Putting the philo in philosophy

The great and the good of the Trinity philosophical society recently assembled to discuss not epistemology, theology or indeed any other class of “ology”, but rather to address the question, “Is music losing its right to artistic licence?”

The disappointment over Soulfly/Sepultura mainman Max Cavalera’s no-show notwithstanding, the evening was an enjoyable debate of the “Pop vs. Rock” question. For what’s it’s worth, this writer’s two cents is that the argument itself is becoming increasingly redundant. Since two of the most acclaimed singles of the year – namely Justin Timberlake’s masterful Jacko pastiche ‘Rock Your Body’, and Beyoncé’s superlative block-party funk-o-rama ‘Crazy In Love’ – also happened to be global smashes, surely it’s now been conclusively proven that chart hits can be as musically innovative and as ingeniously produced as anything on the alternative margins.
Nonetheless, on the night in question, esteemed industry veterans such as Glastonbury supremo Michael Eavis, ex-Revs manager Robert Stephenson and hotpress’ very own John “Socrates” Walsh took to the podium to argue that rock music still essentially has a monopoly on artistic integrity.
The contributions from the students themselves fell about 50/50 either side of the pop/rock divide, with some impressively percipient observations (eg. the speaker who pointed out that “rebellion” in rock music is frequently as contrived as anything in the pop world) exercising the grey matter of all concerned.
Following a short speech, broadcaster John Creedon concluded that what counts is “whatever gets you through the night” – an observation which found agreement in both honorary chairman David Kitt and the majority of the audience.
The consensus, it seems, is that beauty very much lies in the ear of the beholder – a summation which surely even the most querulous individual would have difficulty finding fault with.