An Alternative Indie: Why does Meindert Talma’s Werkman resist consensus categorization?

(1)

An Alternative Indie

Why does Meindert Talma’s Werkman resist consensus

categorization?

Name: Steven Vincent Vrouwenvelder Student number: 6049400

Thesis Master Musicology

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Julia J.E. Kursell Second Reader: Dr. Oliver Seibt Date: 6 June 2016

(2)

Introduction

1. Werkman

Meindert Talma released a record in 2015 entitled Werkman. What can I, as a fan of Talma’s previous music, expect? The CD’s front cover (See Appendix: figure 1) shows a pile of papers with large blue captions on it reading “Werkman.” This album is clearly one of the projects launched to honor the memorial year of visual artist Hendrik Nicolaas Werkman (1882-1945). Beneath the blue captions are the names of the performers, printed in white. The first of these is the Dutch musician Meindert Talma. Talma’s musical output is often combined with non-musical products and events, such as a collection of poems, a novel, museum exhibitions and a world championship football. Werkman seems like another multi-disciplinary project. The back cover reveals that Excelsior Recordings, an Amsterdam-based record label, released the album. Excelsior, a so-called independent record company, is also Talma’s home record label.

So far, there are no surprises. The collaborative artists, on the other hand, are new. Talma used to record music with the bands The Negroes and De Rode Kaarten (The Red Cards). In comparison to the humorous or at least ironic names of these bands, The Melisma Saxophone Quartet, which is the other name on the front cover, indicates a different and perhaps more serious path. This seems to be in accordance with the historical theme of the record: Werkman was killed in World War 2.

The name of the ensemble suggests that this quartet normally plays so-called classical music. It mentions the organisation (quartet), the means (saxophone) and an obscure word drawn from music theory (melisma). This evokes a connection with a culture that is inaccessible to those without specialized musical knowledge. A quick look at their website confirms this; it mentions another recording featuring works of Grieg, Bach, Ligeti, and Lago. These are all composers who are considered to be canonical in European classical music. Remarkably, the quartet does not mention Werkman on their website,1_{as if they do} not want to be associated with it.

(4)

The booklet’s layout confirms that the CD commemorates the life of the titular visual artist as his picture is printed next to a “Concise biography of H.N. Werkman.”2_{Except for} the last few pages, the booklet only features the lyrics of the songs. The final pages reveal that Talma arranged this project; his email address and website are mentioned, and he thanks several people for giving him the idea to collaborate with the saxophone quartet. The text also informs me that the album was commissioned by Stichting H.N. Werkman, the corporation that initiated the memorial year, together with Geert Lameris, who oversaw all of the projects. At the back of the booklet, there is a photograph of the five musicians with Talma sitting in the centre, holding a saxophone. This picture suggests that Talma controls the music, even though he does not play this (or indeed any) instrument on the recording. According to the credits in the back of the booklet, he is only the composer of the music. After inspecting the visual materials included with the album, I wonder how the music sounds.

The first song on the album, “Leens,” commences with a sole sustained sound on the alto sax, but is quickly joined by the soprano sax, which plays a fifth on top of the sustained tone of the former, creating a solid sound. The tone of the saxophones is rich and clean, unaccompanied by air noise, growling or vibrato. Hence, the sounds of the two saxophones blend. They play an ostinato; repeating the same limited set of tones again and again. This ostinato functions as an accompaniment for Talma’s voice, which is calm, evoking recitation rather than singing. With the arrival of the chorus, a third saxophone blends in; towards the end of the song the last (and lowest) baritone sax joins the others. The resulting sound is perceived as a unity, because the saxophones do not make individual sounds. Together with the slow tempo, this creates a serene and static sound.

I experience this song as an oddity. The earnestness of the text and the calmness of the music contrast with Talma’s previous work. The strangeness is intensified because Talma sings from a first person perspective, adopting the role of Werkman, while deviating from his usual way of singing. The singer’s Northern accent, which is immediately apparent to Dutch ears, confuses the listener: it sounds like Werkman is singing himself. Both Werkman and Talma were born and raised in the same region and could therefore have the same accent. The slow ostinato and the unity of the saxophones establish the atmosphere for the first

(5)

episode in Werkman’s life. The tranquil opening of the album seems apt; as a listener, I imagine that I can hear Werkman describing his oldest and most distant memories. I now understand that the concise biography, which is printed in the booklet, is not only an introduction to Werkman as a historical figure, but also introduces the content of this recording. Is this what I, or any other listener, expected when putting the record on?

2. Categorization

Music journalists certainly did not know what to expect. As a fan, I like to investigate whether my own impressions match the opinions of music journalists, or whether

professional critics shed a different light on the music which could enrich a subsequent listening. Talma’s website compiles all of the articles that mention him, including album reviews. These sources are many and varied, both in medium and in aesthetic judgement, so they offer views from varying perspectives. The reviews are mostly published by regional newspapers or by popular music media.3_{Regional papers discuss the album, because both} Werkman and Talma hail from the border region of the two northern provinces of the Netherlands and both moved to Groningen, which is the largest city in the area. Music media, on the other hand, review the album because Talma’s work often falls within the limited genres and styles they cover.

Two websites, 3voor12 and Muziekweb, observe that the album deviates from Talma’s other music, which they call “indierock” (Jeuring; Koning). Both sources fail to find a description for the music on this record, finding it sufficient to mention The Melisma

Saxophone Quartet, which Muziekweb identifies as “a modern chamber orchestra.” Though they agree on what the music is not, they do not agree on what it is. This seems to reflect the overall impression of this and other reviews.

There is no consensus among music journalists on how to describe the album. Roel Sikkema describes it as “classical” but also as “softpop,” while Joey Huisman, writing for music journal Oor, calls it “roots.” Both the music journal Lust for Life and Frisian culture website Skanomodu, describe Talma as a “singer/songwriter” (Kaspers; Oostrom), while other journalists call the music “pop” (Kramer; Schaik). Several of these sources further

(6)

describe the album also as a “song cycle.” Newspaper Friesch Dagblad only uses this last term to describe the music (Hut). I infer from these varying responses, that it is hard to write about the album’s music. On the other hand, all of these sources write with greater precision about the artist Werkman. The municipality of Groningen and many of its cultural

institutions declared 2015 “Werkman year” to commemorate the Groninger printing press artist Hendrik Nicolaas Werkman, who was shot dead by the Nazis in 1945. Reviewers thus seized the opportunity to write about Werkman, but forgot to write about Werkman. Nevertheless, these reviewers seek to categorize the album, perhaps simply because they are expected to guide the purchases of music consumers. Why then, does this album resist consensus categorization?

3. An Alternative Indie

Werkman’s reviews exemplify the difficulty in describing and categorizing music. This

is a problem I encounter every day. When I introduce a friend to a band, without the ability to listen to the actual music, I have to describe it from memory. The shortest and easiest way to do so, is to categorize it. This often results in an endless discussion about which category a piece of music belongs to, because “short” and “easy” also means simplified and biased. Such discussions can be tiresome because they often do not involve actual music, reducing it to a limited set of stereotypical characteristics. This thesis is an exploration of how to work through this problem. In the first chapter, I examine two concepts that are used for musical categorization: style and genre. In the two remaining chapters, I gradually zoom in on the object of this thesis: Werkman.

The concepts of style and genre are both used to categorize music. Categorization implies a certain shared identity among its members. “Genre,” which is etymologically related to “genus” and “generic,” invokes a relation with biology, recalling the classification of species and the taxonomical categorization of diverse types. Shared identity is hierarchical in structure and based on the proximity and resemblance of specimens (for instance, lions and tigers both belong to the genus Panthera). Style, on the other hand, is etymologically-rooted in stilus (Latin for pen), calling forth an association with the material, the medium and the technique of writing (pen rather than book). The shared identity of style groupings seems based on similar ways of expression.

(7)

Although their etymological associations imply a certain implementation in music, there seems to be no consistent use of these concepts among journalists and scholars within the different sub-disciplines of musicology. Therefore, genre and style are confused and often used interchangeably. Both concepts, when imposed on music by journalists and scholars, construct a framework of expectations for the listener. Werkman appears to resist the expectations of music journalists, who nevertheless seek to impose categorization on the music, in order to direct the expectations of their readers. Therefore, in the first chapter, I will discuss the two concepts and relate them to the reviews of Werkman, in order to better understand the mechanisms of musical categorization.

Most reviewers mention that Werkman deviates from the music which Talma is known for making. To understand what it is different from, one has to understand the context. Since journalists state that this new CD differs from Talma’s “usual” indie music, in the second chapter, I will investigate “indie” as a musical category. To research whether

Werkman is indie or not, I will first identify what indie is. Every scholar who tries to define

the word indie clarifies that it is an abbreviation of the word “independent.” Just as alternative (to …) is independent (of …) an alterity; it claims an identity in opposition to something else. “Indie” is conceptually defined against a big business model; the policies of independent record labels are formulated in opposition to those of so-called “major labels,” which, in the indie narrative, are understood to release mainstream popular music. I adopt the definition of “popular music”4_{given by Philip Tagg, because his article is frequently cited,} thereby representing a widely supported understanding of the concept. I also use this

definition to research the discourse surrounding indie music and how this discourse (re)produces the definition. To understand what indie means, I examine Excelsior

Recordings, the record company which released Werkman. For added perspective, I will also look at the related concept of “alternative” music. Building on the insights from the first chapter, I will investigate several texts which attempt to define indie or alternative as a category of music.

4_{“popular music cannot be analysed using only the traditional tools of musicology because popular music,}

unlike conservative notions of euroclassical music, is (1) conceived for mass distribution to large and often socioculturally heterogeneous groups of listeners, (2) stored and distributed in non-written form, (3) only possible in an industrial monetary economy where it becomes a commodity and (4) in capitalist society, subject to the laws of ‘free’ enterprise, according to which it should ideally sell as much as possible of as little as possible to as many as possible.” (Tagg 5)

(8)

This thesis is thus mainly a contextual analysis; however, since I believe that a context cannot exist without a text, each influencing the other, I will return in the final chapter, to a close reading of Werkman. Only after understanding what it means to categorize and how

Werkman’s context is constructed, can I research whether the music deviates from the indie

category or not. In this chapter, I will argue that Werkman fits within the discourse on indie music, despite reviews which claim otherwise. I will conclude this thesis with an analysis of the album which illuminates the particularities of the music, explaining why reviewers have failed to find a consistent category for Werkman.

(9)

Categorization

It’s true that Werkman has something idiomatic. His work is easily

recognizable. Apparently, people can recognize my sound and know where to place my work too. I am not concerned about my own sound.5_{(Talma qtd. in} Knaack 34)

In 2015, The Groninger Museum staged an exhibition of several works by visual artist Hendrik Werkman, as a central part of the Werkman commemorative year. In their journal, the Groninger Museum Magazine, they devoted some articles to other Werkman projects, including Meindert Talma’s album. The epigraph of this chapter is a quote from the

interview in the journal. Talma stated that he is similar to Werkman, because people can easily recognize his music and know where to place it. This is a paradoxical statement, since it suggests that Talma stands out, yet conforms to a set of rules. The latter is belied by music critics, who have had difficulty in describing this album. As I discussed in the introduction, reviews of Werkman categorize it as “classical,” “roots,” and “pop,” among other

descriptions. From this observation, I infer that music does not intrinsically belong to a specific category; instead, journalists impose their own interpretations. In this chapter, I discuss why music journalists and laypeople categorize music and examine how those categories are constructed.

Popular media do not provide a satisfying system for categorizing music. While encyclopaedic websites often include sections on style and genre, there is little consistency among them. For example, Discogs.com “divides music first by genre. We use the word genre for a hierarchal grouping… These genres are then further broken down by style. Style is basically the same as a sub-genre” (Database Guidelines 9. Genres / Styles). Allmusic.com uses a similar definition, identifying genre as a broad category and style as a sub-category (Frequently Asked Questions: What are Genres?). About.com has no section explaining these terms, and they are used interchangeably all over the website. Even an authoritative source

5_{Translated from Dutch: “… het is zo dat Werkman iets eigens heeft. Zijn werk is makkelijk te herkennen. Het}

schijnt zo te zijn dat mensen mijn werk ook snel kunnen herkennen of kunnen plaatsen. Zelf denk ik niet na over dat eigen geluid."

(10)

like the Oxford English Dictionary offers no clarity: its definition of “genre” mentions “style,” thereby making the words synonyms. For its part, Wikipedia has an entry on “Musical Genre” to which searches for “Musical Style” are redirected. Nevertheless, Wikipedia’s article is the most illuminating of those found on encyclopaedic websites, precisely because it underscores the widespread confusion between the two concepts. What all of these websites do seem to share is the idea that music belongs to one or several genres. In other words, genre or style are intrinsic qualities of a piece of music.

Both style and genre are used to refer to a category in music. Both terms are also used to identify a group of music, while distinguishing it from other groups. Attempts to categorize music, however, are often confusing; the terms are taken for granted and their usage is frequently mixed up. On the other hand, scholars from various disciplines have written theoretical works on the categorization of artworks, including music. For this

chapter, I look at these academic sources, focusing in particular on texts dealing with music.

1. Music like the sea

After reading the reviews of Werkman, one may wonder what compels people to categorize music. All of the reviews identify a category, though rarely agree on which one describes Werkman’s music. Aside from this, the reviews are mainly concerned with non-musical aspects: the lyrical content of the songs, the life of H.N. Werkman, and his memorial year. In this section, I examine why people categorize in order to better understand how categorization functions and how it relates to actual music. The first explanation is economic. Sociologist and music journalist Simon Frith investigates how popular music is valued and how meaning arises. Frith assigns an important role to record companies, because musical genre is given by the “Artist and Repertoire” departments of record companies. They classify music both by listening to the way it sounds and by identifying its target audience, with the ultimate goal to sell the record (Frith 89). These categories are communicated to record stores so that CDs can be appropriately labelled and displayed in the right place.

Such labelling by record companies, generates expectations about the music; which are driven by market demands. On the other hand, musical categories are often flexible, as they react to the market. I can attest to this from my own experience. When I worked at a

(11)

record store from 2009 through 2011, the music of Lady Gaga became popular, as measured by sales figures and media attention. Her music was initially filed in the “dance” category and thus sold in that department. When she became a subject of media hype, her CDs were relabelled as “pop.” This decision was made in response to a sudden increase in customers who expected to find her music in the pop section of the store, instead of dance where it had long been displayed. This example shows that genre attribution and categorization are subject to the arbitrariness, flexibility, and sensitivity of market forces. In this light, one can better understand the reviewers’ claims that Werkman is not indie (Jeuring; Koning). Such comments serve to warn consumers (in this case: indie listeners) while advising record stores to relabel Talma’s music for another type of listener/buyer.

A new way of accessing music has come into existence with the rise of the internet. While record stores can still label their products manually, musical providers on the internet must deal with a larger quantity of products, requiring new techniques to direct consumer behaviour. Music Information Retrieval (MIR) is one such technique. It directs a computer to group music together to make browsing collections easier. Music technologists Cory McKay and Ichiro Fujinaga argue that MIR is most useful when it goes beyond mere genre

classification based on similar sounds, because music is also important for mood enhancement and identity formation (McKay and Fujinaga 103). They attribute these insights to findings drawn from psychological studies (e.g., Hargreaves and North 1999). With the shift from physical sales to digital services, it has become clear that an economic analysis is insufficient to explain why people categorize; these digital techniques function better, because they tap deeper into psychology. Nevertheless, McKay and Fujinaga’s arguments are still oriented towards consumption.

Hasan Tekman and Nuran Hortaçsu, by contrast, approach music listeners as people, rather than prospective customers, offering a psychological interpretation from a cognitive perspective. They state that in general “categorisation or conceptual knowledge is an important aspect of human cognition. Dividing the world around us into categories of items that we can treat in similar ways facilitates our lives by providing cognitive economy and directing future learning” (Tekman and Hortaçsu 28). They claim that categorization is a natural capability, which humans use to orient themselves in the world.

The French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari explore this relation between reality and its categorisation (or “striation”) from a philosophical point of view,

(12)

using the example of the sea to illustrate their point (Deleuze and Guattari 556-561). The sea is in the first place an open-ended (or “smooth”) space, but, as a result of the European urge for expansion, the sea was translated into a striated space. Coordinates made it possible to navigate over sea. Sailing changed from roaming over a large surface of water to traveling between coordinates. The invention of coordinates springs from the same psychological urge of humans, Tekman and Hortaçsu investigated, to order the world around them.

In their book Mille Plateaux (1980), Deleuze and Guattari investigate the relation between the striated and the smooth with the concepts of the tree for the former and the rhizome for the latter. The tree is a representation of the categorized world. Tekman and Hortaçsu state that categorizing is hierarchical and is arranged by lists of characteristics (29). Hierarchy is determined by each category’s relation to and proximity with the others. This results in a tree-like representation (both visual and imaginary) of reality with different branches. These branches may split off into little twigs or find themselves grouped together, but eventually all lead back to the same root. For my purposes, the root represents music in general, while the groupings of branches can be understood as genres or styles, with the twigs representing individual artists and composers.

In contrast, Deleuze and Guattari also propose a rhizomatic representation of the world. A rhizome has no beginning or ending, only lines which intersect with other lines. This perspective is perhaps chaotic, but it encourages one to revaluate the world without

striation. Nevertheless, Deleuze and Guattari stress that these two perspectives are not necessarily oppositional (20). The rhizome and the tree are two examples of how categories are imposed on reality, while also stemming from a human instinct that aids in

understanding that reality. In the end, this also leads back to the economic explanation I discussed above. The music industry and journalists impose categorization on music in order to make it more easily accessible for listeners and consumers. This also means that, from a psychological perspective, a human “outsources” her or his urge to categorize the world. One could also argue that categorization in music reviews is a natural “reflex” of journalist as they seek to give the music a proper place in their striated worldview. Whether the

motivation is economic, psychological or philosophical, categorization is an imposition, guiding expectations, while constructing a framework to fit future experiences within.

(13)

2. Genre and Style

In the psychological inquiries I discussed in the previous section, style and genre function as different levels of musical categorization. For example, Hargreaves and North (193) use the word “genre” for the broadest category (pop, classical, and jazz) while “style” indicates a category within a genre. This implies that the two words have a similar meaning while being hierarchically related to each other. The psychologists adopt a popular

understanding of the concepts as it matches the description by Discogs.com and

Allmusic.com. This pragmatic application of concepts suffices to explain why people

categorize, but it does not provide a better understanding of what those concepts mean. Fortunately, scholars from across disciplines have investigated the differences between these two concepts.

Musicologist Allan Moore takes stock of the many theories on genre and style6_and distils the use of these concepts in music and musicology. He claims that the meanings of these concepts changes from one discipline to another, despite interdisciplinary influence. Moore argues that most disciplines favour one term over the other: what is indicated by “style” in one discipline can indicate “genre” in another (Moore 432-433). This

interchangeability is especially problematic in the interdisciplinary study of popular music. Although Moore is a musicologist mainly interested in popular music, his discourse analysis investigates the function of genre and style in musicology in general. Moore concludes by distinguishing the varying ways in which style and genre differ. These distinctions amount to the difference between reception and production, nature and culture, and finally, style and genre have a different hierarchical structure. In this section, I analyze reviews of Werkman in relation to Moore’s discourse analysis, to show some problems with his observations.

The first division which Moore observed reflects the etymological relations of the words (stilus and genus): “style refers to the manner of articulation of musical gestures … genre refers to the identity and the context of those gestures” (Ibid. 441). Moore simplifies the difference by relating genre to “what,” and style to “how” music is made. In this divide, genre describes the reception of a musical product, while style concerns its production. For example, journalist Ybema describes Werkman as a “song cycle,” considering the musical

6_{Allan Moore analyzes discourses from art historians, media scholars, literature scholars, folklorists,}

(14)

product in its totality, thus assigning it a genre in Moore’s terms. Hence, Moore’s division equates genre with form. On the other hand, Ybema also indicates how the music was produced by referring to “saxophones” and “wind instruments” meeting Moore’s understanding of style.

Other distinctions, Moore observed, reflect the idea that genre is culturally constructed while style is naturally given: “in its concentration on how meaning is

constituted, genre is normally explicitly thematized as socially constrained … Style, on the other hand, in its emphasis on technical features and appropriability, … is considered to operate with a negotiable degree of autonomy” (Ibid.). Style is quotable while a genre is characterized by structure and convention. For example, journalist Sikkema mentions Talma’s “Groninger” accent.7_{The timbre of his voice is both a technical feature as well as a} natural trait. It is even quotable, as one can imitate Talma’s manner of singing. On the other hand, Sikkema categorizes the music as classical on the basis that it is composed for a

quartet. This is based on a convention, an intersubjective and thus socially-constructed

truth, by which people associate classical music with composers and quartets.

Lastly, Moore claims that style and genre are both hierarchical structures but in different ways (441-442). Style’s hierarchy is qualitative, according to Moore. For example, modernism can be described as style because it resulted from a quest for new compositional techniques, situated in a particular time and place (roughly Europe and the USA in the twentieth century). The experimentation of a specific composition (or even passage) can likewise be described as style. On the other hand, Moore argues that genre’s hierarchy is exclusive and a-historical. This hierarchy is quantitative, because so-called meta-genres (e.g., pop, classical, etc.) contain many genres (e.g., soul, metal, etc.), which can be further divided into sub-genres (e.g., black metal, speed metal, etc.) and these categories consist of a

number of musicians or composers.

The distinctions Moore observed may seem coherent but, in fact, contain

contradictions. The reviews of Werkman penned by Ybema and Hut exemplify this nuance within Moore’s theorization. For instance, the noted use of saxophones pertains to both convention and to nature. Ybema observes that “music for wind instruments” (blaasmuziek) belongs to the northern Netherlands, while Hut argues that the sound of the saxophones

(15)

resembles the music of Michael Nyman. Ybema implies that saxophone music is a tradition, a convention, and therefore a genre in the northern Netherlands. Hut, by contrast,

associates the sound of the saxophones with the quotable style of a specific composer. Next to the internal contradiction of this distinction, style and genre invert while switching to the perspective of the first distinction. Ybema’s mention of saxophones could, from the first perspective be seen as style, because it refers to how the music is played, and from the other be seen as genre, because it refers to a tradition and thus to a convention. When looking at the reviews through the lens of the last distinction (based on different hierarchies), the attribution of style and genre inverts again. For Ybema, the saxophone stands for a region (quality and thus style), while for Hut, it places Talma alongside Nyman thereby implying that they both belong to post-minimalism (quantity and thus genre).

These reviews reveal the incompatibility of perspectives Moore observed in his discourse analysis. Moore only investigated academic texts and his examination remains within scholarly discourse. The contradiction shows that researchers often make careless decisions when deciding whether to call a category of music a genre or a style. This is a reason why many use the terms interchangeably or reverse their meaning.8_{Moore also} showed that the distinction between style and genre are not mutually exclusive or even complementary, because a grouping of music can be style from one perspective and genre from another. Moore’s discourse analysis ultimately shows that style and genre cannot be hierarchically related to each other, contrary to popular and psychological uses of the concepts. Moore’s approach, despite its contradictory implementations, illuminates the varying functions of style and genre within academic literature.

3. Genre Ideology

Moore shows that style and genre are not exclusive and operate (i.e., group music) in different ways. Following from Moore, I will now address the genre theory of musicologist Franco Fabbri, whose work focuses on popular music. In 1982, the study of popular music was still to a large extent neglected by musicologists. Hence, Fabbri formulated his theory in

8_{Moore gives the example of the theories of the musicologists Philip Tagg and Leonard Meyer who use similar}

argumentation but assign the concepts style and genre to sets of categories reversed from each other (Moore 433-434).

(16)

opposition to contemporary notions of genre in music. Fabbri defined genre as “a set of musical events (real or possible) whose course is governed by a definite set of socially

accepted rules” (52). In Fabbri’s theory, genre is a concept that indicates a category of music. Genre is constructed by five “socially accepted rules” which are hierarchically structured. The structure where one rule is emphasized and another neglected is the “ideology” of a genre (Fabbri 55). He stresses that genres differ from one another because their

corresponding ideologies differ. Both the specifities of the rules and their hierarchies differ. Fabbri argues that genre is primarily constructed through formal and technical rules, which can be understood as form and style. A genre based on a theoretical treatise is a good example of a genre ideology that emphasizes this rule. He argues that in most musicological texts, formalistic or technical rules are emphasized in investigating genres. Therefore, the concepts of genre, style, and form are often confused and used interchangeably. Fabbri stresses that form and style are among the rules for constructing a genre. The other rules he identifies are semiotic, psychological, sociological and economic. When considering genre, Fabbri argues, one has to take more than just its music into account. Therefore, style and genre are not mutually exclusive, rather they operate in different domains.

Fabbri assumes that the notion of “musical events” is the key problematic in his definition of genre, because he defines any activity involving sound as a musical event (52). I disagree;9_{I rather see genre’s definiteness in his concept, as problematic. Fabbri states that} “genres cannot coincide with a sociology of musical consumption” (59) because they are temporal, clashing with his definition of genre as a “definite set of … rules”10_{(52). He implies} that genres are a-historical and, therefore, cannot be limited to the trends of a given period. Genre’s “definiteness” is important in his theory, because he treats genre as a tradition which prevents the infinite multiplication of genres (Fabbri 54). I contend that infinite multiplication is not a problem as long as genres are viewed as imposed by scholars or journalists.

For Fabbri, a piece of music belongs to a genre. This is a top-down approach, because once its genre is determined, a particular piece of music either fits or deviates from the

9_{In my opinion, viewing every sound as musical is not problematic, but sound production can be subsidiary to}

other effects of an activity, for example driving a car. It is not possible or worthy to include all sounds into a system of categorization. Nevertheless, it is no problem to treat the sound of an engine as music but only if this leads to further insights and not just for the sake of categorization.

(17)

label. In other words, Fabbri’s approach is genre-centred. Musicologist Eric Drott, by

contrast, investigates a bottom-up approach to genre which is music-centred. Drott deploys genre as a research tool; a perspective through which to approach a piece of music. He shows how the meaning of a composition shifts when ascribed to another genre (Drott 10-11). Hence, genres are not a definite set of rules, nor do they indicate a definite set of pieces of music. Genres change from scholar to scholar in the research process. Hence, the

(members of the) groupings change as well. Drott shows the agential power of a scholar to change a piece of music simply by changing the perspective. Bringing his insights into the field of journalism, Drott’s conception shows that naming of specific genres in musical reviews is an imposition. Musical journalists ascribe a genre to Werkman; in the process, consciously or not, they create a perspective or framework through which their readers can approach the CD, guiding the meanings attached to the record.

In this chapter, I have explored why and how music is placed in categories. Humans naturally categorize phenomena to inform future experiences with similar phenomena. In music(ology), both style and genre are used to indicate a category of music. Allan Moore’s discourse analysis shows how the terms group music in different ways. Nevertheless, the differences are contradictory or at least inconsistent with each other. I next discussed the genre theories of Franco Fabbri and Eric Drott, synthesizing them to arrive at a working definition for this thesis: one could change meaning by putting music in the perspective of a different genre, and also by putting it in the perspective of a different genre ideology. In the next chapter, I look at different conceptions of the indie genre, showing how different genre ideologies can change its meaning. My aim is to analyse the discourse on indie music without constructing an ‘improved’ genre ideology for the category.

(18)

Indie

Talma, not devoid of obstinacy, takes a new course with Werkman, for this occasion. He set aside the indie rock, he usually makes use of.11_(Jeuring)

In this chapter, I investigate what constitutes indie. It is clear that music reviewers held an expectation based on Talma’s previous albums and the context in which the new album was released. To elaborate on that context, I expand my focus to the record company that released this and many other Talma albums. Excelsior Recordings presents itself as

onafhankelijk which is Dutch for “independent.” The term “indie” is derived from the word

“independent.” This self-categorization creates a set of expectations for the music released by the company. In order to understand what indie means, I will now look deeper into Excelsior Recordings.

Excelsior Recordings is a record company established in 1996 in Amsterdam. It moved to Hilversum, the public media centre of the Netherlands, but returned to its original home in Amsterdam in 2011. The label’s headquarters is currently located at the Tolhuistuin, a newly developed cultural area in Amsterdam North at the shores of the river IJ. The

Tolhuistuin hosts, among other organisations, a satellite venue for Paradiso, one of the most important concert halls for popular music in Amsterdam. It is also home to Studio Sound Enterprise, which is owned by Frans Hagenaars, a co-founder of Excelsior Recordings, many of whose bands have recorded there. Excelsior Recordings has released nearly 200 albums since 1996, ten of which are by Meindert Talma.

Besides Excelsior’s self-categorization as indie, the record company is also

categorized, for example in the Dutch Wikipedia article, as producing alternative music. The terms “indie” and “alternative” are often confused. The Wikipedia articles12_{on the two} terms refer to one another: indie is described as “a genre of alternative rock” while alternative “is a genre … that emerged from … independent music.” The online

11_{Translated from Dutch: “Talma, niet gespeend van eigenzinnigheid, slaat met Werkman voor de gelegenheid}

een voor hem nieuwe weg in. De indierock, waarvan hij zich gewoonlijk bedient, heeft hij tijdelijk aan de kant gezet.”

(19)

encyclopaedia acknowledges that the terms are used interchangeably. The difference between indie and alternative is often explained along geographic lines with the former related to the UK and the latter to the USA (for example by the websites About.com13_and

Wikipedia). When scholars (e.g., Fonarow Empire of Dirt 40; Hesmondhalgh 35) investigate

the difference between these terms, they deploy this geographical distinction, while admitting that musicians on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean identify with both terms. This does not make the distinction clear, nor does this dichotomy account for musicians existing outside of the US and UK (for instance, Excelsior Recordings, which is an Amsterdam

company). To come to a better understanding of the term “indie,” it is therefore necessary to look beyond the geographical distinction, while also taking the category of “alternative’’ into account.

In this chapter, I analyse the differing genre ideologies of indie and alternative music. These ideologies are mainly formulated by scholarly research into each category of music. Alongside these scholarly approaches, I consider the perspectives of audiences and those people involved in the production of music. Here, I use the work of English cultural anthropologist Wendy Fonarow, whose ethnographic research is based on extensive

fieldwork in the British indie scene in the early 1990s, and on her experience as an employee at various indie music studios. In addition to her academic work, Fonarow penned a column as the “indie professor,” for The Guardian from 2010 through 2012, where she responded to readers’ questions about indie music. In this way, she has actively reproduced discourse for nearly two decades answering queries based on her previous research. For example, in her second column (Fonarow, What is Indie?), Fonarow restated five characteristics which she worked out in detail in her ethnography on the indie community (Fonarow, Empire of Dirt 26). For Fonarow, indie music is composed of the following five components: independent music production and distribution, indie as a musical genre, attitude or spirit of

independence, indie as a superior taste and indie as anti-mainstream.

I understand these perspectives as different genre ideologies, in Fabbri’s terms. The details outlined by Fonarow, however, do not coincide with the rules formulated by Fabbri. I do not believe that genre ideologies should be limited to the five rules he defined, but for practical reasons, I will adhere to his formulation to put him in dialogue with Fonarow’s

(20)

observations. Therefore, I combine Fonarow’s last three characterizations, because these are less pronounced and seem to echo Fabbri’s fourth ideology rule. Genre ideologies that emphasize the fourth rule focus on the genre’s social construction. In the last section of this chapter, I will discuss indie as a canon, a perspective that is often implicitly expressed in efforts to define indie music. In this chapter, I will show how the meanings of the words “indie” and “alternative” shift through changes in genre ideology.

1. Independent labels and distribution

Excelsior Recordings initiated a market for independent music labels (Nederlandse

onafhankelijke label markt) on Sunday, 2 September 2012. Excelsior’s public relations

representative and organizer Adriaan Pels explained in an interview with 3voor12.vpro.nl (Vrieze) that the market was founded to celebrate independently-produced music. With independent record stores rapidly disappearing, this market is a new way to sell records, said Pels. Excelsior Recordings invited many independent record companies to the

Tolhuistuin, as the market was exclusively reserved for independently-produced music. In this section, I investigate indie as a genre ideology, that foregrounds the economic aspects of the genre. I refer here specifically to its modes of production and distribution, and to the company policies of independent institutions (e.g., studios and radios). Franco Fabbri states that genres with an ideology emphasizing this rule must deviate from the norm, because otherwise it would not be pronounced enough to sufficiently define the group of music (59). He adds that only scholars identify genres on the basis of economic rules. With indie,

however, this is not the case.

The first, and most widely-expressed perspective on indie, identified by Fonarow is the production and distribution of music independent of the major labels (“majors”). Opposed to the majors are the independents: the indie music labels. Scholarly definitions of indie and alternative music are built on a similar opposition to mainstream music production and distribution embodied by the majors. They rarely define what constitutes a major label, but scholars with a background in musical production often do. Economist Brian Hracs explains that the majors which gradually came into existence through the 1980s, are large multinational corporations which own every aspect of the production process and which also own smaller specialised labels (Hracs 443-445). The majors have full control over the

(21)

production process. The source of independence is unclear, because an “indie” label cannot be more independent than these multinationals with regard to autonomy and

self-sufficiency.

Independence should therefore be conceived from the standpoint of the musician. An artist loses her or his (creative) independence when signed to a major record label. These artists have to conform to the artistic and commercial goals of the corporation; at least this is how the people who are involved in independent music production perceive the majors. As an alternative to the majors, musicians established their own record labels and

distribution networks in the UK (Fonarow Empire of Dirt 30; Hesmondhalgh 35) while a similar effort was made for college radio in the USA (Hibbet 58; Kruse 33-34).

Fonarow explains (Empire of Dirt 30-35) that in the UK, music consumption was influenced by radio programs and weekly music magazines. Music charts were instrumental in this process, because they were measures of financial success. These charts were a reflection of sales figures and were therefore dominated by acts signed to majors. In the 1970s, alternative charts were developed to represent music which was not produced or released by major labels. Companies were founded to manage the distribution of records for a variety of independent recording labels, while independent charts were informed by sales figures compiled by these independent distribution companies. This distribution process was a foundation for the success of the music on independent record labels, according to popular music scholar David Hesmondhalgh (37-38). This process was cheaper and more easily

accessible than that used by the majors. Like-minded companies worked together, even internationally, to sell and promote each other’s music. Artists controlled their creative output, without having to make concessions to the companies, because they were managing the distribution process themselves. The common characteristic of indie music is that it is too progressive to be produced via major labels. The independent production process was so important to its creation that the music was named after the process. This is the British narrative of indie, according to Fonarow and Hesmondhalgh.

In the USA, the dominant narrative focuses on the network of alternative radio stations which were typically located at university campuses. Small communities were connected through the local music they heard on college radio stations and through community music magazines (Kruse 33-34). College radio was aimed at a young and

(22)

literary scholar Ryan Hibbet (58). The definition of alternative is thus less restrictive than that of indie. Media scholar Holly Kruse (35) observes that musicians identified themselves with alternative as long as they believed that their music deviated from the norm. Due to the fact that the distribution process in the USA was not as transparent as it was in the UK, anyone could choose to align with the term. Once college radio music gained popularity in the early 1990s, the term “alternative” was quickly adopted by the majors. Kruse, a self-proclaimed aficionado and insider, asserts that “real” alternative music fans still insisted on buying music produced on independent labels and sold at independent record stores (Ibid.).

At this point, alternative and indie have become intermingled. In both the UK and USA narratives, radio and distribution are crucial for forming an identity in opposition to the majors. Being an alternative to, or independent of (music signed at) majors are similar ideas, and thus the terms became interchangeable. A good example is the oft-quoted book by journalist Michael Azerrad, Our Band Could Be Your Life: Scenes from the American Indie

Underground, 1981–1991 (2001), which sketches the histories of indie bands in the United States. Although he adheres to the narrative about college radio, the decisive criteria for

inclusion in his book is whether an artist is signed at an independent label. Azerrad’s policy is so strict that he does not include the story of R.E.M. who he identifies as one of the most important bands for the scene, despite the fact that they were signed to a major (Azerrad 4-6). Azerrad’s book exemplifies the confusion between indie and alternative. I do not contend that he is wrong, but I think his argument underscores the arbitrary nature of the terms.

In the contemporary music industry, both alternative and indie are still widely-used terms, though there is a preference for the latter in both academic and popular media. Nitsuh Abebe, contributor for the influential website Pitchfork, explains that the popularity of alternative music in the 1990s and the appropriation of the term (and the bands that were associated with the category) by large corporations and mass audiences led to a preference for the term “indie,” among those who wished to dissociate from mass culture. Those who wanted to resist appropriation felt more affinity for indie because it implied independently-produced music. This confirms Kruse’s observations who noticed a similar stance towards the terms in 1993. There had been no clear division between indie and alternative to start with, because both college radio and independent record companies were alternative and indie. When majors started to infiltrate the independent charts, the terms indie and

(23)

and McClung 202; Fonarow 37; Kruse 35). Indie and alternative became hollow words with little reference to the distribution of music and therefore ceased to be precise musical categories. Nevertheless, this account of indie music’s economic ideals is the most frequently cited explanation of the categories. In light of Fabbri’s genre theory it is remarkable that indie and alternative are mainly indicators of economic issues related to music. Fabbri specified that this rule is mostly emphasized by academics (59); by contrast, the indie narrative I have just detailed is shared by both academic and non-academic sources.

Excelsior Recordings was founded in 1996, in the midst of this diffusion of terms like “major,” “indie,” and “alternative.” In the spirit of the times, Excelsior outsourced some of its activities to subsidiaries of majors (Bambarger). For a long time, their distribution was managed by MCA Records (subsidiary of Universal) and later by V2 Records (also, at one time, a subsidiary of Universal). V2 was a third owner of Excelsior Recordings in 2006, according to a newspaper article (Cabenda), and as they still do the distribution, it is safe to assume that this is still the case. V2 is currently a big company that does the distribution for many independent labels throughout Europe.

This supports Hesmondhalgh’s observation that independents were not opposed to commercial success at all, but simply saw their independence as a more sincere way to achieve it (35). “Independent” is thus a relative term in this case, because it merely indicates that Excelsior Recordings operates on its own. This commercial tendency, or lack of anti-commerciality, is examined by Yoni Drijfhout who researched the stances of musicians from Excelsior Recordings, through popular media interviews. One example which Drijfhout provides is that of GEM who composed songs for a television commercial with the intention of becoming rich and famous, though they succeeded only partially and temporarily

(Drijfhout 43-51). I will not reproduce Drijhout’s research; rather I offer it as evidence that indie musicians’ attitudes, like indie label business practices, sometimes deviate from the oft-expressed indie myth of anti-commercialism. When one emphasizes its economic rule, indie becomes an elastic concept. The record market, which I discussed above, exemplifies this elasticity. Excelsior Recordings took the lead in gathering independent labels on the Nederlandse onafhankelijke label markt. Independence seems a strict and easily observable criterion, but they nevertheless invited the label Top Notch to the market. Top Notch, which is a subsidiary of Universal Music, is also connected to Excelsior. They have released records

(24)

together, the most recent being Armand & The Kik (2015). These collaborations show that defining music solely on the basis of its production model does not work.

Although regular distribution may be outsourced to a large multinational corporation, Excelsior Recordings still uses alternative distribution methods to deliver music to their audience. In 2011, the label started a supporters club to which members subscribe to receive a new record on a monthly basis. Ferry Roseboom, the owner of Excelsior

Recordings, explained in an interview with newspaper Volkskrant, that the subscription is a new way to connect with their audience, while also financing the record label (Huut). The subscription also grants discounts to club members at independent record stores. This kind gesture shows the network of related companies and the mutual support of independent enterprises.

In this section, I viewed Excelsior Recordings from the perspective of its distribution and corporate policy. Excelsior’s practices follow the British narrative and can thus be called indie music, although their musical output is also often described as alternative. The

narratives of both indie and alternative, whether British or US-American, focus on the 1980s, emphasizing that since the 1990s, the terms have become less clear in relation to economic rules. Since Excelsior was founded in the 1990s, one cannot expect it to align with narratives of the 1980s. Nevertheless, Excelsior Recordings organizes a market and sets up a

subscription system as an alternative or independent means of distribution. The economic rule, in the genre’s ideology, that initially gave indie its name, is hard to maintain and discern over the course of several decades. The economy changes and the (production of) music changes along with it, but since the meanings of indie and alternative now rarely refer to commerce and corporate policies, this genre ideology no longer suffices to identify a particular category of music.

2. Guitars, guitars, “jangly” guitars

In an album review for the music journal Lust for Life, Chris van Oostrom uses only two sentences to describe the music of Werkman. He claims that the music is remarkably more serious than Talma’s usual “droogkloterigheid” (“dry humorousness” in English) and that the sound is “autumnal.” Most journalists do not put much effort into describing music. The vast majority of scholars who write about indie or alternative music likewise neglect this

(25)

task, either because they focus their research on other aspects or do not possess the capacity to accurately describe it. Nevertheless, they strain to offer descriptions of the music. For instance: “Indie would be stylish four-piece beat combos with skinny guys and skinny girls in skinny jeans wearing their everyday clothes on stage, a twee, retro, or lo-fi sound, simple songs” (Fonarow, What is Indie?). The music is often described with a series of vague adjectives and frequently combined with a description of the band members and their dress code. Often the writer provides just one definite characterisation, but when describing the evolution of a genre, the description does not gain clarity. Take this example by

journalist Simon Reynolds:

Back in the 1980s …. indie was about defiant amateurishness and naivety. Its defects – shaky rhythm sections, weak voices, clumsy playing – were a refusal of the perfectionism and professionalism of 80s rock and pop. [In the 2000s] all [indie bands] were significantly more dynamic rhythmically than the late-90s Britpop afterbirth. (Reynolds 2010)

Although descriptions of the genre are vague there seems to be a clear consensus on some parts of describing the music and at the same time there are contrasting differences.

Almost all sources stress that indie music is guitar-centred. A quick look at the records released by Excelsior Recordings confirms that indeed many of them feature the guitar as a prominent instrument, yet several of the songs by Spinvis, one of Excelsior’s top-selling acts, feature little to no guitar. Nevertheless, while many Excelsior bands reserve a prominent place for the guitar in their music, this is no indication of how the music actually sounds. About.com uses the word “jangly” (among other adjectives) to describe the

technique or sound of the guitar. This adjective is also used by scholars to characterize the guitar (Hesmondhalgh 38; Kruse 36). The word lacks clarity, but seems to indicate that the guitarist plays a bit carelessly, without precision. “Jangly” has also been used to describe the sound of a twelve-string guitar introduced by the Beatles and the Byrds in the 1960s.

Guitarists discuss how to simulate this sound without a twelve-string guitar, on the internet forum Thegearpage.net. Their suggested technique is to narrow the ambitus of the chords and to use the same tones in different chords to create a drone; this is created by playing so-called “open chords.” By maintaining one’s grip and only changing the position of the hand, a guitarist does not have to adjust their fingering. This results in a drone of open strings complemented by the principles of a chord. While this is a relatively simple technique, the

(26)

combination of the drone and the chords can result in “difficult” intervals like ninths. Nevertheless, it is an easy way to play the guitar, and one which obscures harmonic progression. Scholars stress this carefree, slightly sloppy style in ‘’jangly’’ guitar playing.

This understanding of a sloppy technique reflects the assumption that indie and alternative music emerged from punk (Azerrad 6; Fonarow 28; Hesmondhalgh 34; McDonald 356). Some regard it as an extension of punk’s anti-professional stance and its distillation of rock aesthetics through short songs with simple structures (Fonarow 48). Others stress the more experimental side of indie, which they see as a departure from the anger and straight-forward guitar assault of punk music (Hesmondhalgh 39-40). Indie music is understood as both simple and complex; while it may seem contradictory, most people deploy this dichotomy in their descriptions of the category. As I explained above, indie music is

considered to be different enough to be excluded from major labels and commercial radio stations.

Ryan Hibbet (55) also identifies several subcategories of indie, but finds two extremes which explain the complex and shifting nature of the category. These are indie music’s tendencies towards both simplicity and complexity, as described by others. Hibbet (60-67) is one of the few observers to identify and delineate the two main currents in indie music. The first, founded in the singer/songwriter tradition, is lo-fi and noisy, making minimal use of instrumentation; it is characterized by cynical lyrics which are focused on self-deprecation. The second is a movement of bands and musicians who use unconventional instruments or who deploy unusual playing techniques. The music of artists in this latter category is often heavily-produced in studios, suggesting that these bands consider the recording studio an extension of their creative output. Indie’s lo-fi movement, by contrast, takes a defiantly sloppy stance towards recording techniques. These descriptions are again not very precise, but Hibbet helps to clarify the two dominant (and conflicting) strands of music that people

associate with indie.

Turning to the case of musician Low Barlow, Hibbet (63) argues that self-deprecation and a lack of seriousness are foundational for indie. He connects these attitudinal stances with a tendency towards simplicity and minimalism. Here, minimalism not only refers to the number of musicians, but also to the sound quality; a lo-fi sound is preferred while song structures are kept as short as necessary (Kruse 36). This brevity is achieved through the omission of bridges and instrumental solos, which are regarded as narcissistic and

(27)

pretentious (Fonarow Empire of Dirt 42, 67; Kruse 36). Hesmondhalgh (38) explains that indie bands often rejected dance rhythms in response to the domination of the pop charts by techno, funk, disco and hip-hop music. Likening this stance to protestant Puritanism, Fonarow (Empire of Dirt 40) characterizes indie with words like “simplicity and austerity,” “hypervaluation of childhood,” “nostalgia,” and “guitar fetishism,” while concluding that indie can also be seen as technophobic. On this latter point, Fonarow also admits that indie music has embraced dance rhythms and technology at various points in its evolution. This is, she argues, due to the inherent nostalgia of indie music (ibid. 46, 71); as some techniques grow older, it is permitted to use them.

The gradual appropriation of older techniques is a hallmark of the second type of indie music, which is often described as eclectic and complex. The lyrics are foremost connected with this tendency in the music. Simon Reynolds, who is perhaps most influential in this discourse, describes it as “head music,” intended for contemplation spurred by sophisticated lyrics (Reynolds 13-14). Or as Fonarow expressed it in her second column, this strand of indie music is characterized by “songs with intelligent, nostalgic, escapist, or depressing lyrics” (What is Indie?). These adjectives are only explicitly expressed in relation to the lyrics, but they also implicitly refer to the music. Musicians deliberately opt for formal simplicity; it is an intentional choice taken to convey a particular message. As I argued above, the resulting music is often too inaccessible and complex to be played on mainstream radio or signed to a major record label. There are no non-musicologists who can explicate the complex and inaccessible qualities of the music.

Musicologists David Blake (1) and Chris McDonald (356) both emphasize that the essence of indie is “difference;” therefore, they look at how indie music differs from mainstream music. McDonald examines guitar-oriented alternative music, discovering that much of it is centred around third relations. Especially significant are what he calls “modal subversions.” In modal subversions, a major key is implied (for instance, in the vocals) while the harmonic progression centres around a relation with a minor third taken from the respective minor key, or the other way around (McDonald 358-361). McDonald argues that this is possible through the use of tonally ambiguous power chords as fundamental chords (Ibid. 356-357). Power chords are simply a sounding interval of a fifth and thus omit a defining third. This differs from the jangly guitars described above, because a jangly guitar

(28)

sound can feature sevenths and ninths. McDonald argues that modal subversion through third relations is distinct from techniques found in metal, rock and pop music (Ibid. 362).

Blake takes a different approach to investigate the difference in indie music. He also focuses on the guitar, but narrows his research to timbre, which he claims is the

fundamental aspect of pop music. Blake works from the assumption that timbre reflects intentional decisions in studio production. He observes, for example, that My Bloody Valentine’s guitar on “Only Shallow” (1991) sounds “similarly full, … more distorted, … less digestible, and it is not homogeneous”14_{(Blake 7) in comparison to a mainstream guitar} sound. After analysing another two songs, he comes to the conclusion that neither example is homogeneous by mainstream standards. A homogeneous sound is one which does not develop or change over the course of a song or in relation to other songs (Ibid. 6). Blake therefore argues that indie is bound by a heterogeneous timbre (Ibid. 11).

Blake’s observation is as true as it is arbitrary; he studied music which already differs from the mainstream and, after analysing it, concluded that it differs. McDonald made a similar move: by specifically looking for third relations in alternative music, he ignored other chord progressions or other kinds of music which contain similar harmonies. These

musicological analyses are interesting but the conclusions that follow from them are weak as the answers were already concealed in the hypotheses. These studies do not observe indie music (as a grouping) and discover these characteristics within the music, but instead assume these characteristics from the outset, using them to prescribe and delineate which music is indie. Indeed, the results could vary simply by researching another set of songs. “Difference” is thus not firm ground upon which to construct a category like alternative or indie.

What the work of these musicologists does show, is that musical decisions are always deliberate, contradicting the opinions of laypeople who describe indie music as simple and sloppy. I want to argue that the terms “indie” and “alternative” do not describe a particular sound, song structure or musical form. At least there is no consensus about this in the literature. Indie cannot be described as a genre ideology that emphasizes technical and formal musical rules. In addition, no clear distinction can be made between alternative and

14_{Blake elaborates on these qualifications extensively in his paper but the discussion has no added value in this}

(29)

indie on the basis of their sound. McDonald does explicitly cite alternative music’s use of power chords, while others associate indie with jangly guitars, but both techniques obscure tonality. However, McDonald fails to differentiate between indie and alternative, instead researching modal subversion through third relations in alternative music. This is consistent with most scholarly and popular writing which falls short of articulating a musical difference between indie and alternative.

3. Elitism

Most scholars (Azerrad, Fonarow, Hesmondhalgh, Hibbet, Kruse, Reynolds) who write about alternative and indie have no musicological background. Most studies focus instead on the music community, researching how people experience the music. They often describe indie by conveying peoples’ (musicians as well as the audience) stances towards the music. From the literature, I distilled four ways of describing indie without directly referring to the modes of production or the sound of the music. First, those involved with the music are described as having an alternative stance towards making music. This attitude is often expressed as “Do-It-Yourself” (DIY): a philosophy of being independent in musical self-expression, without conforming to the commercial dictates of corporations. Azerrad puts it this way: “the key principle of American indie rock wasn’t a circumscribed musical style; it was the punk ethos of DIY” (6). In this narrative, the attitude comes first, leading to

unconventional music and innovative methods of production. This ethos also promotes the idea that everyone can participate in making music, blurring the line between performer and audience. Azerrad proudly states that one does not need money, nor a pair of binoculars to see an indie performance, thereby implying that the music is for everyone. Despite this view, many scholars find elitism in indie music culture. Independence for the indie listener means freedom from imposed opinions and mainstream tastes, leading to elitism. This involves people’s stance while listening to music.

Hibbet (58) points out that, although indie stems from independent, this connection is only understood by a select few, and thus functions as a shibboleth; keeping those who do not know the true origins of the word on the outside. By regulating the membership of their community, indie fans seek to distinguish themselves and their superior tastes, from those who are just obedient followers of simple mainstream music. Fonarow (Empire of Dirt 57)

(30)

acknowledges that this is also true within the indie community. Indie fans often regard themselves to know (and to know before others) which music is worthy of attention; introducing music to friends is a way to demonstrate one’s superior knowledge. Hibbet, drawing on the theory of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, adds that this endows the “knower” with cultural capital (56).

This tension between accessibility and elitism is also visible in the Excelsior

Recordings supporters club. The combined monthly releases from the supporters club form the core of Excelsior’s output. In every month since 2011, the record company chooses the most representative of their new recordings, establishing an inner hierarchy. The motto of the subscription service, drawn from classic mythology,15_{is Experto Credite (See Appendix:} figure 2) which means “trust the experienced one.” Another motto, referring to classical antiquity can be found on the pressed labels (See Appendix: figure 3) of the CDs: Musis

Sacrum. This means “dedicated to the muses” and refers to the nine Greek goddesses of

inspiration. The last, and most obvious reference to the classics is found in the name of the record company itself: excelsior meaning “superior” or “always higher.”

These Latin phrases and the ubiquitous crown in their branding imagery might be perceived to betray Excelsior’s pretentions. I do not think, however, that Excelsior aspires to promote an elite culture; membership is easily accessible and the subscription service grants free admission to many concerts. On the other hand, Excelsior’s logo is perceived as a mark of quality and is displayed on every album cover they release (Cabenda). Indeed, an Excelsior release can be easily identified by glancing at the cover (See Appendix: figure 4). Perhaps aware of potential elitism, Excelsior changed their lay-out in 2015, introducing, via a supporters club release, a new logo-free cover design with The Miseries (2015), the debut album of The Miseries (See Appendix: figure 5). The self-awareness and modesty of this decision suggests to me that Excelsior is far from elitist. It thus deviates from Hibbet’s description of indie, instead recalling Azerrad’s formulation. Accessibility aside, the supporters club could still be perceived as elitist, because membership is seen as a sign of superior taste. The supporters club thus shows that both perceptions about easy

accessibility and elitist taste are understandable, or at least applicable to Excelsior Recordings.

An Alternative Indie: Why does Meindert Talma’s Werkman resist consensus categorization?