The evolvement of DJing, globalization & the problem for the creative class in the U.S.
by Isaac Basker/Prez Ike
So, just the other day I caught
this video of Richie Hawtin's Traktor
setup, posted on Danny Tenaglia's fan website and read several
responses that critiqued the "evolvement" of DJing, particularly with
regards to the development of Minimal and live performance "DJing."
With some DJ's incorporating so many "gadgets" compared to previous
days where all that was needed was basically two turntables, a mixer, a
mic, maybe some sound effects and a flashlight (if you're Danny
Tenagla, of course), now some are wondering if this is rendering some
of the basic skills needed to DJ previously
obsolete.
I posted a response on the forum there
and wanted to share it as I believe it represents something those who
know me well are aware of my deep interest in, and am dedicated to
addressing in some way or form now and in the fugure. What I am
referring to is, what I see is a growing problems for creative and
innovative minded individuals who are not focused primarily on the
safest means to reach a high income bracket in the U.S. Here is an
edited version of what I wrote:
To me, this
"evolvement" and some of the responses here seem to be very similar
stances that American factory workers take against
"globalization."
In fact, I think
this change and clash is a perfect example of how globalization and
technology advances are causing significant problems for creativity in
the U.S.
We are a culture
where innovation in creative field industries of music, fashion,
traditional visual arts, photography, and film is in the stone ages
compared to other places. I don't necessarily blame us for feeling this
way, actually because there are some reasons out of our direct control
that lead to backlash.
Electronic music, which used to have
some signature American sounds that were popular globally, seems to be
facing the same deal as American car producers are as well. I think it
is partially related to U.S. work culture, and attitudes we have
towards things that aren't familiar, or don't make the most money with
the least amount of risk.
This actually relates to
my critique of Richard Florida's analysis of New York, LA, SF, as the
creative capitals of the U.S. Sure, they are for ESTABLISHED artists,
but they are also the most expensive cities to live. Artists who are
developing and mostly unknown cannot focus enough of their time and
effort on their craft if they live in these cities because they would
have to take a job that earns them enough money. To me, this is why
there is little wonder that great capitals of electronic music
(Detroit, NY, Chicago, SF, etc.) in the U.S. no longer produce the
number of big name DJ's and producers that we used to see.
I think electronic
music's dominance in societies and nations that believe strongly in
their social welfare systems, let young educated people become adults
with zero or no student loan debt, and possess work culture value
systems that are accepting of bohemian lifestyles are bound to produce
or support those that would not be able to really survive or build
themselves up in America this way anymore with the same
ease.
Those who respond
negatively to the changes we see in DJing and producing, especially
from the Berlin minimal scene, are even more fair to be upset if they
pursue their craft primarily in the U.S. We used to have underground
scenes and development of ideas that were outside of the mainstream.
Hip-Hop, House, and Techno were at one time distinctively contrary to
much of what was popular. People dismissed DJing as not an artform, as
well as sampling. Jazz faced the same problem, as did Rhythm and Blues,
Funk, Soul, (notice that these are all forms of black music, as well,
which I believe is important to note, as African-Americans and Latinos
who contributed to this have never been the dominant group in America).
All of these genres were later co-opted by the
(white run) mainstream industries, and innovators could not gather any
support to make a living...
So...then there was increased pressure
to "sell-out" to either survive or continue to succeed. Yet, the
paradox of almost all of these art forms is that they all have strong
underground traditions, as does DJing. If you become successful the
pressure to keep that success in the American music industry, dominated
by corporate owed labels and generally pop-music driven, will present
significant problems for such artists, if that's where you get most of
your money from.
Hawtin, I doubt, earns most of his
money now from the U.S. market, yet his success -- which came from
local support of the scene in Detroit that at one time facilitated such
changes, has significantly diminished on that city now -- and in other
U.S. cities. He is privileged enough to have been around in an American
city at a time that allowed for the staunchly creative to develop. For
the rest of us who didn't get that chance we seem to be fighting for a
diminising piece of the pie, so it is quite valid for us to be afraid
of these changes as it may render our own skills less valuable. How can
it not, when as one responder referred to that promoters here will be
more likely to give a care about how "creative" one is, and the hordes
of less exposed electronic music curious fans that are American, yet
only know who the big European star DJ's
are.
In the end it's
about the $$$$$, and for Americans we live in a society that generally
values this (Protestant work ethic) above all, perhaps only with the
same effect and power on its citizens as a few other nations, like
England and China. The reality is that we you have to make a living to
survive, but we are also caught up in hyper-consumerism that believes
more money and stuff that we are sold to remind of us what we make
equals more happiness, when well regarded studies show that after a
person earns just $10,000, that happiness actually does not increase
significantly. Yet, this message is certainly not sent to many who
quest wealth and power, that I contend leads to significantly less
support of creative and innovative ideas that involve risk, and more
likelihood of one to respond with fear of those that engage in this and
challenge our worldview.
The irony is that some are also
absolutely right to say Hawtin's fame and wealth allows for him to
spend the ridiculous amount of money it must take to do what he's
doing, as mentioned earlier. Of course, this renders those who aren't
as well off, or in areas where an investment that it must take to pay
for his equipment or group might actually get immediate returns (like
pretty much everyone who tries to make anything close to a living off
of their DJing/Producing mostly in America) left out and fearful, and
having to probably "sell-out." The problem is that many technological
innovations at one time have been so costly that they are out of the
reach of most. DJing and producing has long been an artform that used
to privilege the more privileged because of the costs. Yet, now that
the game has been flattened and changed, and I suspect will more over
time, where that equipment may later become less costly, is it wise for
us to shun this change?
I know some pretty well known DJs in
NYC who I have discussed this with personally, especially the pressure
to play styles they don't like because of "market forces." When does
DJing for the "crowd" become the crowd DJing for
you?
It's a line that I
think in America is being increasingly crossed in styles that used to
be the total opposite.
I LOVE DJing records, but I would love
to have what he has. I currently use Serato as well as vinyl, and I
have Traktor, but not the scratch version, so no way to really use it
other than for practicing mixes without a
mixer.
I want to say that
the same criticism of Hawtin and these changes has been made of
electronic music production, in that "real" musicians have argued it
doesn't count because a lot of folks can produce music without even
knowing how to read music, or have been trained play an instrument. The
same arguments were made against mp3 technology by established artists
and record labels, but look how it's enabled folks to promote and sell
themselves as musicians to a much larger audience (albiet in a more
competitive market).
I blame our culture for not allowing
us to grow, and how we don't support unknown musicians much, except for
the hardcore fans. That culture of searching for the unknown is alive
and well in places like Germany, I think, and probably England still
(it's just the cost of living there is too high, hence one of the
reasons for the mass pilgrimage of many to Berlin), as well as
elsewhere, but in America we are so engulfed in hyper-consumerist
celebrity-dom, that those creative types who are passionate about their
craft beacuse they love it, not primarily for money, are on the
fringes, struggling to do what they want, or giving up on it, calling
it a "hobby" and perhaps getting justifiably upset at those that we see
succeeding at a game we can't even get a fair chance to play
in.
We need to work on
supporting innovation, but also showing the value of and respecting
cultural traditions. Remaining fearful and being upset is quite valid,
but we must use that constructively to challenge the real forces that
are behind this, and facilitate positive change to help improve
conditions for creative
types.
4:22:20 PM 
|
|
