David Byrne on capitalism and the “counterproductive” impact on art
Under capitalism, art can become a commodity. As something that’s inherently subjective, with a value that can vary depending on the artist and the spectator – art becoming a fully-fledged, monetised asset is somewhat problematic. This is because the value of art can sometimes be reduced to its price tag, which can influence which projects get promoted and who gets funding to do what. For Talking Heads’ David Byrne, capitalism is the destroyer of art, but separating an incredibly complex system from music is almost incomprehensible.
The issue of capitalism in music isn’t a new emergence; it has long served as a focal point for many influential movements, like rock, as a statement against societal hierarchies and the elite. In fact, many of the biggest names in the business have used music as a weapon or a means of protest, from Bob Dylan to The Cranberries, whose work crafts communities or contributes to movements that challenge destruction or authority.
Different factions of musical subcultures have rallied against such notions since the 1970s, including the punk counterculture – in fact, for many, their initial introduction to anarchist concepts occurred within the realm of punk. Prominent figures like Kurt Cobain once dubbed the genre “freedom” and the ultimate gateway to self-expression in its most limitless form.
In his book How Music Works, Byrne’s take on how capitalist ideology impacts art is a little more abstract than the binary of revolutionary acts in punk and rock and roll. Though musical figures also contest the commercialisation of music as a product, Bryne says that “teaching and funding the arts has been in direct opposition to fostering creativity among the general population”.
Now, it’s easy to express anti-capitalist views, particularly as a musician whose tools are lyrics and images, but capitalism broadly has a knack for co-opting such expressions in one form or another. Meaning that those who critique its principles may inadvertently find themselves benefiting from its existence. Or, it becomes nothing more than rage-fuelled noise. For example, Sex Pistols can release ‘God Save The Queen’, but does it ever become more than a rallying cry for change? Even Talking Heads criticised the capitalist virtues of the American dream in ‘Once In A Lifetime’, but did that incite change?
Or worse, can those at the very bottom ever rise to the top and make ends meet without becoming complicit in the system? According to Byrne, no, they can’t: “It can often seem that those in power don’t want us to enjoy making things for ourselves — they’d prefer to establish a cultural hierarchy that devalues our amateur efforts and encourages consumption rather than creation.”
The sad reality is that, in one way or another, the two are completely dependent. “The way we are taught about music,” Byrne says, “And the way it’s socially and economically positioned, affect whether it’s integrated (or not) into our lives, and even what kind of music might come into existence in the future. Capitalism tends toward the creation of passive consumers, and in many ways, this tendency is counterproductive.”
Artists may continue to rage against the machine for many years to come, and change is never completely impossible, but capitalism is insidious, and manifests itself in many forms, across all spaces.
