[acid-jazz] has capitalism ruined music?

From: Steve (scatanzaro4_at_cox.net)
Date: 2004-06-25 20:22:20

  • Next message: Matthew Glesne: "Re: [acid-jazz] has capitalism ruined music?"

    :: rant warning :: :: rant warning ::
     
     
    perhaps you've seen the painting "capitalism - socialism" which shows 2
    views of a violinist; under the capitalist system, he is huddled in the
    cold, shivering over his violin, a sad look, like a chick tract
    character on his way to hell, while behind him are the faded lights of
    saloons, taverns, and other "joints" he is exploited by and forced to
    perform in. under the socialist banner, he is proudly performing as a
    soloist (presumably a russian aka soviet approved piece) in a concert
    hall to an ennobled audience.
     
    nice bit of propaganda, that. but then, I had the experience of seeing
    art become life when, in the same week, I saw the gonzalo rubalcalba
    trio, live, and the source awards, on tv. it got me wondering, is
    capitalism really bad for the musician and her/his art? could the death
    jaw of lucre really squeeze out all of the "charm for the workman," even
    in music?
     
    but I look at the question a little longer, and some things become
    apparent to me; first, nearly all of the tools now indispensable for the
    creation of modern music come from, for the most part, largely
    capitalist societies; that would be firstly japan, usa, germany, uk,
    then korea, poland, estonia, and oh yeah, sweden.
     
    what are these essential tools? technics turntable. akai sampler. fender
    rhodes / telecaster. logic audio, cubase. neve / ssl console. marshall
    amp. on and on.
     
    (btw as an aside. interesting to note how many of these technologies had
    their origins in a "military" use at some point. the rhodes, for
    instance, was born when harold rhodes was ordered to start a music
    therapy program for the tens of thousands of wounded gi's in ww2. and.
    ever wonder why neve stuff has that boring "grey" finish? because neve
    started out as military equipment. in fact, the modular design of neve
    gear, part of what makes it so prized today over mackie and the like,
    was due to its original conformation to military spec. ie modules were
    easier to repair on gunships, even though they were much more costly to
    make. next time u listen to return to 4ever, thank the military
    industrial complex!!! tax money at work.)
     
    if you're not a musician, you may not realize the revolution that has
    occurred / is occurring with music technology. it is possible, if not
    probable, that a hit record will come from the home pc of a teen-aged
    kid with not more than $1000 invested in his equipment - this when
    record companies routinely spend millions to record, to say nothing of
    promote, albums.
     
    back on point. without the products made in these capitalist economies,
    there would be no music as we know it. no 4 hero. no dkd or bugz in the
    attic. in fact, roll back further. there is no rush, as far as I know,
    among vintage music gear enthusiasts, for much of anything coming from
    soviet states. did they ever produce any great piano? any great
    microphone? when the maestro, v. horowitz, returned to the ussr late in
    life, did he play any soviet piano? no, he had his u.s. steinway and
    sons flown over. there's the reality your poster has twisted. punked.
    what about cuba, what about buena vista social club? well, it may dismay
    some to recall sones and tumbaos pre-date castro, that the legendary
    Havana studio, "egrem" was built by rca in the '40's. that it has a uk
    board and uses german mics, etc. what cuba has been really good at, in
    addition to quashing political dissent via imprisonment, is saving old
    western technology in museum condition.
     
    just consider; if it wasn't for capitalism, ALL of the great music of
    the 20th century we have on recording (thanks to marx's nightmare,
    edison) would *sound* a lot different, i.e. worse.
     
    and, it should be noted, that the nu music software business is as about
    as unlike the caricature of capitalism marx sets up in the manifesto as
    to be funny. software development is very dynamic, and sizeable fortunes
    can be built from a desktop, where a nerdy kat/kitten is programming
    away, trying to develop the next useful vst.
     
    BUT, u say, what have the capitalist musicians done with the wonderful
    tools capitalism has bequeathed on them? or better, while u might
    (grudgingly) concede that capitalism has been indispensable to the
    artist's convenience, what has it done to her soul, her art? here, we
    enter in to more esoteric realms, but a couple of questions might be
    asked;
     
    first, when u, dear reader, hear a piece of music, a track, that really
    moves u, do u think, "wow. that sounds/feels great, but it would sound
    better if it wasn't for that dam patriot act!!!" or "if only clinton
    wouldn't have passed welfare reform, amp fiddler would really sound hot
    2 me."
     
    but consider this; almost every piece of music u like, from mozart's
    concertos to dkd, was made, at least in part, to get people to like /
    buy it. very few artists want their music to be unliked. and that
    includes the most "socialist" artist out there. (socialism's a lot like
    Christianity in that regard. a lot of people espouse it on the macro
    level, but few actually live it in the micro of their own personal
    lives, especially the average attention-pimping artist.)
     
    what about socialist music? does it exist? yes; the best place to hear
    the socialist sound is in university composition faculty concerts. these
    are compositions by artists who's salaries are paid, not by the public,
    supply / demand, but by the state. that's what music sounds like when a
    musician is state subsidized. academic, self-indulgent, dry,
    self-referential, etc. if capitalism makes the artist a pimp, socialism
    makes the artist a bureaucrat.
     
    so, here we are. does the capitalist system suck 4 artists. sure it
    does; the world itself, in some ways, sucks 4 artists. BUT, the
    capitalist system has also provided artists with the TOOLS necessary to
    paint the world w. their OWN sound NOW, much more so than ever before.
    with everyone rocking a software computer setup nowadays, the playing
    field is leveled. u have now only to 2 perform, 2 administrate and 2
    market, which takes talent, energy and persistence. is it in u?
     
    paradox ::: when u pay your subsidy to fund michael moore's 911 this
    weekend. just imagine how boring it would've been if it was made for PBS
    instead of your pocketbook. (mmmm, just like ben and jerry's, sweet
    guilty pleasure!!!)