Monthly Archives: July 2012

Last week I wrote a piece on how meaning seems an important element of the succes of Bruce Springsteen and I noted a not so pleasing comment towards that other popicon Madonna. Yesterday I saw a concert of the Madonna and I want to add some elements to the discussion. For people wondering if I’ll be writing again soon about education and myths, don’t worry .

The concert of Madonna was a stunning visual spectacular with flying drummer boys, dancing monks, choreographies that made many action movies seem like dull. Of course there were the usual sexual/sensual/provocative elements. Last tour there was a gipsy band interludum, now there was a Bask singing trio that worked better in my opinion.

Was it worth the money? There were a lot of comments in advance about the high ticket prices, and actually I received my tickets for free. During the last weeks it was pretty easy to get tickets half price or even for free in lotteries because well, the ticket sales were quite poor. Such a show with such a stage must cost a lot of money and so I could understand why the (regular) prices were so high, but it can be one reason why the concert had between 5000 and 10000 unsold tickets.

A second possible reason was the previous Belgian concert that wasn’t received that well.

A third reason I see actually lies in the distinction between experience and meaning. This show was a great experience. Everything was made to blow you away and to show that Madge is still the queen of pop (and Gaga isn’t even a possible princess). The show was also packed with symbols from Kabala, Christianity,… It depicted the battle between good and evil, … It all suggested a lot of meaning, but to my opinion, it didn’t seem to give meaning.

While I could hardly stand still with all those dance beats aiming at my feet, I did wonder what Madonna was trying to say. Shooting everybody down in the third song, ok? We all have to live together? Yeah, though so? I even want to believe that she is in favor of #occupy, but I have to surpress a feeling that she was merely namedropping?

If I speak with young girls about Lady Gaga, than they talk about how she stands for being yourself, about having doubts but by having those still you be strong. Madonna sang yesterday ‘Express yourself’, but even in the public some people were mentioning that this may seem a bit ironic if it is song by a 53-year old dressed up as a teenager. I thought Madonna actually had authentic moments, but for every true moment there were other where she could be perceived as much less true to her self.

Just a thought. A lot of the meaning seems to be given by a bigger context than the concert itself. Gaga online defending kids who are bullied is something different than Madonna reacting on comments about the expensive ticket prices that her fans should start saving. I think in both cases it’s a real reaction true to the artist, but is it giving meaning?

The bottomline? Nowadays Gaga and Springsteen sell out easier even with similar ticket prices while Madonna don’t, although she gives her audience a great experience.

Yesterday 20 years ago I went to London to see my very first Bruce Springsteen concert. I remember how at first I was shocked that everybody was booing, not understanding it was in fact ‘Bruce’ they were shouting. Last Thursday I went with my wife to Paris and saw Bruce again, with a concert that many of the die hard fans have labeled ‘legendary’. Btw, I’m not a die-hard fan.

Instead of discussing how great it was, I want to use Bruce to look at both the experience economy and the economy of meaning.

One of the things that makes a Bruce Springsteen concert a ‘true experience’ is not such things as pyrotechnics or other inflatable objects (which still can be fun!). Yes, there are some screens but by today’s standards the light show is pretty old-fashioned. No, it is an experience because every concert is different. Take the 2 concerts in Paris. Both started of with a dual accordeon intro, but the first evening it was ‘La vie en rose’, the second night it was the very old French children song ‘Au Claire de La Lune’. The setlist that followed included 15 (!) different songs with the night before. On average there has been a tour premiere every night.

This gives going to a Springsteen-concert a sure element of surprise. You never know exactly what will happen, you just have to be there, because it will always be a one-off.

The main element of a Springsteen concert is meaning. Springsteen has always been some kind of troubadour with songs  commenting political issues and reflecting stories and situations. A song about street racing becomes a reflection on getting older and taking responsibility. This element of meaning is also always present in his concerts, not as militant as for instance Bono preaches, but in the selection of songs and the little stories between songs.

Before the concert I was talking with some young first time Springsteen concert-goers, if that’s a word, and they were discussing why they came to this concert and didn’t want to see Madonna. Madonna was labelled as ‘fake’, not acting her age, putting out songs without a real meaning to them. Of course this may be a matter of taste, but as they were discussing this element of authenticity, the importance of giving meaning was shining through what they were saying.

One could also argue that Springsteen is hiding the fact that he’s wealthy. It is strange how many people still have the feeling that the singer will go back to work in the local car wash the next morning. He does have an image, he knows it and he tries to maintain it.

One could argue that a lot of what Springsteen does is staged, and this is in fact true. The whole band is very professional, for instance in how the always maintain a full use of the stage.

But professionality and authenticity are not antonyms. If you put on a show for an audience, you need to be a professional.