[Mr Coucou]

Originally Posted by Elise

I thought you wanted French rock, now dance music (which both exist, you just have to find it).

Let me address your original post:

Why compare only to rock, a genre that originated in the US and UK? I can just as easily ask where are the American chansons à texte? French music isn’t worse compared to American music, just different (and by different, I mean better).

Because rock is huge; rock is a billion-dollar industry.

Everybody loves rock--- to that end, the French public loves rock. But the French public listens to English-language rock, for the simple reason that French songwriters have produced hardly any rock.

(Also, let me clarify: my defition of 'rock' is broad--- it includes soft rock as well as hard rock, as well as much pop. I would consider 'cool kids' to be a form of rock. Given that defintion of rock, French songwriters have produced hardly any rock---and the question is why.)

France has this concept of a French cultural exception (l’exception culturelle française) where their cultural products have to be protected from the invasion of English and American products. Not only in a negative or defensive way, rather to ensure that in a market where most global products are in English, the arts sector gets enough funding. This is partly where the 1994 French music quota comes from.

But the quota proves my point!

If French-language music is just as good as English-language music, then why does it need a quota?

Think about that. French is the native language of the French--- so if anything, the French would have a natural preference for French-language music. (This would especially be true of the French, given how proud the French are of their language.) And yet evidently, the French have a preference for English-language music such that French music needs a quota.

I could delve into the linguistics of why English is better for songwriting, but I don't have to--- the quota proves my point!!

Maybe just to meet the quotas, the same few songs get played and less good artists get promoted.

If there are "good artists", then why the hell aren't they being played instead of "the same few songs"?

The French public have complained about the same few songs being played. So why don't they just play more of the "good artists"--- wouldn't that be a simple solution that would make everybody happy?

The quota proves my point!

If French-language music is just as good as English-language music, then it wouldn't need a quota, would it?!?!?

The quota proves my point!

The most popular answer in a survey of "What is the most beautiful language?" would probably be French, but it would be more of a struggle for people to name a French song.

Yes-- but you're talking about spoken French. French, when spoken, has a very beautiful sound. But just because French is beautiful when spoken doesn't necessarily mean that French is ideal for song lyrics.

There is something about English that makes it ideal for writing lyrics, despite the fact that English is not as beautiful as French when spoken.

Okay, let me address your most recent post:

While American music, media, culture and the English language is globally dominant, I don't see how that means it is intrinsically better.

French music needs a quota-- in France! In France! It needs a quota, because the French public prefers American music over French music. American music might-- or might not--- be intrinsically better, but the French public seem to think that it is.

The best explanation is that American music is--somehow-- intrinsically better than French music. The only other explanation would be that the French public have simply been conned into thinking that American music is better--- and that seems very unlikely.