From: malcolm@wrs.com (Malcolm Humes)
Subject: Re: Frith comments - on Major Label Music is EVIL!  
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 18:15:29 GMT


Here's something I posted a long time back about a similar thread. 
This is an interview with Fred Frith from around 1980, and Fred has
done enough indie music to have to interesting observations. 

Q: What major factors do you feel determine the nature of the
atmosphere in which most of today's music evolves?

FF: The state of music in general isn't only determined by what
people are playing and listening to. It's also determined by what
the business is pushing, and the relationships within this system
are complex. Record companies, magazines and radio stations
continue to exploit the whole idea of music as fashion. The
business has always required a rapid turnover of material -
something unique and new coming along each week. Record
companies in particular began by turning out a lot of product
and seeing which ones took hold, and in this way they isolated
specific, proven markets and promoted only acts which they felt
fit into those markets.
   These days they're less indiscriminate because they have less
money, but the basic premise has persisted. Most professional
music is ultimately in the hands of entrepreneurs of one kind or
another.  There are agents and bookers and public relations
people and disc-jockeys and journalists all inter-reacting and
creating and destroying images all the time.  Most journalists,
for example, never write about anything that isn't on a major
label.  Even when they occasionally like something on a minor
label they rarely pay it second mind. But on the other hand, they
will listen to a new David Bowie album over and over again to
make sure they have a definitive opinion of it.
 
Q: Do you regret this general lack of recognition, or do you
feel that it is somehow inevitable?
 
FF: I think you have to resign yourself to the fact that if you're
not going to get very much attention. Obviously, there's no
point in lamenting the fact that the vast majority of people
aren't listening to alternative music. There's no particular
reason they should.  When less than twenty five percent of a
democratic country's people can vote a dangerous loony into power
there are more important things to worry about. I would say that
if you make marginal music you need to be as informative as
possible.  Otherwise you stand very little chance of being
noticed at all, and certainly have no right to complain about it.
I mean, the music business isn't a conspiracy.  You can choose to
be a part of its process or you can choose to distance yourself
from it.  Many musicians vacillate between these two extremes.
They want to be well known and yet often have a fear of appearing
to  "sell out", which I think is dumb.  If the music is worth
doing - do it.  Why feel guilty about it? Much of what is popular
is so for very good reason.  The trouble is, some musicians
concentrate on developing strategies to  "make it", instead of
really looking at what they are doing and why.
 
Q: What do you find encouraging in the midst of all this?
 
FF: I like the fact that since 1977 more musicians have begun to
do things for themselves. In the States alone there are now
dozens of alternative labels and alternative groups worth
investigating. Musicians have started communicating with each
other apart from the established communication system. Of course,
such people have hardly any influence on popular taste, but I
think their efforts represent the beginning of something which
could be very important later.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This was from an interview from early 80's, I think from
around 1982, and it appears to be from something called "The
Complete Music Magazine". 

I think it's interesting to note his last comments since it's now
nearly 10 years later.  Was it "the beginning of something which
could be very important later"? Or have the major labels just
taken the lead from the indies and found a new marketplace to
exploit? It seems to me that things are largely the same as they
were 10 years ago now that many of the indie distribution
channels have been killed or absorbed and assimilated and the
majors have a broader definition of what is marketable.
 
Another observation: about FF's first comment about the state of
music being determined by what the industry is pushing - I think
this extends beyond majors, magazines and radio to also include
the music-making tools the industry is pushing as our ticket to
be "creative". Equipment has become "fashionable" too.
 
I thought some further comments of FF tied into this:
----------------------------------------------------------------
(part of a response about use of high-tech equipment)
FF: ...As always, the trick is to make the equipment work for you
and not be a slave to this. The way a device `malfunctions' is
usually at least as interesting as what it's supposed to do.
 
Q: Do you feel that preoccupation with equipment in general can
be a useful means of avoiding the issue?
 
FF: Yes indeed. There are many people who approach music as a
branch of competitive athletics, and who feel obliged to keep on
top of the latest technological developments. But you know how
difficult it is for musicians these days - perhaps especially for
American musicians. Americans are often encouraged from a very
early age to take themselves and their accomplishments extremely
seriously. Now this has a positive effect in that it makes for a
reasonable amount of toughness and independence of mind. But such
an attitude masks the humor of situations, and can lead to an
obsessive self-rightousness that permeates the whole society.
Look at U.S. foreign policy.


 - malcolm@wrs.com 
Xref: sparky alt.music.alternative:9377 rec.music.misc:21985 rec.music.cd:6008