Surprised no one posted this yet-
Does the world need another indie band?
The short version of that article is that no one really knows who buys Scouting For Girls records. It is quite marvellously vehement though if you, like me, spend a mystifyingly large amount of your time trying to think of a new way of saying 'this is a shit indie single.' Not sure it goes far enough for me on some aspects (the bit with some bloke talking about the wonder of some kids dancing to 80s/90s indie as though this makes them genii is particular obnoxious) but does contain the quote from this subject line.
Edit: I might add, this isn't a 'HAR LOOK ALL INDIE ARE CRAP' post. I think the article's interesting because we've been talking about how these instantly charting indie bands are the new throwaway boy/girlband for awhile, particularly this week and although this is a smug indie person talking about it from a smug indie perspective, it's surprisingly on-the-money in a lot of places. It might be worth asking, if it's not a totally overwrung question that ultimate ends up with 'THE MAN' as the answer, why you think these particular little trends of throwaway bands/groups start and what you personally think brought on this particular glut of awful?
Also, I really cannot emphasise enough that I have had to review The Enemy three times in the last year.
Does the world need another indie band?
The short version of that article is that no one really knows who buys Scouting For Girls records. It is quite marvellously vehement though if you, like me, spend a mystifyingly large amount of your time trying to think of a new way of saying 'this is a shit indie single.' Not sure it goes far enough for me on some aspects (the bit with some bloke talking about the wonder of some kids dancing to 80s/90s indie as though this makes them genii is particular obnoxious) but does contain the quote from this subject line.
Edit: I might add, this isn't a 'HAR LOOK ALL INDIE ARE CRAP' post. I think the article's interesting because we've been talking about how these instantly charting indie bands are the new throwaway boy/girlband for awhile, particularly this week and although this is a smug indie person talking about it from a smug indie perspective, it's surprisingly on-the-money in a lot of places. It might be worth asking, if it's not a totally overwrung question that ultimate ends up with 'THE MAN' as the answer, why you think these particular little trends of throwaway bands/groups start and what you personally think brought on this particular glut of awful?
Also, I really cannot emphasise enough that I have had to review The Enemy three times in the last year.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-22 09:05 pm (UTC)I'd also take issue with the idea that C86 'crystallised the indie sound' - if you're working from that reductionist a stance, I sort of feel you get what you ask for!
But yes, some interesting points raised; bit of a shame them don't, for me, seem to go anywhere much. I realise your edit does cover some of what I'm saying, but hell, I don't see why I shouldn't repeat myself, if everyone else is doing it these days ;-)
no subject
Date: 2008-07-22 09:11 pm (UTC)What I find interesting (worrying) in all this is that I think, due to the popularity of 'pop' as a synonym for 'crap,' all we're going to get is a funny redelineation of the genre lines from these articles, when of course there just has to be some kind of inter-genre-fan convention where everyone sits down and admits that crap is its own genre.
The backlash from these bands will be interesting, I think. It's bound to happen soon and I honestly can't predict where it's going to go.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-22 09:45 pm (UTC)Yep. This.
Or, that crap knows no genre and can be found anywhere?
(And from my old Kerrang-reading days, I do remember quite a lot of ''INDIE IS RUB' nonsense, and I'm sure there were a few Pantera fans in there, so while it might arguably be mad, it's not actually that isolated sort of madness...)
no subject
Date: 2008-07-22 11:19 pm (UTC)So all this nonsense isn't non-conformist is it? It sounds like non-conformist stuff might've 10 - 15 years ago or so. But not anymore. What's filling the gap these days doesn't sound like that anymore, just as what filled that gap in the 80s didn't sound like the decades' preceeding.
And this is my problem with these kinds of pieces. they drag the same old names out to whinge. Collins etc wondering where the real alternative that genuinely was way back when has gotten to these days.
And I suggest, that just cos this landfill indie shit sounds like what someone might've been upset about The Chart Show Indie Week fast forwarding past in years gone by, it's not the stuff of depth like it used to be.
And so Collins etc wonder where the non-conformist stuff is these days, because it must be out there somewhere. But the NME, once a semi-bible for this stuff (well it would be, because Collins worked there - right?) is nothing more than a PR exercise for Kasabian or whoever. Complete fluff and shite.
For a while, it seemed like the NME had its finger on the pulse. I'll argue it never did, but for a while I might concede it was close.
If you wanted to find the real non-conformist stuff, you had to do more homework than just buying the NME each week. You had to get off your arse and go to gigs early, buy the fanzines, exchange tapes / flexis... write to people... And you still do. Just cos everything else in this day and age of the net etc is a fingertip away doesn't mean to say all the real non-conformist stuff is easy to find. It never was, but Collins, you got lazy.
Do some real homework for a change.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 12:09 am (UTC)I think the problem is that you find the real n-c stuff and...it's OK. It's a bit better than the View, or the Enemy. You can tell your friends about it, and they'll like it, but they've got their own stuff that's a bit better than the Enemy too - so nothing gets much momentum.
But that's OK! Because these quite good non-conformist bands have got a wide virtual support system, lots of people like them, enough to fill out small gigs and get their music heard, not enough to make them famous, but the thing is being liked by 500 people FEELS pretty similar to being liked by 5000 or 50,000: you simply can't process those kind of numbers. In the past I think bands went from being not at all famous to a degree of fame, and the degree was semi-random - a few got enormous, some got NME-level famous, some got a bit below that, but all of them were more famous than the ten mates, a granny and a dog level. But now the net has made the lowest rung of that ladder quantifiable and a lot of people seem happy to stick with that.
Sorry, drunk and burbling, I will try and be more cogent tomorrow.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 12:26 am (UTC)And no, I wasn't for a second discounting MySpace as a platform for finding new music - there's just a lot of shit on there that it makes finding the good stuff so much harder. So much so that I don't think I've ever bothered, and the only way I've found myself on there was via a recommendation of a friend via Last.FM.
loosely connected pre-coffee ramble
Date: 2008-07-23 07:01 am (UTC)I think what's interesting is that indie-as-a-genre has styled itself with the manifesto of really representing people with really real music and suddenly, the way that indie has marketed itself for years turns out to be as fragile and corruptible as the way in which the pop it sees itself as a reaction to (well, not the good bits of it which just see themselves as making music but you know what I mean) is/was.
I feel there are probably some tensions with a lot of poptimists somewhere at the bottom of all this. I know I tend towards an indie-based interpretation of the musical world, which isn't to say I listen to primarily indie, since I definitely do not but that there are maybe certain phrases I use or criteria I have that point that way.
As a Young Person thus unaware of what went on at the time, I'd personally find it interesting to dig at some of these old "indie"/non-conformist bands (ie: The Jam, etc.) and find out whether they ever were at the time, which I'm assuming they weren't. The retrofetishism-for-credibility around currently, though, is v. interesting in an extraordinary, panicked backpedalling way; it's ok to be pop so long as you're also 80s, thus Neon Neon have a Mercury nomination, etc.
I actually like the article far less this morning. I think I just got overexcited because it had some good insults in. Even so, it's relevant to our interests.
ANYWAY that made no sense because I am not awake yet. I'm not sure any of it was a reply to your post but, err, yes.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 07:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 09:05 am (UTC)DYS?
This guy's argument seems as predictable as the music he's complaining about - or rather there are two arguments here. One is that the kids today listen to conformist crap, the other is about the co-option of treasured symbols and heritage by conformism. Obviously these are old old moves, and seem to me to leave us with two possible responses. One is to say - sure, these things are cyclical, move along nothing to see here but the wheel turning. The other is to ask - sure, but why Indie this time around, or why this and not that. But the answer is probably cycles again. The bigger issues behind this are interesting, but seem equally tired- why are we assuming that non-conformism is good and conformism bad, especially when all the evidence suggests that societies require big doses of both; we're all familiar with non-conformism functioning as small-scale conformism; and then the generational thing whereby non-conformists become taste-makers and gate-keepers, despite their own outlooks and attitudes having shifted, so that they can only recognise the trappings of non-conformism, but which they still pass on.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 09:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 09:13 am (UTC)not even the elvis one? come on.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 09:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 09:43 am (UTC)And he's criticising it for lots of wrong-headed reasons too ("the Pigeon Detectives...won't make you want to topple the Government!" as if that would make them any better), and the indie ideology which focuses on means of production and a DIY aesthetic is total, total bullshit, always has been and always will be.
I think it's inevitable that once anything reaches a certain critical mass outside the mainstream, it will become co-opted into the mainstream (from within, the attitudes of its practitioners, which is why it's so effective) - I don't see this as necessarily a bad thing. I don't think landfill indie is any worse than all the examples of 'proper' indie he talks about (I mean, C86? Ew, dude, gross!) apart from being more omnipresent.
Re: loosely connected pre-coffee ramble
Date: 2008-07-23 09:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 10:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 10:21 am (UTC)SfG was the only thing i played on my mac over the weekend that my mum said 'oh i like this'
yes because it's immensely popular and appeals to a lot of people. and not just a niche of younger people.
Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:30 am (UTC)Top 5 Genres among 12-14 year olds (% saying "in" or "on the way in")
1. R&B (66%)
2. Pop/Top 40 (58%)
3. Hip-hop (57%)
4. Rock (55%)
5. Club/Dance (54%)
Top 5 Genres among 15-17 year olds (% saying "in" or "on the way in")
1. Club/Dance (74%)
2. R&B (68%)
3. Rock (64%)
4. Indie (61%)
5. Pop/Top 40 (59%)
Top 5 Genres among 18-19 year olds (% saying "in" or "on the way in")
1. Rock (72%)
2. Club/Dance (67%)
3. Indie (64%)
4. R&B (58%)
5. Drum'n'Bass (56%)
Top Rock/Indie band for each agegroup:
12-14: The Hoosiers (or My Chemical Romance if they don't count)
15-17: The Ting Tings
18-19: Muse
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:38 am (UTC)Something very important is that musically you react to the people around you, not to the 'wider culture': I think when I was 16 I read the NME partly because it seemed to provide a window on some kind of wider pop culture and let me position myself within that, but I don't know what (if anything) does the same now. Whereas the article Moggy linked to seems to be assuming that the wider culture still exists and that the decline of indie matters within it.
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:42 am (UTC)the kidz are alright! the students, however, are not.
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:46 am (UTC)This bit irritated me the most:
Date: 2008-07-23 10:49 am (UTC)"I recently saw an interview with Conor McNicholas where he was talking about 'growing the brand'," Niven recalls. "The editor of the NME using the expression 'growing the brand'! It's hardly Nick Kent sneaking out of the office to run down Carnaby Street and score smack, is it?"
Yes the NME is rub but i. Fuck off Nick Kent, ii. Fuck off Grandad, iii. you can't really go "oh the glorious days of the hip-hop wars" and then two paragraphs later be saying indie should learn from "Jay-Z the world's greatest rapper", iv. a schism over what should be in the NME is TOTALLY AN ARGUMENT ABOUT THE NME BRAND!!!
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:51 am (UTC)Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 10:54 am (UTC)The one point that is worth further exploration is the argument that none of these bands are making any money from their short bust of success and that they need to build long-term careers in order to do so. (a) Is this true? And (b) does it really matter if they don't make money? In some ways I think the "throwaway" element of these bands is the healthiest thing about them. Pop is supposed to be disposable.
Point of correction: The Verve = the epitome of landfill indie and always have been, Andrew Loog Oldham sample or no Andrew Loog Oldham sample.
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:56 am (UTC)edited
Date: 2008-07-23 10:58 am (UTC)And there was The Verve, who, almost 20 years after their formation, remind us what indie really meant to people in the days when there was no danger of troubling the pop charts, nor of paying the mortgage with music; when the words were about something, anything – politics, perhaps, or at least an original thought about love
I saw the Verve's delusions of relevance at Glastonbury this year. It was horrible, mind-boggling cringe-worthy bollocks.
I think YOOF and/or experience may be the key here. I remember listening to the Offspring and Rage Against The Machine as a teen and thinking it was all terribly revolutionary and subversive and rabble-rousing. I listen to it now and cringe that I could ever have believed this, but I think fans of landfill indie probably experience something similar (insert misguided adjectives of choice, naturally - the Kooks are "deep", the Fratellis "visceral" or whatever), because when your musical palette is underdeveloped (whether through YOOFULNEZ or inexperience) you aren't equipped to make the distinctions you later make. This would also explain why, generally, the less "into music" people are, the less fussy they are (probably a symbiotic relationship, that).
And there is more than a whiff of "things were better in the olden days - which is coincidentally when I was younger and perter and less jaded" about Collins et al's reactions.
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 10:59 am (UTC)Teens bottom 5 genres:
1. Country (15%)
2. Christian (16%)
3. Folk (16%)
4. Classical (23%)
5. Bhangra (24%)
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 11:06 am (UTC)Um hang on a second was hip-hop subsumed into r&b or...is it...just NOT THERE?
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 11:14 am (UTC)It does well among urban teens too, unsurprisingly.
I've now got the age/gender breakdowns open, and hip-hop drops in appeal to boys as they get older but increases in appeal to girls.
Also - the jumps in indie and rock for girls as they get older are HUGE: I think this is the real story behind the article and the current situation, a 'feminization' of indie and rock's appeal (against which you'd predict a journalistic backlash obv).
National Pop League???
Date: 2008-07-23 11:15 am (UTC)fvck off, it's full of people who were There 10 years ago, and run by people even older than that.
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 11:15 am (UTC)is this a new thing though? feels like it, but it could be an illusion
Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 11:20 am (UTC)Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 11:35 am (UTC)This might be because of the dancing aspect? Hip-hop/street dancing seems to be a v popular cross-female-demographic way to keep fit and have fun at the same time - boys tend to be less inclined towards dancing (esp choreographed dancing) for whatever reason. There are like five boys in a class of 25-30 at the class I go to, which is slightly EEK when the tutor demands that the boys run through the routine by themselves.
The feminisation of indie is definitely important, indie bands as the new boy bands etc (and just as boring as boy bands ever were! the only one I had real affection for was Backstreet Boys). I'd love to know how, credibility-wise, McFly are perceived vis-a-vis The Kooks, among teenage girls.
Re: edited
Date: 2008-07-23 12:12 pm (UTC)Re: loosely connected pre-coffee ramble
Date: 2008-07-23 12:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 12:33 pm (UTC)Also in response to yr other comment; when I write a review of one of these bluddy awful "indie" bands on Chartblog, you'd be surprised at the number of times there's a comment from a fan going 'OMG U NOT UNNASTAND THEIR RELEVANCE TO YOOF AND THE CLASS WAR AND STUFF' to which I sort of quietly weep into my keyboard for awhile.
Re: loosely connected pre-coffee ramble
Date: 2008-07-23 12:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 12:43 pm (UTC)Re: loosely connected pre-coffee ramble
Date: 2008-07-23 12:45 pm (UTC)They're also unusual in terms of Weller breaking up the band at its height and saying "fuck all this, soul music is what matters", which made them even more legendary among some fans, and pissed off others hugely.
I find Weller really annoying but like about a half dozen Jam songs and a handful of Style Council ones.
no subject
Date: 2008-07-23 01:06 pm (UTC)Re: National Pop League???
Date: 2008-07-23 01:08 pm (UTC)Re: National Pop League???
Date: 2008-07-23 01:18 pm (UTC)Re: National Pop League???
Date: 2008-07-23 01:20 pm (UTC)Re: National Pop League???
Date: 2008-07-23 01:22 pm (UTC)Re: Some Stats!
Date: 2008-07-23 04:58 pm (UTC)And "Club/Dance" topping 15 to 17! My guess is that in the U.S. "Club/Dance" gets an older crowd, but also that in the U.S. it is more distinct from the more popular genres than it is in Britain. (That said, I just got an email from Solange Knowles' publicist that says that Michelle Williams' "We Break The Dawn" - co-written by Solange - is #1 on Billboard's Hot Dance Airplay chart. That's actually a fairly small market - only about nine stations in the entire U.S. see themselves as specifically going for "dance" rather than r&b/hip-hop or urban or top 40. But "We Break The Dawn" could very easily be classed as r&b or urban or top 40, and it's a really good song, though I think Michelle's relatively nondescript vocals could be holding it back in those markets.)(And I wonder what the crossover is among your teen respondents, if someone who says "Top 40" and someone else who says "r&b" and someone else who says "club/dance" might be thinking of relatively similar music.)