The word, derived from “spastic”, has different cultural connotations – in the US it’s mostly colloquialism to describe loss of control. It can describe being “in the zone” or “doing it all” in vernacular African-American English — or being in a negative or positive state of excitement, said Nsenga Burton, a cultural critic and professor at Emory University.
But Beyoncé and Lizzo’s recent reviews are notable for the conversations they’ve sparked on the subject of ableism and how quickly critics of the offending lyrics have been able to air their views. The chatter surrounding these tracks also ties into larger discussions about what we expect of certain artists, especially black women, as well as how society interprets and preserves entertainment and cultural touchstones.
Why Song Lyrics Change – And What’s Different This Time
Lyrics, whether part of a cover or updates of an artist’s own music, are changed for a variety of reasons. Many revisions relate to language regarding race, gender and sexuality, as well as religion, said Jocelyn Neal, a professor in the music department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Some lyrics are changed to align with audience tastes or modern times, while others are updated to better showcase an artist’s own opinions.
What’s different about Beyoncé and Lizzo’s quickly updated songs is how much conversation they’ve generated around ableism, Neal said.
“Ableism hasn’t been as much of a part of these conversations (about lyric changes) in the past as it is today, and I think it’s a shift in consciousness and a shift in focus that’s probably expected. for a long time,” she said. said, adding that the majority of previously revised songs “don’t have the ableism at the center of these language changes”.
Noticeable too? Criticism in this case has been amplified through social media, which serves as a “much more public platform for providing feedback to artists,” Neal said. In previous decades, a listener may have sent a postcard complaining to a radio station, she noted — with no guarantee that her observations would be widely shared for others to heed.
Various cultural layers make these revisions less dry
Lizzo and Beyoncé’s decisions to drop “spaz” from their respective songs were mostly celebrated, except for some instances where some focused on criticism that it was used in the first place.
But the move also sparked discussions about whether the intended use of the word should be looked at further. Some have expressed concern that the discourse surrounding artists is an example of black women being held to a different standard.
Society didn’t push back against non-black artists who used other ableist terms like “psycho” or “lame,” she noted, and those artists in question didn’t change those lyrics as quickly as Lizzo and Beyoncé did. “The problem goes beyond the word ‘spaz’ for me,” she wrote.
Burton, for her part, initially appreciated Lizzo’s willingness to acknowledge that the offensive lyrics were a hurtful term to some and which she re-recorded so quickly. “I think it takes responsibility and a willingness to be educated,” she said.
But she noticed very few people were talking about how the term is used in the African-American community.
“People are comfortable policing black women’s bodies and language, and that’s a problem, especially when it comes to art,” she said. “Especially when you’re dealing with two black women who are from the United States and who use the term in a way that black people use, which has nothing to do with the disability community, at least in this iteration.”
Burton added that what is meant with language and how it is perceived “can be two different things” and that “ultimately you want your message to be received as it is intended.”
“If it’s not received that way and you can change it, then you should,” she said. “But I don’t really feel like it’s always black women who acquiesce. We can’t make mistakes, we can’t even use the words the way our culture uses them without being rebuffed.”
The changes are linked to broader questions about the preservation and confrontation of art
“If there’s a source that controls the digital version of a song for streaming, and that source changes, the average fan will have a hard time accessing that previous version,” Neal said, noting that what we seeing with the increasingly ephemeral nature of some popular music is something seen in all forms of media and even in academia.
This has led to bigger questions about whether “people are allowed to change things too quickly” and accountability, she said, and it’s something those who work in libraries and information sciences actively reflect.
The ability to respond to audience feedback and update art in “real time” is also something that could one day pose a problem for musicians, Burton said.
“What’s the ending? Now you can come back and say, ‘Look, I don’t like this chorus here,'” she said. “Where does it end?”
“Lizzo seized a moment to do good in the world and that’s something an artist who has this platform is able to do,” Neal said. “I think it’s exciting.”
Although there’s been decades of debate about the importance of popular song lyrics, Neal said artists right now — and even those who’ve come before them — are indicating they’re doing it.
The various conversations around Beyoncé and Lizzo mark a new period in what we expect and question about popular music. They are also part of a larger tradition of questioning and dealing with how the world around us continues to change.
“It’s not just music, it’s not just pop music, it’s not just right now,” Neal said. “It’s about our own stories and our educational processes.”