amateur

I think records were just a little bubble through time and those who made a living from them for a while were lucky … It couldn’t last, and now it’s running out. I don’t particularly care that it is and I like the way things are going. Recorded music equals whale blubber … – Brian Eno

 

I must create a system or be enslaved by another man’s - William Blake

 

From the summer of 2007 to the summer of 2009 I was the guitarist in an indie band that has since signed a record deal and achieved a degree of national attention. During one of the heated discussions that preceded my resignation, I tried to articulate why I felt so uncomfortable with the whole business of being in a guitar band in noughties Britain. As usual, I ended up saying that I thought way too much compromise and industry line-toeing was thought to be an inevitable part of ‘making it’. One of my band members turned round in exasperation and said: ‘so what do you expect us to do, all get day jobs as well?’ His point was that, in a very uncertain musical-economic climate, we couldn’t afford to risk getting all fussy and principled. Instead, in an unforgettable phrase of his, we ‘should be doing what’s expected of us’. But, aside from being slightly appalled by this attitude, I started thinking to myself: not having to rely on the financial support of a record label, with attendant conditions and restrictions? What an obvious idea.

 


This might sound like a romantic notion, but the more you look at the situation, the less far-fetched it seems. It’s becoming increasingly clear that we’re heading for some sort of major overhaul of how music, and art generally, is funded. Everyone knows about the difficulties currently being faced by the record industry. It’s generally accepted that physical distribution will become virtually obsolete over the next few years, as ‘record’ companies inch closer to total reliance on internet downloads. At the moment, the situation is grim, but the full extent of the crisis has not yet become clear. While sales have begun to taper-out, members of older demographics still buy CDs, and the music industry has thus far been able to harness the hype-fuelling potential of the internet to its advantage. So-called internet success stories of the last decade, such as Arctic Monkeys and Lily Allen, were successful primarily because they ended up selling a lot of CDs and downloads.

 

Read the rest of this entry »

Picture 1

First came Definitely Maybe of course, which is a great album, so good I don’t feel capable of writing about it just yet. But as everyone knows, it’s something of an anomaly in the Oasis canon. The artistic standards are consistently high, the lyrics are pretty good on the whole (sometimes exceptional) and, crucially, for all the rock classicism, it mostly sounds like it was released in 1994, which is the year it was actually released in. Contrastingly, all of Oasis’ subsequent records sound like archeological fragments from bygone epochs. It isn’t quite as if you could say that Heathen Chemistry (in actual fact released in 2002) sounds like an album made in 1969, more as though the record has emerged from some bizarre Terry Gilliam-like alternative universe in which history has collapsed, and a sinister dystopian government is trying to confuse the populace with a horrible machine that sounds like 1980 one minute, 1965 the next, then 1976, then 1989, and so on and so forth. Put another way, Heathen Chemistry is, in common with all the other post-Definitely Maybe offerings, a quintessential postmodern record. Oasis were the band the postmodern age deserved, right enough.

The incredibly culturally damaging/boring process was initiated in earnest with their 1995 long-player What’s the Story Morning Glory? a work for which the epithet ‘zeitgeist-defining’ hardly seems adequate. From the Austin Powers-esque, pseudo-retro-nonsense of the title downwards, this is an album which establishes new standards of anti-meaning. Gary Glitter somehow manages to turn up on opening track ‘Hello’, which sets the tone for the rest of the record, an hour-or-so in which childish inanity is driven to such a peak of intensity that paedophilic is perhaps the only word. Read the rest of this entry »

Beastie Boys & Paul's Boutique (1989)

OK, in the broadest sense of the word, all post-Jailhouse Rock popular music is postmodern. Over fifty years ago, rock’n’roll arrived into a post-Auschwitz, post-Hiroshima world in which all the old essential truths and Enlightenment certainties had been blown to smithereens. Rock’n’roll was the cultural expression of a historical moment at which history itself seemed to have collapsed, a blast of feral noise at a time when human civilisation had self-destructively brought itself to the brink of barbarism. It was post-Christian, post-Freudian, post-Einsteinian, and hence also postmodern by default. It was also (on a less melodramatic level) unmistakably the progeny of America, that vast node of the postmodernist worldview; rock’n’roll/pop was the loudest, most visible product of a USA entering its Augustan phase, just beginning to discover in earnest the consumer capitalist ethos that would be its neo-imperialist raison d’être in the ensuing half-century. Ephemeral, playful, and for the most part anti-didactic: it would be difficult to find a more archetypically postmodern form than the musical entity we have come to call pop music in the years since Elvis first dropped.

However, for all that pop music may have always been postmodern at its core, for a long while it existed at odds with, rather than as an adjunct to, ‘classical’ postmodernist art (if that isn’t too much of an oxymoron). Warhol, Reich, and Pynchon might have seemed like the kindred spirits of Dylan, The Beatles, Motown and punk in innumerable superficial ways at the time, but in retrospect they can also appear as polar opposites. The pop musicians of fifties, sixties and seventies were, for all their blasé youthfulness, engaged in establishing a completely new, vital, modernistic tradition (or, to use the less stuffy term advocated by pop-journalist Simon Reynolds, a continuum). By contrast, mainstream, or highbrow, postmodernist art was predicated on the notion of belatedness in relation to long-standing traditions of Western art, concerned primarily with bathos and the multitudinous colourful refractions that can be got out of ironic, nostalgic engagements with an obsolescent culture. While pop music was enjoying a spectacular High Renaissance-like period in the sixties, seventies, and early eighties, postmodernist literature, architecture, and visual art was giving expression to an end-of-history relativistic bleakness; compare Beckett’s elegiac post-religious explorations of the void or James Stirling’s wry, nostalgic architecture with the earnest, optimistic, juvenescent confidence of an Aretha Franklin, a Marvin Gaye, or even a Joe Strummer. In contrast to postmodernist high culture’s riffs on belated absence, pop music offered a powerful and emphatic presence.

But by the late-1980s, pop music had without doubt, in characteristically accelerated fashion, arrived at its own postmodern moment. Since its inception, rock’n’roll had been engaged in a process of continual self-reiteration: witness The Beatles’ ‘Get Back’ traditionalism of 1969 after the convulsions of ’67 and ’68, or glam rock’s fifties-influenced retro-futurism. However, throughout the eighties, as the modernism of punk and post-punk dissipated, the tendency towards revival snowballed, to the point that pop music had caught up with the dominant cultural mode of the age. It was now no longer a marginal or underground alternative to mainstream culture so much as a classic expression of its defining consumerist-postmodernist ethos. Read the rest of this entry »

 

©2009–2010 The Grain