Excited to Be Here

Digital Gluttony

August 18, 2024
Image

Can We Free Ourselves?

This reflection on the modern music ecosystem was sparked by Mark Fisher's Capitalist Realism: Is there no alternative?. Fisher's central claim is that capitalism binds its participants into a state of addictive consumption framed as a system to fulfill their desires. Depressive hedonia transmutes a longing for deep human fulfillment into a perpetual grasping for meaning from social media feeds and mass market products which never deliver. In the strictest sense this subjugation is voluntary. The machine we have built is based on the illusion that the goods and services we exchange create meaning. Even if all actors—from the producers to the consumers—are well meaning, the design of the interaction is corrupting. "While the structure remains, the vices will reproduce themselves."1

Fisher's analysis is bleak. At every turn, he believes that authentic culture as becoming corrupted through commodification. The vein of hope is an awakening from the amnesia of genuine, purposeful community outside of capitalist economics. Art can shake and inspire new generations. Fisher states that "cravings for the strange, the unexpected, the weird"1 enable real perspective shifts that "can only be supplied by artists and media professionals who are prepared to give people something different from that which already satisfies them."1 The spirit of the most compelling art pieces is as Adam Curtis puts it: "we can free you from yourself."1

So, has anyone been freeing us? My largest point of disagreement with Fisher's account of capitalism is that culture has stalled. Challenging, innovative art does exist. It may not be played on the radio, but it is available. (See appendix.)

For starters, digital music production has only become possible with the onset of the computing revolution. Purely from the perspective of genre creation, computers have defined modern hip hop and electronic dance music—both genres with massively talented stars and far-stretching futures. Digital audio production also removes barriers of entry for new artists to record and produce music. The Indie Pop sub-genre Bedroom Pop is named after this phenomenon of artists who substitute a recording studio with a laptop.

Further, the internet and its extension to mobile devices now define music distribution and discovery. Any recording from an artist is available. Music videos don't require professional shoots or a cable network's airtime. The rate at which media is shared, copied, mixed, mashed, stolen, chopped, and inhaled by audiences is incomprehensible. Cultural progression is becoming more fluid. Global cultures don't converse with finite statements between explicit parties, but in a continual mixing of diverse styles and substance.

Drake has built a career on adopting (and commodifying) musical styles. This practice is emblematic of Fisher's claim, but Drake's lack of originality is so transparent that it's comical. His pastiching is obvious because we have access to all of the styles which he has ripped off. Drake's career will be remembered for marketable pop music, not groundbreaking artistry. Yet his exploitation of other genres is also exemplary of the musical diaspora that the internet has afforded the world.

Ubiquitous access to art makes the good stuff possible to find, but it also enables digital gluttony, in this context, the over consumption of music and media. Examining streaming services specifically, a fixed price for unlimited listening means that every waking moment can be crammed with music, podcasts, and audiobooks. Silence no longer needs to be endured. Unpleasant thoughts can be steamrolled with an endless catalog of content. For serious music listeners, these are favorable economics. But when we are constantly listening, music is no longer a scarce reprieve. This is the most damaging consequence of infinite access. Culture is as rich as ever. There are still moving performances. Artists are mastering their crafts. But this abundance is a gateway to a deadly sin. Digital gluttony is dangerous, because it robs impactful art of the potency which might save us.


References

  1. Fisher, Mark. Capitalist realism: Is there no alternative?. John Hunt Publishing, 2022.

Appendix

A list of some of the most innovative and refreshing artists as of late: