The Aleatory Dynamics of Independence: An Analysis of 2 West Coast Music Lables by risa
Hesmondhalgh continues by explaining the different partnerships that exist between corporations and independents. In his elaboration of these deals, we begin to see how the terms partnership, collaborative and consensual relationships, co-operation and networks are often euphemisms that portend an eventual takeover. However, amid these relationships, it is nonetheless pertinent to highlight how the notion of symbiosis can often be valuable in gaining an understanding of the production, acceptance and distribution of cultural texts/products. Pierre Bourdieu, in his article The Production of Belief: Contribution to an Economy of Symbolic Goods, explains how the both the artist and the cultural critic depend on each other for recognition and economic gain. The notion that a dependency exists between independents and majors for both recognition and economic gain will be discussed further on.
Subpop Indeed
Subpop’s history provides us with an imbrication of a number salient issues such as that of scenes, dominant musical forms, distinctions of aesthetic judgment and thus processes of encoding and decoding, distribution and power, affiliations, and legitimacy—especially as it pertains to independents; all of these elements of inquiry make it a particularly useful label to examine. Additionally, Subpop also serves as a good example of the volatility inherent to the independent music industry.
Subpop initially began in 1985 as a fanzine that was the brainchild of Bruce Pavitt. With this fanzine, Pavitt sought to acknowledge and raise awareness about the fact that there was a wealth of good music that existed outside ‘the obvious media centres of New York, Los Angeles and Toronto.’9
At the same time, Jonathan Poneman had been working as a disc jockey at a local radio station in Seattle. He often found himself booking gigs for bands like Nirvana, Soundgarden and Green River (which itself splintered into Mud Honey and Mother Love Bone—which then became Pearl Jam).10 Poneman first met Pavitt in 1986, while making a duplicate of tape at Muzak Corp.. In 1987, Poneman and Pavitt produced a record by a local band called Soundgarden. The album was a local success and Subpop became an official label. Having combined both their savings—a total of $19 000, Poneman and Pavitt watched as their capital quickly depleted over the next three months. Creditors soon came to collect their money; it appeared as though Subpop’s life as a label was about to end. Then, miraculously, a recently signed band called Mudhoney became very popular in England. Therefore, Poneman and Pavitt rushed to produce another album entitled Touch Me I’m Sick. It proved to be a success and managed to remain on the British charts for over a year.11 This was the initial breakthrough that really started it all; by 1990, Mudhoney had sold over 50 000 albums worldwide.12 From there on, Subpop had a hand in begetting bands the likes of Nirvana, Alice in Chains, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Hole, Screaming Trees, The Fluid, The Walkabouts, Tad, etc.
The manner in which Subpop had structured its distribution was by having established numerous international licensing deals with a number of independent distributors. Hesmondhalgh describes international licensing as an association where small companies establish “separate export deals with a series of independent companies abroad.”13 With regards to Subpop’s domestic distribution, they had deals with independent distributors in both the United States and Canada (however, it had been possible for some stores in Vancouver to order from them directly); internationally, they had secured deals with different independent distributors in Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Italy, and England.14 Having an agreement with an independent distributor in England is particularly important, because it is the only means in which to qualify for the ‘independent charts;’ obviously, one of the corollaries of appearing on those charts—aside from it being a reflection of popular judgment—is that it serves as a form of marketing that gives bands local exposure.15 Additionally, Subpop has been particularly cautious about adopting a cash on delivery system, because it has ensured that they be paid soon after the merchandise is delivered; Poneman explains this is a wise move because “a lot of other independent labels have to wait for months, sometimes years, yes years, to get paid and they die.”16
In a bid to be more competitive with major labels, Subpop has been structured so as to operate with a ridiculously low overhead (even lower than Epitaph’s). Normally, the industry rule is that before bands can begin making a profit on their releases, they have to cover the production and marketing costs incurred by their label’s investment in the album. Thus, because major labels have sizable overheads, it is not uncommon for bands to only start seeing a return after having sold sometimes as much as 500 000 copies.17 However, Subpop’s low overhead operation is such that, on average, it can both produce and distribute an album for a mere $8 000; therefore, its bands can often begin making a profit on their albums after only having sold 10 000 copies. The potential of having a higher rate of return, has enticed bands like Sebadoh to snub both PolyGram and Columbia Records—even though both offered higher advances and ‘better distribution’ deals.18
In many ways, Subpop—like many other independent labels, has served as a nursery for young and potentially successful bands. For reasons such as these, major labels have begun realizing how valuable independents are, because they can serve as the agents who take the precarious first step of finding potential talent and giving them a chance to record. Concordantly, Hesmondhalgh explains that it has become increasingly popular for majors to forge affiliations with independents, whereby the independents “are effectively acting as developers of talent in the same way as the Artist and Repertoire (‘A&R’ in industry parlance) departments of the major companies.”19 This can also end up saving the major a significant amount of money, because if a band has already amassed a sizable audience prior to signing with them, then the major will not have to invest as much money in marketing. A good example of this is when Geffen purchased Nirvana from Subpop in 1990. By then, Nirvana had already developed a decent audience,20 so when Geffen helped them release Nevermind there was already a wealth of potential consumers to purchase the album; it ended up selling over 10 million copies worldwide.21 In any case, the idea of Subpop as having essentially discovered Nirvana and having fostered its development only for a major to eventually take over, is a great example of the role some independent labels play in the music market—and it can be a profitable role as well.
Leave a Comment