The Music Venue Trust (MVT) do an enormous amount of vital work, but they seem to have kicked up a bit of a stink this week simply by flagging up how few acts on the Reading/Leeds bill did not find their feet in grassroots venues.
In an article for the Quietus, Luke Turner acknowledged that #ItStartedHere is "a well-intentioned campaign". However, he rejected "the assumption that artists are all on a career path in search of bigger stages and larger festivals, that success is defined in ticket sales and streaming numbers", and indeed argued that "the music industry's traditional escalator increasingly only suits those born into privilege and/or playing it safe".
He concluded with a heartfelt plea: "To focus on music venues as steps to be conquered on the way to a typical career is everything that is wrong with the commodification of art, especially in a time when that route is a slippery illusion. Let's celebrate grassroots venues not as part of the infrastructure of an industry that's nigh-on kaput, but for what they are - vital, beloved rooms where those onstage create an energy that, even if it's only witnessed by ten, twenty people, lets us touch the electricity of music, and find a little joy."
One of the people to applaud Turner's sentiments was Kingsley Hall of Benefits. Hall is a champion of the MVT's Independent Venues Week but has previously taken issue with the organisation for using this particular line of argument. When CEO Mark Davyd described grassroots venues as "the research and development wing of the music industry", Hall reacted by rejecting the idea that such spaces are merely stepping stones and criticising the implication that artists performing at that level aren't "the finished article".
First things first. Turner and Hall are both absolutely correct in insisting on the inherent and non-financial value of grassroots venues and the live music they host; any function they might (or might no longer) play in generating stadium stars of the future is irrelevant to that value.
However, at the same time, I also endorse the position taken by Davyd and the MVT - and, to an extent, Hall does too. Of the star factory narrative, he told NME: "I get why people push it - it's marketing, a cute soundbite, and you've got to get people into these venues by any means necessary so that they can keep ticking over." It's a fair point. If the prospect of catching the next Radiohead on their way "up", however improbable that might be, draws in more punters, then who can blame struggling venues and vexed promoters from trying to play up and capitalise on that narrative (among others)?
It should also be acknowledged that one of the MVT's aims is evidently to force those who run arenas and book their shows to start giving a shit about grassroots venues and taking steps to protect them (such as raising funds through introducing a levy on ticket prices). How better to achieve this than by referring to an ecosystem and arguing that the closure of grassroots venues might result in the pipeline of stadium-ready artists running dry, thereby endangering the arenas' own long-term futures? Appealing to base self-interest rather than enlightened altruism is perhaps not the most noble of tactics, but it may well prove to be the most effective.
It is for the same reason that, in making their case to politicians, Davyd and the MVT regularly choose to emphasise the sizeable contribution of the music industry as a whole to the UK economy. As acknowledged above, the worth of grassroots venues should not and indeed cannot be measured in purely financial terms. But our current Tory overlords are a terrible gaggle of philistines who wouldn't know "the electricity of music" if it bit them on the arse, so does it not make good sense to try to coax them into taking action by talking a language they actually understand?
So, to clarify. We - Turner, Hall, Davyd and the MVT, and I, and hopefully you too - know the real reasons why grassroots venues and the music performed therein matter. But when those reasons routinely fail to convince politicians, purse-string holders and those with the power to bring about change, or simply fall on deaf ears, the MVT shouldn't be condemned for adopting a pragmatic approach - especially given how desperate the circumstances are.
No comments:
Post a Comment