Just What The Hell Is 'Indie' Anyways?

By Josh

So what exactly does this term "indie" mean? I've definitely had that question posed to me more than once by callers at the radio station, not to mention the family, friends, and random numerous people who ask me what my favorite kind of music is. No matter how many times I'm asked, I can never seem to come up with a short, concise, coherent answer. It almost seems like nowadays theres a definite category for every type of music and that by middle school people are trained to put everything neatly in its musical place. And therein lies the dilemma with the "indie" category. Indie isn't metal, it isn't hip-hop, its not punk, hardcore, ska, pop, r&b, soul, jazz, blues, trance, dub, reggae, gothic, folk, etc, etc. However, "indie" bands/artists can incorporate elements of any or all of those other categories in their music. That makes it difficult to pigeonhole an "indie" band easily into any one genre. So in at least one sense, "indie" is more about what category it doesn't fit in, than what category it does fit in.

On the flip side of that thought is the prevalence of "indie" artists who do seem to fit into a set category. Artists like Elliot Smith, Songs of Ohia, The Make-Up, Fugazi, Jeff Mueller, Jeremy Engik, Superchunk, Knapsack, The Rachel's, etc., are all generally embraced by the indie crowd. Each of these artists have also put out at least one album of material which could be easily described as either folk, pop-punk, mod, hardcore, etc., all decidedly non-"indie" designations. So this observation pretty much forces us to throw out the premise of exculsion we arrived at in the first paragraph.

So now we're back to the start again. What the hell is "indie"? The single most useful criteria there can be lies in the word "indie" itself, which is, of course, short for "independent". "Indie" music is made by artists in a DIY fashion, pressed and released by themselves or by small time, "independent" record labels, with only the motives of self expression and creating good music to fuel them. This defination would probably be the best one yet except for the fact that millions of artists make music in this fashion away from the mainstream. Are all of these artists, "indie" artists? Obviously not. To further compound the problem with this defination is the presence of those "indie" artists who no longer reside on independent record labels. Can an "indie" artist be on Warner Bros or Dreamworks or RCA and still be considered "indie"? Depends on who you ask really.

So as you can see, defining what "indie" is, is not such a simple task. Personally, I think its kind of a combination of the three things mentioned above mixed together with other variables. It's kind of my own theory that the underground itself exaults somewhat in being, well "underground" and esoteric. To escape the ubiquous and vapid mainstream which is filled with "dumb" , easily digestable and marketable crap, the "indie" crowd has attempted to fashion an alternative which has no clearly identifiable characteristics therefore rendering it basically impregnable to mass exploitation. While this certainly has its good points, like putting creativity, openmindedness, self-expression and art above profit and marketshare, the use of the term "indie" itself still holds its down side. Like any cliche or subculture, there are those elements that tend to think their particular defination/lifestle/ideas/clothes/hair/whatever, are the way everyone should be. Maybe you could call it "indie-pocentricism"? Regardless of who it involves, elitism is pretty much retarded and damn boring too. Then there is alwasy the fact that as soon as any group becomes associated with any one type of music you can bet there are those unimaginative people who are willing to memorize all the correct names, styles, etc. These people are ready to homogenize everything down into an easily traceable demographic and make life excruciatingly dull for us all.

So maybe the real answer to the question of "What is indie?" is everything and anything. I always thought that alot of the best music of now evolved out of the creative energy and networking that emerged during the early days of punk. For that reason, I think alot of people who make what has become categorically "un-punk" music probably consider themselves or their approach to music, punk to some degree. Regardless, if nothing else, I think we can truly say that what has come to be called "indie" is a musical sub-culture of people and artists, whom leery of the mainstream masses and their predilection for the latest trends, have chosen to create something seperate and apart, which fosters creativity, artistic expression, and an intimacy between artist and audience that can't be found in ordinary commerical music.

Back To The Main Page