fatal flaw emerges from his work. Why rock and roll? At a time when numerous genres were on the rise, Paterson fails to address in particular why it was the complex mixture of genres that is rock-and-roll and not another of the copious other genres of music that took off and had such a resounding impact.

Although in my opinion Peterson has missed a substantial fragment of this topic, I am not suggesting his views are completely incorrect; rather they’re accurate, though Paterson simply misses why it was rock-and-roll in particular that emerged.

Is it reasonable to consider that rock music is generated male?

Although it’s clear large scale ‘rock’ is male dominated, it must be considered that the stereotype of rock is one of guitar solos, not vocal symphonies, and it’s generally recognised that females have tendencies to opt for vocal positions, rather than the electric guitar ‘technology’, which is branded a masculine topic anyway.
Furthermore, Frith and McRobbie, when discussing the stereotypical style of rock (heavy metal) branding it ‘cock-rock’ as music and performance was crude and aggressive, not the typified female image.
Although looking at 1980’s rock, gender becomes less relevant, as ‘gender-benders’ such as the ‘Motley Crewe’ appear, taking on female features, questioning is gender really relevant, or does rock simply appeal to males more? Artists such as Janis Joplin (renowned for being ‘one of the boys’) would disagree.
Suggesting rock-and-roll, synonym for sex (a male dominated topic), operates as a form of sexual expression and control for both genders?