by IAN GILES
Have you ever heard someone say they like listening to “indie” music or have an “indie” style? The music term “indie” started out referring to anything recorded that wasn’t distributed by one of the Big Six record labels: Warner Music Group, EMI, Sony Music, BMG, Universal Music Group, and PolyGram. While early indie music was associated with DIY rock aesthetics, those were simply emergent properties of the artists who were unable or unwilling to work with major labels. Whereas avant-garde is a designation of an aesthetic position, indie was simply a designator of a mode of production.
In recent years, indie has largely become an aesthetic definition tied up in previous indie music and its associated styles which seem alternative but in a way that is softer and more palatable than alt, goth, or emo styles. While researching for this article, I did a Google image search of “indie style” and was immediately inundated with various sources presenting me with the “Best Indie Boy Aesthetic Ideas,” whatever that means. How can a boy be indie? Was this boy distributed by an independent record label? The wild techno-jazz fusion which I like, according to the previous definition of the word, should be designated as indie. However, no one would call it that because indie has now become a designator of aesthetic rather than a designation of a mode of production.
You may ask, why should we care about this? Aren’t you being incredibly pretentious, you silly indie boy? While genre terminology can often be vague or erroneous, indie is unique in that, when used properly, it gives important information to consumers about products. It is important to be conscious of how the things we consume are produced, who owns them, and who has power. Fundamentally, monopolies are bad for artists and art because they limit the possibility sphere of art to marketability when the most interesting and innovative work sits beyond that sphere. Independent artists, not held back by marketing teams and big conglomerates, can produce more innovative work. By supporting independent artists we can lift up a greater plurality of voices. While the word indie being relegated to describe boys who wear skate shoes and knit sweaters isn’t particularly important in the grand scheme of our collapsed democracy, it does represent a larger problem of focusing too much on aesthetics and not enough on our substantive role as consumers.
While it is nearly impossible to consume completely ethically under capitalism since somewhere down the production pipeline is sweatshop labor or an environmentally detrimental practice, we can still use our dollars to support more ethical and sustainable consumption. With our clothing we can avoid fast fashion by thrifting or buying things that last when possible. With our overpriced coffee, we can choose fair trade or organic products. With music we can support local and independent artists. While it is often far more expensive to consume ethically and sustainably, by doing so when we can, we make ethical production more economically viable. When we prioritize aesthetics over substance, those aesthetics get co-opted by large companies. You can buy vintage looking clothing from Shein, but don’t let them trick you. Avoid placing aesthetics over substance. Be a substance boy, not an aesthetic boy.
Leave a Reply