IDM Mailing Archive

Andrew Haley wrote 9/10/96

quoted 6 lines Damn, I hate elitism, and this is one of its worst forms. The

> >Damn, I hate elitism, and this is one of its worst forms. The >attitude is: It's "our" music and we don't want the great masses to >pollute it. > >Question: why is "underground" techno better?

Hello again, It seems like my original message has been taken in a way that makes it seem that I am an elitist, fascist. But I don't care WHO hears what music, I'm not trying to remain on an ivory tower. As a matter of fact, In my first message what I meant when I said; "MTV is feeding the pretty little egos of people with more "complex" musical tastes by creating a special channel for them (or special shows). The whole thing is pitiful." was that MTV saw two types of listeners; those that liked "underground" and those that liked "mainstream" music. MTV is here dividing listeners between your "vinyl buyers" and "the great masses." I was saying that I thought that was wrong. I encouraged buying from small stores in order to support people (like a lot of my friends) who really want to devote their lives to music, NOT to protect "our sacred" music from the hands of the masses (rather more from big corporations). I don't like MTV because they're so big and because they have so much power over what music we see and hear. If they were little and were making choices, that's one thing, but they're world wide and have a huge impact on our world culture. Anyway, I don't think any one thing should have that big of an impact...whether it be Chritianity or US megacorporations that exploit cheap labor (here it is a similar question as with artist and MTV and also availability of music; do you support the company that pays the workers so that they can eat something, even though they pay to little? Do you go along with the company because it makes clothes cheaper so more people can afford clothing?) You're right that they are just videos (just like they're just pants or sweaters) and you can't make sweeping political statements about them, but I think that you can make them about huge corporations, and that is what MTV is. It makes me mad just as it makes me mad that local foreign movies aren't shown because they can't compete with the budget of American movies. So, everyone sees American movies and things become monotonous and boring. I hope that this explains things a little more, even though I'm sure most don't really care. This is a problem with the company, not with anyone that would ever want to listen to music...that's just a dumb argument anyway. Of course you want people to listen. But there are alternatives to using MTV to do that. That's all I meant to say. That encouraging them to get bigger may not be a good idea. And thanks for not flaming me! Everyone's been pretty nice about things so far (well, exept one or two people.) take care, Tiffany @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Tiffany A. Johnson (tijohnson@vaxsar.vassar.edu) Art History; major Women's Studies; minor Vassar College Poughkeepsie, New York or Minneapolis, Minnesota @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

quoted 2 lines Question: why is "underground" techno better?

>>Question: why is "underground" techno better? >

The underground is in fact often "better". Why? It's the old art/entertainment divide. The artists are usually internally motivated - with some internal vision which they are attempting to express. In a sense, they follow that calling more for themselves than for the audience (which is not to say that they are necessarily oblivious to audience reaction). This type of creator tends to be less interested in the effect on the mass audience and more interested in the work itself. The entertainer is generally externally motivated - at best, to bring the audience satisfaction via his or her work; at worst, to simply separate the audience from their money as rapidly as possible. The creators of underground music are more likely to be creating simply for the love of music, rather than for profit or mass adulation. That is, they are more likely to place high value on the music itself, rather than seeing it as a means to an end (popularity, fame, wealth, whatever). If they were primarily interested in the life of luxury, they certainly wouldn't choose such an esoteric medium as their path to that plastic paradise. Caveat Emptor: Of course, the division is not absolute. There is bad underground music (though more often than not at least the intentions were good); there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream (Eno!). However, overall: What's the result? The work of the artist more often challenges the audience. The work of the entertainer more often panders to the audience. Guess which one sells more records. Zenon M. Feszczak Philosopher ex nihilo *In my value system, "good" here means "artistic". I place higher value on art than on entertainment, though both have their place. If the kind reader disagrees with that hierarchy, then this argument collapses like a fat cat on a polished floor.

ADDENDUM: The signal/noise ratio will definitely decrease if idm goes mainstream. 3

quoted 1 line The signal/noise ratio will definitely decrease if idm goes mainstream.

>The signal/noise ratio will definitely decrease if idm goes mainstream.

This list has signal? C. -- cspot@hyperreal.com (Chris.Hilker)

zmf> ADDENDUM: zmf> The signal/noise ratio will definitely decrease if idm goes mainstream. This is the most amusing thing I've read on IDM in at _least_ a year. ozymandias . . . the self-reflecting image of a narcotized mind . . . ozymandias G desiderata ogd@organic.com Think "bus" (415)278-5674 http://www.organic.com/Staff/ogd/ ::AOAIOXXYSZ::

At 3:56 PM -0400 9/10/96, Zenon M. Feszczak wrote:

quoted 3 lines The underground is in fact often "better".

>The underground is in fact often "better". >Why? >It's the old art/entertainment divide.

i'm sorry but this is a load of elitist bollocks. good music is where you find it. can we please get over the cliqueishness? i find it highly irritating. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Drukman jsd@cyborganic.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello, On Tue, 10 Sep 1996 15:56:23 -0400, "Zenon M. Feszczak" <feszczak@sas.upenn.edu> wrote:

quoted 2 lines there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream

> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >(Eno!).

What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? For example, let's look at the Subject of this thread. Eno has never made it onto MTV (except during a U2 documentary). I don't know of any way he is mainstream in any other way. He's only known to musicians and music business people ( and of course, ambient music listeners, who are not in the mainstream ). Cheers, Ken <*> kstuart@mail.telis.org

quoted 4 lines there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream

>> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >>(Eno!). > >What Eno has made its way into the mainstream??

Devo: 'Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo!' Bowie: 'Low,' '"Heroes"," 'Lodger' U2: 'The Unforgettable Fire,' 'The Joshua Tree' (won a Best Album Grammy), 'Achtung Baby,' 'Zooropa' etc etc Not to mention the startup jingle for Windows 95 that's being debated on the ambient list C. -- cspot@hyperreal.com (Chris.Hilker)

Hello, On Tue, 10 Sep 1996 20:13:45 -0700 (PDT), "Chris.Hilker" <cspot@hyperreal.com> wrote:

quoted 11 lines Ken wrote:

>Ken wrote: >>Zenon wrote: >>> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >>>(Eno!). >> >>What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? > >Devo: 'Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo!' >Bowie: 'Low,' '"Heroes"," 'Lodger' >U2: 'The Unforgettable Fire,' 'The Joshua Tree' (won a Best Album Grammy), > 'Achtung Baby,' 'Zooropa'

Yes, but notice that Eno is not to the left of any of your ":"s. I'd be surprised if 1 out of 100 purchasers of either Devo or U2 albums has any idea about Eno's input, other than seeing his name in the credits. This may not be the case for Bowie's albums, but I'm not sure how mainstream these particular Bowie albums are. I think that a lot of the "Ziggy Stardust" fans got lost when "Low" was released. Whereas hardly any Beatle fans were lost by release of "Revolver" and "Sgt. Pepper", both of which contained "ambient" tracks which were just as challenging at the time as, say, Autechre is now. But I would say that Bowie/Eno albums are one of the most positive influences on the mainstream, and IMHO, their 1995 album "Outside" was both the best and also the most successfully creative/innovative album of the year. In any event, it remains to be seen whether Zenon meant Eno albums or albums which Eno participated in.... Namaskar, Ken kstuart@mail.telis.org

quoted 4 lines In any event, it remains to be seen whether Zenon meant Eno albums or

>In any event, it remains to be seen whether Zenon meant Eno albums or >albums which Eno participated in.... > >

Actually, I didn't have a specific intention in this regard. But now that you ask: Definitely the mass of Eno's mainstream efforts have been his collaborations. But some things with his name on it have also crossed into mainstream territory. A few random samples before coffee: Eno/Cale - "Wrong Way Up" Eno - "1/1" in "9.5 Weeks" Passengers - which is labeled with Eno's name etc. 3

cspot tried to sneak this knuckleball by:

quoted 7 lines there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream

>>> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >>> (Eno!). >> >> What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? > > Devo: 'Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo!' > Bowie: 'Low,' '"Heroes"," 'Lodger'

Not a single one of these albums was remotely "mainstream" when they came out. No amount of revisionist history can alter that initial context. - Greg Who remembers the days when he used to buy albums the day they first walked into the record store, like these 4 albums

The world according to Greg Earle:

quoted 11 lines cspot tried to sneak this knuckleball by:

> >cspot tried to sneak this knuckleball by: >>>> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >>>> (Eno!). >>> >>> What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? >> >> Devo: 'Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo!' >> Bowie: 'Low,' '"Heroes"," 'Lodger' > >Not a single one of these albums was remotely "mainstream" when they came out.

But they have "made their way" into it. Hell, there was an article in last month's 'Premiere' on 'The First Wives' Club.' Title: "We Are Not Men! We Are Divas!"

quoted 1 line No amount of revisionist history can alter that initial context.

>No amount of revisionist history can alter that initial context.

Well, no amount of revision can alter the initial context of this thread - the claim that Eno's work is unknown in the mainstream. (He may be unknown personally, but his work is anything but.) C. -- cspot@hyperreal.com (Chris.Hilker)

quoted 11 lines From: "Chris.Hilker" <cspot@hyperreal.com>

> From: "Chris.Hilker" <cspot@hyperreal.com> > Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:13:56 -0700 (PDT) > > The world according to Greg Earle: > >>> > >>> What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? > >> > >> Devo: 'Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo!' > >> Bowie: 'Low,' '"Heroes"," 'Lodger' > > > >Not a single one of these albums was remotely "mainstream" when they came out.

They were mainstream in this country, which is where Eno lives. Or did the poster mean the "US mainstream"? Andrew.

quoted 10 lines Hello,

>Hello, > >On Tue, 10 Sep 1996 15:56:23 -0400, "Zenon M. Feszczak" ><feszczak@sas.upenn.edu> wrote: > >> there is good* music which has made its way into the mainstream >>(Eno!). > >What Eno has made its way into the mainstream?? >

Roxy Music, Talking Heads, Bryan Ferry, U2, David Bowie, Glass... 3