The Fredösphere

A while back Ian Moss guest-blogged at the Fredösphere, asking what it would take to get the public excited about new music.

The conventional way to get noticed is to obey genre discipline.  Write something that belongs in a preexisting category; if it's good enough, fans of that category will give your work easy acceptance.  Many musicians are comfortable doing this, although some find such sluttish behavior despicable.

The other way is to create your own genre.  This requires enormous ability plus an iron will.  Expect to toil for years without reward.  Don't be terribly shocked if the reward never comes.  If you're lucky, you'll win in the end.  If you're very lucky (i.e., if you're Wagner) they'll name the new genre after you.

A third way consists of ignoring genre boundaries and creating an eclectic body of work.  If you're good, you'll gain the respect of those peers who know you, but you'll never receive wide recognition.

Is this "system" fair?  No, but human nature being what it is, I just don't see how fighting it is worth it.  There is a vast horde of people out there whose approach to music is ... well, the not-nice word is lazy, but I think a better description is that they simply don't make it a priority to spend the time wading through music of all genres to find all possible pieces that fit their idiosyncratic tastes.  Thus, they rely on genres as a filter.

Will modern communications make searching so much easier that genre discipline breaks down?  I want to believe that.  Collaborative filtering says "yes."  The internet's tendency to grease the wheels of the power law says "maybe not."

If you really want to start a new genre, I think you have to look at what motivates people to give new music a chance.  I think new music works when it acts as a vehicle delivering religion or sex.  I really don't think a new sound will succeed on its own, no matter how novel or well-crafted it is.  If you look at innovators from Wagner to the post-WWI modernists to Elvis to the Beatles, you'll see it all boils down to religion and sex -- or most compellingly, a religio-sensuality.  A sensulotatry.

Read Hanslick's description (I can't find it online) of Wagner devotees wandering around Bayreuth with copies of the Ring libretto under their arms, or Mark Twain's experience at the Festival.  Think about the screaming, fainting girls at Beatles concerts.  What the heck is going on?  Whatever it is, is definitely is not merely musical.

I'm no expert, but I get the feeling the same dynamic is at work in philosophical movements.  Think of Wittgenstein's acolytes, or Steiner's.  Even Nietzsche, the most groupie-resistant of them all, found popular acceptance after madness had wiped his personality clean, allowing others to read thereon whatever they wished.

I hope I don't sound cynical here; I don't intend to be.  Nevertheless, to encourage the kind of cultish mentality needed to build up a following, I've resorted to wearing outlandish clothing and making extravagant claims.  Look at this picture of me trying out my new persona.