Arson Smith wrote:I never even heard of Pitchfork until I met you kids, anyhow... the only time I am ever even reminded of its existence is when someone posts something here from it and then starts bitching about it...

T
O

steve wrote:These things aren't done for us, they are done for the people who exist parasitically off of us. Fuck them in the eye.

T
A
L

Brinkman wrote:May justice be swift and without mercy.

L
Y

unarmedman wrote:Everyone calm down and remember, this could be worse.

Bobby Brown rules, I always wanted to punch Whitney in the face!!!

steve wrote:The thing that's good about underground culture is that it isn't being thrust at everyone. It is discovered in due time by people who are receptive to it. We each find those things we are fond of because they suit us specifically, not because we acquiesce to group thinking.

This is a very, very good point. Art that gets foisted upon others in the relentless manner of a McDonald's commercial should immediately be suspect. Great art doesn't have to beat you over the head to convince you of its greatness.

If the hippie down the street can cut off his dreadlocks, sport tight-fitting jeans and black shirt so as to be hip and therefore get laid, then I'd be an asshole if I got up-in-arms when a suburban white kid did it. Well, even supposing...
I think a very poor-quality "mainstream" is conducive towards a prosperous underground. I think of this conscious attempt at blatant commercialism on behalf of indie labels as the underground "molting" it's more fame-motivated side. Really, we could do without it.
Perhaps venues that cater to the "indie" scene suffer when high-profile "indie" artists start packing stadiums instead, but indie venues are more like the thermometer than thermostat; their number increases and decreases depending on the popularity of the artists they cater to. Speaking for my town, I can say having a plethora of venues to perform has not made the city more fertile towards creativity. Rather, it seems a lot of musicians here are all lemonade stands competing for that same lemonade dollar. The ratio of shit-vs-art is the same in hipster circles as it is elsewhere. Perhaps recently, the favor has been tipped towards "shit", and thusly, the commercialism.
Either way, the next Mekons album comes out at it's own speed.

Aneurhythmia wrote:

Barbo wrote:

Aneurhythmia wrote:Yeah, but commercial viability is inextricable from art in all but the most ideal situations.

I would argue that this is neither art, nor is it merely commercially viable. It is done for profit under the guise of "hipness" and art.


Jon

I meant the songs, not the act of compiling them.

steve wrote:This is obviously, demonstrably wrong. It couldn't be more wrong, actually.

Well, I should qualify that by saying that my ideological concept of art includes an audience. That, and we're not commies.

steve wrote:

Aneurhythmia wrote:Yeah, but commercial viability is inextricable from art in all but the most ideal situations.

This is obviously, demonstrably wrong. It couldn't be more wrong, actually.

Commerical viability is separate completely from art in all but the worst situations.

That is closer to the truth, by my reckoning.

tmidgett wrote:

steve wrote:

Aneurhythmia wrote:Yeah, but commercial viability is inextricable from art in all but the most ideal situations.

This is obviously, demonstrably wrong. It couldn't be more wrong, actually.

Commerical viability is separate completely from art in all but the worst situations.

That is closer to the truth, by my reckoning.

I don't disagree, but that only tells you that I'm a pessimist.

Christopher wrote:Great art doesn't have to beat you over the head to convince you of its greatness.

Thanks a lot.
For years I've slaved over my Mona Lisa Electric Hammer and now I'm being told great art should beat you in the head.
I guess it's back to the drawing board.


I wonder how well a chainsaw with The Scream painted on it would sell...

Aneurhythmia wrote:

tmidgett wrote:

steve wrote:

Aneurhythmia wrote:Yeah, but commercial viability is inextricable from art in all but the most ideal situations.

This is obviously, demonstrably wrong. It couldn't be more wrong, actually.

Commerical viability is separate completely from art in all but the worst situations.

That is closer to the truth, by my reckoning.

I don't disagree, but that only tells you that I'm a pessimist.

So, what happened to your "ideological concept of art" as that which has a (commercial) audience?

There is a range of reflexivity (or lack thereof) between artists and their "audience" (be it a potential/real/imagined/commercial audience, etc.). It seems that for many, this reflexivity takes place in the first-person, with the artist as producer and receiver. Otherwise said: with the artist producing art in whatever register, and with whatever the final product, that most satisfies the artist him or herself.

The world of independent music is possible and is great because it is a mode of production by and for producers, wherein the relations of exchange as well as decision-making powers are not stratified into for-profit (exploitative) hierarchies.

Or am I wrong?

steve wrote:The thing that's good about underground culture is that it isn't being thrust at everyone. It is discovered in due time by people who are receptive to it. We each find those things we are fond of because they suit us specifically, not because we acquiesce to group thinking.

That's a keeper.

That sentiment is something that I have often tried to succinctly express, but I have always failed.

For example, I have a particular, younger, female, ex-coworker friend who doesn't understand just how much she makes my teeth grind when one of these types of conversations comes up:

(imagine we're shootin' the shit in a bar, and some turdfest like FallOutBoy/Killers/MyChemicalRomance/whatever is playing on the jukebox)

She: "Oh man, I fucking love this song! Do you like these guys?"

Me (being polite): "Um, no I don't think I really..."

She: "You're kidding me, they're like totally popular right now! I just figured you'd know all about them!
I mean, you being 'the music guy' and everything!"

I mean she says this kind of 7th grade shit with such a straight face, and intones "totally popular" so earnestly as if it were a compliment all by itself or something... and I just can't help but just silently gnash my teeth and sigh internally... because words are failing me at that point, and I'm trying to hold it in and not do one of these eloquent moves:

She: "Oh man, I fucking love this song! Do you like these guys?"

Me: "No, but this retarded shit fucking sucks, whatever the fuck it is!"

Then add in a random dude or two who are just hanging about, trying to bang her, and being all agreeable with her: "...it's a GOD DAMN ARMS RACE! Fuck YEAH! ROCK!"... and then people honestly wonder why you don't like to to go out much anymore, and accuse you of being old and/or bitter because you just want to stay home.

I'm with Kerble about the Pitchfork Fest. It's run by people who like some decent music, there's apparently a nice atmosphere and it's a good deal for the bands you will see. I'd probably even go if I lived in Chicago, despite the fact that I seriously dislike Pitchfork as a music journalism site.

Also, those bands listed in the original post are already pretty mainstream bands so who even gives a flying fuck? Sounds like par for the course frankly. Don't let it bother you.