Imitators or New Generation?
Asian Kung-Fu Generation is reputed to be one of the greatest Japanese “new generation” Rock bands. They sang “I want to be connected with you,” and attracted a huge fan base. Their work is praised by many music critics who admire both the lyrics, which have literary sensibilities, and the straight music.
A short while ago, the band released their second album named Solfa, and some critics observed that the songs had become less hard and more “pop” in feeling. I think this is partly true, because the album contains some music which has a pop feeling. But I think they also became stronger in their spirit.
Yet they are reputed to be imitators of Number Girl.
I feel there’s a conflict in perceptions.
How can they both be “imitators” and members of the “new generation”? To be sure, the vocalist, Masahimi Gotoh, admits that he was inspired by the music of Number Girl, and Asian Kung-Fu Generation also have a song named “N.G.S.”, which means Number Girl Symdrome. But I think they established their own identity and their music is quite different from Number Girl.
Many bands (not only bands) are reputed to be “imitators of X,” even if their music is great and they have their own identity. Maybe people should be a bit more careful when they label artists.
Comments
pketh :: November 16, 2004
I’ve never really heard number girl , but I’m really a huge fan of Asian Kung Fu Generation .. I just stumbled on it one day and loved it even though I can’t really say I’m much of a fan for Japanese music. The internet’s wild like that I guess.
I would say that the word ‘imitator’ is much too strong. Imitation is something you willingly and consciously do. It’s not fair or accurate to say that any one group is a rip-off of another group unless it really is (ie: like all the cheesy ‘for-teens’ girl and boy bands we get in N.America).
At worst maybe they have a similar sound sometimes?
Thanks Yuko, for the article maybe I should find the answer for myself :D
I think a musician cannot be popular if he is just imitating others. Even if the melody or the lyrics are similar to other songs, he has his own ideas and feelings to tell to the listeners in his music.
Another thing: I think popular melodies don’t change easily. I like to listen to old songs which were popular, for example, 20 years ago as well as songs popular now. Many ‘new’ types of melody come out, but there have always been popular melodies.
Commenting on this entry is closed.
Imitation and innovation may not be such irreconcilable opposites in art, and particularly in music. J. S. Bach is widely recognised as one of the most inventive composers in the history of music, yet he was deeply traditional in many respects. More generally, artists need to learn from earlier artists and develop a solid understanding of earlier art before they can go on and innovate. Maybe we’ve gone a bit over the top today, expecting all innovation all of the time.
I’m also a bit wary when it comes to musical styles that are labelled “new.” After the punk movement had lost its novelty in the late seventies, people started to talk about New Wave, yet what I heard in most New Wave acts was continuity with what had gone before rather than a radical new beginning.
Still, I’m curious about the Japanese “New Generation” — who are those bands? Are they “new” or are they just marketed as new?