4. Independent To What? Investigating The Complexity Of
4.2 The DIY Ethic And The Narratives Gravitating Around Independent Music
79 The following paragraph will therefore examine the ways in which ‘independent’ has been analyzed referring to its narratives and to its modes of productions and looking at its interrelations with the music industry.
I will refer to this distinction made by Strachan (2003) between ideological and industrial dimensions as the key elements to take into account for the theorization of the notion of independent. For the sake of discussion, I will leave at the beginning these two elements distinguished, to underline how these elements belong to different academic traditions, and I will then try to look at the interplay between them.
4.2 The DIY Ethic And The Narratives Gravitating
80 What needs to be taken into account in the definition of independent is its oppositional character which depends upon its relation to the mainstream music industry, which is traditionally constituted by the major recording companies.
In more general terms, this assumption calls back to a common critique to the music and to the culture industry against which we can position the notion of independent. According to Toynbee (2000), the discursive construct of the ‘independence’ can find its foundations in the theorization of the culture industry, and particularly of popular music, by the Frankfurt School, which has significant impact upon the common sense understandings about the relationships between the music industry and music-making practices.
In the assumptions Adorno and Horkeimer (1947) make around the role of capitalism in the culture industry, the authors stress the ways in which culture industry implies the standardization of culture to a commodity. According to their perspective, standardization represses the individual creativity of cultural producers. And more interestingly for our discussion, if culture is in itself autonomous, in the culture industry culture “abjures its autonomy” (1974, p. 127) or we could say its independency. Finally the last issue that I suggest here it’s the emphasis given to dominant relationship existing between the culture industry and the public, which is considered a mass audience of passive consumers distant from cultural producers.
The pessimistic view of the culture industry given by the Frankfurt School has always been a point of departure for the following debate around culture industry.
However according to Adorno and Horkeimer (e.g. 1947), independent production would be included within the system of standardization of the culture industry.
A fundamental assumption to understand the existence of sector which is independent to the culture industry, is the point Morin (1962) makes to criticize Adorno and Horkeimer’s (e.g.
1947) perspective: “An important principle is that the cultural creation cannot totally be integrated in the system of industrial production” (1962, p. 24). According to Morin, on the contrary of the Frankfurt School authors, cultural production can exist independently from the system of the culture industry.
I’s anyway still important to point out that the assumptions Adorno and Horkeimer (e.g. 1947) make are particularly relevant because they provided a pessimistic view of culture and culture industry which is still very common today in the social discourses of the independents.
Adorno and Horkeimer’s (e.g. 1947) perspective is actually very present referred to the music industry from which the ‘independents’ want to distance themselves from.
81 The common sense dichotomies existing between art versus commerce and standardization versus creativity are still rooted in the social discourses gravitating in independent music culture.
These assumptions presuppose an understanding of the music industry as a structured and hierarchical industry in which standardized practices inhibit the creativity of the artists. As Strachan suggests:
There is a naturalized assumption that the recording industry is an inherently corrupting (set of) institution(s) where artists are routinely subject to bad financial practice and are necessarily restricted in terms of creativity.
Those involved in the DIY independent scene seek to separate themselves from the corporate recording industry by attempting to establish an alternative, self-sustaining, autonomous network based upon ideals of collectivity and fair exchange. ( Strachan, 2003, p.17) .
The importance of these social discourses assuming the freedom and independence from the economic constraints of culture industry can be found in any kind of cultural production. For example Becker (1982) mentions the ways in which photographers, who do commercial work commonly perceive this commercial attitude to influence negatively their personal work.
However in the particular case of music, the notion of independence has its own peculiarity and is much more rooted than in other cultural fields.
In the case of music, the independent music culture is particularly affecting social discourses and values which are constructed in opposition to a music industry. I will try to summarize briefly these characteristics which are entailed in the common understanding of independent:
- Independence from corporate control: independent is by definition explaining the oppositional relationship existing with the corporate music industry (the majors) - DIY punk ethic: independent music sector relies upon a set of values which can be
summarized in the DIY (Do it yourself) ethic
- Rootedness in local music scenes: independent record labels and artists are fostered by localized music scenes in which grass-roots music activities take place on a face to face interaction
- Innovation and originality: the fact that independent music is not constrained by industrial and economic processes allows to foster individual creativity
- Identification with an audience of experts: audience of independent music is meant to be highly committed to the ideologies of independency
82 In the case of music, the independence can be defined by reference to DIY punk ethic: the independent music sector relies upon a set of values which can be summarized in the DIY (Do it yourself) ethic which affect the narratives and practices among the independents.
The indie attitude originates in its grass-roots music production and in the non-professionalism of the punk Do-It-Yourself (DIY) ethic of the late 1970s and early 1980s. In contrast to the mainstream rock, punk portrays as its ideological goal the DIY ethic, which means the possibility for musicians to rely upon themselves and to engage in the production and distribution of music without depending upon the standardized structure of the music industry.
As this definition suggests: “DIY is essentially the simple idea that you can do for yourself the activities normally reserved for the realm of capitalist production” ( Holtzman et al., 2005) This independence enables to keep the artistic creativity autonomous from the commercial and industrial constraints of the corporate record labels. To the standardized and vertically integrated system of the mainstream music industry, the independents embraced the purity and the authenticity of grassroots music making practices. Music in punk has always been defined in terms of purity and authenticity in the sense that music which is ‘uncommodified’
by the market, tends to be ‘true’ to a particular social group (Bannister, 2006).
The notion of authenticity is crucial in the DIY independent culture because it’s connected to an anti-consumerism and anti-commercial ethic of punk.
Therefore in the ethic of punk, being unprofessional and without expertise it’s perceived as positive value, because it’s a sign of authenticity. This means that in DIY attitude there’s neither clear distinction between productions made on an amateur or professional basis, nor clear distinction between music producers (musicians and music producers) and fans, because they are all engaged in sharing common values related to the DIY punk ethic.
The closeness of fans and musicians is considered one of the crucial elements of the DIY ethic at a point that “spectators become fans, fans become musicians, musicians are always already fans” (Shank, 1994, p.31).
Being outside the economic constraints, the DIY ethic attempts to create a cooperative and friendly environment, in order to share a sense of belonging to the DIY independent culture, in which the identity is in opposition to the music industry. The sense of belonging to the DIY independent culture is absolutely crucial, but the independent music culture needs to be understood in relations to its modes of production.
83