Old Wave

I just finished Are We Not New Wave?, a scholarly (University of Michigan Press) look at a musical form from Theo Cateforis.  As the author notes, new wave is rarely written about as a distinct item from punk, partly because it's so hard to categorize. Indeed, new wave in its early days often was punk but, in America, tried the new moniker to avoid association with a commercially failed music (as opposed to England where punk had its moment in the sun).  Even once it was more established, it got called by various names--New Music, Power Pop, Modern Rock, Synthpop, etc.

So what was new wave? Protean enough that no single description can pin it down, but in contrast to mainstream rock of the 70s, it tended to be shorter, punchier, more stripped down and less blues-based while allowing for a quirkier range of subjects in its lyrics. It also rejected much of the excesses of rock while adopting its own alternative style.

Cateforis tries to explains new wave both as a musical and sociological phenomenon.  The first couple chapters deal with the rise of the music from the 70s into the early 80s.  It scored some early success but, even as the disco era was ending, was never quite the commercial success record companies hoped for, though it eventually broke through.  Then, some time in the mid-80s, music moved on, while absorbing many of new wave's sounds.

The rest of the chapters have Cateforis looking at distinct cultural aspects of the music. One chapter deals with new wave's whiteness--how it was the province of a sort of stylized, anxious white man as exemplified by David Byrne of The Talking Heads.  Another chapter deals with kitsch and camp, where a band like Devo could play on the retro-futuristic look of the space age, or The B-52s could sport Goodwill clothes and old hairdos and sing about beach parties--both bands taking from late 50s/early 60s Americana with the ironic distance that allowed critics to approve.

Then there's a look at the power pop side of new wave that was trying to duplicate the kind of punchy, melodic rock sound of the early Beatles.  Many bands accepted this mantle, but none were as popular as The Knack--or as reviled (even other power pop bands hated them) since they were seen as manufactured, not to mention misogynistic.  On another end, there's new wave synthesizer artists, such as Gary Numan or The Human League, who moved away from rock's guitar-based culture.

Finally, we have crossover, where new wave incorported new sounds that often had commercial appeal beyond hardcore fans.  Bands took beats and ideas from funk, rap and disco, or had a sound with a touch of Jamaica (The Police) or West Africa (The Talking Heads).

An epilogue looks back at the music a generation later.  Ironically, it's been split in two.  There is (or, anyway, was a few years ago) a revival of interest in the music that concentrates more on the 80s, synth-side (when MTV started).  Meanwhile, when the 70s roots of new wave are looked at, they're either included in punk or, even odder, have become part of classic rock--the very music they were originally in opposition to.

Cateforis has done deep research--50 pages of notes and bibliography--and it shows.  If the book has a flaw, it's one shared by so many academic works: it can read like a dissertation (which is how it actually began).  Another minor problem is he sometimes indulges in unquestioned beliefs common on campus.  For instance, at the end of the crossover chapter, looking at the success of The Talking Heads' Remain In Light, not to mention Paul Simon's Graceland, without any comparable success of African bands, he pronounces the world beat movement to be "ultimately inequitable and exploitative." Cateforis doesn't bother to prove it, he just states it.

Still, if you're interested in the music, or popular music in general, Are We Not New Wave? is well worth your time.