Guess What? Hey Monday IS a band: Art Objectively Undefined

Humans would not be human if they chose not to categorize the many things in which make up their society. Art is no exception. In reading Terry Eagleton's introduction on "What is Literature?," its 14 pages are devoted to this question and thus, tries to define this phenomenon called "literature." If one were to ask a person outside the academy "what is literature?" a person might quickly decide that anything published and or is a book as, literature. Similarly, if one asks "What is music?" a person might quickly reference their favorite band. Although, what if their favorite band is not necessarily, good?? Is it not music? Is the person wrong for thinking that it is music? No. According to Eagleton, literature (an all other such art alike) is defined by their social ideologies for "[t]hey refer in the end not simply to private taste, but to the assumptions by which certain social groups exercise and maintain power over others"(14). What this means then, if that person mentioned a well-known band who has won many Grammy's and is commonly liked throughout the society, it was almost as if they were forced into thinking (and liking) this artist and their music. Literature then is not what any one person regards as literary, but what several people in power regard as literary.

While the Formalists believed that readers should judge literature by its linguistic qualities, there was a minor flaw in this assertion. Eagleton brings up a point based on historics. Just because what one society feels is literature does not imply that another society will feel exactly the same, for "the idea that there is a single common currency shared equally by all members of society, is an illusion"(4). Because so many dialogues and discourses exist amongst one common language, it only expands literature in the sense that each of these discourses will flourish amongst its own dialect. Therefore, if the Southern written dialect of America was brought to the broadcasting (a.k.a proper English) society of Los Angeles, the pieces in what the Southerner's have written may not appeal in such a way that Los Angelinos would consider literature. They might in fact disregard it, for its structure might not render in the way in which Formalists read a text in that "Literature transforms and intensifies ordinary language, deviates systematically from every day speech"(2). Because Southern dialect would sound slang to the Los Angelinos, nothing would be intensified, the language would remain common and unchanged. The same is the same for the artistic expression of music, for of course, music itself is its own language. Therein language are discourses and dialects of its own, otherwise known to us as, genres (i.e. rap, rock, pop etc).

In regards to music, there is a similar academy by which is dedicated to informing its society on what is pleasurable to listen to. In other words, in the way they hear music as "music", their society will be exposed and will no doubt feel the same. Music is not a private taste. There are many bands in American that have gained fame and recognition for their musical achievements. While one (very passionate) person might not see (or hear) this band as "music", the majority will have overruled their hearing. For example, take into account this music video by Indie Pop/Rock band, Hey Monday:



The Formalists, if they were to do a reading of Hey Monday in terms of music, would probably crawl over broken glass before they got to any considerable conclusions about the band. There is no transformation or movement away from the three-chord progression of a song, not even the voice of the female lead singer Cassadee Pope, herself is a progression of the musicians before her. Does she have a range which is comparable to Celion Dions? Mariah Carey? No. But because the music industry is not necessarily formalistic, the band's singer or three-chord progression is not what is important, in so much as their appeal is to many young girls whose dream it is to be the lead singer in an almost-all male band.

It is no wonder then that the self (being that one passionate person), is appalled when something like the Twilight Saga is considered literature. It is given this category not because of the structure and its discourse, but because a vast majority of the society believes it to be, literature. It is no wonder why many people believe that Americans are doomed. Meyer's does not adhere to Formalist traditions for she does succeed in the basics of linguistics. Similarly, Pope does not succeed beyond or near the basics of music. Because literature or music cannot be objectively defined, says Eagelton, then what we are left with is what society defines for us. Like in all art, "...some achieve literariness, and some have literarniess thrust upon them....What matters may not be where you came from but how people treat you. If they decide that you are literature then it seems that you are..."(8). To conclude, I myself cannot say that Hey Monday or Twilight is not music, is not literature. I must believe that they are in fact, because my society and the persons running these academies have led me to believe so. This is a warning, if American art is to succeed and surpass its time, and not just simply become a fad, then Americans must learn that art is not simply entertainment. While I agree with Eagleton that value is a transitive term, Shakespeare and Plato are still around to teach us, which means they have some sort of timeless value, which means our values have not really changed as a society. So why then, is our art not meeting up to these such values? As a society, are we misled?

That is something to ponder.

Eagleton, Terry, trans. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota, 2008.