Radical Gardening: en föreläsning med George McKay, Marabouparken, Stockholm

Marabouparken logo23 APRIL KL. 18.00
MARABOUPARKEN KONSTHALL
ENTRÉ 50 KR

 

FÖR MER INFORMATION VÄNLIGEN KONTAKTA:
Niki Kralli, Informatör Marabouparken konsthall: niki.kralli@marabouparken.se
Fran Higgins, Publicity Officer, Frances Lincoln Publishers: franh@frances-lincoln.com

Radical Gardening:
Politics, Idealism and Rebellion in the Garden
Samtidens intresse för trädgårdar förknippas ofta med villaförorter, fritid och ”gör-om-mig-TV”. Trädgården kan också ses som ett uttryck för något religiöst eller andligt (Edens trädgård), något militärisk (välklippta gräsmattor) eller något aristokratiskt eller kungligt (herrgårdar och slott). George McKay utforskar en alternativ rutt genom historien och landskapen som kopplar odlandet till ett vidare politiskt perspektiv. I boken Radical Gardening lyfter han fram och firar ögonblick, rörelser, gester och människors förhållningssätt till trädgårdar och trädgårdsarbete. Boken länkar trädgårdshistoria med subkulturer, individuella växters historia med politik, aktivism, pop, media och konst.

Välkommen till George McKays föreläsning onsdag den 23 april!

George McKay är författare och professor i Cultural Studies vid Salfords universitet i England. Han intresserar sig för alternativa kulturer och hur de kommer till uttryck genom musik, proteströrelser och livsstilar. Förutom Radical Gardening: Politics, Idealism and Rebellion in the Garden har han skrivit böckerna Senseless Acts of Beauty: Cultures of Resistance since the Sixties, DiY Culture: Party & Protest in Nineties Britain, Glastonbury: A Very English Fair and Circular Breathing: The Cultural Politics of Jazz in Britain. Han medverkar regelbundet på brittisk radio och TV och skriver för tidningar som The Guardian, Independent, New Statesman.

 

Share Button

Number One-itis and Lead Singer Syndrome: how popular music kills its own

With the 20th anniversary of the death by suicide of Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain, I’ve been thinking about pop and rock’s capacity to self-harm, to disable its own. I write about what I’ve called this ‘destructive economy’ in Shakin’ All Over: Popular Music and Disability. Here’s an extract from chapter 5.

________________________________________

Melody Maker kurt-and-richey-cover-april-8th-1995… It is apparent that there are [music] industry-specific conditions, which tend to target certain kinds of pop workers: singers—frontmen and women—appear most vulnerable. Why the singers? Perhaps because there is arguably a closer relation between their instrument, which is the voice, and the body; perhaps because they are the focus in the band of fans’ attention, and feel the adulation and pressure more; perhaps because the singer is often also the lyricist, who writes the band’s subjective and expressive text….

Pop stardom is an illness that can seriously, even fatally, threaten health and undermine ability; to do well in this career is frequently to be or to get a bit or a lot fucked up. Its workers employ medical terminology to express the condition. His then manager described the unattractive transformation of Ian Dury, following the chart-topping success of the single ‘Hit me with your rhythm stick’ in 1979, as the result of him suffering ‘a very bad attack of number one-itis’. Shortly afterwards Dury himself wrote a song called ‘Delusions of grandeur’ in which he sang of the egotistical pleasures and symptoms of the career—‘I’m a dedicated follower of my own success … I’ve got megalomania’—as well as of the insecurities—‘Oh, look at me, just another pathetic pop star’. When a band member congratulated him on the astute self-confessional lyric Dury, extraordinarily, vehemently denied the song was about him, arguing that it drew on what he had observed in others. He did though himself say, of the industry’s traditional trajectory to success and beyond (usually back), ‘after people make it, a malaise sets in’.

Deborah Curtis notes that, round the same time (the punk scene had inscribed within it a self-referential narrative about its own relationship with the industry, a symptom of its political unease with its own commercial imperatives), as Joy Division became more successful in late 1970s Britain, her husband and that band’s frontman ‘Ian [Curtis] contracted what was known as LSS (Lead Singer Syndrome)’. Number one-itis and LSS are the medical metaphors that describe the industry’s sheer damagability, which may be focused most on, but is not restricted to, those who make it.

The pop and rock industry has a notable capacity to facilitate the ruination of its workers; it’s a high-risk, hi-vis workplace culture where one is never quite safe. And, extraordinarily, it seems where there is never quite enough trust to go round. This feature is a neglected area of research in popular music studies. Consider the kings of the scene, the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll, Elvis Presley (died 1977), and the King of Pop, Michael Jackson (died 2009), whose own controversial physicians prescribed the fragile men in their care huge amounts of drugs in the periods leading up to their deaths. Dr Feelbad. Pop’s unsettling medicine is a repeat prescription, a systemic regicide for the subjects to follow….

Share Button

Film, Carnivalising the Creative Economy: AHRC-supported Research on and with British Jazz Festivals

Am delighted with this new 15-minute film about jazz festivals research, featuring academics and leading jazz festival directors talking about how they collaborate. It is made by Gemma Thorpe. Funded By the Arts and Humanities Research Council, as an output of the Creative Economy Showcase at King’s Place, London, on March 12 2014. Thanks to all who contributed—hoping to see it available on the websites of all the festivals and universities involved very soon. Enjoy!

Share Button

AHRC Research Network on Community Music, final report meeting, 27 February 2014

‘Music is good for you’?… ‘The music [created] could be crap or not crap’…

The culmination at Whitechapel Gallery, London, of a national set of workshops for community music (CM) scholars, practitioners, policy makers and funders through 2013. These took place in Norwich, Leeds, Manchester, London. The network was funded by AHRC, and was part of the Connected Communities Programme. The function of the day: to present a report and findings produced. The report will be available soon as a downloadable PDF on the Resources page of the Connected Communities website.

CM meetin group shot Feb 2014

 

Here are some notes I made on the day.

This report confirms the continuing ‘definitional reluctance’ of community music (CM). CM has a ‘chameleonic identity’—which has been seen as wilful, or strategic. My question: But how is it also, eg, after decades of activity, lazy, non-reflexive, even anti-intellectual? Or, if these are just too powerfully accusatory, at least exasperating?!

Myth-making, attractive mystery of some CM practice, not least around social impact. ‘Mysticism’ over pragmatism? ‘The appeal of the charismatic?’ An ‘opaque umbrella’? But where is the robustness of definition and understanding? Instead: a set of ‘mythologies’.

‘Quiet radicalism’, which seems to both confirm and undermine the alternative and cultural democratic history of CM. Not in fact much evidence of CM’s radicalism among today’s practitioners. The community musician as service provider rather than cultural revolutionary. GM: How can it be ‘quiet’ when CM is (sometimes) so noisy? Does any ‘quiet radicalism’ mean it loses its distinctive values and practices? Practitioners agreed on ‘unseen’ or ‘unrecognised’ outcomes of CM activities—but are they also lost, ignored? The importance of the intangible.

CM as music education: CM nowadays to an extent is accepted within formal music education, or are these still ‘uneasy bedfellows’. Is CM music education, even, or does it work through music for social education, say? Compared with formal music education (cf National Plan for Music Education), which remains more ‘obedient’, and ‘elitist’.

‘Quality’ of CM music—how do other Community / Participatory Arts address this? How does CM access and illustrate and measure evidence of quality? Anecdotes, stories and quotations abound, even in reports. Is there advocacy rather than evaluation, and sometimes ‘deliberate blurring’ by community musicians and their organisations?

Next steps ...

Potential next steps …

How can academic researchers help? It’s such a fuzzy field, esp for the uninitiated—can there be a contribution here? This could also help articulate the benefits of CM, for funders and policy-makers, and the place of cultural value. Is a chameleonic state unconvincing to the sceptical?

Share Button