Modern Versus Northern. An Irrelevant Debate?

[Guest andyrattigan]

On this issue I believe each to their own. Some people like only Northern and some people only Modern Soul and some of us such as myself love Soul music in its entirety. I personally dont care what music someone likes and would be reluctant to start slagging off someones musical preferences. However, I do take issue when some people say that Modern Soul is not Soul. This debate usually occurs from the perspective of white Europeans that have adopted the discarded Soul sounds of black america and formed for themselves a distinct musical subculture that has within it several subgenres. On the one hand there are the Northern purists arguing that anything post 1969 cannot be considered Soul music and you have some Modern fans who loathe the uncouth and raw production styles of the 1960's.

However, most modern soul enthusiasts embrace 6ts soul as it was this music that kindled their love of black american music in the first place.

The main problem I have with this debate is that we never hear or have heard the opinions of those at the centre of it; that is the artists and the producers. Marvin Gaye, Curtis Mayfield, The O'Jays, Little Anthony, Willie Mitchell, Garland Green, Frank Wilson, Lou Rawls, Terry Callier etc. etc. have never been known to sit on internet forums discussing the validity and "soulfulness" of their musical output. Why? Fair enough smart arses I know some of them are dead. However, the main reason the remaining artists of the 6ts, 7ts, 8ts, dont descend into this debate is that for them there is no dispute. When Marvin Gaye recorded "Love Starved Heart" he just sang his fuckin heart out as he did in the 7ts and 8ts. He wasn't thinking "this one is for the "northern" crowd" he simply sang from the depth of his being. When he later recorded the unreleased Modern classic "Where are we going?" or the Soulful disco hit "Got to Give it up", he wasnt shunned by his contemporaries for going all "disco". Carl Carlton and Garland Green didn't fall out over the fact that Carl was more of a "northern" fan and thought that Marvin had sold out, whereas Garland loved "modern" soul and thought Carl was a closed minded c*** and he would shun him at future weekenders by staying primarily in the "modern" room. These debates and grievances never occured within the ranks of Soul music's finest for the simple reason that all of the Soul artists that recorded in the 1960's simply adopted the advances in music technology and production techniques during the 1970's. Soul music simply evolved. There were wasnt a single soul artist or production studio during the 7ts that eschewed the advances within music technology and production. True there was some dreadful overly produced disco muck released but then the 6ts had its muck as well as its glories. So fair enough if you dont like 6ts Soul, or 7ts Soul, or 8ts or the new independent Soul artists that is your perogative and anyone who holds it against you in my opinion needs to develop tolerance. On the other hand 6ts purists dont have the authority to claim that modern soul isnt soul. They may not like it but they dont have the right to usurp the term "soul" from the very artists that created it and developed it. White Europeans do not have the right to redefine and recalssify a central component of black american culture. In my opinion it is a form of cultural imperialism. Northern, Modern and Crossover are all labels invented by us on the UK- Euro soul underground to help us distinguish different periods and styles within Soul music and each style has as a relevant a place within Soul music as the other. It is the heighest form of arrogance to dismiss 7ts, 8ts and nu real indie soul (not that craig david or destinys child muck or overly produced r&b, check out Soulbrother records for a few good compilations of Nu indie Soul) as not qualifying as Soul. You may not like it but as a white bloke living in Dublin, London or Manchester you dont really have a right to redefine the music of black african-american culture. Can you just imagine the audacity of some white european telling Curtis Mayfield which of his records were soul and which werent. It would be akin to Winston Churchill telling Mahatma Gandhi he wasn't Indian enough.

We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as foes.

(Martin Luther King Jr.)

[Bazza]

Dont think anyone has said ..anything after the 6ts is not soul.my opinion is that the best northern soul was produced before the 70s, but the 70s+ stuff is still Soul,,I suppose

Bazza

[John May]

Irrelevant debate I feel, weather it's 60,s or modern, its still soul music, albeit very different in sound and production, i personally try to appreciate all, but in prefference i'm a 60's dinosaur........

[Zed1]

Irrelevant debate I feel, weather it's 60,s or modern, its still soul music, albeit very different in sound and production, i personally try to appreciate all, but in prefference i'm a 60's dinosaur........

Ditto!....

I think sometimes the divide is made worse by many venue's 'Safe' music policy........

There is doubtless a lot more to modern Soul than Angie Stone!, in the same way as there is a hell of a lot more to Northern soul than Frank Wilson!...

[Guest Matt Male]

You're right it is an irrelevent debate and i really resent the inference that because i'm not a black American i have less of an idea of what soul is and is not. So musical discernment is determined by race? Would you also say that black Americans can't appreciate Mozart like white Europeans? That's bollocks mate. I don't feel my appreciation of soul music is diminished just because i'm a white European. To be honest i'm really insulted by that suggestion. :angry:

Why do you say 'on this issue each to their own' and then go on to slag everybody off?

Edited October 13, 2006 by Matt Male

[Ernie Andrews]

This ones a minefield. to say that one thing is not another is a prejudicial statement unless the criteria are absolutely tight which in soul musc -is not. So in a nutshell you can call whatever music whatever you want unless it can be substantiated by set criteria which as I have said Soul music is not!

Ah the westburn tommorow where I will hear all types of soul music and a little music that might be classed as something else if anyone has amind to do it!

Im feckin Mad! Now work out does this mean Im angry or Loopy? Get my point!

[ockers]

irrelevant

its whats in the grooves

[Guest woolie mark]

very interesting post andy and i enjoyed reading it

i agree that distinctions between modern and northern genres are contrived

i feel sure most of the us artists would agree that it's all blues

[Guest Goldwax]

.

"You may not like it but as a white bloke living in Dublin, London or Manchester you dont really have a right to redefine the music of black african-american culture. "

I don't think anybody here is trying to redfine black american culture - we simply catagorise soul music for our own purpose.

With regard to the talent you mentioned - I have never seen or spoke with a single artist who was anything but full of praise for the love of Soul music in this country, no matter what labels we have for it.

[Guest wAvy]

hiya andyrattigan,

i've just read this post twice to get it in my head, as it's rather a long post! after reading it for the second time, i think you've actually started the debate and answered it yourself lol!

i do like more 60's music, because as you say, it has that 'rawness' about it, (which your right, technology had moved on in the 70's and no doubt if in the 60's they'd of had that sort of technology they would of produced stuff that sounded like 70's or modern (or whatever you wanna call it) and so back then it would of been done in one take with basic mics, but saying that, there is some 60's records that are a bit shit tbh!

but lets not forget, most of these 'Northern Soul' tunes whether they be 60's, 70's or indeed 80's-maybe are mostly 'studio floor droppings' anyway, (sorry i can't think of another way to put that) so to someone who only likes Mowtown, (which i class as commercial soul) might listen to any 'northern soul' tune and think all of it's shite!

going back to my 2nd paragraph regarding technology, i'm glad they didn't have the studio's/mics like they did in the 70's because well, music has to evolve just like everything else in this world. if music were a child then in the 60's, music would of been about a 10 year old i reckon - growing up fast but not quite at the experimental stage yet! that started to come in the late 70's (i.e. kraftwork (i know it's not soul music but they were an experimental group at that time, as were a lot of bands in that era regarding the introduction of synthersisers)).

have i missed the point here?! oh well!

wAvy

Edited October 13, 2006 by wAvy

[Guest andyrattigan]

You're right it is an irrelevent debate and i really resent the inference that because i'm not a black American i have less of an idea of what soul is and is not. So musical discernment is determined by race? Would you also say that black Americans can't appreciate Mozart like white Europeans? That's bollocks mate. I don't feel my appreciation of soul music is diminished just because i'm a white European. To be honest i'm really insulted by that suggestion. :angry:

Why do you say 'on this issue each to their own' and then go on to slag everybody off?

With all due respect Matt I have in no way suggested that white Europeans can't appreciate Soul music or that african americans cannot appreciate classical music.I happen to be a white European and am obsessed by soul as I am sure you are as you are on this forum.You have infered a meaning within the text that wasnt there. The thrust of my argument is that I believe no one has the right to retrospectively redefine what Soul music is be they black, white or green for that matter just because they dont like a particular genre. My point is about defining what Soul is not about appreciating it or ones prefered genres. The overall intent of my post was that fair enough if you dont like Modern Soul many of my fellow soul fans and friends dont. I would be arrogant to try and make someone like it and I understand some people simply prefer the rawer 6ts style which I myself also appreciate. I just think that if someone loves for example Marvin Gaye's 6ts choons but cant stand his 7ts and 8ts choons fair enough but I dont think they are correct in saying its not Soul as some purists do. My point is just that no one has the right to redefine a genre of Soul music as "not soul" just because they dont like it. The artists who created the music in the 6ts still saw themselves during the 7ts and 8ts as Soul artists and I just feel to try to rob them of the soul tag is disrespectful and arrogant. I wasnt slagging anyone off either Matt but I was just trying to illustrate that some times though rarely some people fall out over their musical preferences and I think this is absurd as it is taking peoples opinions personally. I have friends that dont think 7ts or 8ts soul is soul. I think they are wrong but they are still my friends and they dont hold my love of Modern soul against me nor should they and I dont think any less of them for their opinions or purist attitudes. However, I just wanted to have an intelligent debate and regret that my words have angered you but I believe you have misunderstood the point I was trying to make. regards, Andy

[Tabs]

You are right this is an irrelevant debate.

"The thrust of my argument is that I believe no one has the right to retrospectively redefine what Soul music is"

Who is trying to redefine it?

Very presumptious to assume people are trying to alter history.

You answered yourself in your original post, 'Soul music simply evolved'.

Its really a question of personal choice which style of soul music you prefer.

[Guest Bearsy]

Im not falling into this wind up

[Guest Matt Male]

Can you just imagine the audacity of some white european telling Curtis Mayfield which of his records were soul and which werent. It would be akin to Winston Churchill telling Mahatma Gandhi he wasn't Indian enough.

With respect Andy you need to go back and read your own post. If i've misuderstood it's because in your post you have linked the ability to define what is and isn't soul to the colour of someone's skin. If that's not what you mean then fair enough, if it is then i strongly disagree. As for anyone's right to define what is and isn't soul music, well that's part of the purpose of this forum and to honest i think it's massively arrogant to say that no one should even attempt to try to discuss what constitutes soul music. Lets just close the site down shall we?

Why do you want to deny people the right to define what soul is? Is it because you're a modern soul fan and you don't like the fact that a lot of people on here don't consider Modern Soul to be 'soul' at all, and silence them?

I've got my ideas of what soul is, you've got yours, Curtis Mayfield (God rest his genius soul) had his. I'd be more than willing to tell him that i consider some of his stuff almost Jazz when i meet him in heaven.

You didn't say that no one of any colour has the right to define what is and isn't soul. You specifically said white Europeans, see above. You are suggesting in the post above that only 'white' Europeans cannot define for themselves what they consider to be soul and are you are therefore suggesting that black Europeans can?

All the best.

Matt

Edited October 13, 2006 by Matt Male

[Epic]

I have been reading these forums for a long time now & this particular topic has cropped up in many different guises. Have come to the conclusion that it is an "each to his own" situation & if a record means something to you then that is fine & dandy. I have a craving to hear music both old & new - that's what does it for me & I am happy with that.

[KevH]

hi,thought i'd put my bit in on this old debate.

Northern is basically 60's, or at least it's roots are (debate that!)

The Torch ,Wheel, Cats, etc,,played virtually new releases of the time (newies?),that have now become standard classics.

Carstairs played at the Mecca wasn't more then 2 years old when played by Levine, but as they say ,you had to be there.

[Guest WPaulVanDyk]

Of coure it has to be each to there own. and no doubt like many of us on here we are not only fans of Northern but fans of soul music.

But i am sure if people want to admit to liking the Real Thing (yes a big fan seen them live 3 times) or Whitney Houston or whoever so be it i think sometimes people look at them and want to tell them your stupid for liking it because it ain't something close to there liking.

However since the late 80's you find soul music is not as big seeing R & B took over. But many can still descrive what new soul music is be it Lemar or whoever.