The following is an essay I submitted for the Popular Music module of my Media and Communications degree at Brighton University. I have however not included the bibliography which might squander a bit o’ possible plagiarism. I wanted to embed the MCR music video into this page but for some reason it’s not on YouTube…

 “Within the teen world there is hardly a socialising force as great as popular music”

(Bloom, 1987 et. al. in; Williams, 2003, page 23)

“There is a powerful identity with rock musicians, what they stand for and what they sing about” (Williams, 2003, page 23)

Although its’ history dates back to the 1980s and the concept is musically different in current times, the subculture referred to as Emo has never been so apparent in mainstream culture. It dominates ever increasingly popular social networking websites (such as MySpace.com (Mills, 2008, page 20)), is recognised within the domain of fashion and is popular amongst Western youth; this aspect of which has been of great concern due to sensationalist journalism surrounding the topic in addition to the understanding that followers of the trend encompass sever emotional difficulties. Noting that music television has become the locus for the latest in a long line of moral panics organised around cultural forms (Grossberg (1989) in; Mundy, page 223), this thesis aims to explore the supposed threats indicated by emo through the analysis of a relevant music video; My Chemical Romances’ I’m not OK (I Promise). Reaching a definitive conclusion may be difficult however, since Emo is a complicated notion, Greenwald (2003) stating that “Emo means different things to different people” and that this declaration is quite an understatement (page 1).

Emo, at its most simple, is a contraction of the word “emotional” (ibid, page 2), though both Greenwald and luv-emo.com identify this definition as unhelpful, since “emotional” is “an all encompassing word”, meaning the term has “no limit as to what it can and will describe” (luv-emo, 2007). Although the meaning of emo is rather ambiguous (Greenwald, ibid, page 1), Greenwald’s  account ‘Nothing Feels Good: Punk Rock, Teenagers and Emo’ (2003) is useful as an explanatory backbone of the idioms’ history and should not be dismissed for its journalistic approach, since it is music journalists like Greenwald that often act as “opinion leaders, […] rock interpreters [and] the ideological gatekeepers for everyone else”(Frith, 1978, page 165) and thus, envision and define new images, styles and products (such as emo), whilst emphasising the cultural (not economical) significance of these products (Shuker, 2002, page 98). `The cultural significance of the term “emo” has been discussed (and somewhat incited) through sensationalistic newspaper reporting, most significantly, within an article titled “EMO cult warning for parents”, published by tabloid newspaper The Daily mail on the 16^th of August, 2006.

Although the origins of the term “emo” itself are “shrouded in mystery” (Greenwald, ibid, page 24), it is rarely disputed that the understanding of emo as a music genre emerged from a fashionable, American music scene in the 1980s known as “hardcore” that according to Greenwald, was led and popularised by Washington D.C band, Minor Threat (ibid, page 9). Hardcore was a sound that encompassed cathartic energy and monochromatic beats within short bursts of song (ibid, page 9) and performance of such music aimed to erase the forth wall between the stage and the audience through implementation of extensive audience interaction (ibid, page 10).  Guy Picciotto was one fan of Minor Threat, inspired enough by their music to form a band; Rites of Spring, to create similar music with a different aim; “to confront and break down the limitations of the self” (ibid, pages 11-12). This sound proved popular and as a result, an influx of bands with similar musical style emerged (ibid, page 14).  “Emocore” became the moniker applied to these numerous bands that were influenced by the punk attributes of hardcore music but which also incorporated distinctly emotive lyrics and vocals (ibid). Discord Records was the independent record label that dominated this sceneat the time (ibid, page 10).  It is interesting to consider that the label of “emo” is today applied to bands that are not, in Greenwald opinion – punk and “to fashion trends” and “sad eyed kids in the back of the class” (Greenwald, ibid, page 2).

Today, major record labels market “emo” music, much of which currently has an obvious pop influence; My Chemical Romance on Reprise Records (parent owned by Warner Music Group) are one example of this (luv-emo, 2007). Greenwald’s “sad eyed kids” who listen to this genre of music were labelled as “emos” in Sarah Sand’s Daily Mail article which together comprise a “teenage cult”, the followers of which supposedly “practise and promote self harm” whilst bearing “the psychological traits of self-pity, introspection, self-dramatisation and hormone imbalance[s]” (Sands, 2006). These emotional issues are also supposedly reflected in today’s fashion aesthetics of emo that Sands describes as a more hip variation of Goth (ibid) (fashion elements highlighted by Mills include very tight jeans, asymmetric haircuts and the incorporation of much black (Mills, 2008, pages 40-45)). Dick Hebdige (1979) studied subcultures via the use of semiotics, in order to locate definitive differences between “subcultural and ‘normal’ styles” (page 100). The term “bricolage” refers to “the means by which the non-literate, non-technical mind of so-called ‘primitive’ man responds to the world around him” in order to make sense of the unknown and Hawkes suggests that members of a subculture can act as “bricoleurs”; finding new ways to incorporate certain objects or signs into comparatively new symbolic environments (Hawkes, 1977, in; ibid, pages 103-104), thus erasing or subverting the more “conventional” meanings of these aesthetics and igniting new discourse (Hebdige, 1979, page 104). Sands’ assumption that emos’ heavy incorporation of black clothing represents celebration of pain, death and misery (Sands, ibid) may then be inaccurate and merely be interpretation. Sands’ damning article was reported on by UK weekly rock rag Kerrang! who acknowledged it as the latest way to persecute and “demonise” rock fans (Alexandra, 2006) no less because “[…] rock music [has] always been heavily infused with socially determined meaning” (Bjornberg, 2000, page 347). Kerrang!’s treatment of the article caused thousands of fans of emo - and the previously mentioned band My Chemical Romance - which the article elected as a preferred band for emos – to contact Kerrang! “to defend [their] way of life” (Kerrang!, issue #1127, 2006). This is not the first time however that music has influenced the construction of ideological identities.

Stanley Cohen explains that moral panics are likely to occur when “a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests […]” (Cohen, 1972, page 1). Cohen identifies the individuals capable of inciting such panics as “folk devils”, what he describes as the “visible reminders of what we should not be” and as symbolisations of historical social changes (ibid, page 2). These ‘folk devils’ are often found within the site of youth subcultures, since these are often formed around and are reactionary to “the terrain of social and cultural life” (Clarke et. al. in; Gelder, 1997, page 100). Moral panics have a history and tendency to revolve around premises of music and/or genre, examples including the social impact of punk in the 1960s (see Hebdige, 1979) and shock-rock artist and “antichrist” Marilyn Manson in the 1990s (Wright, 2000). Cohen concludes his work with an analysis of the media representation of the Mods and Rockers of the 1960s. The music enjoyed by these rival subcultures was claimed as connected to the violence between them, as witnessed on south coast locations such a Brighton (Cohen, 1972, page 19). “Emos” too then, can be understood as one strain of music influenced folk devil, the music of which apparently encourages the practise of self harm, which morally, there is an obligation to stop. My chemical Romance’s music video for “I’m not OK (I Promise)” was released June 2004, two years before Sarah Sands’ article in the Daily Mail. The following aims to explore how the video may or may not substantiate the allegations made about emo subculture within Sands’ article.

The video is set in an American high school, where one can witness each band member encountering a number of different problems associated with being within such an environment, including bullying, feeling excluded and being unlucky in love. The video starts with My Chemical Romance front man Gerard Way being informed by his school chum/guitarist Ray Toro that he is a loser that “is never going to make it”. Way retorts that he “[does not] want to make it; that [he] just wants [something]”. His sentence is cut here; however, what he wants is later revealed to be “revenge” (MCR, 2004). Black title screens with white text are intercut throughout the video. The majority of these title screens revolve around the initial that is displayed, which contains the rhetorical premise of “IF YOU EVER FELT…” As the video continues, emotional buzz words connected to the said premise are flashed before the audience on these title screens, including “ALONE”, “REJECTED”, “LOST”, “CONFUSED”, “ANGRY”, “USED” and “UNCLEAN” (the last being a reference to casual sex, which is implied onscreen by male hands zipping up a fly). This is especially magnetic to viewers of the video (who are likely to have felt at least one of these perturbations in their lifetime), since music is argued to be experienced by way of ‘emotional empathy’ (Movin and Oberg, 1990, page 127 in; Bjornberg, 2000, page 350). Towards the end of the video, the viewers are warned by more title screens to “BE PREPARED TO FEEL…REVENGE”, to “FEEL THE ROMANCE”, finally ending on a title screen of the band’s name. This suggests that hope and possibly a cure for these or similar emotional conflicts (read as “emo” conflicts) can be found within the music of My Chemical Romance for their fans and or/emos, as many fans would also argue (see NME, 2008). However, it is worth noting how the inclusion of the “MY BRUTAL ROMANCE” and “MY X-RATED ROMANCE” titles may undermine this ideal and cause concern. Parents rarely want to expose their young to that of a brutal or x-rated nature and such declarations could act as confirmation of Sands’ indication that My Chemical Romance creates music that aids damage to those who follow the “cult” of emo (Sands, 2006).

Within the I’m not OK (I Promise) video, the desired revenge of the once tormented band members is presented to the audience visually through shots of their beating up of the school mascot, and implied violent retaliation to the bullies responsible for the initial emotional or physical pain caused. It is worth noting however, despite this violence, it is outward violence the viewer witnesses, and not that which is reflected upon the self; i.e. in the form of self harm, which Sands highlights as a popular trend amongst emos (ibid). Music videos are capable of not only  transforming audiences into music fans and consumers, but the format also helps them to identify with the performers themselves and also, the communities they may create (Frith, 1988 ,page 216, in; Mundy, 1999). This notion of group identity can evidently be confused with that of group behaviour when individual cases are highlighted and/or exaggerated in the press, as is the case with Sands’ article which indicates that every emo youth encompasses serious emotional issues (Sands, ibid). The discussed music video then could arguably encourage emo fans to act in a similar violent manner, despite the bands reluctance to even be associated with the “fucking garbage” genre of emo in the first instance (Gerard Way; in Rolling Stone, 2007). The connection of the band to emo is plausible when the video contains the before mentioned indicative aesthetics of emo, including black clothing and body piercings. However, when determining the meaning of a music video, it is not useful to consider visuals alone, since the format ‘makes sense’ when understood as part of a larger continuity; “a process of aesthetic, ideological, technological and industrial convergence between popular music and the screen” (Mundy, ibid, page 224) and because images are often subordinate to the “rhythmically determined pleasure principle” provided by the videos’ soundtrack (Nielsen, 1991, page 9 in; Bjornberg, 2000, page 351). It is imperative to consider that “…popular music performance has always been an audiovisual phenomenon”; the music itself constructing an equal quantity of meaning as the visual does (Berland (1986) et. al in; Bjornberg, ibid, page 349).

I’m not OK (I Promise) is a song that is structured around one key lyric that is located within the chorus; “I’m not OK […], you wear me out” (Plyrics, 2009). Although popular music is generally characterised by the repetition of a small number of well-demarcated sections and symmetrical construction (known as strophic disposition (Bjornberg, 2000, page 354)), it is not complex to understand why certain individuals find it hard to believe that the emo kids are “OK”, since the band currently - and reluctantly -  nominated to represent the genre have written an “emo anthem”(Kerrang, 2006)based on the chronic notion that many individuals are actually not OK. Within the songs’ breakdown, the lyrics shift to “I’m OK now”; a reflection on attempting to forget distressing things from the past, such as “the dirty looks” and “the photographs [a] boyfriend took”; lyrics from within the bridge (Plyrics, ibid). However, this does not correspond with Gerard Way’s manic, visceral scream of “Trust me!” that finalises the song’s bridge.  The “discursive repetition” (Bjornberg, ibid, page 355) of the primary lyric is important considering that lyrics are often unheard by audiences and only sporadically manage to engage the viewers attention (Vernallis, 2004, page 137). This repetition can be understood as driving the underlying message of consumption that the music video contains. Gerard and his band mates have seemingly found their own “revenge” in some form, either through their formation of My Chemical Romance (an interpretation suggested by the heavy use of intercut footage of the band playing their song throughout the video), or the previously implied activity of outward violence. Audiences too can get their “revenge” (and perhaps even begin to feel “OK”), only this for them comes in compact disk format; Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge – the album for which I’m not OK (I Promise) acts as a lead single for. The recurring use of the word “ROMANCE” within the titles towards the end of the video also help our understanding of it as a vehicle of advertisement for the band itself.

Television is regarded as central tool for global economic power, since it is a medium at the heart of many corporate marketing strategies and is a prime site for advertising and promotion (Mundy, ibid, page 230). Music television, the “ultimate example of the commodification of culture” (ibid, page 223) is highlighted by Wollen (1986) as containing a “significant hybridisation […] between programme and ad”(in; ibid, page 231). Both Grossberg (1992) and Kaplan (1987) argue that the televisual commodification of music has rendered ideologies of ‘rock authenticity’ and ‘opposition’ as redundant, stating that rock’s “public and discursive existence has now been transformed from a crisis of social rhetoric’s and shared historical events to a powerful and pervasive popular sensibility […]” (in; Mundy, ibid, page 232-236). This transformation acts as a “celebration of artifice” (Ihlemann in; Bjornberg, 2000, page 348) and such “popular sensibility” - that favours rock performance as a “visual experience” (ibid, page 233) - obviously makes more economical sense in terms of Western societies capitalistic framework where commodity is key (Heath and Potter, 2005, page 5). On May 31^st, 2008, a peaceful London protest was staged by My Chemical Romance fans in objection to the Daily Mail article (NME, 2008), which paradoxically managed to underline threats within emo and its music, despite the apparent scholarly consensus of rock’s redundant, previous ideologies of opposition. The Daily Mail responded to the protest with a minimal apology, preferring to highlight that the protest provided “wonderful publicity for Warner and [the] impending release of My Chemical Romance’s latest album [at the time]”; Welcome to the Black Parade (ibid). Here, we can understand how “the cultural and the commercial have now become increasingly inseparable” (Mundy, ibid, page 233) and how the arguable threats of My Chemical Romance and emo remain a grey area for some. Tetzlaff (1986) discusses the escapism that music television can provide its audiences but recognises that this form of resistance is a weak one, since it is only temporary and any resistance that the format may engender “does not touch the arenas of power” (in; ibid, page 237). This suggests that any subversive behaviour shown within a music video will conclusively be ignored by the majority in favour of greater behavioural discourses favouring the social system (ibid). The main issue regarding My Chemical Romance in this sense then, is the largely young demographic that comprises the subculture of emo. Youth tend to be merely commencing the path to maturity and have fewer responsibilities and perhaps therefore, a lesser need and/or understanding of adhering to dominant societal norms, potentially meaning they are more susceptible to that of a deviant nature.

This thesis is far too concise to explore such a topic extensively; however it has attempted to establish how the meaning of a music video can be determined and/or influenced by elements such as journalism, image, the music itself and simple, capitalistic economics. This thesis has aimed also to explain how the combining of these elements can be used as grounding for press allegations regarding musical subcultures and their “folk devils” and also, as a source of confirmation or denial for these allegations (using the example of emo and My Chemical Romance to illustrate). Our connotations of both music and image will continue to be open to our own personal experiences, as well as those of influential journalism such as Sands’ article, meaning an arena for debate will always be available. Thus “more moral panics will be generated and other, as yet nameless folk devils [will be] created” (Cohen, ibid, page 172), especially since such sensationalistic stories help to sell print media to the masses. In the words of Mundy, music video will likely continue to evoke stories, rather than re-telling them (1999, page 226).