Customer Reviews

The Birth (and Death) of the Cool

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Gioia has written a thought-provoking volume in which he suggests that the era of cool is over and has been replaced by postcool, a concept that he defines as a shift in popular culture from cool's supposed superficiality and ironic detachment to the supposed placement of value on authenticity, straight-forwardness and sincerity. While this makes for a nice, fun read, Gioia's book fails on a number of crucial points.

In the first place he traces the concept of cool to jazz musicians, the earliest being Bix Beiderbecke. As a personal hero of mine I fully support the notion of Bix's coolness, however, Gioia completely ignores the numerous examples of cool that exist prior to Bix gracing the Earth. Among the first to spring to mind is Oscar Wilde and those referred to collectively as dandies (a decidedly uncool word despite what it defines). Wilde even received modern-style media attention for his antics, which Gioia uses as an indicator of cool, whereas Bix had to wait long after his death to get any attention outside of jazz circles. He also ignores the large number of French writers who certainly qualify for cool: Baudelaire and Rimbaud being prime examples. Gioia then moves on to Lester Young and Miles Davis as further embodiments of cool. I would be hard pressed to find anyone who would disagree with him here.

Gioia details the tragic meeting between Beats and Capitalism. He discusses Jack Kerouac and crew and describes their influence on the nation's youth. He then reports on the reactions of the uncool (parents, the media, etc.) to this movement. It is, of course, disapproval, which, naturally, makes the Beats loom larger in the eyes of the cool kids of America and increases the appeal of the Beat aesthetic, ethics and lifestyle (a word that Gioia hates but that does have a certain utility when discussing sociological phenomena). So, as is to be expected, a marketing vampire realizes that money can be made off of the back of this movement thus taking whatever dignity it had and turning it into a tool of capitalism. Gioia believes that cool gets hijacked by the 1960's and commodified. I am in agreement up to this point.

Gioia's argument really starts to fall apart around this time. He seems to be oblivious to the fact that there is real cool and corporate cool and that the two have little to nothing in common. He goes so far as to lump Paris Hilton and Nike into cool alongside Bix and Kerouac. I highly doubt that any cool person reading this would accept a world of cool in which Lester Young and Miles Davis share space with the Backstreet Boyz, Pepsi and Kiss (all examples from the book). Only the most radically cool-challenged person would be unbothered by such a concept. Gioia uses this notion to support further arguments and examples throughout the rest of the book. This has about as much to do with the concept of cool as sex does with selling cars. Sex can be used to sell cars but in no way do cars teach us anything about sex.

Now, I understand that a definition of cool is going to be subjective and hardly scientific. I subscribe to the notion that cool, like obscenity, is known when it is seen. At least by a cool person. How do we know whether a person is cool or not? For starters, I'd say that accepting Gioia's bizarre examples of what cool is probably means that a person is very uncool. Very likely without the possibility of redemption. It'd take an awful lot of bossa nova to fix that kinda mind.

Perhaps the most shocking aspect of this book is that Gioia, who has written, amongst other things, one of the greatest books on jazz to ever have been published (West Coast Jazz: Modern Jazz in California, 1945-1960), proves himself to be so uncool. Putting aside his jaw-droppingly ambiguous stance on the value of jazz (!), his complete misunderstanding of Frank Sinatra's art, and his sympathy for the saccharine singer-songwriter infestation of the Seventies, Gioia voices his approval for Harry Potter, the rapid worldwide spread of Junior Achievement, talk radio, geek chic and a downright nauseating series of books that, by the grace of God, I had never heard of before called "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Teens (The 7 Habits Of Highly Effective Teens). He goes on to speak admirably of a 14 year old who created an internet business that sells office furniture and the down-home sweetheart winners of American Idol as well. All this in his celebration of sincerity, authenticity and straight-forwardness. Did Gioia learn nothing from the jazz world? What is more sincere, authentic and straight-forward than a Chet Baker trumpet solo?

The world of postcool that Gioia describes is a world that has lost all of its poetry, all of its adventure; a world in which children are deprived of floating down the Mississippi and adults buy their children books on how to be better teenagers (I really cannot get over that one!); a world where not buying a brand name has become a spiritual experience; a world where status is defined downwardly but is accorded far greater value than when Kerouac donned his first pair of khakis without a single thought toward anything other than keeping his legs covered; a world in which a a TV program creates art through the votes of tasteless fools; a world where the loudest and most ugly-minded radio host rises to the top of the food chain; a world in which nuance, subtlety and style is forsaken for a false honesty that is more contrived and posed than anything to come out of the Age of Cool.

I closed this book longing for something cool (hip June Christy reference, my dear highly effective teenagers) and terrified that Gioia might be right about the direction that this country is heading, even if he happens to like it. On goes a Bud Shank record, on goes a pair of khakis and sandals, in goes the martini, flick goes the lighter.

Ted Gioia presents an enjoyably written argument that covers the rise of the cool, the apex of cool, and the ultimate decline into a post-cool situation from which traditional notions of cool will never return. The result is an interesting conceit -- much of it well researched, sourced, and argued -- but ultimately one that is too reductive and simplistic to be entirely effective.

Gioia's pinpointing Bix Beiderbecke as a progenitor of the cool aesthetic is nicely done (as is the subsequent segue he builds into into Lester Young's and then Miles Davis' respective personae), and his case for jazz and the notion of signifying serving as the unconscious role model for the Cool aesthetic is tremendously well noted. Additionally, his analysis of the origins and ambiguity of the word "Cool" itself is an exceptionally fun read.

However, he loses ground as he moves out of jazz -- clearly his comfort zone -- into the popular cultures of the 1970s onward. Arguing that the post-cool age moved honesty and a lack of irony out of the fringe sounds clever, but his argument requires some serious visual blinders to the point of being academically dishonest. For starters, this thesis means ignoring the entire (decidedly non-ironic) folk movement revival of the 1960s, and either tacitly viewing Woodstock as an anomaly, or just ignoring its existence as a cultural benchmark. From the modern era, Gioia fails to point out the fact that a band such as The Strokes - embodiments of his described cool aesthetic - are routinely voted the most influential band of the past decade (more generally, Gioia apparently has either never heard of hipsters, underestimates their impact and importance to current social trends, and/or is ignoring them in favor of his overall argument).

It seems ultimately that Gioia's thesis requires some tweaking of facts to fit his story, and avoids a clear look at the overall situation. Sure, he is correct that homespun Taylor Hicks bested glamorous Katharine McPhee in American Idol, but he fails to note that Katharine is the one who actually went on to a successful career while Taylor Hicks' sales dragged to the point he was dropped by his label (he also notes the plain-looking Buddy Jewell besting Miranda Lambert in Nashville Star...but again, ignores that Lambert is the one to enjoy a vital career).

While arguing that rap and hip hop of the 1980s is the nadir of style-over-substance, Gioia misses the point entirely in looking at such artists as A Tribe Called Quest or Public Enemy, who more accurately seem to be torchbearers of the Cool aesthetic of Miles that Gioia loves, yet also offer politically engaged social commentary. In fact, a troubling point seems to be that once Gioia seems to exit his comfort zone of 1950s jazz, he seems outright ignorant of the landscape, in favor of using exceedingly limited and discrete examples (or, as noted above, often distorted points) to push his view along.

While it's certainly true that today's talk show radio shows are decidedly non-Cool and prone to the brusque and grating tone of a post-Cool age that Gioia discusses, it is nevertheless curious that he ignores the vitriolic and violent behavior of Southern whites during the Civil Rights struggle that took place during his constructed Cool period. Perhaps most baffling, however, is his listing of Miles Davis as somehow embodying Ghandi's peaceful philosophy - ignoring Miles' own admissions of anger issues and domestic violence. In fact, Miles Davis seems to, quite frequently, have embodied the post-Cool aesthetic Gioia describes given his frequently aggressive and profane attacks on whites, and it is curious that Gioia ignores this completely (this is not to suggest that Miles was not cool...but rather to point to Gioia's oversimplifying). Unlike pop culture of the past two decades, Miles Davis' career is undoubtedly within Gioia's knowledge base and comfort zone; why on earth would he so profoundly distort a fact? While other points might be forgiven as errors of understanding or lack of a full picture, this one seems outright dishonest.

Ultimately, this is - up to a point - a worthwhile read. Gioia writes in a fun and conversational approach, and certainly, he is hitting upon some key shift in the public conscience. However, his statement of facts are often highly suspect (or, as pointed out, flat-out wrong), and often simply suggest a man whose generational comfort zone has passed.

As a final warning, upon finishing this book, you will find yourself overwhelmed with the desire to pick up Lester Young albums. That alone is recommendation enough for this book.

Wouldn't it be great if everyone could write an opinion piece of what they like, and call it "cool?" Or label everything they don't like or which they disagree as "uncool?" Is "cool" relative, or subjective? Who's to say what "cool" is? This is interesting reading, but accept it as only one man's opinion. "Cool" is not limited to any particular brand of music style, religion, fashion, lifestyle, taste, and "cool" has evolved and splintered into so facets and directions. What, Jazz musicians can't dig talk radio? Poets can't dig classical music? Who's to say? I may dig Chet Baker and not Miles Davis, so which "cool" category do I fall into?

the birth (and death) of the cool offers a history of the rise of the concept of 'cool' (mostly through jazz; but, eventually, permeating modern culture), then suggest current realities showing it's demise. the suggestion is that the concept of cool -- aloof and above -- has gone by the wayside in our culture both by being watered down and co-opted, as well as by replacement values, like earnestness and authenticity. the author is a jazz historian, so much of the story is told through that lens -- but this makes sense since the concept of cool was born in that context. more interesting to me than the actual rise and fall of this youth-oriented cultural construct was viewing this as a case study for how values rise and fall within youth culture, and how those values -- particularly once they're simultaneously embraced by wider culture and by marketers -- dissipate and are replaced by new (or old) values. worth a read for anyone interested in the evolution of cultural values. i was constantly, during reading, thinking about how youth culture has become the dominant culture in america (and most of the developed world). the transitory values held by youth culture get amalgamated into mainstream culture, lose their purity (if that word can be used) and lose steam; by then, youth culture has moved on, and culture at large starts to look to youth for what's next.

In this almost prophetic view of American culture, Gioia describes modern America as it enters "postcool" culture. Gioia insists that this postcool culture will be/is marked by desired sincerity, earnestness, and the ability of anyone to cultivate fame and a voice via grassroots movements (i.e. Amazon reviews, YouTube videos, blogs, etc.). His description of the birth of cool - namely the work and lifestyle within jazz and Hollywood circa 1950 - is a thought-provoking approach to the reasons behind America's consumerism, music industry, and marketing, which culminated in the 80s and 90s in the form of often bogus claims that an item of fashion could make one "cool" and stylish. He contends that America is now purging itself of what has been force-fed it for decades and is entering an era where coolness is no longer desired.

In this up-to-date, modern view of a culture of which we often find ourselves oblivious, Gioia politely suggests a reality that far too many of us have surely ignored or been blind to see. In an age where marketing is failing to relate and a new generation rises to seek truth, transparency, and relevance, the "cool" is now dead and gone - a relic of how our society once acted out of almost Pavlovian response to mass appeal. Truly a hopeful and extremely accurate account of our country's current and near-future situation, Gioia's The Birth and Death of the Cool is a must for those hoping to understand America's nearest steps in culture.

An expectation I held, for one reason or another, was that Gioia would contend that bullheaded politics during the Bush terms culminated in a public of unheard voices and relentless confusion amidst trying times, resulting in a society which boasts independence of its mass media, its politics, and its moguls, relying instead on one another to find truth and power. Although the latter is indeed what Gioia contends is happening, I found it rather ironic that such an obvious matter - in fact almost a decade's worth of material - slipped from his commentary entirely. Regardless, Gioia presents us with an incredibly clear view of our current situation and brings to light the path that has led us here.

Can cool become a thing of the past? "The Birth and Death of the Cool" discusses the concept of cool and how it has been waning over the past few decades as it has become a tool of business and other elements. Going over the history of cool and where society may be heading next, Ted Gioia gives readers a fascinating read of cool. "The Birth and Death of the Cool" is a choice pick for any cultural studies collection.