Underground music: a genre, a statement, or a judgement?

Disclaimer: The contents and opinions of this blog post do not represent the views or values of Honours Review as a publication.

Whether online, in record stores, in music magazines, awards, or even daily fan conversation, the terms such as “underground” and “alternative” are increasingly used for the classification of music releases. Either used in combination with other genres to describe a certain music style (“alternative rock”; “underground dance music”) or even functioning on their own, the underground and alternative are understood as self-evident by many. The common definition is simple: alternative/ underground is simply not a part of the mainstream. In academia, however, as early as 1996 popular music genres (as a whole) were called under scrutiny for their unstable boundaries, constructed, marketing-oriented and agreement-based nature. [1] As umbrella terms often encompassing a variety of genres based on broad criteria, the terms “underground” and “alternative” can be questioned even more so. If the core nature of such music styles lies in their implicit or explicit opposition to mainstream music rather than any similarities of conventions, technical elements, or instrumentation, then defining the underground/ alternative becomes nearly fully extramusical: based on the context, politics, or values that the bands choose to communicate. Where are the borders of the underground/ alternative music world and what requirements one needs to fulfill to qualify? Where is the mainstream in music? Despite the simplicity of its broad definition, the underground/alternative music remain contested categories, described as carrying a variety of implications by various scholars and critics; and often bands become described by alternative based on radically different or even increasingly contradictory sets of rules.

The underground as obscure

One possible difference between the underground and the mainstream music styles lies simply in the reach they have. The alternative is not supposed to be readily available, supported by the mainstream media or concerting in large arenas: it would rather be small-scale in both production and distribution, limited to the dedicated fans who found it through own searches or by recommendation. While this appears to be clear-cut enough, the emergence of online media blurred the distinction. Asking “Where is the musical underground in 2017?”, The Guardian described that the definition of the underground as “music that – by default or design – existed on the margins, with the bare minimum of exposure in conventional media” such as radio and TV was functional historically. [2] Nowadays, however, it is YouTube and social media which “are infinitely more important in promoting music and anyone can upload to them”. [2] While access to alternative/ underground music is certainly easier in the internet era, we must not make the mistake of erasing obscurity from the markers of this umbrella genre. Among others, the readily available radio/ Billboard charts, the trending section of YouTube or curated Spotify ‘hit’ playlists continue to play a role in boosting the popularity of chosen musical styles and their most well-known representatives. If those channels would be regarded the modern mainstream distributors, it would still be possible to say that underground music has less obvious media presence and can be rather found in more obscure (although still easily accessible with a click) areas of the internet (personal blogs, forums, or smaller personal playlists for instance). Effectively, it might be not the accessibility of the internet that puts the “obscure alternative” into question; but rather, the popularization of such music styles. With self-named “alternative” frequently making it into the radio or Billboard charts and popular awards such as Grammy mainstreaming the Best Alternative Music Album winners, one can ask whether (as Mark Fisher argued) under late capitalism “'alternative' and 'independent' don't designate something outside mainstream culture; rather, they are styles, in fact, the dominant styles, within the mainstream”. [3]

The underground as counterculture

In addition to their obscure nature, early definitions of underground frequently contained elements of independence from the cultural industry, rebellion, or counterculture. Kai Fikentscher described the term as “denoting a context in which certain activities take place out of a perceived necessity for a protected, possibly secret arena that facilitates opposition, subversion, or delimitation to a larger, dominant, normative, possibly oppressive environment” [4], Stephen Graham mentioned “principles of improvisation and outsider DIY organization and politics” [5] as distinguishing the underground, and The Guardian placed “cosying up to big business” and deals with the cultural industry at odds with the values of alternative music [6]. To many, listening to the underground continues to mean a statement of resistance: whether to the political system, the dominance of the Big Three labels (Universal, Sony, Warner), or the formulaic pop conventions. Yet, it would be a mistake to equate the underground/ alternative with counterculture: a simple search for definitions online yields results that confuse this distinction as well. The diversity of genres included by it ranges from the inherently political anarcho-punk/ riot grrrl/ queercore born from marginalized groups to the decidedly apolitical or even associated with high art genres such as math rock/ progressive rock/ free improvisation. While the latter group can still be seen as rebellious in a way (towards simplicity and the accepted conventions of popular music, in this case), few common elements can be identified between the two. Finally, “independence” of alternative is not free of doubts either: coming back to The Guardian’s guide, today instead of the major labels “brands have colonised the world of non-commercial music”- a large part of the ‘underground’ is becoming commodified. [6]

The underground as… elitism?

Lastly, it is necessary to question the value judgements carried (often perhaps subconsciously) in the classifications of underground and alternative music. Besides the counterculture element, Stephen Graham pointed to “aesthetically challenging or complex” as a distinguishing quality of underground music [5], and the research by Gamaliel Percino, Peter Klimek, and Stefan Thurner supported a correlation between the decreasing ‘instrumentational complexity value’ and increasing sales of music styles [7]. Within the underground communities, one can often find a pressure for “originality” and “authenticity” regarded as the markers of music quality. Those constructed terms are sometimes what leads to the perception of the underground as “better” or more “art-like”, echoing the privileging of Boltanski and Thevenot’s Inspired Value world (the principle of creativity as crucial in art) [8] and the XIX century expressive individualism (the cult of artist as a genius) [9]. While this is certainly not true for every underground music fan, often the “alternative” genre prefix signifies a mildly elitist tendency to detach from the core culture perceived as too well-known/ commercial - as such, it might be means to elevate oneself above the tastes of the majority: to the domain of art that cares about the ‘real’ artistic expression first and foremost.

 Conclusion

With the variety of possible classifications and blurred boundaries between the underground and the mainstream, dubbing a band “alternative” is a construct carrying a lot to be unpacked. From expressing obscurity and rebellion to a veiled value judgement, underground music styles have different levels and certainly are not homogeneous. All in all, how one chooses to describe their music on the line between alternative and mainstream might tell you more about their extramusical priorities than their music taste. When dealing with the ‘underground’ or ‘alternative’ music then, it is always interesting to ask: what does calling this band “underground” really imply?

References

1. Frith, Simon. Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music. Harvard University Press, 1996.

2. Petridis, Alexis. “Where is the musical underground in 2017?”. The Guardian, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/music/ng-interactive/2017/oct/09/where-is-the-musical-underground-in-2017.

3. Fisher, Mark. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?. Zero Books, 2009.

4. Fikentscher, Kai. "You Better Work!": Underground Dance Music in New York. Wesleyan University Press, 2000.

5. Graham, Stephen. Sounds of the Underground: A Cultural, Political and Aesthetic Mapping of Underground and Fringe Music. University of Michigan Press, 2016.

6. Aroesti, Rachel. “No alternative: how brands bought out underground music”. The Guardian, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/music/ng-interactive/2017/oct/16/no-alternative-how-brands-bought-out-underground-music-timberland-red-bull.

7. Percino, Gamaliel et al. “Instrumentational Complexity of Music Genres and Why Simplicity Sells”. PLOS One, 2014.

8. Boltanski, Luc and Thévenot, Laurent. On Justification: Economies of Worth. Translated by: Catherine Porter. Princeton University Press, 2006.

9. Madigan, Patrick. “Expressive Individualism, the Cult of the Artist as Genius, and Milton's Lucifer”. The Heythrop Journal, vol. 54, no. 6, 2013.