- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Popularity tells us much, but it rarely tells us anything about inherent value. H. R. Jauss suggested that the reception of art tells us its ideological value. Those art works that get debated, that annoy us, that cause scandals, are the ones that are questioning our ideology and asking the questions that trouble us. Those works that are palatable to "everyone" are those that tell us what we already believe.
ABBA was calculatedly reiterating the fables we tell our children, stories about the subjective self, about "love," about romance, about how gosh-darned important our angst is. Their songs told readymade stories derived from, or uncannily similar to, 1950's Doris Day-like films, 1960's prime time television. In other words, their narratives could not be objected to, because they told us what we "all" wish to believe.
Compared to them, contemporary acts like Lou Reed (who had a hit record with "Walk on the Wild Side": a song about TG prostitutes) and Television and the more severe of the "art rock" folks were at least doing formalistic experiments, if not starting to question the validity of mass assumptions. Those narratives, whether they were ever profound or not, at least pushed at the edges, and their listeners would have to make more mental room, ask more questions, and that is why these works were officially acceptable as officially "weird."
To suggest that there is any exercise of intellect in ABBA lyrics, aside from Bjorn's heavy policing of the act for image and stance, is puzzling. There is always a reward for being the reassurance a society seeks in a troubled time. It is always remunerative. It is not, however, ideologically, intellectually, or philosophically helpful.
That ABBA are rich is something that, I am sure, will please their grandchildren. It does me no good or ill when asked why they became beloved. That is the question the columnist seeks to answer: why and when.
When? When camp's satire was neutralized by the profit motive. Why? Because, like the 1970's, we are seeing a supposed destruction of empire and economy. The next thing to see revival will probably be the Survivalist movement, which had turned into the Militia movement that McVeigh joined.
