From: Matthew Glesne (mglesne_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 2004-06-25 21:52:20
steve, steve, steve
you have touched a nerve on this fair socialist, so please forgive if i get a little ranty myself.
you base your hypothesis - that capitalism is *good* for music on the basis of
1) that equipment was made in "capitalist countries." Yet you immediately discredit that theory with your observation that much of the technology was developed in military laboratories - or (i would strongly guess) research laboratories. That may sound capitalist, but of course, the military and university research facilities are some of the lone bastions of socialism in western countries. Massive state subsidies, plans and targets, working for the common good = socialism. plus, don't forget the theramin - the granddaddy to electronic music = a product of early soviet revolutionary research.
And to reduce Cuban music to the Buena Vista Social Club - and its pre-castro origins is a severe mistake. The emount of styles and quality of music that have come out of cuba since the revolution is mind-blowing. Everyone in Cuba is looking forwards. because of the revolution, cuba is perhaps the richest depository of skilled musicians in the world. i witnessed omar sosa this past week at the skirball (do not sleep on this wonder) and was amazed at his mastery of the piano. the rich heritage of classical, jazz and latin were so effortlessly under his control that he is able to create something truly new in today's world. our musicians simply don't have that knowledge, that classical training - particuarly one's unfortunate enough to be poor or middle class
2) You say that socialist music (there is no such thing) can be best found on university campusues. You are referring to a slice of socialism within an overall capitalist framework in American/Western nations. Whereas, yes the means of production are "socialist," this has nothing at all do do with the socialist view on music. Socialists stress high level musical training for the masses. Capitalists say that musical training is only for those who can afford private lessons.Socialists say that the best music should be available for all to hear. Vanguard music (sorry i get caught up in my marxist termonogy) in Capitalist societies is highly elitist by its nature (the radio is crap, so you need a computer or lots of money to buy releases - not a level playing field when 1/2 the country does not have internet access). You seem to have an opposite impression of socialist music - that it is supposed to be avant-garde and unliked by the masses. THis is totally wrong.
State funded radio is the only place where we can hear our music, whether it be the BBC, Radiomultikulti in Gernamny (jazzanova), Radio Nova in France or US college radio, community funded pirates, etc.
Yes, even if you feel that today is a good time in American for our music, you have to realize that we are looking through things fom a privledged vantage point (los angeles, new york, san francisco, chicago... to a lesser extent believe me). ask those living in a small town anywhere, or those even in a place like phoenix or san diego, where the basic requirements of a "scene" simply are not there. this excludes 90% of our country from even getting a clue about this great music. this is good?
in cuba (i have been there), i had conversations with young jazz heads about subjects much too far for me to relate. they were at the club free (foreigners had to pay - to subsidize). all the case de la musicas are free, there are many Party organized parties that are free. Seats are reserved at the havana international jazz festival (one of THE best in the world) for students for free, the opera costs pennies, the philharmonic, etc, etc. If students show promise they are given training and attention there that only the rich get here. instruments and equipment is shared equally and rationally across the country, rather than hoarded in million dollar stuidios here. remember our country has banned the export of any US music or music instruments for 40+ years, and they still maintain a musical culture of a breathtaking scale. It simply innundates you and is everywhere - and loved - and constantly looking forward - not backwards to the buena vista days. everyone in cuba seems to!
be a
musician - and you make as good a living as anyone. the cuban government puts on festivals for everytihng - the hip-hop festival flies in mos def, the roots and dead prez... there was a beatles fesitval when i was there.
i could go on and on about things we already all know about - the evilness of the RIAA, the record labels, commerical radio, the concert promoters, the empy jazz joints, the troubles our artists always find themselves in, etc....
i just wish people had a better idea of what socialism really means.
matt
Steve <scatanzaro4_at_cox.net> wrote:
#message st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
:: 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!!!)