Popular Culture Niagara: 2006 Popular Culture and the Local Conference Paper - Jeremy Morris, May 12, 2006

****NB: These are the crib notes from my talk. Please email me if you want to use this paper as a source or if you have any questions.

Branding the Montreal Music Scene

Early last year, my father, whose musical tastes I had always thought could not be further from mine sent me an email telling me that I should check out the Montreal-based band the Arcade Fire. I had been listening to the band for a few months already, so I was more interested in why my father had picked up an album I considered to be outside his usual purchase pattern. Although this personal anecdote highlights the fact that almost a year later, I am still trying to understand how my father’s tastes are converging with mine (or perhaps, though I will never admit it, vice versa), it also speaks to the heart of the matter I wish to discuss. My father’s interest in the Arcade Fire is less surprising if we consider the fact that in 2005 the eyes of the music world, and in particular, the indie rock music world, turned to Montreal. The city was written up in the New York Times (Carr, 2005) and Spin Magazine (Perez, 2006). Numerous newspaper reviews and music articles made reference to Montreal’s role in creating new and interesting Canadian music. Documentaries ran on the BBC (2005)and on NPR (2006). The label “indie rock”, like the label “alternative” in the early 90s, had become increasingly detached from its original meaning and increasingly more mainstream and, in 2005, Montreal was declared its Mecca. The recent success of bands such as Stars, The Dears, The Stills, Wolf Parade and of course, the Arcade Fire, brought national and international interest to music in Montreal. Suddenly, Montreal was the next Seattle, Austin, or Halifax, and even my dad was checking out what was going on there.

Of course, there was a vibrant music scene (or rather, scenes) in Montreal long before the above bands got famous, and there will continue to be one long after the hype dies down (apparently, Portland is the new Montreal this year). However, I am interested in why and how Montreal suddenly became the focus of so much discussion in the indie rock realm. I am particularly interested in the sources that “officially” dubbed Montreal a scene, what the ensuing conception of that scene was, and how this might affect current musicians involved in (and fans taking pleasure from) the Montreal music scene. Primarily through press discourse, this paper traces some of the events of the last two years that have led to the idea of Montreal as an ideal place in Canada for making music. While the reactions from those involved in the scene are mixed, the paper argues that the idea of a Montreal scene is now part of the “brand” of many artists emerging from this scene.

UNDERSTANDING SCENES

Before focusing on Montreal, a brief discussion of the term “scene” is warranted. Scene is an incredibly (and as Simon Frith acknowledged), “fruitfully muddled concept” (Frith qtd. in Straw et al., 1995). Will Straw (1991), drawing on Barry Shank, first engaged the term with the following description: “A musical scene […] is that cultural space in which a range of musical practices coexist, interacting with each other within a variety of processes of differentiation, and according to widely varying trajectories of change and cross-fertilization” (373). Although Straw’s discussion does not necessarily ground scenes in geographical boundaries, there is a locality to the space of which he speaks. Scenes may represent a style of music made in a certain place but they also encompass the various institutions, actors and practices that make up the flows of a given community (which is not necessarily physical). In the last decade and a half, the usage of the term has expanded to encompass an even broader range of analysis. Among other definitions, scene has come to represent a musical aesthetic, a collection of musical practices and/or a geographically bounded place. For some popular music scholars, the various ways in which the term scene has been employed render the term ineffectual. David Hesmondhalgh (Hesmondhalgh, 2005) for example, argues that viewing scenes as “bounded places” and as “complex spatial flows of musical affiliation” is essentially incompatible (23).

Straw (2001), however, readily acknowledges these contradictions: “The place of “scene” within cultural analysis seems forever troubled by the variety of tasks it is called upon to perform. How useful is a term which designates both the effervescence of our favourite bar and the sum total of all global phenomena surrounding a subgenre of Heavy Metal music” (6)? But in this fluidity lies its charm. The usefulness of the term comes specifically from its imprecise and elastic boundaries (6). The term is “flexible and anti-essentializing, requiring of those who use it no more than that they observe a hazy coherence between sets of practices or affinities” (6). Scenes are not limited to the one style of music, or even one particular geographical area. Rather, scenes point us to the intersections of various institutions, actors, tastes, places, spaces and economic and cultural activities. Only such a flexible term can help us approach the complexities of musical practices and affiliations in local and global contexts.

Thankfully, for this presentation, my intent is not to settle this debate. My interest, instead, lies in how scenes are constructed. As cultural spaces, scenes only exist once they are so named. This is not to deny the material elements of scenes, but to recognize that the way these material elements get incorporated in discourse also serves to shape the very scene in question. I do not intend to outline all the people, places, and spaces that I believe make up the Anglophone Montreal music scene (these material and historical elements have, I believe been well-discussed by Geoff Stahl (2002). Rather, my interest here lies in understanding which elements of the Montreal music scene are highlighted in current discussions of that scene. What are the conceptions of the Montreal music scene and how do they affect those currently making music in the scene?

THE BIRTH OF MONTREAL SCENE

If the current Montreal scene had an official birthday, it would be in February 2005. That month last year saw both the New York Times (Carr, 2005) and Spin Magazine (Perez, 2006) write lengthy articles detailing the hot new music coming out of cold Montreal. The success of the Arcade Fire’s debut album Funeral, which although released in late 2004 was just gathering major steam in the mainstream media, and other acts such as the Stills, the Dears, Stars and Sam Roberts were offered as proof of the scene’s existence and coherence. These articles point to Montreal’s cold weather and cheap rent as fertile grounds for musical innovation. The cold keeps songwriters inside and writing all winter while the cheap rent actually makes it possible to eke out a living in a vibrant city. The articles also point to Montreal’s unique cultural landscape. The Anglophone musicians, a minority in Montreal, have had to band together to collectively build a scene for themselves. Whereas a city like Toronto has historically had a significant infrastructure for music, thanks to the fact that the music industry in Canada is relatively Toronto-centric, musicians seeking to make a living in Montreal have had find or build clubs and studios in order to access proper resources. In addition “Montreal's vaguely socialist and communitarian politics, along with the city's reputation for hedonism” (Carr, 2005), have been described as key elements in shaping the bohemian nature of musicians and the audiences that comprise Montreal’s burgeoning scene. Interestingly, the kind of music coming out of the scene is rarely discussed. Where it is referred to, references are usually band specific (e.g. “dark […] orchestral rock”- Carr 2005) or completely abstract (e.g. “new and challenging music”- Carr, 2005). It is as if the concept of scene, as applied to Montreal, barely requires any kind of anchoring in musical characteristics.

Of course, like many other cities, Montreal doesn’t have just one music scene. It lies at the intersection of many scenes. There’s a salsa scene, a cabaret scene, a jazz scene, an experimental/ noise scene, a hip-hop/electronic scene and numerous French music scenes. In addition, the indie-rock scene that was so heavily featured in 2005 has historical roots dating back to the early 90s (see Stahl, 2002); a fact that is acknowledged only in passing in the Spin and New York Times articles. The scene that has received all the attention is therefore one among many, and like all scenes, it has followed a historical ebb and flow of the recognition it receives from the outside world.

Accurate or not, the reactions to and reverberations from the above articles were palpable. Both the BBC (2005) and NPR (2006) sent reporters to Montreal to unearth the roots of the scene. Subsequent newspaper articles, blog posts and artist interviews have all responded to the claim that Montreal is now “officially” a scene. While some articles celebrate the new attention Montreal is getting (“It’s All About Us: Montreal’s Pop Scene Extended its Reach to Other Continents in 2005” Dunlevy, 2005a), others describe the typically humble Canadian reaction to all the hype. Articles titled “Seattle Redux” (Dunlevy, 2005b), “Been There, Scene That” (Shanda, 2005), “Montreal Gets Spin Doctored” (O'Meara, 2005) and “Spotlight Unnerves Montreal’s Music Scene” (Bendersky, 2005) all feature opinions and/or artist interviews that negotiate the myth with the realities of the Montreal scene. While most artists agree that Montreal is a great and affordable place to make music, they generally resist or appear indifferent to the hype:

“I'm sure that everybody in America thinks that everyone in Montreal is now very excited, but the X factor of Montreal is that it’s […] been cool in the eyes of itself for decades. I don't think it's particularly affected by what happens with a few indie rock bands.” (Stars’ lead singer Torquil Campbell qtd in Shanda, 2005)

The X factor, the idea that Montreal is already aware of its own coolness is an idea that is echoed in comments from other musicians. This not only reflects a nonchalant reaction to the attention, but a view of Montreal as a place that prides itself on being a hidden secret. Many fear that all the attention will ruin the charm and authenticity of Montreal’s music scene. Or, in less academic terms, “Once Spin says you’re cool, it's obviously shit” (Jonathan Cummins, lead singer of Bionic, qtd. in Dunlevy, 2005b). Many artists, however, are sensible enough to see the added benefits it provides:

“I don’t agree with wanting (the spotlight) to go away. It’s good for the city. Bands like Pony Up! have been able to get a lot of hype on one EP, which would not have happened if we didn’t have this attention.” (Gary Worsley, co-owner of indie label Alien8 qtd. in Bendersky, 2005)

“The hype didn’t kill the scene. The hype made it possible for certain musicians to make a living and get people to listen to their music.” (Campbell of Stars, qtd. Rabinovitch, 2005)

The tensions facing any musician living in a scene are relatively clear in these last series of quotes; the hype has both opponents and proponents. The attention that every fledgling band needs to get established is also one of the most difficult aspects to negotiate on the road to success. Suddenly Montreal acts have become the focus of attention for no other reason than geographical affiliations, or ties to other Montreal bands.

It is for this reason that many of Montreal’s musicians disagree that there actually is a scene at all. Place or location seems secondary to their understanding of the term scene. Unless there is some kind of musical coherence, then scene is viewed as a false label.

“All these articles say that Montreal has a pop sound. I mean, it’s ridiculous. There are thousands of bands in this city. That assessment is based on five or ten bands, all of which live in the same three blocks.” (Howard Bilerman, producer and ex-drummer for the Arcade Fire qtd. in NPR, 2006)

“The New York Times wanted an article on ‘What is the Montreal sound?’ just like Seattle grunge was defined by the Subpop [label] sound. That makes it readable, […] There is no Montreal sound! They couldn’t put it in a box and package it.” (Jonathan Cummins, lead singer of Bionic qtd in Rabinovitch, 2005)

“Sheffield and Manchester, that was a scene: people doing something with an aesthetic that hasn’t been done before. A scene now is a way to sell records. It’s a marketing tool.” (Dan Boeckner of Wolf Parade, qtd. in Rabinovitch, 2005)

Montreal’s lack of aesthetic musical coherence, for these artists, suggests that the scene is merely a fabrication, a way to package a number of artists and explain a seemingly random increase in music coming from one location. The bands may know each other, play at the same venues and in each other’s side projects, and hang out in the same cafes. But for these artists, the fact that Montreal does not have as cohesive a sound as they recall Seattle or Manchester having negates the possibility of a Montreal scene. Boeckner’s charge that the scene is simply a marketing creation is perhaps most interesting, for his argument attributes the creation of the scene almost directly to the record labels. This suggests that the Montreal scene might have been some kind of strategic boardroom concoction. In truth, these bands all belong to different labels, and are likely involved in significantly different marketing strategies. Still, Boeckner sees the scene as a way for several record labels, each with an interest in promoting Montreal music, to sell more records.

I will return to the idea of scenes as a marketing tool in a minute, but first I want to discuss one last salient feature of the construction of the Montreal music scene: the Arcade Fire. The attention directed towards the Montreal scene is almost entirely entwined with the rather meteoric rise of the Arcade Fire. An excerpt from a concert review in the Montreal Gazette makes this abundantly clear:

“What a year. Just 14 months ago, nobody knew The Arcade Fire. Not David Bowie, not David Byrne, Coldplay, U2 or you. And nobody was talking about a Montreal music scene.” (Dunlevy, 2005c)

With the success of Funeral (relative to other independent label albums), critics have turned their attention towards understanding the role Montreal plays in explaining how and why the album sounds the way it does. Interestingly, several members of the band are not from Montreal but have moved here from other provinces or countries (in fact, many of the “Montreal” scene bands are not exclusively comprised of people who have grown up in Montreal). Montreal is cited as heavy influence in their music, yet the other locations from which they hail are rarely discussed as potential influencers of their sound and musical practice.

The Arcade Fire’s success has also lead to the search for the “next” Arcade Fire. The issue here is that the band becomes a metonym for all the musical activities taking place in Montreal. Suddenly, the Montreal scene becomes linked to a relatively large collective of indie-rockers who are exploring art-rock/orchestral pop sounds and live performance theatrics. All the subsequent bands that emerge are expected to have (or at least discussed in reference to) these characteristics. With the Arcade Fire as a shorthand reference for the Montreal scene, the bands working here now must therefore negotiate this image, whether they like it or not, whether it suits them or not. The result is a self-reinforcing strategy…each review further affirms and defines the Montreal music scene and each mention of the Arcade Fire subsequently outlines the expectations for musicians involved in that scene.

Wolf Parade has received the brunt of following in the Arcade Fire’s footsteps. Since the two bands are friends, have toured together, and both lean towards a genre most critics refer to as art-rock, these comparisons are understandable. But they also serve to obscure important differences in values and style between the artists:

“This tour has made it totally apparent. We’re different bands. We’re being marketed as part of the same movement - I don’t even f--king know. We’re friends, but we’re not approaching things the same way, or going for the same aesthetic. We’re a punk band. We’re all ex-hardcore kids. […] Watching the Arcade Fire, they’re coming from the same emotional place, but […] we don’t operate on the same level.” (Boeckner, qtd. in Dunlevy, 2005d)

While there is not outright resentment to being lumped in with the Arcade Fire, Boeckner voices a frustration here that his band must negotiate its image with the conception of the Montreal scene in general and the Arcade Fire specifically. Similar reviews for bands that have released albums in the wake of Funeral such as Stars, The High Dials, Belle Orchestre and even French-speaking acts like Malajube all make reference to the Arcade Fire. Even a recent review of the upcoming rock band Mobile, a band that used to play in Montreal but moved to Toronto two years ago to get greater industry attention, draws comparisons:

“Somewhere in the void between the Arcade Fire and Simple Plan, Mobile inserts its own bookmark in the Montreal Sound” (Dunlevy, 2006)

This quote is also interesting because of its mention of Simple Plan. The band is perhaps the most commercially successful English rock act to come out of Montreal in the last few years. It is, however, much more mainstream than most of the artists that are usually discussed in relation to the Montreal scene. In this light, it is interesting to consider how the term scene is employed most commonly when the music produced seems smaller scale or more local in nature. Simple Plan’s mainstream sound is part of an international pop punk scene and can be classified as such without reference to location, but the Arcade Fire’s indie creativity is instead seen as more closely tied to the effects of being part of the Montreal scene. In this light it is interesting to consider how place functions with respect to the narratives told about certain artists; which places are called forth (when and why) in descriptions of various artists.

BRANDING AND SCENES

“Anyone in Montreal is obviously going to (criticize) it. It’s just a little commodification of Montreal culture. But people should take it with a grain of salt. Have some fun. It’s good for business.” (Dan Seligman, director of indie rock fest Pop Montreal qtd. in Dunlevy, 2005b)

I want to conclude by linking the above discussion of the how the Montreal scene is constructed to some of my other research interests; Seligman’s quote is as good a segue as any since it gets to the intersection of scene and business. As someone interested in the ways in which popular music gets marketed, and the ways in which that marketing subsequently affects artists, listeners and music, my other research considers how the concept of “brands” applies to the popular music industry. Branding has become the dominant paradigm in marketing