Rather than sing the praises of superbly performed Bach, serious and pedestrian critics both insisted on spilling more ink on the ground than the seed by Onan on the daring album cover, characterizing it as “indecent,” “tasteless,” and “pornographic,” while at the same time referring to St. John’s debut as “St. John's Passion: Violinist Lara St. John plays some R-rated Bach” (Willamette Week) or “Selling 'jailbait' Bach” (U.S. News & World Report).
One might read such and believe St. John is in danger of being burned at the stake as a hérétique. These particular characterizations of the marketing of Bach Works for Solo Violin betray an astringent prudishness that, at best, makes the critics sound naive and, at worst, simply stupid.
The second example of media missing the whole point was Brandi Chastain’s celebration of the United States Women’s Professional Soccer Team winning the 1999 Soccer World Cup (read: the Big Enchilada). On July 10, 1999, at the Women's World Cup at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California, after scoring the fifth penalty kick to give the United States the win over China in the final game, Brandi celebrated by peeling off her jersey and falling to her knees in a black Nike sports bra, her fists clenched in victory.
In every interview conducted with Chastain after her and her team’s brilliant play, the first question was, “Whatever possessed you to remove your shirt?” Certainly not, “How does it feel to be at the top of your profession?” No, the media had to ask Chastain about her delicate sports lingerie, apparel worn by millions of women each day while exercising. All of this attention prompted Chastain to name her personal website, “It’s Not About the Bra."
American media lives to exploit that faux-Victorian “decency” factor to such an extent that consumers of its products no longer really know what is decent or indecent, acceptable or unacceptable. A review of such is completely appropriate here as it would have been 10 years ago, had I been so annoyed about it then.
Article comments
1 - duane
I have nothing to add concerning Chastain, but re: the violinist:
The violinist is an attractive young woman. The CD cover is beautifully provocative and not just possessing a little whiff of marketing genius.
That's just it. It's a marketing ploy. It's insulting to people who are interested in serious music. Oh, she's gorgeous, no doubt, but what does that have to do with music? She will outsell Agnes, the violinist with a trace of moustache, simply because she's cute, even though Agnes can outplay her in the dark standing on one foot.
These particular characterizations of the marketing of Bach Works for Solo Violin betray an astringent prudishness ....
It has nothing to do with prudishness. It has to do with being disgusted by the blatant pandering to musical illiterates to make a buck. It is indeed in the same class as the Britney phenomenon.
2 - Doug Hunter
Well said duane. Saved me from having to make the point.
3 - C. Michael Bailey
Splendid criticism of my faulty reasoning. This article would have served the reader better as two separate articles as they nominally address two separate issues.
I do direct readers to Lara St. John's recently released complete Bach: The Six Sonatas and Partitas for Violin Solo. These recordings are the finest of the last decade, demonstrating a maturation of the artist without the loss of spirit or personality.
4 - Amanda
On St. John: okay, so maybe it was a marketing ploy. Or maybe not. Her breasts were covered up, right? So isn't it possible that the designers were trying to make an artistic point about the raw relationship between an artist and her instrument? It could be symbolic of being stripped down, uncomplicated; she's not all dressed up (or dressed at all), because it's just her and her violin.
I'm not saying I know what the marketers were thinking. It could be either interpretation, or some other one entirely. But to assume it's sexual, just because you find it titillating, is narrow-minded. If we labeled every image that could possibly inspire an erection as "indecent," we would be in serious trouble.
Nudity is not inherently sexual. To automatically criticize a product that includes nudity (especially such non-explicit nudity as the Bach cover) as sexual is reactionary. It indicates a lack of belief that nudity can be anything BUT sexual. THAT'S where the French got it right. Lots of nude beaches in Europe are less "meat market" than many American dance clubs are.
On Chastain: Again, why does this have to be sexual? It's a freaking sports bra, for crying out loud. Go to any swimming pool or beach in America and you'll see women half as covered up in so-called "decent" bathing suits.
Great article. I hope it continues to spark debate and to get people thinking about ingrained cultural assumptions.
5 - Amanda
Another point to consider: Assume for a moment that the St. John cover WAS simply a marketing ploy. What if people who would otherwise not think to pick up a classical CD think "Oooh, boobies!" and get exposed to something new? Maybe they'll really dig the music for its own sake. Is their introduction somehow tainted because they were intrigued by a provocative cover?
If Agnes doesn't sell as many CDs as St. John because St. John has nudity on her cover, there is no reason to believe Agnes has "lost" any customers. Boobie-buyers weren't going to pick up Agnes' album to begin with. If anything, a provocative album cover that ends up creating new classical fans increases the potential market for other classical artists.
6 - gdggt
wow i love this it reallyhelped with my school assignment D
♥♥♥