« This Ain't a Scene, It's a Comments Box
Part I: Reading Brooklyn Vegan Is Not Going to a Show
| Main | This Week's Soundtrack »

This Ain't a Scene, It's a Comments Box
Part II: Blood Sweat and Uploads

[Earlier, Part I]

Despite all I've said so far, something has obviously changed. I’d have to be an idiot to think the internet hasn’t had some influence on the way bands come up, and perhaps on the identities and sounds coming from different scenes. “Lord knows I'm no internet utopian,” Barthel writes, “but it seems strange to deny that there are real communities online. They may not be able to give each other haircuts or provide venues for bands to play, but none of that is necessary for vital art to happen.” Vital art, no. How about vital audience?

On the surface, the internet era seems like it should be tailor-made for bedroom stars—those kids who don’t take part in any local scene, simply uploading their work to the global audience that might find their MySpace page. That's the way the net gets idealized—whether by no-name bands looking for exposure, lonely bloggers looking to flex their influential muscles, or desperate major labels. But is that the reality? Is that really the era we now live in? Last week Ryan Catbird asked whether it was conceivable for small-time acts to follow the "new model" set by Nine Inch Nails and simply give their music away for free:

I still think the more important question is: “What if an artist that hasn’t already built a career on the label system released their work directly, gave it away for free, retained their rights, etc.  Would it matter?”

The answer, sadly, to that one is “no, it doesn’t matter.”  Myriad small unheard-of bands are out there posting their albums for free every day, but there’s still no good way for them to get heard.

For all the chatter about how new technology/Music 2.0/viral marketing etc. has the power to “break” new artists, there are precious few examples of this actually occurring. 

Catbird is right, but one needn't be cynical about the 2.0 scenario either. The fact is the business models for an arena-rocking megastar and a DIY band from Ohio have never been the same, not in the 90s and not today. The degree to which different revenue streams are available—whether through retail sales, touring, or licensing—is tied explicitly to one's audience. That's where a lot of bands, bloggers, and fans get mixed up when it comes to the internet: there is an illusion that the internet somehow holds the key to bypassing all the dues-paying, skipping straight to the career opportunities and adulation.

If your music bypasses Hank in your hometown but reaches Henri in Paree, where exactly does that get you? Aiming for the bright lights of internet stardom without honing your chops at home—and building a tangible, carbon-based following—is a chimera. Which is just to say that bands should log off and rock the old-fashioned way.

For that matter, bloggers should log off too. For those wondering why bloggers don't "break" the new hot shit band, here's a newsflash: the internet is not the ground floor. If you want to break a new band, go see a local show and find a band that's toiling away in your own obscure back yard. Why do bloggers think they need to sort through the desperate pleas for exposure in their email inboxes to find the right bands? Your inbox is not the scene.

Yet, sadly, there seems to be a danger that in fact that is the new scene. Not to put too dour a spin on it—Barthel is right to say that it's wrong to claim internet culture as "inauthentic"—but the national indie scene is beginning to shake down into the kind of singular social hierarchy that would usually define individual community scenes. Look, for instance, at last year's end-of-year lists, almost all of which, across the board, were identical. Maura Johnston, in a comment to her own post at Idolator last week, said this:

If anything a big part of my frustration with indie rock right now comes from the insularity that's bred by the ever-shrinking mass—it's so informed by itself and only itself that it's sometimes speaking a dialect full of really really boring words.

In other words, the variety of subcultures that has made indie rock so invigorating for two decades is currently getting a little vanilla, as the most popular tastemakers, whether based in New York or Chicago or Toronto or wherever, seem to be aligning their viewpoints, even if unintentionally. So if the blog culture is somehow consolidating all the music scenes of the country into one generic über-scene—to the point that it's novel to point out that No Age played shows at a dingy club that holds vegan potlucks—then it's time to start looking outside of that scene. As Barthel puts it,"the best and more enduring American indie bands of the 90s, if they were part of a scene at all, existed on the outskirts of that scene." And the outskirts of this scene is your scene. So log off and go see a show.

Follow-up posts:

  • Who's Hyping?

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54eeeec07883400e55236c03c8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference This Ain't a Scene, It's a Comments Box
Part II: Blood Sweat and Uploads
:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I think what the Internet can do is to facilitate word of mouth. It's certainly no magic potion for the vast majority of musicians, because most musicians have nothing especially distinctive about them. But it's an exaggeration to say it doesn't matter. Take the case of Jonathan Coulton: an eccentric, geeky songwriter whose not insignificant popularity has been entirely fueled by Internet word of mouth. Sure, he doesn't chart, and most people have never heard of him; but people come to his shows wherever he goes, people download his music and pass it around, people make videos to his songs, and I'm sure he's making a fair bit of money from all this. His career would have taken many years to build before the Internet, if it happened at all.

Right - I'm not saying it's either/or; but the internet is one tool among many - not a "new model" that replaces outright an "old model". And I think bands, for the most part, get this, but many fans, bloggers, and critics seem to take the myopic view.

Got it.

I would suggest that the internet commuity in general largely works the way Scraps describes it, whether in support of a musician who otherwise might have few options, or for other purposes.

lots of really smart things being said in this post

yo scott,

this was a great read! theres some bloggers in la, (radio free silverlake, and a few others) that not only go to shows but also set up shows, support the local scene and try to help the community continue thriving. bands need to use the internet as thats were people are finding about music, but both consumers and bands need to spend some time away from the computers and go to a show!!!

ps, joan of arc (your FAVORITE) are playing at pehrspace next week!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Categories

...