Why do American bands say "Aeroplane" instead of Airplane?

The Complex Systems Motivating Small Decisions

Here’s an interesting observation about American pop culture. There are at least three songs written by significant American bands that use the British spelling of “airplane”. The Black Keys, a blues-rock duo, have a song called “Aeroplane Blues”, The Red Hot Chili Peppers have a song simply titled “Aeroplane”, and Neutral Milk Hotel decided to name their now cult-classic second album and its lead single “In the Aeroplane Over the Sea”. There are no explanations in the songs’ lyrics as to why the alternative spellings were used and these songs do not describe Great Britain or any of her former colonies that still use this spelling of “airplane”. Why, then, are these American bands using this spelling?

Well, as EE Cummings says, “since feeling is first, who pays any attention to the syntax of things”. Translated to common english: “since emotions are what’s important, nobody really cares about doing things in the ordered, correct way”. Almost certainly, “aeroplane” just sounded better to these artists than “airplane”. 

There is, however, more here than a simple, aesthetic artistic decision. First of all, this is a perfect example of what I’m going to call “casual globalization”, which I’ll define as elements of our society that unintentionally demonstrate its global nature. Globalization allowed these bands to make this artistic choice, but the global nature of the word “aeroplane” was not intended to be a part of these songs’ appeal. Contrast this with a coffee shop that advertises that its beans come from Guatemala or a K-Pop band that sings partially in English in order to appeal to Western audiences. In both cases, the global nature of the product is a part of its appeal. When the coffee shop advertises that its beans come from Guatemala, it is showing off that its product is global in nature. When the K-Pop band sings some of its lyrics in English, it is a deft attempt to add global elements to its music to appeal to an increasingly global audience. As our world becomes increasingly globalized, there will be more and more instances of casual globalization. The device you're reading this on, for example, has parts originating from and manufactured in dozens of different countries, something that I’m guessing wasn’t a part of your purchasing decision. 

Another conclusion one might glean from the repeated use of the word “aeroplane” by American bands is that there is some sort of objective, or at least commonly accepted, scale for the beauty of sounds. These musicians, all successful, have been elevated by consumers as experts on what sounds are better than others. All three groups came across the decision to use “airplane” or “aeroplane” and all three groups, unencumbered by thematic considerations, chose to use “aeroplane”. This is obviously not concrete evidence that the quality of a sound is totally objective, but particularly considering that they deliberately chose to not use the default spelling, I do believe that it is evidence that it is not 100% subjective. This, of course, should not be an alien concept for anyone who has cringed hearing the word “moist” or gotten frustrated with someone singing out of key.

The inferences one can make from these bands’ decision to use “aeroplane” instead of “airplane” demonstrate that even simple choices are motivated by, or reflective of, complex systems and ideas. The Black Keys, Neutral Milk Hotel, and The Red Hot Chili Peppers were almost certainly not thinking of globalization or aesthetics when they made their decision to use “aeroplane” instead of “airplane”, but both globalization and aesthetics are key to understanding what makes that decision possible. 

To add yet another layer to an essay about the word “aeroplane”, I would suggest that complex decisions, in contrast to simple ones, say more about the individual making them than the broader philosophical or historical context. For example, while a band’s decision to use “aeroplane” instead of “airplane” says little about the band but a lot about globalization and aesthetics, the decision of an artist to introduce, for example, a particular rhyme scheme says more about the artist, their style, and the message they are trying to get across than the societal context in which the artist is living. Sure, artistic trends and societal events might influence this and similar artistic decisions, but I would argue that we don’t listen to our favorite artists because they regurgitate the current style or accurately describe current events. Instead, we are interested in the artist’s particular version of the current style or the way in which they engage with current events. It is within those decisions, the artistic means by which an artist communicates their message, that we can examine the complexity of the artist.

I hope, too, that my decision to write this whole article based on this one observation says a lot about me, and just might entice you to subscribe.