A lecture, a tute and a night out

After the above three events, some points are reorientating my research:

.CULTURAL CAPITAL (post Ian’s tutes, and the readings for week 7, I am increasingly finding that a consciousness of cultural capital now defines A LOT of EVERYTHING)….
Which leads to my next point on :

.BOURDIEU. Specifically, his conception of Cultural Capital as a social exchange that is either embodied or learned. (either way, it’s intrinsic to our interactions).

.INDIE – this is the subculture I'm going to focus on. I guess I'd identify as Indie, so it makes some academic theories a little more easy to understand in a practical context. I guess it also engenders some subjectivity, some bias. But subjectivity when it comes to ‘sellouts’ is arguably what generates debate in the first place. The fact that musicians want to be able to make money is, in itself, not that scandalous. It's quite practical. But questions of how much money? and from whom? And will it change your sound? And will I identify with the people that like that sound? are things that speak more of Indie attitudes and values. These are questions of politics and taste. People get passionate about those things.

YOUTH - Indie as a genre is one way of looking at a type of music, and a culture of music. But it has more extensive implications for shared (and targeted) identities and practices. This is demonstrated by one of its major forerunners: College Radio in the 1980s. College Radio emerged as an independent Radio network for various colleges in the US. According to Holly Kruse in her book, Site and sound : understanding independent music scenes,

"Music put out by independent record labels (and disseminated over the air waves of college radio stations emerged onto a national (and international scene)."


In this way you can conclude that the kids at college, back then, were doing it for themselves. (D.I.Y). They were both consuming and mediating cultural artefacts. The fact that this music couldn't be heard on mainstream radio stations assured an 'us' vs 'them' mentality that denoted the music as morally superior, and more organic. More on the aspect of authenticity later. Main point is, Indie was for the kids - and generally still is.

Back to Bourdieu, and taste in music (and art in general) as a marker of cultural capital.
The quote below is veh veh amazing: it encapsulates what I couldn't hope to observe about taste/identity/aesthetics and subjectivity:

"Taste classifies, and it classifies the classifier. Social subjects, classified by their classifications, distinguish themselves by the distinctions they make, between the beautiful and the ugly, the distinguished and the vulgar, in which their position in the objective classifications is expressed or betrayed." (from Distinction)

(So I think what he meant was: Once you say you like X, (be it a band, a movie, a vintage shop etc.) you are an X sort of person, not a Y person like the person over there in the corner. And the more you judge them for being Y, the more of an X you are. )



Field Work: (sort of)

The other night I was watching an album launch in the valley. I was chatting with someone from a supporting act. I said to him, I like band X, and he rolled his eyes and said…’they’re so derivative.’ The conversation ended. I felt tasteless and generic for liking ‘derivative’ bands, and he went strutting off in his Cuban heels, his tight pants and his Dave Graney crevatte. Wanker.

Clearly he had more cultural capital to play with than me. The band I liked was more popular than all the obscure ones he’d rattled off to me when he mentioned his taste. (and they all must have been entirely avant garde and none of them derivative.) His appearance and his playing in a band from Melbourne might have generated some capital too.

There was a wealthy middle-aged mum there that night who suggested to a grungey, druggy band I know that they could make lots of money from playing on a P & O cruise. Oopsy. Poor thing had never heard them play before and as she left the room they sniggered behind their hands.

Clearly she had no problem with sellouts, but I think she wouldn't have even seen a band on P & O as a sellout. They would just be making money, or being successful. With all her wealth she had zero subcultural capital amongst these people. And if she could have bought it she might have known that selling out (particularly to a chain of holiday liners) is BIG FAT NO NO.