but what is rarely debated, is, that it is also a problem, that anyone nowadays can listen to every music he wants too.
this was very different in the past. industrial, punkrock, even metal, or goth, and other experimental and interesting subcultures, were based on close-knit, social groupings and structures; sure, everyone knew the sex pistols, or the cure, or iron maiden; but to be really in the know about what was going on in the punk scene, or the industrial world, you had to be an insider; a part of the circle; of this "secret society"; because that's were the information was shared, and the titles of the important tracks was mentioned.
this led to a huge amount of "quality control"; not everyone was admitted to this circle, and when you 'misbehaved', you risked being run out of it. that musical taste was based on a social setting in itself was already a merit, and it brought other pros with it. politics were closely associated with music; reactionaries probably would have had a hard time trying to get into the hippie groupings of the 60s; while nowadays even rightwing people often listen to the 60s rockbands; when they would have risked getting their teeth punched out when they went to a social happening of this music in the 60s - possibly.
that you were part of a group meant - you met girls. while nowadays, having an - really - obscure music taste hardly (or rarely) gives you an advantage with the gender you're interested it.
the thing is, there is a reason most people listen to dumb pop music. interesting, creative, daring music has no place amongst the "masses". you wouldn't say that a scientific theory has its merits only when it is based on approval by general populance, would you? the general population did not understan einstein's theories when he formulated them - and the general populance cannot understand truly daring, groundbreaking art. it never did - cue all the artists who are now legends but were unknown during their lifetimes.
art is too precious, too special, too important, to let it be handled by - general society. it belongs to the artists, who really know what they're doing and can understand it.
now the interesting thing is. that art is bound to obscure, small circles is a fact. and the developements of the past years did not, and could not, change this. we now have an onslaught of social networks, streaming sites etc. that seemingly make art available to everyone. but behind this, outside of this, the real interesting stuff is still shared - by these informal circles. oh no i don't talk about underground "piracy" sites. i mean legal stuff.
for example, almost every artist, unknown or superstar, has a number of unreleased or other private tracks that he just shared with his close friends. but even with released stuff - released stuff that remained lesser known - the information of it is often shared by these social circlcs. when a truly interesting release is made, the word is spread from friend to friend and travels through the interconnected social threads.
often - generally? - you get to know more good stuff by recommendations of your circle of friends, then all the social and streaming sites. or rather - you get a lot of stuff by these channels - but the exquisite, outstanding stuff, comes through these personal ties.
these circles are in many ways similiar, but also different from past circles. they're often completely informal. they're literally just your "circle of friends", or in artist cases - your circle of artist friends.
this is a plus, because the informal nature means that popular culture, the streaming sites, the social networks, can't really tie into this. if your friend suddenly starts spamming your favorite recommandations, or invites bullshit people to your party by posting it to the larger social networks; you just stop sharing this stuff with him.
but i think we need to move. we can take on more. the more "formal" circles had its plusses too. it was good you had a punkclub where you could meet likeminded people, or an industrial anti-fanzine to get to know more music - and political theories.
i have two ideas: first, really create circles, in which some music is shared *only*. for example, as a producer, while still doing regular releases, to produce every now and then some killer and exquisite tracks only for that circle.
if this secret circle has a large number of members and artists, an interesting outcome can be had, and a community created.
it should be noted, that it's best that no outsider knows this circle or this music exists, or has ever existed.
it's also a plus when political and social theories are circulated in this grouping then.
maybe it would be possible to make the existance and the name of the circle public, but not letting everyone in - but that would be risky, and could lead to failure.
the second idea, to find another way to limit the amount of people that can access the art of a given artist. that you have to pay for some releases is a step in this direction, and maybe the price should be set higher - you would have exclusive art if you pay 10 euro for a single track, right?
but it would be awkward and extremely negative that of all things, money, this capitalist bastard, would be the measure of who can access art and who not.
but i am sure other barriers of accessibility could be found for art.
there is a lot to be done, and a lot to be achieved. but regardless of wether one succeeds with these concepts; art will still be for special circles.
