Journal of Popular Music Studies, Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages 217–237

“If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk”: Walter Benjamin’s Progressive Cultural Production and DIY Punk Record Labels

Kevin Dunn Hobart and William Smith Colleges

This article examines contemporary independent do-it-yourself (DIY) punk record labels, regarding them as potentially significant sites of political engagement at the intersection of cultural production and the global political economy. Drawing upon extensive interviews with well over a hundred DIY punk labels from around the globe, the article explores the varied ways in which DIY record labels offer possibilities for political resistance. The article first sketches the development of the global DIY punk record industry over the past several decades, noting the translocal networks that have helped create and connect punk scenes across the globe. The article then explores the practices of these record labels, drawing particular attention to distinctions between DIY and major corporate record labels. Central to this section is the argument that, in most cases, DIY record labels serve as both a social activity and an anticapitalist business model. This leads into an examination of the ways in which DIY punk labels embody Walter Benjamin’s call for progressive cultural production. The recent Occupy Wall Street and related movements have thrown into stark relief many people’s frustrations with globalization and existing capitalist structures and practices, as well as the inherent challenges of imagining, articulating, and realizing alternative ways of being. This is particularly true given the seeming ubiquity of global corporate-led capitalism. As Hardt and Negri (2000) argued in Empire, this system has become all-encompassing, flattening out the fragmented sovereign nation- state system that pre-existed it, to create a fully-enclosed system to which there is no exterior. According to Hardt and Negri, one cannot “opt out” of the system because we are all firmly entrenched within that system. The ubiquity of transnational capitalism raises particular challenges for cultural production. How does one create culture that is critical and politically progressive in today’s context? Or, in Gramsci’s terminology (232–43), how can one engage in counter-hegemonic struggles when global

C 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 218 Kevin Dunn capitalism’s hegemony seems to be so absolute? A “war of movement”— attacking the system from the outside—is impossible because there is no being “outside” of the system. A “war of position”—creating counter- hegemonic beliefs and practices from within the system by using the tools of the system—seems to offer some potential, but hegemonic practices of appropriation and assimilation are constantly at play; increasingly so in the irony-drenched postmodern consumerist culture of Western societies. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than in pop culture, and pop music in particular, as The Beatles’ “Revolution” is used to sell Nike shoes and soccer star/multimillionaire David Beckham sports a Gaultier-designed t-shirt with a diamond encrusted CRASS logo. Though recent decades have witnessed the rise of neoliberal economic policies that have heralded new heights for transnational corporate capitalism, debates about how to effect political resistance through cultural practices are not new. It is worth recalling that in 1934 Walter Benjamin argued that a progressive cultural politics is not achieved through content, but via position. That is, it is not what you say, but how you say it. For Benjamin, a progressive cultural product was one that helped transform consumers into producers, or “collaborators” (Benjamin 777). Benjamin called upon his contemporaries to engage in just such a political enterprise. This current article examines the social practices of today’s global do-it- yourself (DIY) punk record community and argues that it represents an attempt to realize Benjamin’s challenge to produce culture progressively and collaboratively. Most of the material for this article is based on personal interviews conducted with over a hundred record labels across the globe.1 In his cultural studies work on punk record labels, Alan O’Connor makes an important distinction between commercial and DIY labels.2 Commercial punk labels are companies that regularly achieve sales of 20,000–100,000 copies, often through distribution in chain records stores and big-box establishments like Wal-Mart (O’Connor 35–36). To achieve this, they usually work through major record distributors. In the , there are four major “independent” distribution companies that are actually owned by major record labels: Fontana (owned by Universal Music group), ADA (owned by Warner Music Group), RED (owned by Sony BMG) and Caroline (owned by EMI). Many of the commercial punk labels—Epitaph, Vagrant, Sub Pop, Fat Wreck, Equal Vision, Victory, Trustkill, BYO, Fueled by Ramen, Secretly Canadian, Bridge Nine, Mute—distribute through these “indie” distribution companies. DIY record labels, on the other hand, tend “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 219 to have much smaller record sales and distribute either directly or through actual independently owned and distribution companies (though that line becomes harder to discern given recent shifts in the music industry, which will be discussed later). One cannot adequately discuss DIY punk record labels without reference to the “commercial punk labels” and “independent” distribution companies. That said, most of my discussion concerns DIY punk labels: record companies usually run by one individual or a small group of individuals who achieve record sales far below that of the commercial punk labels. Moreover, my focus is not limited to the United States, but reflects the global DIY punk record label community.3

A Brief History of DIY Record Labels Independent, DIY records labels predate the origins of punk, and there is a long and respected tradition of small record labels in the music industry. Sam Phillips’s Memphis-based Sun Records, after all, is generally credited with helping invent rock’n’roll. But the arrival of punk signaled a marked increase in the number of small, DIY record labels. In part, this was due to changes in major record companies themselves. Before the emergence of punk, British record companies began investing heavily in new recording technologies, which meant that older studio equipment and studios suddenly became available for independent music producers and companies to either buy or rent at affordable costs (Laing 29–30). But punk’s DIY attitude also encouraged many bands and enterprising entrepreneurs to venture into the record industry. The Buzzcocks’ 1977 Spiral Scratch EP was released on January 29, 1977, becoming the first homemade British record. Released on the band’s own New Hormones label, it quickly sold all 1,000 copies of its first pressing. The EP went on to sell 16,000 copies, largely through mail order (Reynolds 92). For many punk musicians, the Spiral Scratch EP was the most important of the original punk releases. Although the Sex Pistols, with their “Anarchy in the UK” single (released the previous November on EMI) showed that anyone could be in a band, the Buzzcocks showed that anyone could release a record, with the details of the recording process (e.g., number of takes and over-dubs) and pressing costs printed right on the record sleeve. The influence of the EP was profound, not just on bands and listeners, but on the recording industry itself. Bob Last claims that he founded his Fast Product record label after picking up Spiral Scratch:“Ihad absolutely no idea there had been a history of independent labels before that. Spiral Scratch turned my head around” (quoted in Reynolds 94). Soon after, 220 Kevin Dunn

London’s punk band Desperate Bicycles formed Refill Records to release their own single in May 1977. The sleeve contained a breakdown of the recording costs (£153) as an inspiration to others to follow suit. As the band chanted on the single: “It was easy, it was cheap—go and do it!” (Spencer 288–289). Many of the new punk labels began distributing their releases through an organization of interdependent independent retailers known as the “Cartel.” The Cartel was centered around the Rough Trade record store in London, which connected with other stores across the to form an independent record distribution service (Laing 30). Thus, punk helped create a system of recording and distribution that was autonomous within the music industry. The increased popularity of punk as a genre, and thus as a musical commodity, meant that the established record companies began to take notice. For the major labels, punk offered a new market of youth consumption from which they could turn a profit. Within a few months, major UK record labels began signing a multitude of punk bands, or bands that they thought might be profitable in the new “punk market” (Laing 32). This major record label signing frenzy had a substantial impact on the UK punk scene. In some ways, it helped commodify the punk scene, bringing, what was for some, unwanted external attention to what had initially been a small scene built upon personal connections. Now punk was a commercial product that could be (and in many cases was) packaged and sold by major record labels. Many bands could not resist the allure of a hefty paycheck or the promise of reaching a larger audience. But the signing spree also played havoc on the small record labels that had helped create and nurture nascent punk scenes across the United Kingdom. The small independent labels simply could not compete with the power, strength, and resources of the major record companies. The result was the pilfering of some of their best, most profitable talent by the major labels. For example, the Good Vibrations record label, which was so instrumental to the development of the punk scene in Belfast, lost four of its first six bands to the majors. But many DIY record labels survive, continuing to release punk music. As the commercialization of punk mutated into “new wave” and the mainstream music industry moved on, looking for new youth fashions to capitalize on, punk went underground and continued to be nurtured by small DIY record labels. Indeed, the narrative of punk becomes global as scenes develop across the globe, spawning even more small DIY record labels. Chris Ashford, a clerk at a local Los Angeles record store, formed What? Records and released the Germs’ single “Forming.” Greg Shaw “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 221 started Bomp! Records, spinning it off of the similarly named fanzine, while Chris Desjardins, another fanzine writer, also began releasing records under thenameofhiszine,Slash. In 1979, Bad Brains put out their debut single (“Pay To Cum” b/w “Stay Close To Me”) on their own eponymous label. The following year, their friends in the TeenIdles posthumously released an EP on their newly founded Dischord Records. Because of their success and ethics, Dischord would provide a template for punk DIY record labels, further strengthening the position of small record labels within the US punk scene. In the United States, these labels were instrumental in creating the indie music scene4 documented in such places as journalist/musician Michael Azerrad’s Our Life Could Be Your Band, Steven Blush’s American Hardcore, and Eric Davidson’s We Never Learn. One of the dominant narratives concerns how this scene blew up with the run away popularity of Nirvana following the 1991 release of Nevermind. In the wake of Nirvana’s success, there was another major label signing frenzy, similar to the pilfering that took place in the 1976–1978 UK punk scene. Again, major labels were signing away the best-known bands from small record labels that had released their previous work. One of the benefits for these small labels was that, in some cases, major labels bought an act’scontract for a substantial fee, providing the small labels with much-needed cash infusions. In other cases, the label was able to make significant profit from holding onto a band’sback catalog. Such was the case of Berkeley’s , after Green Day signed to Reprise in 1994 and achieved mega-star status.5 Other labels were catapulted into commercial success as their bands rode the wave to greater popularity. Such was the case for LA’s , which was started by Bad Religion’s guitarist Brett Gurewitz in 1988. In 1994, three of the label’s acts—the Offspring, NOFX and Rancid—had hit records (ironically, Bad Religion had signed to Atlantic Records the year before), transforming Epitaph into a moderate-sized commercial record label, with several sister labels, including , owned by Rancid’s . The impact of the Nevermind-inspired explosion is often bemoaned in American punk circles. Azerrad complained that, in the post-Nevermind world, “Punk had winnowed its heritage down to a single inbred white gene, working hairsplitting variations on a simple theme” (Azerrad 498). Yet, this characterization is only true if one looks at the cookie-cutter punk acts that continued to be marketed by major record labels. Azerrad laments the death of DIY punk scenes, but only because he stops looking for them after 1991. Just as DIY punk went underground post-1978, DIY punk in the United States has continued to thrive under the radar since the media 222 Kevin Dunn hype-machine and major record label spending splurges of the early . Today, DIY punk cultures thrive on the existence of hundreds, if not thousands, of DIY record labels across the globe.

Common Practices of DIY Punk Labels The record industry is constantly in flux, with the business terrain shifting and technological advances constantly altering seemingly established practices. In the late , when punk first “broke,” there were six major labels dominating the Euro-American market, and two major formats: vinyl was preferred, but the cassette market was healthy as well. As of 2012, four major labels have consolidated their hold on the Euro- American market even as CD sales are rapidly being replaced by digital downloads. In a few years it is likely that some of the labels quoted below will probably be out of business, with new ones taking their place, and music will likely be bought, and listened to, in different formats and on new devices. However, in the DIY punk community, vinyl has persisted as a major format, with several labels releasing exclusively on vinyl (e.g., Olympia’s Rumbletowne), and many others releasing vinyl with digital downloads.6 In this section, I discuss the common practices among DIY punk record labels. As the following discussion illustrates, there is a fair degree of variation among labels. Clearly, there is no single way of doing things for a DIY punk label—this is part of what distinguishes it as a mode of production from corporate mass production. Yet, there are important distinctions between DIY and major corporate labels in terms of business practices, and my primary goal here is draw attention to these differences. Major record labels have divisions called Artists and Repertoire (A&R) dedicated to scouting out new talent. These divisions are tasked with recruiting and overseeing the artistic development of newly signed artists, which is generally understood by the labels as commercial marketability and success. Most of the contact an artist will have the major label is conducted through the A&R department. A&R representatives tend to be young, and have connections with particular music scenes, either as musicians, journalists, or record producers. They also tend to scout talent through word of mouth. It is very rare that an artist is discovered by sending a demo to a record label. Once a label’s A&R representative has identified an artist he or she wishes to sign, the representative offers the artist an exclusive recording contract, though the details of the contract are usually hammered out by “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 223 lawyers for both sides (Albini 11–13; Weissman 22–26). Depending on the terms of the contract, the artists are contractually obligated to provide the record label a set amount of material for release: perhaps just one album, but usually several albums over a set amount of time. To assist with the recording of that material, the label will normally provide the artists with a monetary advance. That advance is often used to hire a producer (often determined by the record label), book studio time, and perhaps purchase new equipment. Once the artists finish recording, they submit their work to the record label for approval. Often the A&R department will be involved in the recording process itself, encouraging changes and making suggestions, usually with the goal of producing at least one commercially viable single. Once the record is finished and accepted by the record label, the art, promotion, and marketing divisions become active in trying to generate consumer interest in the record. Artists are usually expected to go on tour to help promote the release, sometimes with financial assistance and support from the label. As the record begins to sell (if it begins to sell), the record label maintains control of sales revenue until its own costs have been recouped. These costs generally include the artists’ advance, as well as production, processing, and promotion costs. As Steve Albini observed in his 1993 essay “The Problem with Music,” most bands signed to majors rarely see any profit and many often find themselves in debt to their labels. Contemporary DIY punk labels operate in substantially different ways. First, there is usually a close personal connection between the DIY label and the band. Often these labels are started by a musician to release his or her band’s own music. , who founded Dill Records in 1989 (which mutated into Asian Man Records in 1996), speaks for a number of label owners when he says, “I was in a band [Skankin’ Pickle] and we just put out our own records. I wasn’t looking to start a label, it just kind of happened” (Park). Likewise, Andy Instigate of the Swedish label Instigate Records claimed he “couldn’t think of anyone willing to release my crappy bands (and I still don’t) so the only option was to do it myself” (Instigate). Many other DIY labels have emerged because individuals wanted to become more active participants in their scene, releasing music made by their friends. For example, Alex DiMatessa of Grave Mistake (and bassist for Government Warning) said his “main motivation was to put out records for bands from my area (at the time Maryland and DC) that I was either friends with or just thought were good bands that should have something on record” (DiMatessa). For someone like Michal Halabura of Poland’s Nickt 224 Kevin Dunn

Nic Nie Wie (NNNW) label, founded in the 1980s under communism, there weren’t many options other than DIY:

There were really few chances for bands in 1980s to release their own records. Apart from the censorship, it required “connections” of sorts. So, some small cassette labels erupted—not necessarily punk, but working in this DIY and—of course—illegal way. As there was a band connected to our crew—Ulica—and we were in touch with a lot of people by that time, we decided to try “doing it ourselves.” (Halabura)

The majority of DIY record labels I have spoken which deal almost exclusively with bands they know personally. This logic is clarified by Locust frontman Justin Pearson of Three. One. G. Records: “Obviously we have to like the band or artist first off. But we also factor in things like our personal relationship with the musicians. Typically we lose money on releases, so if we are going to put time, energy, and money into something, we want to know exactly who we are putting effort into” (Pearson). Larger commercial punk labels may have personal connections with the bands they sign, but often they work solely with bands that have gotten increased attention while being on smaller DIY labels. Given that today most bands have the ability to release their own material digitally, the primary purpose of a record label is to cover the production, advertising, and distribution costs that might be beyond the means of the band. Still, the DIY record label has another vital role: community building. The respected DIY punk labels tend to be those that, regardless of size, treat their bands and other labels well by fostering a sense of community. Renae Bryant of On The Rag Records also plays with the band All Or Nothing HC and she argues that, from a band’sperspective, “the only reason to be on a record label is to be a part of a community of other bands you admire and agree with their ideas. Being on a record label, in the punk world, is like being a part of another family” (Bryant). For some labels, community building is a central aspect of their mission. A label like Dischord, for example, states that its goal is to help document the , DC scene, so almost all of its releases are from DC-based bands. Likewise, Knw-yr-own Records only releases music by artists based in and around Anacortes, WA. In contrast, some labels are less interested in location and more interested in releasing subgenres of “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 225 punk, such as , , or pop punk. Other labels deal exclusively with bands with shared political commitments. For example, J-Lemonade, who runs the Polish label Emancypunx, said that in order for her to work with a band, “it has to have women or queers involved. It has to be a non- commercial, DIY, feminist band” (J-Lemonade). Likewise, Robert Voogt of Commitment Records said, “Commitment Records was started to promote the positive , so I want all bands that I release on the label to stand behind that idea too” (Voogt). Other labels are more pluralistic about who they are willing to work with. The New Orleans-based label Community Records, for example, is seriously dedicated to both the New Orleans scene and ska-punk, but has signed bands from outside the region and the genre. But more often than not, regardless of location or genre, there are usually personal connections between labels and their bands. Another critical distinction in practices between major labels and DIY labels is the use (or nonuse) of contracts. As noted earlier, one of the primary characteristics of the relationship between artists and major labels is the contract. The details of each contract tend to be different, reflecting the negotiations that took place between the band and the label’s lawyers. But in general, major contracts stipulate that the artist is in an exclusive relationship with the major record label for a given amount of time or number of releases. The larger commercial punk labels often use contracts, but in most cases, it is more to spell out expectations and rights than for constructing a long-term obligatory relationship with the artists. For example, (owned by NOFX frontman and then-wife Erin Burkett) uses contracts with artists, but they are on a release-by-release basis. Bands are free to leave the label whenever they choose. In most of my interviews with DIY punk label owners/operators, nothing seemed to inspire a stronger response than the issue of using contracts. The overwhelming majority of DIY punk labels I spoke to eschew the use of contracts. Chris Mason (of the band Shang-A-Lang) at Dirt Cult Records said, “I don’t use contracts. It’s generally a verbal agreement and a handshake. I don’t generally generate enough money to worry about such things” (Mason). When asked about contracts, Dan Emery of Anti-Corp (and formerly of the hardcore band Sanctions) responded “Absolutely not. Never will. If somebody wants to take their release elsewhere when the pressing runs out, or release something on another label, it is fully endorsed” (Emery). Todd Congelliere of Recess Records (as well as the bands FYP and Toys That Kill) said, “If something happens where a band doesn’t feel right about 226 Kevin Dunn keeping a record with me, then I don’t wanna do it” (Congelliere). Kent McClard of Ebullition added: “Contracts only have value if you intend to hire attorneys and sue people in court. I have never taken anyone to court, and I have never been taken to court. I have no intention of taking bands to court” (McClard). Derek Hogue of G7 Welcoming Committee Records pointed out, “Generally, it seems unnecessary to us. Even if a band screws us over, how are we ever going to enforce a contract? We wouldn’t even know how” (Hogue). Some of the people I spoke to believe there is no place for contracts in punk, including J-Lemonade of Emancypunx. “Cooperation in the DIY network should be based on trust. It’s not a business” (J-Lemonade). Ryan Cappelletti of Punks Before Profits added, “I just think a handshake and a smile is fine. I don’t care about being ripped off. I just hope they don’t do it. I mean, punk to me has always been the anti-business movement. Money and contracts destroy everything” (Cappelletti). In that same vein, Will Rutherford at Penguin Suit Records (and the band Acts of Sedition) said, “if I can’t have a handshake deal and make it stick, they’re not actually my friend and I’d rather not release it” (Rutherford). However, a few labels, such as Basement Records, do use contracts. As owner Chuck Dietrich explained, “I didn’t when I first started. There was still a sense of trust and companionship amongst bands, but nowadays people sue for cutting in line at McDonald’s. So I do it, but I’m proud to say I have never had to use or execute a single contract for anything, which probably amounts to over 1,000 contracts I’ve done” (Dietrich). Despite many labels’ aversions to contracts, it is clear that some do take the time to spell out specific expectations to which the band and the label must agree. Todd Taylor, at Razorcake Records and editor of the punk magazine Razorcake, offered the following observation:

I understand many punks’ aversion to business. I wholeheartedly recommend you never sign a contract that’s drafted by a large corporation because they have lawyers to void that shit and put you over a barrel. But, if all you want to be is on the same page with people on your level—let’s be honest, many of us drink, forget, have other things on our minds—two or three pages of simple language can ease a lot of future anxiety. (Taylor, interview)

This is a similar position held by Jerry Dirr at Phratry Records (and of the bands Knife the Sympathy and Autumn Rising): “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 227

I started typing out the agreements that we’d previously discussed in person, or over the phone, and I’d give copies to each band member. These written agreements are meant to serve as a reference tool that we can revisit down the line, if need be, after the verbal agreement is put into motion. If anyone ever has a question about splitting royalties, etc. it’s there on paper. I never ask for anyone’s signature, but it’s a backup in case anyone forgets any of the aspects of our verbal agreement. (Dirr)

What are the general details of these arrangements? Although there is some variation among labels, there is also a general trend. A band’swork is always privileged and protected, in the sense that they retain control over the masters and rights to the music. Labels tend to give the bands a percentage of the pressings, usually between 15% and 20%, but occasionally as high as 50%. The band can do whatever they want with those copies, but they usually sell them while on tour. If the band wants more, the label will provide them at wholesale or cheaper. If there is a second pressing, the band gets another percentage of the copies or the cash equivalent. The general opinion of most of the DIY label owners I interviewed is that the relationship between themselves and the artist is a personal agreement based on mutual respect and a code of conduct (“Don’t fuck me, I won’t fuck you”). This is a significantly different way of doing business from the major labels, primarily because it does not accept the terms of a relationship defined by a corporate model. In the corporate model, the talent is regarded as something akin to employees that work solely to generate profit for the label. The talent is expendable. More often than not, the music is less significant than the marketing and promotional machinery that helps construct market desire for the product (Albini 11–13). The DIY labels I surveyed characterized the relationship between label and artists as more collaborative and mutually beneficial. These labels argue that because they tend to be friends, artists also tend to be treated with greater respect and autonomy. This does not mean that frictions and outright hostilities do not emerge. Anti-Flag started their own label, A-F Records, after frustrations over the release of their debut album with New Red Archives. As drummer and founder Pat Thetic notes, “We released a record with a record company that fucked us over, and we were like ‘Screw this, we can do it ourselves’” (Thetic). Most people in the scene have stories about a band or label screwing the other over. In fact, this communal knowledge about the ethos of certain bands and labels is an important feature 228 Kevin Dunn of maintaining a general honesty in the DIY punk community. If a label gets a reputation for screwing artists over, other bands are less likely to work with that label. Given the enormous number of DIY labels, as opposed to the major record labels’ oligopoly, indie bands have many options. Likewise, DIY labels tend to be averse to working with bands that have a troubling reputation. In this way, the DIY music scene self-polices and requires no contract to do so. Many bands actually use multiple record labels. They may release a 7-inch on one record label, a split EP on another, and their full-length LP on yet another. Their reasons for doing so generally relate to their desire to help out friends at different labels, as well as sharing the cost of releases. Bands with significant international audiences will often use different DIY labels in different countries to release their music in order to broaden the distribution networks. The issue of distribution is perhaps the primary reason why many bands today choose to work with an established record label instead of starting their own label. Corporate record labels have vast distribution networks, ensuring that releases get into record stores around the globe, particularly into big-box stores that are currently among the primary purchasing points for music. In 2008, Wal-Mart, Best Buy, and Target were the number two, three, and four top music retailers in the United States, respectively; iTunes was number one (Tanner and Hillis). The ability to access these markets is a major distinction between commercial punk labels and DIY punk labels. Distribution companies basically serve as a middleman between individual record labels and retailers. Record labels will send the distribution companies copies of their releases, usually to be housed in a central warehouse. The distribution companies then sell these releases to a wide variety of retailers. They could be anyone from the big-box stores, like Wal-Mart or Best Buy, to record store chains, to independent records stores, to “one-stops,”7 and even to individuals selling records out of their apartments or at shows. The distribution company helps market the release to sellers, takes orders from the buyer, houses, and ships out merchandise, and collects payment. It then turns around and sends the labels their money, minus a distribution fee (usually around 15–20%) that is taken off the top. Commercial punk labels such as Epitaph, Vagrant, and Sub Pop often distribute through major distribution companies to get into chain records stores and big-box stores like Wal-Mart (O’Connor 35–36). In the United States, there are four major “independent” distribution companies “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 229 that are actually owned by major record labels: Fontana (owned by Universal Music group), ADA (owned by Warner Music Group), RED (owned by Sony BMG), and Caroline (owned by EMI). This creates a gray area in conversations about punk record labels. A punk label like Epitaph may pride itself on being independently owned and operated, yet they have a distribution deal with Alternative Distribution Alliance (ADA), which is owned primarily by the Warner Music Group (Warner currently owns 95% of ADA, with Sub Pop owning the remaining 5%). Given that distribution is the primary purpose of a record label, it can therefore be problematic to regard Epitaph (or other labels in similar situations) as truly “independent.” Often the connections are complicated and hard to see at first. For example, Dischord Records and Crass Records currently use Chicago Independent as their primary distributor. Chicago Independent in turn distributes through Fontana, which is owned by Universal. DIY punk labels generally do not operate on the same scale as commercial punk labels and, therefore, do not have direct access to these large distribution companies. Instead, they have several options available to them. At one level, there are several “true” independent distribution companies, such as Ebullition, Redeye, Independent Label Collective, Revelation (aka RevHQ), No Idea, and, once upon a time until its spectacular 2009 collapse, Lumberjack Mordam (see Razorcake #53 and #54). Although making money is clearly important to these companies, most independent DIY distribution companies seem to operate less as profit-maximizing entities and more as community-builders. There are, of course, exceptions. Redeye prides itself with operating much like the larger, corporate-owned distribution companies. As co-owner Glenn Dicker stated, “We try to have the same business practices [as the majors] for the most part, but we are just a whole lot smaller” (Dicker). In contrast, there is a marked noncorporate ethos in the way the ILC seems to conduct itself. When they add labels, they are looking more for a good fit, than for profitability. Personal connections matter too. When discussing why it is important to stay independent, Dan Phillips (who worked for Lumberjack Mordam and then cofounded the ILC in 2009) responds: “A lot of people in the scene can relate to that. People want to support that. We want to support that in the scene. We’re in it for the music. We all own our own labels, we know how important it is and good it feels to be independent and DIY.” Phillips continued:

Profit-maximization is not the driving motivation. Of course we’ve gotta meet the overhead and meet the operating costs. But we can 230 Kevin Dunn

do that while still being honest and true to the labels and customers. We want to keep making money but the bottom line is supporting the independent music scene .... We’re trying to help the scene and people in the scene stay in business. Doing that means getting their stuff out there. Our goal is to keep operating and keep everyone around, to help everyone survive in the music business. (Phillips)

ILC and Redeye, along with Ebullition, Revelation, and No Idea, represent important distribution networks for small DIY record labels. Distribution companies basically serve as a middleman between individual record labels and retailers. They do the legwork of getting a label’s releases out into the world. Sometimes they will just order a handful of copies of a new release, other times they may order almost half of the pressing if they think it is a likely seller. In most cases, these “truly independent” distros are small affairs. ’s Ebullition is basically a one-person operation run by Kent McClard. Florida’s No Idea has a slightly larger staff, but it is still an intimate affair. In both cases, the distribution company developed from a DIY punk label. “I had been doing a zine and a record label and if I wanted to get those things out to the world then I had to do the distribution myself,” McClard said. “After a few years, it was apparent that the distribution was larger than the label” (McClard). Most DIY punk labels are small affairs and their distribution tends to be very direct. They sell their releases at shows, and perhaps at a few local indie record stores. Ryan Cappelletti of the label Punks Before Profits and vocalist for Positive Noise is a good example: “I just trade records with people and then I just bring some boxes to shows. That’s my favorite part about punk: some kid with some boxes of records at a show. I got most of my records that way” (Cappelletti). Indeed, one of the most important ways that the DIY punk labels I spoke to distribute their releases is by trading with other small DIY labels. Swapping releases is a time-honored tradition in the DIY community and it allows labels to increase their own offerings and to get their releases out to more people. Dan Emery of Anti-Corp said, “We get everything in the distro off of trades with other labels, mainly because it makes distribution work for both parties, but the financial aspect of being able to barter is also pretty cool” (Emery). Trading between labels is especially common for labels in different countries. Michal of the Polish NNNW label said, “We see a DIY network as our natural ecosystem, so we try to use these channels mainly ....Mail “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 231 order, auctions, trades—that’s the reality of labels like ours. We’ve had problems with the biggest chain store in Poland, but we sued them and won the case. Up the punx!” (Halabura). Jordan Atkins of Residue Records noted the importance of trading with overseas labels when he observed, “It can take a while to see the results of trades, but it is the best way to get records overseas and to places that are hard to get people to pay a more expensive wholesale” (Atkins). A number of DIY labels also distribute physical CDs and vinyl through online stores. Amazon is the obvious behemoth in the online market, but few DIY labels I spoke to deal with it, usually because of principle, and the hefty fee they extract from each transaction. Instead, many labels use a handful of independent one-stop stores like Interpunk, PunknJunk, and RevHQ. These one-stops tend to accept copies of releases on consignment (the number varies on expectations of sales, but they will usually take a few of an unknown release) and offer them in their online stores for a fairly minimal mark-up. Some labels prefer not to work on consignment because it is often hard to ensure that you will get paid what you are owed. But a number of labels expressed positive experiences working with these independent online distros, which have largely replaced the pre-Internet mail order system. Perhaps the biggest challenge mentioned by most label owners was simply having the time to dedicate to the label. Part of the time required to run a label is spent on marketing and self-promotion, things that many in DIY punk scenes find distasteful. One concern I expected to hear more about in interviews was the challenge to financially sustain the label, but I was surprised at how rarely that issue came up. Very few labels are actually making a profit (e.g., Asian Man, Basement, Big Action, Collision Course, Dirtnap, and Livid Records) while many are just breaking even (e.g., Eradicator, G7 Welcoming Committee, Razorcake Records, and Warbird Entertainment). But many DIY punk labels lose money regularly. There is a simple reason for that: their business model is not one defined by profit- maximization. In the simplest terms, they are intentionally bad capitalists. But according to many of those I spoke to, that is often the point. In some ways, the DIY record industry can be seen as an alternative model to the world of the corporate music industry. DIY punk labels tend to invest in bands they like, not the ones that they think are going to make them rich. They tend to price their releases so that people can afford them, rather than worrying about increasing the profit margin. As Chris Clavin’s 232 Kevin Dunn

Plan-It X Records proclaimed: “If it ain’t cheap, it ain’t punk.” At the core of this business model is a dedication to a DIY approach to self-sufficiency that stresses a love for what you do, grounded in a sense of support for a community or scene. And this brings me back to a discussion of Walter Benjamin.

Staying Punk or Selling Out? Why Benjamin Matters A great deal of energy is spent in homemade zines, in letters to Maximumrocknroll, on Internet chatboards, and in curbside conversations about whether punk bands that sign to a major record label are “selling out.” For many, the situation is framed as “us-versus-them.” As Ruth Schwartz, then the head of Mordam Records, asserted in a 1996 interview: “What independent music is about, is anger against major labels and the music business [on] all levels .... I think my job is to be a part of the support system for artists to freely express themselves and to express an alternative point of view that they are not necessarily going to be able to express through a big major multimedia corporation in this country—either orally or aurally” (quoted in Sinker 115–116). From this perspective, signing to a major label is a rejection of the punk ethos, DIY punk scenes, and all that they stand for. But while many bands certainly sign to major labels in hopes of financial benefit, many justify their move on the grounds that they are increasing the political effectiveness of their message by reaching a larger audience. If a small DIY label only presses 300 copies of a band’s 7-inch, their ability to get their message out is greatly limited. Thus, for these artists the answer to the opening question of how one creates culture that is critical and politically progressive in today’s context of global capitalism is to use the tools of the system, that is, sign to a major corporate record label. For example, the anarchist musical collective scored a major commercial hit after signing to EMI in Europe and Universal in the United States. Defending his band’s decision to sign with the majors, lead singer Boff argued;

Weknow what we are doing. It is not as if we are na¨ıve. Weunderstand the relationship between band and label. We are trying to use them to sell whatever message we have and the music we make, and they use that to make a profit. That’s fine and we accept that. If they are good at getting our records widely distributed, we acknowledge their “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 233

role. If I thought we could do that on our own record label and have complete control, we would, but we can’t. (quoted in Sinker 128)

Likewise, the American punk band Anti-Flag signed to RCA (owned by Sony BMG) in 2005, which caused a great deal of controversy and charges of selling out. Defending the decision, drummer and founder Pat Thetic argued: “You have to use that [global capitalist] system. Obviously it’s cliche´ but you have to at least be able to have a voice to say this is fucked up, rather than to have no voice and scream in the wilderness and nobody hears you” (Thetic). Yet history has often shown that such bands become disillusioned by the promise of amplifying their political effectiveness via a major record label, as was the case with Anti-Flag, who eventually left RCA and are currently on Side One Dummy Records. As cultural studies scholar Lawrence Grossberg has wryly noted, the history of rock and roll is one of continual cooptation in which “rock and roll constantly protests against its own cooptation” (252). Potential reasons why can be found in Walter Benjamin’s 1934 essay “The Author as Producer,” in which he explores how poets (and other artists) can create politically progressive works of art in capitalist systems. He begins this essay by questioning the relationship between form and content, and argues that artists need to insert themselves “into the living social context” (Benjamin 765). For Benjamin, what the artist says is less important than the “technique” of the work. His argument that content is less important than technique draws attention to why punk bands signing to major labels are deluding themselves about their ability to use the system. Ultimately, Benjamin suggests, it is the system that uses them. As Benjamin noted almost eighty years ago, the mainstream will “assimilate astonishing quantities of revolutionary themes, indeed, can propagate them without calling its own existence ...seriously into question” (774). Thus, focusing solely, or even primarily, on the content of an artistic message fundamentally misses the point. Cultural studies scholar Ryan Moore, for example, may long for a clearly articulated political vision within punk, but the content of lyrics, despite how progressive or revolutionary they may seem, are largely irrelevant. By considering contemporary modes of production and distribution in the music industry as “technique” in Benjamin’s terms, it becomes clear that the primary result of a punk band on a major record label is the further enrichment of the major label and the larger economy in which it operates, regardless of whether a band is 234 Kevin Dunn singing about the crappiness of multinational corporations. Or, as Taylor put it: “And every artist from Hole to Rage Against The Machine who said they were going to bring the machine down from the inside? They lied or were delusional. The machine has paid them well and they’ve since shut their fuckin’ mouths about toppling the industry” (Taylor, Razorcake 39). If raging against the machine from the inside is a fruitless endeavor, then how might progressive cultural production be realized? Again, Benjamin is instructive here, as he points to the importance of “technique,” understood as the artist’s “position in the process of production,” and makes the critical distinction between an “informing writer” (one who merely proselytizes) and the more effective “operating writer,” who employs an interventionist cultural mode. This is similar to sociologist Stephen Duncombe’sobservation that DIY zine makers engage in “propaganda of the deed” (76). It is worth quoting Benjamin fully on this point: “What matters, therefore, is the exemplary character of production, which is able, first, to induce other producers to produce, and, second, to put an improved apparatus at their disposal. And this apparatus is better, the more consumers it is able to turn into producers—that is, readers or spectators into collaborators” (Benjamin 777). This observation is at the crux of why DIY labels are politically important. Because a progressive cultural politics is not achieved through content but via position, being DIY and independent is far more effective than talking about being DIY and independent. It is a form of cultural production that can turn passive consumers into producers in their own right. As the interviews presented in this article have repeatedly illustrated, DIY punk record labels have created a global network of collaborators. Through their activities, they continue to inspire others to produce while providing a powerful apparatus: the informal yet vibrant global DIY punk network outside the direct control of the corporate music industry. Although today’s capitalist system can easily appropriate and assimilate messages and symbols, it is far more difficult to appropriate the ethos that is at the heart of DIY punk culture, as Anne Elizabeth Moore’s recent work Unmarketable (2007) effectively illustrates. Benjamin’s astute analysis of cultural production underscores that, in the end, the practices of the DIY punk record community are far more progressive, rebellious and threatening to the status quo than a major label band singing about the evils of capitalism while wearing a leather jacket with a big circle-A on the back. The medium is the message, and so is the system that delivers it, thus the importance of DIY as lived practice within today’s music industry. “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 235

Notes 1. Some of the material and quotes in this article, particularly certain interview quotes, appeared in my article “How to Start Your Own DIY Record Label”,” Razorcake #60, January 2011. Thanks to Todd Taylor for being Todd Taylor. 2. Alan O’Connor’s Punk Record Labels and the Struggle for Autonomy (2008) is certainly the most comprehensive work on DIY punk labels to date. I have a few critiques of the work (e.g., his myopic employment of a Bourdieu-ian framework limits his analysis; his narrative of DIY punk is almost exclusively a Maximumrocknroll-themed narrative; he doesn’t offer significant reflection of the social and political implications of the DIY punk scene). He will have criticisms of this article. 3. The people who run DIY punk labels are people from all walks of life (O’Connor). There is no given age frame for DIY punk label owners. The people I have interviewed have been in their teens, twenties, thirties, forties, and fifties. They include young kids in high school, recent college graduates, regular folks working regular jobs, and a few who have made their label successful enough to avoid having to work for someone else. They come from a wide range of educational backgrounds. Some are high school dropouts, some graduated from college, and a few have postgraduate degrees. They also come from all socioeconomic classes, with most coming from working or middle class backgrounds. In North America, most of the people running DIY punk labels are white, but not exclusively. The most common characteristic is that most are male. Still, there are a number of significant female record label owners—Lisa Fancher at Frontier, Renae Bryant at On the Rag, Jennifer co-owner of No Idea, Ruth Schartz formerly of Mordam before the Lumberjack buyout, and Heather at RealPunkRadio the Label—but these are definitely in a minority. 4. Although I recognize that there were (and continue to be) plural music scenes, for this article I treat them as a singular music scene because of shared distribution/production/exhibition practices. 5. Lookout later encountered serious financial problems and many of its bands sued for breach of contract, seeking to reclaim the masters of their recordings after Lookout failed to adequately compensate them. When Green Day successfully rescinded their masters in 2005, Lookout was effectively crippled, laying off staff and halting all new releases. 6. At the time of writing, there has also been a revival of the cassette tape. 7. One-stops are basically other major distribution companies that of- fer a wider range of products than just music, such as DVDs, clothing, and other merchandise. The big independent one-stops are currently Super-D 236 Kevin Dunn

(employee-owned and based out of Irvine, CA), RevHQ, Edge (family-owned and based in Cleveland, OH), and Cargo in the UK.

Works Cited Albini, Steve. “The Problem with Music.” Maximumrocknroll 133 (1993): 11–13. Atkins, Jordan. Personal interview. 29 July 2010. Azerrad, Michael. Our Life Could Be Your Band: Scenes from the American Indie Underground 1981–1991. Boston: Little, Brown, 2001. Benjamin, Walter. “The Author as Producer.” Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings Volume Two: 1927–1934. Eds. Michael W. Jennings, Howard Eiland and Gary Smith. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1999. 760–85. Bryant, Renae. Personal interview. 31 October 2010. Cappelletti, Ryan. Personal interview, 23 July 2010. Congelliere, Todd. Personal interview. 14 October 2010. Dicker, Glenn. Personal interview. 29 July 2010. Dietrich, Chuck. Personal interview. 27 July 2010. DiMatessa, Alex. Personal interview. 14 August 2010. Dirr, Jerry. Personal interview. 22 August 2010. Duncombe, Stephen. Notes from Underground: Zines and the Politics of Alternative Culture. Bloomington, IN: Microcosm, 2008. Emery, Dan. Personal interview. 22 July 2010. Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Ed. and trans. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. New York: International Publishers, 1971. Grossberg, Lawrence. “Another Boring Day in Paradise: Rock and Roll and the Empowerment of Everyday Life.” Popular Music 4 (1984): 225–258. Halabura, Michal. Personal interview. 4 January 2010. Hardt, Michael, and Antonio Negri. Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2000. Hogue, Derek. Personal interview. 14 October 2010. Instigate, Andy. Personal interview. 25 July 2010. J-Lemonade. Personal interview. 18 September 2010. “If It Ain’t Cheap, It Ain’t Punk” 237

Laing, Dave. One-Chord Wonders: Power and Meaning in . Philadelphia: Open U, 1985. Mason, Chris. Personal interview. 21 July 2010. McClard, Ken. Personal interview. 29 September 2010. Moore, Anne Elizabeth. Unmarketable: Brandalism, Copyfighting, Mocketing, and the Erosion of Integrity. New York: New P, 2007. Moore, Ryan. “Postmodernism and : Cultures of Authenticity and Deconstruction.” The Communication Review 7 (2004): 305–27. O’Connor, Alan. Punk Record Labels and the Struggle for Autonomy. Lexington, KY: Lexington Books, 2008. Park, Mike. Personal interview. 24 July 2010. Pearson, Justin. Personal interview. 8 August 2010. Phillips, Dan. Personal interview. 30 July 2010. Reynolds, Simon. Rip It Up and Start Again: Postpunk 1978–1984.NewYork: Penguin, 2006. Rutherford, Will. Personal interview. 21 July 2010. Sinker, Daniel. We Owe You Nothing: Punk Planet: The Collected Interviews.New York: Akashic Books, 2001. Spencer, Amy. DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture. London: Marion Boyars, 2005. Tanner, Adam, and Scott Hillis. “iTunes passes Wal-Mart as top U.S. music retailer.” USA Today. 3 March 2008. Web. 28 March 2012. Taylor, Todd. Personal interview. 3 August 2010. Taylor, Todd. “One Punk’s Guide to ....”Razorcake 46 (2008): 37–49. Thetic, Pat. Personal interview. 12 May 2005. Voogt, Robert. Personal interview. 21 August 2010. Weissman, Dick. The Music Business: Career Opportunities and Self-Defense. New York: Three Rivers P, 2003.