Authenticity Revisited: The Rock Critic and the Changing Real

Abstract

The idea of “authenticity”—sometimes verbalized in terms like “integrity,” “honesty,” “sincerity,” “credibility,” “genuineness,” and “truthfulness”—is central not only in writings on (pop, rock, and classical) musical value and significance, but also in recurring debates about the role of music journalism. More like a rollercoaster than a rolling stone, the concept seems to spin around its own axis, still claiming its usefulness, as if untouched by increasing reflexivity and critical disclaim. How can that be? How can pop or rock music be authentic in the first place? How are such claims legitimated? Has this highly charged, but slippery, term anything to offer in a contemporary critical perspective? Based on the authors’ previous study of rock criticism as a cultural field (Lindberg et al. ), this article argues that when dealing with “authenticity,” one should be prepared to meet a number of quite differing ideas and concepts.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 125 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.