THOSE POOR, DUMB KIDS

I love Arcade Fire. But, man, there is something about their whole schtick – the haircuts, the Amish-steampunk-great-depression costumes, the music-as-art-project mentality that permeates everything, the deification-by-Pitchfork, the private school in-joke wink of it all – that just rubs me the wrong way. As a graphic artist, I have to admit that some of it is sour-grapes jealousy: the Neon Bible stage set was gorgeous, the work-clothes and thrift store cocktail dress costumes are a smart take on rock band theatricality that’s way more Clash than (oft-sited) Bowie. And its not really their fault their popularity owes so much to the mid-decade influence of music blogs and a positive Pitchfork review.

But indie and punk music used to belong to dumb kids, and smart kids playing dumb. Now the Columbia and Northwestern diplomas seem de rigueur in indie music, as is a carefully curated academic stance regarding “what my band is about”. Its still cloaked in off-handed nonchalance, but its there. And those private school CVs come with another question attached: is indie rock becoming something only for rich kids?

Isn’t anyone ready for indie rock to get elemental and dumb and visceral again? This is, in part, an old person complaint, and I can barely contain my exasperation at the sound of my own generation rattling our dentures in service of lamenting the loss of Nirvana. Arguably, getting elemental and dumb and visceral again is what Arcade Fire accomplished – their debut album evoked arena-sized sincerity of U2 with more honesty and originality than Coldplay ever will. There was passion there that's elusive (or just more elusive than it should be) – and perhaps its not their fault that the evident passion was immediately co-opted, caged, and scrutinized by the music blog academia.

The descendents of The Beatles, The Stones, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, Dylan, etc. – the touchstones of rock-n-roll – those types of artists exist in the periphery now, in indie-music. And the new music press exists completely online. Rolling Stone is in the business of diversifying their advertisements, selling energy drinks and vodka. MTV removed “music” from their fucking name.

In the arts, history does not repeat itself – while you can draw parallels between Kurt Cobain and John Lennon or between mid-1990s indie cinema and 1970’s American autuers, they’re always weak analogies. The “next big thing” is always the next new thing, no matter the parallels or level of influence at work. The Arcade Fire very thoroughly processes and reinterprets their ‘70s new-wave, Band-Aid ‘80s arena rock, and anachronistic Americana influences into something familiar – easily dissected and delineated, completely transparent – but honestly new. And that’s why slavishly “retro” artists never work or last: early Metallica shared a greater affinity with Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath than a band like Wolfmother does. Metallica’s music was built on the foundations of their heroes, it didn’t just propose a frame-by-frame recreation. The strict revivalists’ music is built on haircuts and fashion, and while their music can contain a visceral, invigorating punch – its lacks an authenticity beyond the authenticity it is carefully replicating.

Is it possible for poor people and dumb kids to make compelling rock music anymore? Does it even matter? Is there any incentive or drive (for the poor) to make interesting music if it doesn’t bring fame and wealth? Making compelling music doesn’t provide the time and money, and the attendant freedom that is the real ambition of a creative person. (The Beatles, today, would be signed to Matador or Merge and would be playing the 500-capacity club in some rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. Those people you see? With a Beatles shirt for everyday of the week, with John Lennon staring out at you from their poly-cotton blend? Those people would hate The Beatles today.) It brings poverty – and unless you’re already just slumming it, “Common People”-style, in the theme park of Indie Boheme, there’s no upside to trying to compete with Ivy League kids and their well thought-out concepts. And I think its to the detriment of music.

But who knows - maybe not.