Noise / Industrial Artists and Generational Wealth

[John Cagefight]

If anything can be learned from forum past, to activate people, there needs to be someone to starts new interesting topics that stir some discussions. I often find it curious that there seems to be challenge to start one. This topic should not discourage anyone. Sometimes you get criticized or ridiculed, but not that bad thing.

The recent AI thread seemed to be overflowing with the want for new / fresh discussions - and this is a topic I'd been wrestling with internally for a bit, so I thought I'd like to see where other people stand on this phenomenon.

In a handful of cases, either through word of mouth or other means, I'd discovered that noise / PE / industrial artists whom I hold a tremendous amount of respect for, come from substantial generational wealth. The type where working a day job was / would never be a concern for them.

Perhaps in part of jealousy towards their good fortune, and the time it affords, I have to admit it shook my sense of identifying directly with their work. I find myself wondering what impact it might have on my own art if I were at once afforded the time to truly indulge my passions without the interference of a day to day workload occupying the bulk of my time - and also whether being divorced from this common, human experience of needing to dig ditches in order to sustain a roof over one's head might change the humanity of the work.

In no cases have I stopped appreciating the work of an artist when finding out they might be Trust Electronics, but it would be hard for me to say it had no impact on how I experience it, also.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I would think there is perspective that sets Finland (or scandinavia) quite different from USA. Even if Finns have very little visible "generational wealth" in the scene (at least seems to me), what we have here is social security system.

It is not wealth, in ways of luxury of having huge funds at disposal, social connections and whatever, but it really is this safety net of some sort, that one can fail miserably in life, in just about every aspect of it, and still trust it'll be all right.

My own background is at some sort of (Finnish standard) very normal lower-middle-class, totally normal family. Salaries combined with seemingly endless debt enable normal life of two parents and kids named with most popular names of each year of birth. Hah. No cultural ambitions, no business ambitions whatsoever. In other hand, there is no dysfunction and no serious opposition of someone heading totally opposite direction than everybody else.

Someone might have generational wealth, but I do wonder how big role it is within work in general? I remember reading Jojo Hiroshige interview where he dismissed Juntaro for being from wealthy family and because of that habit to "make a mess and not clean it up". This habit of making mess and have funds to do it, may have resulted the exceptional art?

[Balor/SS1535]

This seems to be a big topic of discussion in at least the portion of the American scene that I am most closely connected to (really, it's stemming a lot from a particular power electronics veteran).  While I am not as vehemently offended by this as him/some others in the particular context of noise, I am extremely frustrated by it in other portions of my life.  I can't say that I blame artists for taking advantage of the opportunities that they have---I would love to just dedicate my life to doing this stuff, after all---but I do think it divorces them from some of the struggle that can take good art and make it great.

On my good days, I tell myself that dealing with this makes me more authentic.  Or something like that.

[NedOik]

Come on, man - name the names! You are amongst friends here. Hehe.

This is something I often ponder, partly because I recognise that knee-jerk reaction in myself. I think it's something deeply ingrained from being a British working-class oik, no matter how much I try to pretend otherwise.

I can think of a few examples, particularly from literature, where discovering a writer came from a position of financial security made me question my opinion of them, or at least reconsider how I related to their work. But ultimately, it never really changed my appreciation of the work itself. So this kinda echos what Mikko said about Juntaro.

Dennis Cooper is one example. He came from a wealthy family, his mother paid for the printing of his Little Caesar magazine in the 1970s etc. Learning that initially made me look at things a little differently, but didn't diminish the work itself in any way. Although, when I met him, my girlfriend's immediate reaction afterwards was, "That guy's a total prima donna." Hehe.

I suppose that's where I land on this. Although, if I was really wealthy myself, I'd never touch a computer again and you'd never hear from me. Hehe.

[Flames of Torture]

Although, if I was really wealthy myself, I'd never touch a computer again and you'd never hear from me.

And why is that? Wouldn't you still be interested in noise? Or is the urge to just log off from the internet so strong, you'd disappear for good? I do respect that.

There is something to the notion that if you want something done, ask a busy person. Or in other words, needing to work can be good for an artist's creative work ethic.

Some people have the ability to motivate themselves to be busy all day long, even with total freedom. But for me, I respond better to pressure, at least for the time being: I get more art done when I also have to show up at the job 5 days a week. So working my modest job is a plus.

EDIT: even if money no longer was an issue, I'd need to find a way to keep busy. Over Christmas break, I generally feel quite dour because I lose a lot of momentum. This year, some creative tasks need to fill the space where the job used to be. With freedom of doing art 24/7, I'll need art to feel like a job, or I'll slow right down. In the past, I can think of times when art became a job, for example taking substantial time off to record and busting my butt for the full duration. Those times felt good. It wasn't "taking it easy" at all. Which is probably what I have more of an issue with, than wealth.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I also think generational wealth may sometimes correlate with other qualities. Lets say you got parents who got good amount of money, may be result that they were in other ways rather gifted and ready to do the leg work. So even if you got mommy help out finance some zine's, more importantly one may have inherited the drive or obsessions of creation (amongst other things).

About naming names, like mentioned before, I dont know any rich people in Finland. On level that grown up man couldn't reach if he want to.

[accidental]

I remember reading Jojo Hiroshige interview where he dismissed Juntaro for being from wealthy family and because of that habit to "make a mess and not clean it up".

Where can i find this interview?

Also curious who this US PE guy mentioned in the thread is.

[The Devil´s Cormorant]

Yeah it's quite uncommon to come across people who are rich enough so that they don't need to have a day job in Finland. And for the few who are, I think it's safe to assume those people are not found in questionable subcultures. So it mostly becomes a trade-off, ironically not considering the rich but the poor. If you're steadily jobless and live off of welfare you have a lot of free time to put into music, but you might not have money to buy all the nicest gear; if you're working you have some more money to spend on gear, but you don't have time to use them. I can appreciate both struggles. It's admirable to see creative people do a lot with what little they have. But I also don't fault anyone for happening to have the resources to get the gear they need.

[Balor/SS1535]

Come on, man - name the names! You are amongst friends here. Hehe.

This is something I often ponder, partly because I recognise that knee-jerk reaction in myself. I think it's something deeply ingrained from being a British working-class oik, no matter how much I try to pretend otherwise.

I can think of a few examples, particularly from literature, where discovering a writer came from a position of financial security made me question my opinion of them, or at least reconsider how I related to their work. But ultimately, it never really changed my appreciation of the work itself. So this kinda echos what Mikko said about Juntaro.

Dennis Cooper is one example. He came from a wealthy family, his mother paid for the printing of his Little Caesar magazine in the 1970s etc. Learning that initially made me look at things a little differently, but didn't diminish the work itself in any way. Although, when I met him, my girlfriend's immediate reaction afterwards was, "That guy's a total prima donna." Hehe.

I suppose that's where I land on this. Although, if I was really wealthy myself, I'd never touch a computer again and you'd never hear from me. Hehe.

ha!  It feels strange to speak for others, but those who are curious should be able to figure it out fairly quickly if you start exploring noise-Facebook.  There are not many people making "economic/social inequality"-themed noise outside of the Hospital/"arthouse" scenes at the moment either.  Sorry to all for being evasive about all this, but things are as they are---and I need to keep the peace for a collaborative project!

Not Dennis!  At very least he has credibility following a childhood of ax-wounds, visits to local murder sites, and so on.  More seriously, I met him once, and he was very kind.  I also really appreciate that he continues to use his status within the literary world to promote others who are young/new/underappreciated.  If it took privilege for him to get there, then that's turning it back around in a productive way (in my book).

[Duncan]

Like anything there are gradients to this. If it supports a label in putting out lots of really cool albums then it's a good thing. If it helps a gimmicky artist pay their fees to have press and booking agencies get them into all the right places to do their act 'professionally' then that's another matter, though that class of artist is kind of its own thing. Nailed on "I come from nothing, nobody helps me, I work for it" artistry is often pretty lame too, for that matter.

There's also a difference between individual generational wealth and differences in other material economic conditions, which I think have a greater impact on how noise can form in different places. When I toured the USA I was struck by how even on a self made, DIY level there was so much more resource available to allow activity. Totally basic homes large enough for a basement to make sound in. Only 2 shows of an 11 day tour in a bar/venue because enough non commercial space is available to rent you can instead have workshops, rehearsal spaces, galleries etc run by sympathetic people. Compared to UK this is another world. See also: funding for arts in other countries, even if many in the underground don't like the form that takes. Tommy C in his WCN saying he doesn't think his taxes should go on things like (presumably) Fylkingen. Or a FB discussion I saw once criticising the French govt's approach to supporting art in the context of a Raoul Hausmann LP. Worthy of the debate of course, but I know many of us in Blighty would love to have these problems.

[Skin Flick]

It's a tough thing to parse on for me personally. I came from a very lower class family, parent figures mostly relied on social security checks and old retirements but it wasn't enough to really support. There's certain people in the scene you can tell really care for the stuff and wanna give back, maybe using family money as just a jumping off point but afterwards did it all themselves which I can respect. But anybody who gets into the scene and already has a crazy rack setup I squint at a bit...