Big fat elephant in the room and no one seems to address it

[moderngirl]

OK, its been briefly talked about in 'this weeks nme' thread but as far as I'm aware, and I did looked for a good 1.5 minutes, there doesnt seem to be another thread talking specifically about the very controversial claim of Ryan Jarman's.

Forgive me if in fact there is a 20 page heated debate somewhere else i've missed...i've just got back from a six week rekky in Thailand - this was one of the first music related stories that I discovered on my return and I came on here to find out what you lot thought about it...only to find, well, not a lot.

So....talking sense? or talking out his arse? Personally, I'm torn. I can definitely see where he's coming from - indie music has definitely lost its appeal, its edge, its attracting for being alternative. Its heading to be more commercial than pop and theres no one to blame other than the record labels and the stupid bands that allow the record labels to mould them into whatever they want.

HOWEVER...apart from the obvious fact that global warming, along with nuclear disarmament is the biggest worldwide problem we're facing at the moment, there are a few reasons why I raise my brow at mr jarman. With all due respect, they are friends with the Kaiser Chiefs, and have supported them in the past, do you not think Ricky and co would be perhaps a little perplexed by these comments seeing as they cant deny they're pretty high up in the 'mainstream indie' stakes and it surely hasnt all just happened magically without them wanting it to. Playing at the V festival. And then there's the fact their music was on Hollyoaks for example. Now someone high up would have had to give permission for that, whether its agreeing for their music to be added to a library that production companies can use in their shows, or simply saying yes to a one off, theres no escaping their music was on one of the most mind numbing and 'mainstream' soaps around. If they're 'nostalgic for a pre-emily Big Brother era' why allow this to occur? But I get it, the Cribs at the real deal, their music is unique, their attitude stears well clear of mainstream indie - they're all about the fans, they're all about putting a message across through their songs, they're all about doing it for themselves, their way. Do remember, I'm a member on this forum because I am indeed a fan - and will continue to be. I just think there are points that could be raised in a counter argument.

Now I say this without meaning to be provokative, more, entice debate which is probably what he intended anyway for any strong opinion is bound to be challenged - but does no one else see the flaws in what he's saying? How come none of you want to talk about it? For what seems like the first time in forever, a band member has said something divisive, something worth thinking about and on his own forum, theres barely a ripple of reaction...

[manda]

My herd of teal deer, let me show you them.

I don't think you're bringing up something that no one necessarily wants to address, at least one person I know can vouch for the fact that I've voiced rather strong opinions on some points wherein I have issues with things they've said versus things they do. Like their insistence that they're above all things a punk band, when all the punk bands I know don't have management teams on two continents and major marketing campaigns funded by major labels behind them. But it also comes down to opportunity more than anything else, I think, and I shouldn't really fault them for it because I don't know for a concrete fact that the bands I know would necessarily not do the same were they given the same opportunities.

What I think is important is that they aren't necessarily out there playing songs about a lot of the crap that's out there at the moment. And they may not have the political bent of the old school punks out there, but a lot of what they've done is often astute current social commentary, which may be just as valid a statement. To quote the rallying cry of a lot of feminists beginning in the 1960s, "the personal is political". Though I will also admit that even with the new album I've had my own issues to address to myself, wherein I've questioned whether it was really necessary for boys - albeit at least in my opinion sincere and well-meaning boys - to point out the inequalities of gender politics in society when there's at least one half of the world's population who are all too aware of it on a daily basis and at least some of whom are not at all afraid to raise hell about it themselves.

And then you say, just as an example, that they're friends with bands like the Kaiser Chiefs. I don't know any of them, so I couldn't say what sort of band they profess themselves to be, but to me they've always seemed to be simply a pop band and aren't attempting to be anything other than that. So I'm not sure that comparison is entirely applicable. I think a much bigger problem are bands who proclaim themselves to be an underground subset band like (oh hell, I'm just going to point fingers and name names here) Fall Out Boy, who have appropriated a "punk" image when they're all a bunch of rich suburbanite boys from a Chicago suburb where the average median family income is six figures and higher, and are turning their version of appropriated "punk" (yes, they deserve it to be in quotes) into a franchise by opening trendy hipster East Village bars and whoring themselves out at the kinds of shallow, stupid parties which are then photographed by various trust fund cokehead douchebags with digital SLRs who then sometimes manage to make a lucrative "career" out of it. And yes, I've seen our boys showing up on the fringe of that (*cough*ParisHilton*cough*CoryKennedy*cough*) and it does bother me a little bit, but as long as they don't get caught up in the lifestyle as far as I'm concerned they're just another band the rich kids have caught on to and are hiring to play their parties until they get bored and the Next Big Thing comes along.

So here's where I think opportunity and meaning converge: is it more important to never compromise or to try to pass on your ideals to as many people as will listen in the hopes that you'll get even just one person thinking outside their normal sphere? A while back I mentioned this in one of the "sell-out" threads, and I think I need to dust it off again. Vivien Goldman, who was an editor at the underground punk weekly Sounds back in the 1970s, recently was debating what it means to be punk these days and how you can venture into the mainstream without thoroughly selling out your ideals and pointed out that back in the 1970's, Geoff Travis refused to sign the Clash to Rough Trade because he felt that it was more important that they reach as broad an audience as possible rather than sign to an independent label and stay small. And not that they are the Clash, but they do have a doggedly DIY aesthetic, even if it may be slightly diluted by the influence of major label involvement, and basically that's what I see happening here, in order for them to reach as many people as possible whose views may be changed by them, there are certain... I'm not going to say 'capitulations' but maybe 'compromises' that may have to be made which may read as mainstream trading off. I think it's too early to say if it'll really change them for the worse, I'm hoping not.

If anyone feels they'd like more clarification on anything I've said, just ask. I won't bite anyone's head off, I promise.

[moderngirl]

First of all, how refreshing to have a decent and articulate reply that doesn't tell me to fuck off and stop moaning/die.

You talk of opportunity - something, yes, they've been privilaged to experience and deservedly so, but with opportunity comes choices. They have made a concious decision to embrace the opportunity to have two trans-atlantic managements and to increase their publicity this time round, something I'm in no way condemning them for - but I do find it somewhat hyprocritical. Yes, they have chosen the route of an independent label here, but it seems there is an element of 'picking and choosing' the moments when they choose to preech about the motives of certain bands and then follow, to a degree, a similar path. All I'm saying is I'm a little confused as to how Ryan can justify what he is saying, when the decisions they've made in terms of the labels they've signed to - major stateside, the fesivals they choose to do, the people they employ to promote them are not completely 100% free of corporate interference.

In terms of the message they are putting across through their songs, you're right, it is ten times better than most of the crap thats out there at the moment. My musical knowledge is somewhat limited, but as far as I am aware sexism is not the obvious issue to address through song these days, and therefore yes, they should be applauded for tackling it so fiercly. And yes, you're right, its not something we're all completely ignorant of, but then again you could argue that for an major political/social point a band chooses to write about.

The reference to the Kaiser Chiefs was perhaps a mistake on my part and the point I should have just stuck to was their decision to support them rather than their personal relationship. Thats none of my business. You mention Fall Out Boy, and my little musical knowledge of American bands tells me Death Cab fall into a similar catergory as FOB, another band the Cribs chose to support.

"is it more important to never compromise or to try to pass on your ideas to as many people as will listen in the hopes that you'll get even just one person thinking outside their normal sphere?"

Absolutely try and pass on your ideas. Everyone does, and voiced opinions and ideas make the world an eclectic, diverse place. People buy music for a reason, whether its for the message the band puts out, their style or simply that its a catchy song. There's is nothing wrong with sharing your views to the world. This particular example has just confused me somewhat. And I'm not being 'theatrical' when I say this, but I just don't see how Ryan can complain about the 'mainstream attitude of most indie bands' while standing on TWO stages errected at festivals sponsored by Britains biggest moblie phone and business corporations - O2 and Virgin.

[benjistar]

Firstly, apologies if any of the following seems harsh, I don't mean it to be, I'm just trying to further the discussion. Anyway, here goes.

It may seem like a cliché, but this discussion seems to forgetting one thing: THE MUSIC ITSELF. The bottom line of this argument has to be the fact that The Cribs have released 3 unique, absolutely amazing albums, albums full of warmth, integrity, soul and truth. They haven't compromised any aspect of their music for anyone, so in that sense it's completely ludicrous for anybody to suggest that they're 'selling out' or being hypocritical in any way.

moderngirl's consternation (again, if the following seems harsh, I don’t mean it to, I respect the fact you’ve brought this up) seems to revolve around that NME feature and in my opinion she’s seeing the interview before she’s ‘seeing’ the music - the hollyoaks thing (should we now start referring to it as ‘hollygate’?) isn’t a huge issue and it doesn’t compromise the band’s music. Cross-proliferation of media is such a common thing these days it almost seems arsey to try and avoid it.

The v fest thing perplexed me a little at first, but I have faith in the boys that itÂ’s not part of any mass sell-out plan and I think you should too. One listen of MN,WN,Whatever should be reassurance enough that theyÂ’re not ditching any of their principles, whether they be musical principles or ideological ones. A quick poll of some of my mates who arenÂ’t massively into the band (their loss) suggested that this album is actually less accessible for non-fans than the New Fellas. And they certainly havenÂ’t toned town their live show either. Perhaps by doing v fest the boys are simply trying to take their message of integrity to more people? No cynicism should be required here. Just faith.

What Ryan is saying about mainstream music is true. When was the last time a new band with some actual substance and heart grabbed you? In the past couple of years I’ve struggled to find any new music that I can identify with apart from The Cribs, which is why they’re so important to me. I don’t want to name and slag off bands, because that just seems weak and not very dignified, but put it this way: a band like The Kooks and Air Traffic (I could name dozens) have songs that may be nice to tap along to on the radio, but if you searched for any depth or substance to their songs you‘d feel alienated. I want a band to inspire me, a band with a cause to fight for, a band who speak nothing but the truth. As for the Kaiser Chiefs thing, they’ve never pretended to be anything more than a pop band (although that said I’m not a fan of the ‘angry’ thing they got going on with the new album). I mean, as Parva they even had a song called ‘Put Me On the Cover Of Your Magazine’, a song you feel was only part irony. I don’t know the in-depth details about their relationship with the Cribs, but friends are friends. What do you want them to do, publicly and clearly disassociate themselves with them? Now that would be selling out - selling out your friends, the worst kind of selling you can do.

I think people havenÂ’t been discussing this issue because itÂ’s relatively non-existent; people donÂ’t see it as an issue. The music speaks for itself. The Cribs are clearly not hypocritical, and clearly not sell-outs, and it would be mad and churlish to suggest otherwise. TheyÂ’ve done everything completely on their own terms.

As Gary himself said on that Drowned In Sound podcast thingy, “just ‘cause you hear us on the radio, doesn’t mean we’re bad people. Don’t freak out on us, we’re still the same band we’ve always been.” Some people seem to forgetting that. Have faith guys.

[manda]

The festival thing seems to just come with the territory these days, because you'd be hard pressed to find festivals that aren't underwritten by a massive corporate sponsor. If there's any hint that there's money to be made someplace they aren't already making it they come running like hyenas to a fresh kill. And very few decent-sized festivals can afford the overhead of putting on something like that without an underwriter who can give them a big budget to work with.

I also would just like to correct one point: FOB and Death Cab really aren't much alike. I've seen both referred to as "emo", that's about it, but they sound different and to my ears, at least, neither one even falls in the original definition of emo music. I'm not particularly a Death Cab fan, because musically they just don't do anything for me, but I can respect that they're intelligent, articulate guys who have legitimately interesting extracurricular projects outside of licensing their likenesses for action figures (FOB and MCR have both done this... just WHY?) or running cheesy nightclubs. Chris Walla, for instance, does production work for other bands like the Thermals and Tegan and Sara and a couple years ago wrote a rather endearing column for Under the Radar magazine all about his love of Blur. I can't disrespect that! (I can, however, disrespect Pete Wentz's modeling contract and his claim that owning over 700 hoodies is somehow a shoutout to hardcore punk and Bob Dylan wrapped in one - make that 730 - cozy little sweatshirts. Uh... no.)

So yes, I named names. I don't care, 'cause it needs saying. That poo is not punk chuffing rock.

I also thought I'd try to clarify something else I said up there because I'm not sure it was understood in the way I intended it. About the sexism thing - I'm certainly not faulting the boys for attempting to take it on, but my point in that half of the world deals with it was referring specifically to the female half, who have to live with it. And my issue was just that, as girls, why should we need guys to champion us? Why can't we do it for ourselves? Is it further proof of how sexist the music industry is, that as soon as guys do a record about it, suddenly it's a vital issue of concern? It's not anything I'm at all blaming the boys for, 'cause I think it's just an unintentional side effect but it's something that I do think about. And I'm not man-hating either by raising questions, for the record. I've been accused of it in the past when it wasn't my intention so I'm just going to state here that it's not. Just something that I've been thinking about.

[moderngirl]

You make a very interesting point actually on the sexism thing, I'd never really seen it from that angle. But you're right, I'm sure that's not how they intended it, however, it could be seen that way. The only female I can think of that would gladly speak out on the subject is Beth Ditto and if she hasn't already, I'm sure its coming.

Going back to the festival thing, there are plenty that yes, may have corporate backing, but don't promote the mainstream and take a more reserved, relaxed approach to the festival experience. For bands to jump onboard to one of these festivals doesn't scream "we're in it for the money!!" at me. Electric Gardens, Truck, Secret Garden Party, even Bestival. Maybe they werent asked, but the Cribs could easily headline any of those. And if all else fails.........Start your own!!!!! With every 'real' indie band of your choice!!! Why not?? If thats not going against the grain, doing things your way, then I don't know what is.

I'm still pretty shocked there hasnt been more of a reaction from you lot. What else do they have to do to provoke one??

[benjistar]

I'm still pretty shocked there hasnt been more of a reaction from you lot. What else do they have to do to provoke one??

No reaction is needed! The fact that you're a Cribs fan is the reaction. I don't think there's an issue here and that's why people aren't arguing about that. You're taking issue when there isn't one to take! See my post above for more of an explanation on that.

[moderngirl]

Honestly, I completely missed your reply. I scrolled to the bottom and just saw manda's.

I understand what you're saying about letting the music speak for itself and up until this point it has. I think my motives for trying to bring this issue into discussion have been confused. I'm in no way trying to find fault in the band, I'm GENUINELY confused. I'm now getting mixed messages from their actions (playing at V fest and O2) against their words and purely wanted to hear what others had to say on the subject. Simple as that!

And i'm sorry, but I just don't buy that its not an issue worth raising. Who else is indeed speaking out about the commercialisation of indie music? I've never said what Ryan said was incorrect! I whole heartedly agree. The fact three of my previously devout RnB loving mates have decided they now adore Kate Nash is proof enough to me - and I will argue until the day I die that there must have been some label backing in KEEPING her at the top of the charts.

I'm not asking for an argument, and I though I had worded my opinions quite carefully so far to avoid that. Simply a discussion.

[janeinma]

I must say I do disagree with Ryan, I currently love The Twilight Sad who sing of torment and anguish personal though not political. I also like Cold War Kids and feel they are trying to make some points- their religion and use of it offends me no end but thats just my take on religion.
I also love Mumm-Ra who I feel try to make different music to the stuff in the chart, produce amazing tunes and haven't sold out.
My biggest beef is the fact the guys buy into some american music which makes me cringe with its mediocrity. Sorry guys I cant and dont like Pavement , Lee Ranaldo, Thurston Moore or Sonic Youth. Their music just leaves me cold.
But as long as the guys produce music which makes my heart soar and my whole body surge to their riffs I say live and let live.
We love the music it doesn't mean we echo his thoughts blindly.

[jade]

I'm still pretty shocked there hasnt been more of a reaction from you lot. What else do they have to do to provoke one??

No reaction is needed! The fact that you're a Cribs fan is the reaction. I don't think there's an issue here and that's why people aren't arguing about that. You're taking issue when there isn't one to take! See my post above for more of an explanation on that.

yeah, i'm a little shocked you jump to conclusions like that too benji.


I've thought about it, and I've agreed. I became more and more disenchanted with this whole "indie" thing over the past year, so when Ryan said it onstage it was pretty much like he'd took the words out of my mouth. What I mean is that I was beginning to think it was contrived - a label identifying bands as punk when they really, really weren't.

(of course, i don't think Ryan was actually serious about global warming, or i'd think he was a bit silly.)

music and words are a bit separate - just on one level, the music and the melody are the primal bit that makes you dance, feel emotions or whatever; and the words are a bit higher up.

now i'd rather listen to any band or artist playing pop songs - i.e. well written and hooky; than some meat and potatoes thing.

[Pablo Honey]

i'm going to try and this thread (and i won't succeed)

1) ryan was JOKING about the global warming comment and has said so a few times now.

2) he is right about the commercialisation of indie music.

3) so many bands have played corporate styled gigs before and it doesnt mean they have "sold out." radiohead played v last year and they are on of the last bands i imagine selling out. in fact id say not playing a gig for a stupid reason like "its sponsored by virgin" is more selling out than anything. the day you choose not to gig and get your music out to the world because of stupid reasons like i mentioned before is the day you HAVE sold out.

rant over :/

did i win?

[aguyiusedtoknow]

People are getting carried away by this, and to be honest the music hasn't changed that much. The only difference is that more of it is being played on the radio, and so being heard by more people. There is still loads of good new music being made. For example, if Radio One was still playing Jamelia and Britney Spears all day, then we'd all be sat on some obscure indie forum raving about how good Jamie T (for example) is. But because Radio One go completely over the top with people like Jamie T, a lot of people call it commercial and automatically grow a distaste for it.

Personally I don't listen to the radio, not at all anymore, but it's harder to discover new music if you don't hear it anywhere. I know people can download every album under the sun, give it a couple of listens and then decide, but not everyone can do that. The people who do only like things they hear on the radio do so mainly because they haven't got the time/money to get ahold of four or five albums a month and give them a few listens, and you can only like a band or song if you've heard it.

If you ask me, people who take an instant dislike to anything on the radio, just because Radio One play it, are every bit as bad as the people who listen to Radio One religiously and follow the herd in to adoring The Next Big Thing. It's just another form of discrimination. Everyone needs to stop caring about everything but the actual music, not to listen to an album for the first time thinking 'this is going to commercial cheese-on-toast bollocks', because that does affect how you hear it. If you can just listen to every band on a level playing field then you'll find you can actually realise what music you personally enjoy.

[Basher]

its hardly the most important thing in the world

taking it too far y'all ^^

just enjoy the band, the live shows and the albums

[Basher]

i thought radiohead played V simply because everyone thought it would be the last place they would EVER want to play

[moomin]

I have been thinking on this and reading the thread
going away and thinking some more and then I asked myself one question

am I unhappy with the current music scene?

my answer was no not really
I like how the mainstream has now changed to bands who can play their own instruments instead of pretty girls or boys all in a row dancing and miming, I prefer this scene to the last scene of pretty boys rapping about how tough they were sitting in a pool surrounded by girls and guns.

I like the better pop bands like Kaisers and Franz making the charts and I understand this will have a ripple effect of bands popping up like The Kooks

All this doesn't mean to say I want the 'indie' scene to be completely commercial, (it would have to accept being called by its new name otherwise - pop) but I do see that after a while the next big scene will come along and this one will be no longer fashionable, the overly pop indie punk will be shown for what it has become and we will have already moved on.

The Cribs arent stupid, they must know this is a popularity contest where every scene gets its day in the sun before being dumped for the next, so then I started asking what was the point of the huge statement of commercialisation of Indie music and I was left with this

if you flood the market with run of the mill people get bored of trying
they stop progressing because they know with the set one two bang a drum sing they can make money
so maybe their point isnt really lets stop with big festivals or lets stop enjoying a one two bang a drum sing bands but lets make sure there is enough attention being put on the artists who are trying to make a difference in the scene they have found themselves in

and with jonny borrell coming out with his usual drivel in this weeks nme
if you have a message you need a forum on which to get it across
if you feel strongly enough about something then sometimes you have to use the same medium you dislike in order to reach the people you have similar views
as a band today you cannot really get away without doing interviews because its seen as a publicity stunt to make more money Mr Borrell will know this so what exactly is he trying to do other than his usual foot in mouth jabbering


I hope that makes a bit of sense