|
We recently printed a shortened version of our ‘Constellation in Conversation’ piece in issue 3 of our OIB zine, but after numerous requests we’ve decided to upload the interview in full. Constellation are one of those special labels that along with Southern truly embody the punk-rock spirit of independence. It’s a fantastically eclectic label that over the past ten years have released some of the most important music of our generation. It was therefore with huge admiration that OIB recently caught up with Don, one of Constellations original founders. OIB: Founded in 1997 with the vision to document and promote the thriving artistic talents of the Montreal music scene, to what extent do you feel Constellation has gone beyond documenting, to actively constructing the genre, if you accept it as such, of modern day post-rock? Don: We understand (and appreciate) the impulse of a question such as this, however, if the legacy of Constellation is viewed as a contribution to the construction of a genre, we will have failed miserably. Simply put, the only value we have ever accorded the term 'post-rock' lay in its inherent promise to resist/overcome/subvert/blur genre; in effect, to make the idea of genre a bit less meaningful. We're all guilty of using whatever shorthands are available to us to classify/accept/dismiss cultural phenomenon (and accrue cultural capital) with the drop of term, but why we would celebrate the enabling of the process has always been lost on us. None of this negates per se the *potential* value of a term such as 'post-rock', except that we know all too well what is actually referenced by the term, or at the very least, we know that specific aesthetic/musical values *are* intended as the primary reference, in direct opposition to how we (as in Constellation) would have liked to see such a term employed. Why couldn't we have used 'post-rock' to signify an undefined entranceway, a less genre-specific place? Substitute 'difficult to categorise' for any genre term and you'll pique our interest far faster. And if that's not enough, let's not forget the commercial/marketing applications for which genre terms have always been battle-ready soldiers. Feeding the pinheads that run the music industry more ways to commodify and sell diluted versions of ourselves back to us ought to be resisted, wouldn't you say? OIB: Post-rock, as a vague definition, seems to be showing no signs of slowing down, with huge recent releases from the likes of Mono, Explosions in the Sky, and Contellations very own A Silver Mt. Zion. To what extent do you feel that the ‘scene’ (if you accept such an ideal) is still relevant and has something to offer? Don: We have nothing whatsoever against the bands you've mentioned, but we honestly don't feel in any way as though we're part of some 'scene'. At the risk of beating a dead horse, we seem to have been lumped together with these bands based on some idea of genre (more specifically, Godspeed has often been mentioned in the same breath as these bands and by extension, Silver Mt Zion) when in fact, our own view of our affinities have nothing at all to do with musical 'likeness' and everything to do with modes of operating. We're far more likely to feel affinity for some noisy, (truly) independent punk band rather than even the most stellar instrumental rock band that shares few of our politics. OIB: Recent Constellation releases such as Lullabye Arkestra are not characteristic of the classic ‘sound’ most associated with the label. Is this a conscious decision to broaden the horizons of the label or a natural progression of the music growing out of Canada? Don: While we hope all of our decisions are conscious ones, I don't think we've ever decided to work with any band as a calculated move to go in one direction or another. For better or worse, Ian and I continue to make collective decisions about what to release based almost exclusively on whether we care about the music in question and have respect for the people making it. We obviously know our own catalogue intimately, and while we concur that some common elements run through it, we have never agreed with the extent of commonality that many have proposed. It seems that each time we release a record by an artist new to us, we deal with this question of changing or broadening directions, when in fact we believe we're simply continuing to do what we've always done, albeit depending on the record, it may occasionally come across more dramatically. OIB: Constellation have been in business for nearly 10 years now. How have your views of the ever monopolizing music industry changed? Don: If they have changed, it would definitely be for the worse. But perhaps rather than changed, our views as a result of being in the trenches and seeing the music industry for the cesspool it often is, have been brought into sharper focus. That corporations are, by definition, unable to care about music as anything more than commodity has been self-evident to us from the beginning so little has changed there, but witnessing first-hand the mimicking of these corporations by the so-called independents has been a truly discouraging/infuriating spectacle. OIB: A proper response to this question would be essay-length, and we're trying for brevity here. So, the best example of our having to "accept some levels of commodity" is likely on the distribution side. The majors, together with mega-retailers, have arguably decimated the independent distribution structures built through the late-70s and 80s, particularly (but by no means exclusively) the North American ones. We continue to work through 100% independently-owned first-order distributors in Canada and the USA (and Europe) on an exclusive basis, however, these distributors haven't for a long time had an option of selling on to independents only, simply because the distribution chains have been re-engineered to sell to corporations. The three largest USA distributors (ADA, Caroline, Fontana) of 'independent music' are owned by the majors (Warner, EMI, Universal). A couple of years ago, Walmart already sold 1 in every 5 records purchased. Long-time destination-type mom & pop record stores are closing, or at the very least panicking as they get driven out by chains (and digital sales). So, we have little choice but to accept the fact that our records, if we want to sell enough to survive, will leave the warehouses of our trusted distributors, bound for places we'd rather not think about (but of course we do anyway). That said, what we refuse to do (as an example), is to cooperate with the marketing practices of these entities, and that automatically limits what they will even try to sell of our records. We have been virtually shut out of HMV stores in the UK because we have refused to pay 'racking fees', i.e. payola for placement and volume. No matter the potential demand for any record, the chains would prefer to sell none of it (and make sure this is the case) if you refuse to play it their way. A record that may well sell ten (or 20, 50, 100) copies in a bunch of stores, on it's own and without coercion, will be stocked instead as a single copy, and not re-ordered, except under extraordinary circumstances. OIB: How actively is Constellation embracing home digital music technology such as iTunes? And how important is this market to you? Don: Nobody knows where the record industry is going, everyone simply knows it's changing. We have resisted for a long time selling digital-only music, but have recently decided that our heads may have been too deeply buried in the sand. Regardless of where things eventually settle, we think it extremely unlikely that we would continue to be interested in doing what we're doing if physical records cease to be part of the equation, because for us, they're an enormously important part of the equation. Our tiny foray into digital sales to-date is a non-exclusive arrangement with Insound.com, based in New York, and we chose them as a place to get our feet wet because they met some minimum criteria for us, i.e. unlike iTunes, they're independently owned and they're selling albums only, not individual songs. Depending on how this goes and on how we feel about it all, we may work with other resellers or we may ultimately decide against it all. If we do go further, we intend to pay as much attention to who we're working with in the digital realm as we always have with the bricks & mortar distributors. OIB: Are there any myths regarding Constellations political ethos which you feel have been fabricated? Don: Not so much fabricated as perhaps lazily understood. In a music/cultural press that loves to set-up straw men and light them on fire, false dichotomy is the platform on which the straw men stand: We clearly don't understand that our participation in money exchange/market structures renders our critiques of (late) capitalism hypocritical; that attempting to formulate our own ground rules for how/when we engage with journalists is just a marketing strategy, visible to anyone with half a brain; that it's all-about-the-music-man and any attempts to say otherwise is pseudo-intellectual gobbely-gook. Make
no mistake, we understand all too well the limits of what we're engaged
in here, but the only purpose the reactionaries serve is to goad us on,
and for that, we thank them. |
 |
(Still) Staring at the Rude Boys |
||
|
||||
|
||||
 |
||||
CONSTELLATION
IN CONVERSATION