I found the story of Skip James fascinating. Having gained the name Skip for being something of a Nomad, he won a talent competition for which the prize was a recording contract. He recorded 26 tracks in two days in 1931 and instead of electing to take a cash payment for his recording, signed a contract for a percentage of the sales. However the depression set in and radio emerged and the market for recorded music in the United States collapsed meaning that he never saw a cent from the sales of his records. He decided that he was unable to continue to be a musician and became a Baptist Minister (as his father had been) and essentially disappeared from the music industry altogether. In 1964 he was discovered in a hospital and came to perform at the Newport Folk Festival in front of 18,000 people. He was suffering from cancer and in 1968 Cream covered one of his songs which gave him the money to have an operation which extended his life by a few more years. In these later years he recorded and performed music again becoming a legend of the genre.
To me this story highlights (again) the need to provide artists with an industry in which they can secure a reasonable and reliable income. At the time of winning the talent competition Skip James was considered one of the best blues guitar and piano players around with a unique sound, lyrical and performance style. Yet the economic conditions of the time were unable to provide him with the means to support his art - one can only imagine the contribution he could have made over the three decades in between. In considering the current state of the industry we should reflect on the loss to society if we continue down the path of creating an environment where the best musicians are unable to succeed. Instead of rewarding talent and quality, the business model of the labels centres on commercial success. Those most able to reflect on society and to produce artistic and social progress are faced with an environment where they must not only compete against all other culture but must compete for a random and unreliable reward. This does not seem to me to be the incentive we need to ensure these artists continue to create.
I was interested to learn that at the time of the first recording of Skip James that the recording studio was housed in an old chair factory. As the commentator pointed out, gramophones were made by furniture companies at the time so it made sense that the recordings took place near by. Since this time of course there has been incredible convergence with many of the record labels later merging with equipment manufacturers. In the digital age however there has been some divergence again, with many of the modern device manufacturers being separate from the labels altogether. The introduction of digital distribution, particularly file sharing, also highlights the further separation of labels from the wider aspects of the music industry. Arguably this has been a significant part of their downfall. Many have reflected on what could have occurred had the labels sought to buy or even license the original Napster. The labels did attempt their own digital distribution (PressPlay) but this failed to capture the interests of consumers. It is only in recent weeks that it appears that they may be looking to enter this side of the industry again.
Another very interesting aspect to this film for me was the life of J.B. Lenoir. His story reflected the next generation of blues artists after Skip James. Lenoir was a fantastic guitar player and singer who unfortunately died following a car accident in the mid 1960s, just after he had begun writing political music. Until I saw this movie I personally tended to associate blues music with issues such as love/relationship problems and with slavery. Having heard some of the music of J.B. Lenoir, particularly the Vietnam Blues, I have been reminded that political music of any persuasion is possible in any genre. He wrote about civil rights issues, the treatment of women as well as wider political issues.
The term ‘political music’ is not something that can be defined accurately and am always aware of the artificial separation I make between this and emotive and dance music. Of course political music can make you dance, it can also make you feel emotions. These categories are useful but not absolute. Some music is purely about love; some music is purely designed to make you dance; some music is clearly designed to make you think; some music has another purpose altogether and some music crosses these lines and has a range of qualities. When it comes to studying political music/technology/law, I see a scale of sorts with some music being more closely aligned with music that makes you think and when I speak of creating an environment where this music can thrive, again I think of a scale of the regulatory factors more likely to enable this.
No comments:
Post a Comment