The New Thing

I've always felt like it's only and exclusively the absence of a New Thing that makes for good work. Your New Thing comes along, and maybe the originator of the New Thing does some interesting work; maybe one or two of the people or bands that fall quickly in line make a few interesting noises; then the New Thing is boring, and the only thing more boring is the queue of people lining up to announce how great the New Thing was back when they were the only people who knew about it. In the absence of New Things, art breathes & fucks around, uninterested in much beyond its own capacity to remain interesting. Case in point: Austin psych, producing interesting bands now that the town's bracing for a mass dot-com exodus. The Canadian death metal scene is the sorriest excuse for a scene ever, so what does it produce? The best damn death metal bands in the world, that's what. And so on.

By the way, can I just be the first to mention how really excited I am to see John joining us here? I'll brave the embarrassing fanboy vibe to say that John is great and I'm very happy to see him; it's not sucking up if it's true.

To answer the question, I stick with what I was saying in, I think, Mark's thread -- that it's not as important for there to actually be a New Thing as it is to momentarily feel as if there is. Good, if unfortunate, example: while no one can make halfway believable "New Thing" arguments about the Strokes, I don't doubt that a ton of people heard that record and essentially "turned on" -- essentially had that feeling of "Wow, something has just happened." I'm not looking for New Things in the objective, critical sense, but New Things in the sense of individual records whose tones and feelings just can't be acquired elsewhere in quite the same way. Sounds where you can't think, "Hmm, I can buy X or Y to satisfy that urge" -- I like records where, new or not, you just have to buy X.

Did you maybe feel that way about the Avalanches, Tim?

Nitsuh - using the "makes everything else seem irrelevant" definition of "new thing", yes, I did feel that way about The Avalanches. But the problem with that album as an example is that it increasingly seems like a one-off, ie. the opposite of the whole movement/revolution thing that people seem to want (a fair chunk of us could probably agree that 2001 witnessed a host of fantastic "one-off" albums). Even if there were a host of artists following in The Avalanches' footsteps, I can only imagine a small portion of them being any good, and that probably in spite of and not because of the influence (apologies mr. sinker).

Other problem with the "one-off" phenomenon: in the absence of a supporting scene to dive into, I listened to Since I Left You every day for over four months (late November to March), and I've purposely left it on the shelf since then. Compare and contrast with UK Garage, which I've listened to constantly since late 99 and still love to death because of the constant replenishing of material and therefore new ideas and sonic twists.

Actually, I lie - The Avalanches are part of a "movement", only it's broader and more diverse than most that are classified as such - it is however the one that's given me the most excitement and enjoyment this year. This would be the encouraging trend of non-ironic stylistic appropriation. Coming from a samples group, The Avalanches' headfirst - and, crucially, heartfelt - dive into disco, BoC-style IDM etc. paints in broad strokes the same process I hear occurring in "Digital Love", "Get Ur Freak On", the songful side of microhouse, even No Doubt's "Hey Baby" - artists and producers saying, "hey, this house/hair metal/bhangra/ eighties pop/dancehall sounds *excellent* - let's use it!" Which is why I made a point of distinguishing Since I Left You from Odelay even though the latter is not a bad record - because The Avalanches are genuinely in love with the music they are appropriating. Arguably 2001 has seen some of the best and most frequently exciting stylistic appropriations since, I dunno, post-punk? The hip hop "golden age"?

This, incidentally, was probably why I was so unnecessarily questioning of your proposition of a rock-played-live revival around eg. Life Without Buildings (an idea I find more interesting now then a few months ago, though, and might support with a few qualifications): because to me a "new thing" should be something that continues to attempt to knock down sonic barriers - to shake things up. The qualifications being that I'm starting to think of specific ways that a live band might still be able to shake me up.

untidy!

By my own personal standards UK Garage was certainly a "new thing", but it's regarded with a decidedly jaundiced eye by most of those taking the "long view". Continuation point is interesting though - I think that hip hop was as exciting this year as any other, but hip hop has been banging around for over twenty years, gangsta rap for half that and post-Timbaland techno-rap for about three.

Good, if unfortunate, example: while no one can make halfway believable "New Thing" arguments about the Strokes

nitsuh, weren't you yrself making new thing arguments about the strokes this summer to further yr theory of music swinging back towards the "people-playing-in-a-room" phenom? ;)

Nitsuh: Jess has got you. I recommend using the Walt Whitman Escape plan. Simply quote Whitman's axiom "If I contradict myself, then I contradict myself." Therefore, giving you both the literary and Zen edge! :D

Maybe Nitsuh was just being self-effacing.

oh, i was just playing. i dont think i'll be challenging nitsuh to a battle of wits any time soon.

Last night I went to the Polish National Home in Greenpoint Brooklyn. The lineup was the ever-lovin Rogers Sisters, DMZ (a defunct garage-punk band from Boston who reunited last night), flamboyant R&B auteur Mighty Hannibal, who performed an assortment of his sides from the 50s, 60s, and 70s, and the whole show was capped by the Detroit Cobras.

It leant weight to Nitsuh's "people playing in a room" prediction. Though any moment of last night's music rocked harder than the Strokes. More energy.

Oh how timely this question. Just last Thursday went to see LTJ Bukem spin. Since I don't go out that much anymore I needed a sure thing and something not too hectic for me overworked dad's brains so this seemed like a good choice. It was too. Total closed-off 95/96 universe sound-wise really, but utterly enjoyable. Still, nagging in the back of my head a voice saying "this is not cutting edge. is this the first sign i'm starting to give up? why the ***** should I care about these bloody questions?" A propos nothing: he closed with Atlantis...still absolutely glorious.

So time to finally give up on that brute Modernism and its demands for overarching Newness? I must admit that the "pockets of closed-off soundworlds doing their thing because they do it very well, sometimes creating bridges or arteficial islands for hyprid forms" approach is one I feel very comfy with the last few days.

My last snide remark re. Reynolds: if he really wants a new thing why does he have bloody Pulp as his nr.1 album? ;) Knowwotimean?

I think I just want the Good Thing more than the New Thing, but have to be aware of the trap of assuming that Good Things can only come from old, familiar paths...

Jess really has got me. I used that wording mainly to avoid another big Strokes argument, but I may as well be candid: two of my bigger "Did something just happen?" thrills of the year came out of the The Modern Age EP and Life Without Buildings, which were basically why I was making those "people in rooms" arguments at the time. I really do think we've strayed away from the "people in rooms" thing enough that hearing someone return to it does provide a blinding little thrill, even if it's a bit of a reactionary one.

My big musical-craft question right now is how to make forward- looking technically-inventive stuff that still retains that "people in a room" feel. One incredibly simple trick I've picked up on -- and this is so ridiculously simple as to make me feel really dumb for not picking up on it earlier -- is to run programming/sequencing through a little amplifier and record it in a room with a microphone. It changes everything.

Oh, dear, now I've given away my sole musical innovation.

You mean no one's done that before?

Nitsuh: Or perhaps more obviously just the transformation of the detailed programming stuff into something that's both possible and exciting to play live. Which has also (of course) been done before, but I think that rock artists and groups have of necessity been somewhat ignorant of the "live jamming" approach that has arisen from a lot of the more live-friendly dance acts (eg. Basement Jaxx or a lot of the more Tigerbeat-style IDM acts).

When I saw The Avalanches live - in complete contrast to the record - they were trying to go for this effect. They didn't quite pull it off, spending way too much time being rock stars, disappearing, swapping instruments and generally wasting time, but the twenty or so minutes out of the hour they played that actually clicked were awesome in a way that had nothing to do with an emotional connection to the content. On the one hand they were a "proper" band with the whole rock instrument set-up (which meant everything sounded like the original song + punk) and on the other they had jazz trumpeters playing into samplers and were mixing in odd records mid-performance. While the actual show wasn't my favourite of the year by any stretch, the ideas present would be inspiring in the right hands.