Print

Print


----------------------------Original message----------------------------
[log in to unmask], Internet
 
I'm terribly sorry that I misplaced the name of the person who wrote this in
response to my post on post-industrialism. But here it goes anyway...
 
>I'm sorry but I don't buy this at all (pun not intended).  At the
>"industry" level, a music video exists to sell product.  NIN would not be
>given money by their record company to produce a video unless it would
>"sell the product" (CD's, tapes, T-Shirts, concert tickets, Trent action
>figures with Kung-Fu GripT).  I would say that the majority of video
>directors and musical group would say that their reasons for making videos
>isn't soley as a commercial and I would say that they function as much more
>than commercials in cultural exchange & circulation.  But do you really
>think that this category of "post-industrial" (which is ultimately just
>another musical category that means virtually nothing) differs from other
>videos in this respect?  Madonna claims to make videos as art, Liz Phair
>directs her own videos as an artist, even the King of Commericialism
>Michael Presley-Jackson would probably claim that his videos are a
>statement first and ad for his CD second.  Raising up NIN et al as somehow
>above this system seems rather inappropriate and unproductive.
 
>If I've misinterpreted your point here, I apologize in advance.
 
Thanks for your comments which I think are very valid, and no you haven't
misinterpreted me. But my point is that the artists try to achieve these
things that I mentioned in my first posting (e g trying to be non-commercial
by relating to avant-garde filmmakers like Brakhage, Anger etc) but as Archie
Goodwin and others have examined in the past - this is just another way of
selling the product, that is by appearing to be uncommercial to appeal to the
audience of the alternative scene. I'm sorry if I was vague. Why I choose to
define post-industrialism which you regard as just another genre is my way of
separating the videos examined from the current mainstream.
There is and have since the 60's been a split between hegemonic and
alternative film practices which has permutated down into rock-video. True
avant-garde perfomers like SPK and Throbbing Gristle have never been
interested in the monetary profits a video can make, and I beleive that Mr.
Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails don't have profit in mind either. If he had
he would be writing for the charts. Of course he is bound by the system so he
must make money to keep doing what he does, but no one can accuse the
Happiness in Slavery video for being overly commercial.
 
Many thanks also to Gabeba Baderoon for the tips on post-industrial books!
 
Sorry about the broken english, but I am swedish!
 
 
Peter Bergting ([log in to unmask])