The Aleatory Dynamics of Independence: An Analysis of 2 West Coast Music Lables by risa
This tension felt by amateurs of independent music towards majors and the commercial music industry raises another problem. What occurs when an independent label, such as Subpop, begins to enjoy a significant amount of economic success? It is difficult to say. There are instances where an independent label can do reasonably well and not risk losing the legitimacy that it has already accrued. A good example of this would be Matador Records. Matador seems to maintain its legitimate status amongst independent circles, even though it is distributed by Warner.42 Naturally, this legitimacy is intimately linked to the bands that constitute a label’s roster. With regards to Matador, it has bands like: Arab Strap, Cat Power, Guided by Voices, Interpol, Mogwai, Yo La Tengo, etc. and the large followings that these bands continue to enjoy undoubtedly has an influence on the label’s legitimacy.
In 1995, when Subpop audaciously sold 49% of their shares to Warner for $50 million US, they were at a threshold of potential demise. 1994 had been a horrible year for Subpop; Nirvana’s lead singer, Kurt Cobain, had committed suicide; Hole’s bassist, Kristen Pfaff, had been found dead in her bathtub; and Alice in Chains had to cancel their 1994 tour because of their lead singer’s drug addiction. Grunge was petering out. The sale had ambivalent consequences. One of the positive aspects of being associated with Warner, was that it would facilitate their distribution; however, this—as we shall see, came at price. On the other hand, with most of their commercially successful groups either defunct or falling apart, all that was left was Subpop’s independent-oriented bands. Therefore, when they sold part ownership to Warner not only did they lose 49% of their shares, they also lost a lot of the legitimacy that they had garnered. Many saw the partnership with Warner, as an indication that Subpop had sold-out; animosity towards Subpop soon developed. In fact, Doug Pray, a documentary filmmaker, made a documentary called Hype! which sardonically chronicled Subpop’s sudden rise, in it:
Jonathan Poneman and Bruce Pavitt (co-founders of SubPop records, the grunge label) toot their own
corporative-strategy horns, [while] other scenesters bemoan the vivisection performed on a once-healthy alternative music community by an insane and vacuous press corps. [sic]43
When Warner partnered with Subpop, they immediately slimmed down the album catalogue by eliminating the bands that had a lesser following—in short, those that were deemed unprofitable. This is a cost-cutting measure that is typically executed when majors gain distributive control—or in some cases partial distributive control—of an independent. Distributive control, Frith contends, is one of the reasons that explains the majors’ “continued domination of the music business—they can decide what not to distribute.”44 So the question is: then what occurred with Subpop’s sizable back catalogue? Well, the distributor Outside Music sought to amass the segments of the back catalogue that Warner had deemed unprofitable and sell then them at a reasonable price. Some groups, like The Shins for example, are still available on Warner. This bifurcation of the distributive responsibilities between Warner and Outside Music is particularly interesting. The fact that Outside Music has presented itself as an alternative and independent distributor, might serve as an intimation of a certain strategy on their part. When Subpop’s contract with Warner comes to an end, perhaps Outside Music is hoping that Subpop will remain solely with them because of the legitimacy gained by an independent affiliation.
The tenuousness of Subpop’s financial state of affairs was revealed in 1997, when they underwent a massive restructuring. Subpop’s Canadian assets bore the brunt of these effects the hardest. That which was once vaunted as one of the most under exploited regions in North America,45 was also apparently the most expendable. Subpop ended up laying off some its staff, closing its office in both Boston and Toronto, and revising its band roster—specifically its Canadian contingent.46
In the end, the affiliation with Warner did not really attenuate Subpop’s difficulties. In fact, it can
reasonably be argued that the move did more damage to their legitimacy as an independent than anything else.
Nevertheless, with respected and moderately successful bands like Hot Hot Heat, Kinski and The Shins, Subpop has slowly started to regain some legitimacy over the last three years. However, they are by no means in a comfortable position. They continue to struggle; struggle to garner legitimacy; struggle to be profitable; struggle to remain partially independent… besides, what else would one expect?
Leave a Comment