A Post-Modern Anti-Culture Culture

‘Post-Rock’ is a term commonly used to describe music characterised by the use of ‘rock instruments for non-rock purposes’. It is a sub-genre of Indie music that gained popularity in the mid-90s. Prominent artists that are often placed under this tag today include Mogwai, Tortoise and Sigur Ros (Allmusic). These bands are similar in that they are mainly instrumental (although Sigur Ros do have vocals, they ‘sing’ in a fusion of English and Icelandic).

However, the post-rock culture, or scene, actually began as something quite different from what it has become since. It is different from many other subcultures as the ideology of those involved with post-rock was actually based on the idea of escaping the mainstream and genre classification, and the notion of not even being a subculture at all. Other subcultures, such as Indie, Alternative and Punk, deliberately separated themselves from the norm by fragmenting away from the mainstream in specific groups (Hodgkinson, 2004). However, as journalist Simon Reynolds, the man who is understood to have coined the term, says,

“Post-Rock severs itself from rock ‘n’ roll ideas like ‘youth,’ ‘community,’ and ‘populism’… they have given up the idea of mass success or even Indie cult-hood, and accepted the idea of being marginal forever” (1994).

The culture of, and the music within Post-Rock can be hard to define or label, as the idea behind the ‘scene’ was to oppose the very idea of scenes. This resulted in a kind of post-modern lack of cohesion.

This is exaggerated by the fact that musically, the artists said to be Post-Rock when the term began to be used, are often dissimilar. Unlike today where it describes mainly guitar-derived instrumental music that invokes a mood or emotion, Post-Rock was typified by, and aimed for, innovation (Hodgkinson, 2004). This included the more experimental elements of Kraut-rock, ambient, prog-rock, space rock, math rock, tape music, minimalist classical, British IDM, jazz (both avant-garde and cool), and dub reggae (Allmusic). Prominent artists were Stereolab, Slint, and Talk Talk, who do not sound similar at all.

Another differing factor between Post-Rock and other subcultures was that it was not associated with any particular area geographically. Rather, a few isolated and, at the beginning, unnetworked areas such as parts of the UK, Chicago in the US, Montreal in Canada, and New Zealand. These areas often produced distinguishing sounds that, as the culture grew, became more recognised (Hodgkinson, 2004).

Ultimately as appreciation of the genre of music and its associated scene grew, they became more recognised and subsequently, became more defined. This, of course, defeats the purpose of this scene that attempted to remain ‘pure’ of such labelling. In fact those involved in the Post-Rock subculture (mainly those making said music or writing about it in fanzines) did not embrace the banner of Post Rock at all (Reynolds, 2005).

Nowadays (though again, without the labelling), the Post-Rock culture still exists, but is often intermingled with Indie and Low-Fi. These subcultures use online tools such as forums and other websites to connect with each other. Pitchfork uses a mix of regular journalists as well as information from the public in order to provide comprehensive music news about artists not covered by more mainstream music news sites. One quite unique online collaboration tool is Tiny Mix Tape's Mix Tape Generator where users of the site create mix tapes to match what are often quite humorous moods or themes submitted by other users.

This perhaps inevitable progression is what has allowed the ideology to continue, if not in its intended pure form.

As a relatively young Post-Rock fan, I was introduced to the genre through its newer form that I mentioned. As I read more about the Genre, I discovered many of the original artists. Now I can say I am as big a fan of Stereolab as I am of Mogwai as I am of A Silver Mt Zion, all of whom are labelled Post-Rock, yet all of who represent different forms and periods of Post-Rock. As much as those making the music may not wish to be labelled or boxed, doing so allows their music to be shared and appreciated.

While many Post-Rock related resources focus only on the music genre, particularly on its more recent history, I hope in this blog I’ve helped to explain to any Post-Rock music fans the complexity of the culture behind the music.

For an incredibly in-depth review of the different artists within the subgenres of Post-Rock, check out Piero Scaruffi’s “History of Rock Music” Post-Rock section at http://www.scaruffi.com/history/cpt521.html

To listen to a few examples of Post-Rock, Keith Henderson put together an “Audio Journey” at http://www.aural-innovations.com/issues/issue16/postrok1.html

For Post-Rock artist, album or track recommendations look at Allmusic’s page on Post-Rock/Experimental at http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=77:2682

References:

Allmusic. Nd. Post-Rock/Experimental. http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=77:2682 (Accessed May 11, 2008)

Hodgkinson, J. 2004. The Fanzine Discourse over Post-Rock. Music Scenes: Local, Translocal, and Virtual. 221-237. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=zrGa3vYOoZgC (Accessed May 11, 2008)

Reynolds, S. 2005. Untitled. http://blissout.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_blissout_archive.html#112140209965630241

(Accessed May 11, 2008)

Google-mania

I recently read a blog about Google. It detailed one student's experiences, both good and bad, when relying on Google for day-to-day information. It prompted me to think about how I use Google and other information sources.

Google, for me, means Answers. Answers to any question I can dream of... and I don't believe I’m the only Google-loving freak.

When I was younger, and a sibling or I had a question or wanted to know the meaning of a word, out would come the big, heavy dictionaries and various reference books. We’d pour over them and discuss our findings with whoever was around.

In some ways, I feel that not much has fundamentally changed. When I, or someone else has a question, the common response by those around is “Google it” or “check wiki”. In the same way I remember looking over those big books with a sibling or parent, people will stand behind you reading the computer screen over your shoulder, as you find out the answers together.

There are, however, some very important differences to keep in mind. While in the past, one could count on accuracy and reliability from a physical encyclopaedia; the range of information one can get from Google or other online information sources is not always desirable. Information can be inaccurate or incredible (Grazette, 2007).

Due to the relative lack of filtering in a Google search, I am finding more and more that Google can’t sufficiently answer everything for me. Even Google’s attempt at providing more academic information, Google Scholar, often leaves me unsatisfied. I try to use this more credible information in my research, only to find that what I’m reading is simply a “preview” and I have to pay to read an entire article or e-book.

Because of this, I have come to rely on University library databases more and more in my hunt for reliable, trustworthy research. Although bias can still exist in the information I find through said databases, I find that the selectivity and filtering of information gives me a head start, and makes assignment research far less daunting.

It does lead me to question, however, what I’d do without access to such databases. While access to databases can be privately purchased, the cost of doing so would be highly expensive for the individual.

If a person cannot afford to purchase access themselves, or isn’t lucky enough to have access through a university or other institution, they are left with the problematic and unsatisfactory free sources of information I mentioned earlier.

The digital divide, or knowledge divide, are terms usually applied in a global sense; the differences in levels of access to knowledge or technology in poorer countries versus those more well off (Aquili and Moghaddam, 2008). I think what I have talked about is an often-overlooked, yet similar situation, if on a much smaller scale.

The Internet holds a vast amount of information, and as a 20-year-old university student, I feel that I am only just beginning to really come to grips with the importance of being “smart” about online research. Google and Wikipedia aren’t going away anywhere, and I certainly don’t want them to. However, like badly behaved children, they have a time and a place.

I think that it is important to be educated on how best to research and seek reliable, accurate information. However I also feel that those without the higher levels of information access that I’ve discussed are at a disadvantage. The Internet is often said to be a tool of democracy, and while it has freed up areas such as music, information is an area still plagued by restrictions. These limitations force many to rely on more sub-par, often dubious information.

References:

Aquili, S. and A. Moghaddam. 2008. Bridging the digital divide: The role of librarians and information professionals in the third millennium. The Electronic Library, 26 (2): 226-237.

Grazette, J. 2007. Wikiality in My Classroom. The Washington Post, March 25.

Brightsy has 98537845 friends

Kidding!

That would make me the most popular girl in town right? Perhaps not...

A 'friend' nowadays is not the same as it was in the good old days (bring back the '90s, i say!) Now, due to online social networks such as Myspace and Facebook, a 'friend' could be someone you work with, play sport with, went to Primary School with, or... someone you have never met.

"Tell me more!" I hear you cry.

Although Myspace was not the first social networking site (Friendster and Bebo came before it,) it was the first to become such a defined cultural phenomenon not only online, but also irl ("in real life," for the uninitiated.) Myspace is a brand; a "place for friends." It is, however, aligned more with youth and its associated cultures, such as consumerism and music (Fine, 2007).

For me, it started the summer before last. I made that jump into cyberspace with Myspace. I had, until that point, refused to become one of those people who collects 'friends' like one might consume popcorn ("must.have.all.that.i.see"), ranks them, and then post photos of them and myself drinking, dancing, and posing. Then, that Christmas I was given a camera and suddenly I started to like the idea of sharing photos and stories of nights out with my friends. I could send comments to my friends. I could look up people I used to go to school with, who I hadn't seen since I was nine. I could check if that friend of a friend from that party was single. I could include Michael J Fox as one of my top four friends. What's not to love?

However, if you looked at brighty4prez's space and saw the relative lack of activity, you might have noticed that Myspace is perhaps, no longer where its at. It's not that I suddenly became really unpopular (I swear!), it's that most of the people I used to contact through Myspace have moved on. To Facebook.

Facebook is a much more open and somewhat less cliquey social networking site. Although it started as a US College-students-only site, now, anyone can join (Fine, 2007). Aesthetically, Facebook profiles are much more uniform than those on Myspace, where text is often illegible and pages load slowly due to an overload of amateur and messy video and slideshow uploads. Facebook also uses real names, rather than nicknames, and has extra layers of security as a standard to protect identities.

Such differences have resulted in Facebook gaining a broader audience, and increasing popularity. Where Myspace has a cool, youthful, more superficial vibe, Facebook is used by those young and old, for social and business networking (Fine, 2007) …. hell, my mother has a Facebook (or as she called it at first “that Face…tube thing.”)

This graph shows globally, what I have experienced myself locally. It shows the two sites "daily reach" over the past 6 months. That is, the percentage of all internet users each day who are visiting the two sites. It shows how Myspace's popularity has peaked at about 7%, but that Facebook has recently caught up and is still increasing.

These global trends can be recognised as they're occurring, as so many of us are actually part of the trends ourselves.

And now, excuse me, I must officially go and update my mood.

Reference:

Fine, J. 2007. O.K. (SIGH), I'LL JOIN FACEBOOK; But its mashup of friends and business is a bit unnerving. Business Week. (4050): 24. (accessed May 5, 2008, from Proquest database).

The Rise and Fall of DRM

The rise of the Internet has altered much of the world as we know it. Music is no different. The creation of a smaller, more compressed file type, “.mp3”, and the widespread rise of high speed internet/broadband over the past few years have led to a huge increase in the amount of music that is downloaded. While the most prominent debate that arises on this issue relates to the legality of downloading music, and is seen in fairly black-and-white terms, my own experience leads me to feel that the issue is far more complex than most believe.

Firstly, I’ll give you a brief history of online music file sharing over the past decade or so. In 1999, Napster became the first peer-to-peer (p2p) program. Users could share their mp3 collections with other users around the world and download songs off each other. As its popularity rose, the recording industry soon took steps to shut it down (Perry, 2007.) Napster began its demise. I can recall, even at 11 years old, discussing with another Napster-using friend how much trouble it was becoming to find the songs I wanted.

From that point, numbers of digital music downloads have only increased. New p2p networks have gained popularity and record companies have begun selling music online.

Until recently, however, legitimate, paid-for music downloads have been encoded with Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies. These technologies control how many times a track can be copied or moved, if at all.

The creation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in 1998 means than breaking one of these digital locks is a criminal offence, even if no actual acts of copyright violation follow (Perry, 2007). This may sound fair on the surface, but in reality it prevents a person from legitimately using this music; music they have bought.

DRM technologies were seen as a way of preventing piracy. However, events in the past year or so have suggested that the recording industry is beginning to realise these DRM technologies are not successful. Not only do they not prevent people from illegally downloading music, they can even be a deterrent.

In the past year, some record companies and online music retailers have begun to sell DRM-free music. An owner of this DRM-free music can then listen to this music on their computer, put it on different devices such as their phone or a portable music player of any brand, or burn a CD copy for listening to in the car or through their well wicked stereo speakers, to name a few likely scenarios. Such seemingly legitimate uses were either impossible, or limited, with DRM “protected” music.

While I prefer to live in the past and still purchase CDs of music I like (*gasp*), I do download music first to see if I like it. In fact if I think of my favourite artists, I discovered most through recommendations from friends or music websites, and downloading a few tracks before purchasing CDs. If I had to pay to hear a band for the first time, I’d be a lot poorer either money-wise, or music-wise. Such experience has led me to be a strong believer in keeping these so-called “illegal” channels of downloading music open, as they serve as a legitimate means of music introduction for both listeners as well as artists.

Statistics say that 85% of recordings don’t generate enough revenue to cover costs (Perry, 2007). Todd Rundgren, a recording artist with a career spanning almost 40 years, commented on this by saying, “artists don’t see money from their recordings; we capitalise on music we have recorded by going out and performing live. It is actually more worthwhile to give your music away – and make it up in terms of ticket sales.”

I will continue to purchase CDs, and pay to see live music, and sometime’s I’ll pay $40 for a t-shirt at a show, but I would never, and still won’t pay for music only to have someone tell me where and how I can listen to it. I welcome this shift in ideologies towards DRM-free music, and eagerly await the next chapter in the story of digital music.

References:

Perry, T. 2007. Imagine There’s No DRM… I Wonder if You Can. IEEE Spectrum, 44 (7): 14. (accessed April 25, 2008, from Proquest database).

I am The Blog King!

Hi there!

I'm Sarah Bright, (Brightsy to my friends) and I am new to the world of Blogs...so be gentle with me!

To ease myself into it, I thought I'd search through my favourite webcomic to see if my favourite webcomic dinosaur had anything to say on the matter. He is a crazy dinosaur...he 's a little daft, he think's he's reaaaaalll sexy, and he's just plain lovable. He is T-REX! Here's what he thought...

(CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

North, R. 2004. Dinosaur Comics. http://www.qwantz.com/archive/000313.html

(CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE)

North, R. 2006. Dinosaur Comics. http://www.qwantz.com/archive/000783.html

What a great guy.