What constitutes life today?
What is a home? What is work, what is a school? Where are they? Where
are we? What are we?
Apps
you know and love
We
are adaptable. Flexible. Resilient. Productive. Innovative. Positive.
Above all, we are individuals, on a journey, as pliable as the tools
we use, copied and pasted, regularly updated, equipped with the
latest climate-proof clothing and anti-viral software.
A
5-year-old clicks through exercises on a laptop. Last
week she had a high
temperature and understandably
would not submit to a
lateral flow test, so this
week she is not allowed
to go to school or see other children. Having
reported the symptoms and accepted the consequences (for fear of
worse consequences if he didn’t),
her father asked,
via
the online portal through which the teacherscommunicate
with
parents,
for some
materials to be provided relating to the
topics listed for this
week. He was sent a generic ‘isolation timetable’ dating from the
previous term (when the child was also off for a week) consisting of
some CBeebies
links and suggestions such as making
a rocket out of recycling, andtersely told to look up
resources online. The implication was that to expect anything more
was
unreasonable. Yes, this is a common and predictable occurrence, yes
we have a range of
resources at our disposal,
and yes the child’s absence is due not to illness but to government
policy. But, well, we are very busy. In
the absence of a negative test result, the
responsibility for your child’s education has
been passed
over to you. Thank
you for your co-operation.
Luckily
the father does not have to ‘work’ during school hours (actually
how much this is luck and how much a matter of being excluded from
paid employment opportunities due to childcare responsibilities is
something of a grey area), so is ‘free’ to set up and supervise
the child’s learning, cajole her into maths and phonics, tend to
her needs, clean up after her and make desultory attempts at
housework. In the bedroom the child’s mother works full-time for a
large public sector organisation. Her desk is a window sill. A
rubbish-and-dogshit-strewn patch of turf behind the block counts as a
communal ‘garden’. The wifi sags under the strain of homeworking
and homeschooling. On weekend mornings he works as a cleaner.
He used to write.
It is usual in our sick
society for politicians and business executives to be detached from
the lives of the people over whom they wield power; this is part of
their parasitic self-serving hypocrisy, on which they should be
challenged and held to account. But a second-order detachment seems
to have occurred by which the people reporting and commenting on politics, and
supposedly holding those in power to account, now seem to to be required to inhabit the
same remote world as those politicians and business executives, and a
different world to the rest of us. It is in all their interests -
politicians, chief executives, advisors, management consultants,
editors, columnists, opinionators - to keep the news rolling, to keep
the show on the road. Journalists pass on snippets of parliamentary
gossip like off-duty courtiers and report on welfare cuts and
deportations as if they were episodes from a TV drama, a bottomless
box set of triumph and tragedy, characters and cliffhangers,
set-pieces which resemble real life but are not part of it. And we
watch, stunned, as the same breathless, depthless tone is applied to Covid, even
as it becomes apparent by the most cursory joining of dots that the government, through its negligence and callousness, has allowed thousands of people to die and then blamed the public for it. All this is just
grist to the content-mill. To pause the drama in order to step
outside it and look at how the narrative is being shaped and in whose
interests, to actually look at politics politically, would be
a career-ending offence. It is their duty to impel knee-jerk
excitement at each new WhatsApped twist and turn, no matter how
horrific or banal. Their job is not to inform or educate but merely
to keep people watching and clicking.
He
tries to picture Hugh Pym languishing on an NHS waiting list, Owen
Jones opening a DWP brown envelope, Ayesha Hazarika on a rail
replacement bus service. It is impossible.
He
goes outside to the yard and flings another full rubbish bag on top
of the overflowing wheelie bins. Does Laura Kuenssberg have to put up
with his? He wonders as he goes back in.
The child is not eating
properly. She refuses all but two types of dinner offered to her. She
will not eat any vegetables. Whole meals are thrown away. The problem
has been going on for over a year. People say it’s just a phase.
He
phones the GP surgery. Do they have a dietitian linked to the surgery
who can dispense advice? (Not to actually see the child. No-one
expects that any more, except in A&E or cancer wards.) The
administrator goes to check.
There is no dietitian. It will
need to be a referral from a GP, who will need to speak to you. You
will need to phone at 8.15am to make a same-day appointment.
The
surgery has been run this way since before the pandemic. It does not
operate a proper appointments system. Anyone who wants to see a GP
must ring at 8.15am - on the dot, not a minute earlier (answerphone)
or later (engaged) - and try to get through to an administrator, who
will ask a series of questions and decide whether a slot can be
allocated on that day. Now of course, in the pandemic era, the prize
at the end of the 8.15 phone-in lottery is invariably not an
in-person appointment, but another phone call.
This
means patients become rivals in a competition for spaces, who have to
be ready to play the game, guessing the right time to ring and
upselling their distress to get a slot. This system is regarded as
completely normal, and anyone who takes issue with the surgery for
imposing it is deemed unreasonable. The ‘appointments’ are not
even really appointments; a five-minute phone call will be scheduled
between, say, 11am and midday, and the person has to wait near the
phone and be prepared to drop whatever they are doing when it rings.
It
is difficult to think of a system more likely to discriminate against
people with mental health problems, and to exacerbate those problems.
If someone is suffering from depression and already feels worthless,
let alone ready to push past other people to get help, this system
will not enable that person to seek support, it will do the opposite.
If you are already suffering from anxiety, waiting for the clock to
tick round to 8.15 and scrambling to get through, then winning a few
moments of clinical attention but still not knowing when the phone
will ring or if you will miss the call and lose your slot (as has
happened to people, for instance with physical disabilities) is
guaranteed to cause huge distress.
The
deterrent aspect also encourages people to put off addressing health
problems - with themselves, or with their children - until they
become more acute, and require more intervention, take up more
resources, create more stress and long-term complications, and lead
to less time for routine appointments. And so it goes on.
None
of this is of any interest to the administrators. It’s just how it
is, sir. As for the clinicians, who knows? They are so remote and
their time is so mysterious and precious that every second has to
count towards the immediate issue.
Hello,
you are through to the NHS. We cannot help you. Please do not attempt
to visit your GP surgery. Stay at home, or go to work. Good morning,
this is the NHS. Please do not use our service if you can avoid it.
Press 1 to continue, or hang up. Good morning, you are through to the
world-renowned, world-beating NHS. All our staff are very busy saving
lives right now. If we leave our duties to answer your call, someone
in real need could die as a result. Do you want that on your
conscience? If the answer is ‘Yes’, please hold. If the answer is
‘No’, please don’t bother us. There are apps, there are
websites, there are over-the-counter pills. Why not use them? Good
morning, this is the NHS. Have you considered going private? Good
morning, you are through to the NHS, the UK’s leading heritage
healthcare brand. If you need us, this means you have
failed to keep yourself well; just like if you are claiming welfare benefits it is because you have failed to keep yourself financially
healthy. Please hold. We are very busy. You, evidently, are not.
Thank you for your understanding.
The
call menus, the leaflets, the banners outside the A&Es, all
proclaim: Hello, this is the NHS. Do you actually have a problem, or
are you the problem?
There
is an alternative way of booking appointments, the administrator
reminds him (the role of the surgery administrator has changed from
booking appointments to telling people how to book appointments;
again, this is perfectly normal and reasonable, and to suggest
otherwise may be regarded as abuse of our hard-working staff who are
here to help you) - you can go through the surgery’s online portal.
Later he visits the surgery’s website to reacquaint himself with
this portal. First you need to find the tab which takes you to a
generic corporate booking site. Then to make an appointment you need
to log in, and to log in you need to enter a username and a password.
To create a username you need a ‘Patient ID’, which you need to
get by contacting the surgery. Kafka would be proud. A Kafkaeqsue
portal, leading not to a distant dimension but to somewhere utterly
banal that used to take just a few seconds to reach, but now takes
hours or weeks.
Can
I not book an appointment over the phone then? He asks. The
institutional voice tightens. Yes, we do have some appointments. The
earliest we have is Thursday, 3 and a half weeks away, between 7am
and 8am.
A
phone consultation, in three and a half weeks’ time, at 7 in the
morning. Offered matter-of-factly, without any glimmer of its
absurdity. He can hear her waiting for him to turn it down.
This
term at school they are looking at space. Improvising an activity on
the theme, father and daughter take a box of chalk outside into the
yard and together they draw the solar system to scale on the pavement
behind the building. The adult assesses the current state of the
mountain of uncollected rubbish as the child colours in the gas
giants. It is a cold, crisp, blue day. Seagulls circle overhead,
waiting to rip open the exposed bin bags. Inside, the mother has
caught the child’s cold. She notifies her work that she will take
the day off sick. Exhausted, she spends the day in the same room
where she works and sleeps. She receives no reply from her employer.
You
don’t have any devices
At
night
he
feels the walls of the flat closing in. He
remembers when
he was a child and
he
used to lie in bed in the dark and imaginethe
bedroom was a capsule
travelling
through space.
At
the time the
fantasy brought an oddly comforting, cosy feeling of both safety and
adventure. Now
his
default settingis
a
combination of cosmic
terror and claustrophobia,
as
if
the flat, with all three of them in it, exists
in a
vacuum, devoid of humanity, mediated
by automated messages and virtual
portals
to
nowhere, simulating
social interaction,
disguising the fact that they have been abandoned, supply lines cut off, leftcircling
a black hole.
He
goes outside and walks across the yard, stepping over the sleeping
planets. He clambers up onto the mountain of rubbish, over split bin
bags of rancid rotting food. He lies there and waits.
Did
you forget something?
(Sorry the formatting is f***ed. Come back LiveJournal, all is forgiven...)...
I was wandering through the upper floor of the
library, cleaning spray and damp cloth in my plastic gloved hands, when I
noticed a small bird flutter down from the ceiling and land a short distance in front
of me, on a walkway between the biography section and the study area. I stood
still so as not to alarm it, and looked closely to make sure I didn’t imagine
it. Sure enough, there it was, a sparrow, as quiet and timid as I was. I looked
around, but no one else seemed to have noticed it (the library wasn’t that
busy). I was wondering whether to just leave it to its own devices when I
spotted one of the caretakers, a gentle, rotund man in his sixties, on patrol a few metres away.
I motioned him over and whispered, ‘There’s a bird
in the library.’ I pointed out the tiny visitor, gesturing round the corner of
a bookshelf.
It took him a few seconds to see it. Then he stepped
slowly in front of me. ‘Pass me that cloth,’ he said, quietly but purposefully.
I did so. He moved closer, then jumped forward onto the floor, throwing the
cloth over the creature and holding it there. It wriggled but didn’t seem to put up
much resistance. Although dramatic, the moment passed almost entirely unobserved. The main floor was near-deserted and no one in the study area looked up from their laptops. The caretaker got up and walked
briskly to the lift, cupping the trembling bundle in his hands.
I found another cloth and resumed my cleaning
duties.
Later I saw the caretaker in the staff kitchen. He
told me they knew the sparrow was somewhere in the building; it had been inside for a couple
of days but hadn’t been sighted for a while. Birds sometimes fly in through the
front doors or the windows in the roof, and get trapped. This one would have been
imprisoned without food or water for at least 48 hours. Trapped in this glass cell with no opportunity for
nourishment, it would have got progressively weaker, until it could barely move.
The caretaker had taken the bird outside and unwrapped
it, but it didn’t take off. It just stood there. When he went back after a couple of hours, it had
gone.
28/06/2021
My daughter is hiding under the living room table because
she doesn’t want to have a bath, because she doesn’t want to have the plaster
taken off her forehead, because she is scared it might hurt.
After a minute I say, ‘I have to tell you something.
Remember that new scooter we looked at? Well, I ordered it and I got an email to
say it’s coming today. But they said they won’t deliver it until you’ve taken
the plaster off.’
She comes out from under the table. ‘But how will
they know I’ve taken the plaster off?’
‘They know everything. They know everything we do, everything
we say, everything about our lives. The driver has the scooter in the back of
his van now and he’s waiting for a message to say your plaster is off. Then he’ll
deliver it.’
She weighs this up practically. ‘OK.’ She gets into
the bath. After a while I wash her hair and take the plaster off. It hurts a
bit. I tell her she is very brave. She gets out. Just as I am drying her hair the
intercom buzzes.
She gasps. ‘It’s here!’
21/12/2020
[wakes up]
Siri, what Tier am I in today?
'Good morning! Today you are in Tier 5b. Going outside is prohibited except for essential work purposes. This will be reviewed at 3pm. Would you like me to update you if your tier status changes?'
[Full version of the final part of my contribution to the Sydney Review of Books discussion of the blogosphere, Mark Fisher and the k-punk book, focusing on the 'Acid Communism' fragment. This was understandably edited for the article, but the original (written in July 2019) is more of a self-contained blog-style piece so I thought it was worth putting up here.]
Formulating
thoughts about this unfinished introduction is not easy as it was obviously meant
to be the beginning of a large project, expanding historically and
theoretically in parallel with the buried collective consciousness it was going
to bring to the surface and set free, and we have to imagine how it was going
to get there. It is also desperately sad. The fragment is bubbling with
optimism – much more so
than most of Mark’s other
writing - and however sceptical I am about some of the claims made in it I am
sure that over the course of a whole book Mark would have argued me around and
made me realise how my horizons are being limited.
To throw a
deeply uncool pop reference into the mix: although the focus of the intro was
the culture of the 1960s and 70s, the group that came to my mind while mulling
over Mark’s idea of a
new form of psychic and political consciousness-raising was indie-dance act The
Shamen. You could even imagine them dropping the phrase ‘acid
communism’ into an
interview circa their album In Gorbachev We Trust. Way before
blogs, from 1989 to 1991, The Shamen were my first almost-political awakening:
they talked about hallucinogenic drugs and “altering your
consciousness” in a very
contemporary way (they only got really hippyish about it later, when they
teamed up with Terence McKenna and lost the plot somewhat) and En-Tact was a sort
of Iain M Banksian program for a psychedelic techno-socialist utopia. These
days of course The Shamen are remembered as a cheesy novelty act (culminating
in 2015'sPeepshow Super Hans debacle),
but they were a huge influence on me and not in the way you’d expect.
They were also one of the few acts at the time to try to intellectualise rave
culture and connect it to broader social and political trends.
And this
reminded me that Mark wrote an essay called ‘Baroque Sunbursts’
for an anthology in 2016, which I haven’t read as
disappointingly it isn’t in the
k-punk collection or available online, but it’s been
discussed and quoted, for instance here. In the essay
Mark apparently applies some of the same arguments made in the Acid Communism intro with regard to 1960s-70s counterculture to rave culture: the latent utopia
glimpsed in the otherworldly club environment; the spectre of collective
freedom exorcised by a process of “psychic
privatisation”, the loss of
that freedom and its incorporation by capitalism.
The writer of
the piece linked above has some reservations about Mark’s utopian
reading of rave, which on the limited information available (like not being
able to read the original article!) I suppose I share. On this topic the Jeremy
Deller documentary Everybody in
the Place that’s been
mentioned on here was indeed a breath of fresh air, but what was significantly
underplayed in it, beyond the cautionary tale of Paul Staines, was the
entrepreneurial side of acid house which was actually the embodiment of
Thatcherism. But at the same time rave was maybe the last instance of a
genuinely transformative and disruptive, rather than reactionary, positivity.
I’ve always
been wary of calls from political activists that ‘revolution’ is probable
or even possible, and I am not sure I agree with the assertion that material
conditions are more oriented towards revolutionary change now than they were in
the 1970s, especially if you include time as a ‘material’ element.
Nevertheless, the suffocating effect of the present “existential
and emotional atmosphere” is crucial.
as well as being immersed in pop culture, as Owen says, another thing that
distinguished Mark from more conventional theorists was his grasp of how the
external, material environment created by neoliberalism has in turn cultivated
a particular interior, emotional state –
a sort of overstimulated misery and resignation which, while
individualised and for the most part unspoken, is still experienced collectively.
Part of how the regime exercises its power is to shut us off from each other in
the guise of ‘connecting’
us. This is obvious in any workplace. It is also noticeable at home,
when one’s digital
device lists all the other wifi connections in the vicinity: technologically a
minority of these connections is probably powerful enough to supply everyone in
the building, and yet capital dictates that we each buy our own ‘package’
and keep our neighbours out. Uninhibited, the signal literally travels
through walls, between households. It’s there, we’re just not
able to collectively utilise it.
Given the
reasons why the book never got further than this fragment, the ending of the
introduction is heartbreakingly poignant, pointing as it does towards a subsequent
section which would analyse Capital’s machinery
of “consciousness-deflation”
as a first step towards reversing it and igniting a collective desire
for action. And this is one of the areas where we should concentrate our
energies, because the liberation of psychic space is a necessary precondition
for any attempt to dismantle the system of power which threatens our material survival.
04/11/2018
‘...and it was arguably
here, in this position of wretched seclusion, detached from any cultural movement,
without institutional support or camaraderie, with no readership, no media profile
or publishing deal, no outside interest whatsoever, and with no economic
independence, no definable role or status, no energy for writing and no time or
space in which to write, with no desire to write, no material, no plan, no
words, in this inescapable state of intellectual abjection and terminal
exhaustion... it was here that his
best work was produced.’
26/10/2018
(Sometime in 2016)
I am
instructed to assist a team leader by assembling motivational banners for him to
place around the offices. The posters roll out to a height of six feet and are
designed to be displayed in groups of three, spelling out the latest organisational
slogan: ‘transform’, ‘together’, today’.
We only
meet for a few minutes, but behind the usual initial synthetic enthusiasm
the team leader is surprisingly phlegmatic. As we carry the stuff across the
car park he explains that the campaign the banners were created for has
finished, but they are still being put around the building “to keep it in
people’s minds.” Keep it in people’s minds? “To make them work harder for
less,” he says, “And make it seem inspiring.”
We reach
the area where he is due to install this particular triptych. He
walks along the aisles eyeing up possible gaps and corners. The staff know him
and their exchanges are friendly, but as I follow with the tall corporate
sails, a definite tension emerges. His approach is that they have to go
somewhere, but every suggestion is met with hostility. He proposes putting a
banner in front of a wall display, in front of pigeonholes, cabinets, desk
drawers. Every spot is in the way of something. The workers, already cramped
for space, make it clear that they don’t want the things. As he attempts to set
them up someone mouths to me, “Take them away.” “I wish I could,” I silently reply.
Finally, having exhausted the appearance of negotiation, he imposes the things
on the staff, regardless of their objections. We push them into position. The buzzwords
loom over the office workers, literally standing over their shoulders and
obscuring their views. There is a sense of resigned inevitability about the
exercise, although one could still imagine the workers rolling the banners up
as soon as the team leader has departed. Sadly on my visits to that area in the
days afterwards they are still visible.
Formed
in the north-eastern town of Ferryhill
in 1976 in the wake of the Sex Pistols, Penetration were an enthralling burst
of punk energy. Led by singer and lyricist Pauline Murray, their songs of military
conflict and domestic servitude attacked the dictators and firing squads of
polite society, and as they gained momentum they threatened to invade the
mainstream.
By
their time of their second album Coming
Up for Air, however, Murray was finding the rock format intolerable. “I felt
I was drowning in some ways, hence the title.” She ended Penetration and began
writing new material with bassist Robert Blamire. “The dynamics of the songs
had changed since we weren’t writing around guitar riffs.” A new, more abstract
studio palette was provided by the decidedly un-macho sounding Invisible Girls,
consisting of Murray and Blamire, keyboardist Steve Hopkins and Factory
producer Martin Hannett (who had previously played under that name with John
Cooper Clarke), with contributions from Vini Reilly and others. The result was a
futuristic but highly accessible record which didn’t adhere to the industry
conventions of group or solo artist, major or indie, pop or post-punk. It was
sublime.
Originally released in September 1980, Pauline
Murray and the Invisible Girls
is an extraordinary work of art, a treasure not just of its own time but of any
era. Yet soon after completing it the singer followed her own backing band and
disappeared. Long unavailable, the album has now been reissued and hopefully
will be discovered by a new audience. Interviewing Pauline Murray by email, I
encountered a unique performer still striking a vital oppositional note in
today’s no-alternative culture of commodified rebellion, digital passivity and
talent show banality.
What does punk mean to you? Does
it mean the same thing now that it did in 1976? Is punk still possible today?
At
the time it meant opening your eyes and seeing things as they are. It was about
questioning tried and tested methods and doing things in a different way. It
was about not caring whether you could do something but more about having a go.
It was about contributing rather than passively consuming. It was about having
the courage to break away from the stifling confines of a society that bowed
down to “superiors”. It was about the youth of the late seventies turning their
backs on the middle class hippy generation. It was about thinking for yourself
and expressing your individuality. It was outside the system for a very short
time and showed what people could achieve with focus and direction of energy.
The raw music, anti-fashion, photography, art and design, writing, fanzines,
the 7” single and animated audiences. Exciting stuff! It was as if a window had
opened and real primal expression could emerge. It felt that you could
collectively change the world and it certainly changed the lives of those
involved.
Punk
now means a certain category where products of a certain type can be marketed.
It has turned into a stereotype and has no power to change.
I
don’t think it’s possible today to have the black swan that was punk as young
people have lived in a different world. They have been distracted and pacified
from an early age by video games, mobile phones, computers, the internet, fast
food and the American hard sell.They
are surrounded by unmotivated people, and there doesn’t seem to be anything
that brings them together.The culture
of music and art has been hijacked by the clean people and karaoke singing
appears on prime time TV.
Despite your achievements you
rarely feature in the endless BBC4 documentaries on punk and post-punk, which
are usually quite Londoncentric (or at best Manchester). It seems that if you lived
outside these places and there’s no stock footage easily available you risk
being edited out of history. Have you noticed this, and if so does it surprise
or annoy you, because your work might not be getting the recognition it
deserves?
Journalism
and the media have become very lazy and would rather print a press release than
analyse something themselves. The same old story and names have been repeated
again and again without any depth of research and it has become stock footage.
We weren’t part of the high profile London
crowd and didn’t have hit records so it’s easy to get overlooked. We are
sometimes more noticeable by our absence. It’s just one of those things - the
powers that be, write and re-write history.
How do you view the second
Penetration album now? The year after it came out you said it left a lot to be
desired but ever since I first heard it in the ‘90s I’ve loved it.
Obviously
I was too close in the making of it at the time. I felt that we were rushed
into it and could have come up with better songs with more preparation. We
worked with the fledgling producer Steve Lillywhite who had a different
approach to the producers of the first album. I know we gave it our best shot
as we always do. I was becoming uncertain about where the music was going and
things were pulling in different directions. Listening to it now brings a tear
to my eye, to hear such young kids taking on and generally succeeding in a
monumental task. There are some great tracks on there. Come Into the Open,
Shout Above the Noise.
From
Penetration to the Invisible Girls, from Shout Above the Noise to Screaming in
the Darkness - was there a deliberate connection between these two opening
tracks?
There’s
no conscious connection at all between these two tracks. I had put Penetration
behind me and was writing new songs. Shout above the Noise is very external
whilst Screaming in the Darkness is internal.
Over what period were the
Invisible Girls songs written? Did any ideas date from while Penetration were
still going, or was the split the starting point for them? Were some written in
the studio?
Penetration
finished their tour at the end of 1979. I had nothing planned after the split
but somehow Rob and I gravitated towards each other. We bought a Teac four
track and set up a recording studio in his parents’ house. By March 1980 we had
recorded a John Peel session (with a temporary band) and soon after that teamed
up with Martin and Steve to record Dream Sequence as a single. None of the
ideas were left over from Penetration.We came up with them all as new. I had also written some on my own -
Sympathy, Dream Sequence, Drummer Boy, which I had never done with the band.
Most of the album was written before going into the studio. Only Time Slipping
was worked on at the time. It was a backing track idea of the Invisible Girls.
I took it away and wrote the tune and lyrics and we re-recorded the backing
track though none of us can remember doing that!
How would you describe the
experience of recording the album?
We
were living in Martin Hannett’s house for the duration in Manchester recording at Strawberry studios. I
remember Martin playing Atmosphere by Joy Division, which was very poignant at
the time. The first week was backing tracks with bass drums and piano moving
through the process in the conventional way. As it progressed we were working late
into the night then starting later each day. I began to become more withdrawn
and couldn’t speak to anyone and had to go home after the second week. When I
returned, I felt disconnected from the album and did vocal tracks again and
again without guidance. I think Martin did an amazing job with the production
but the content and playing by all of the individuals involved should never be
overlooked. There’s something magical, deep and intense.
The lyrics on the Invisible Girls
album are so strong but rarely appreciated. The album is lyrically very intense
- I’d say it’s as poetic as, for example, Joy Division’s Closer - but the depth is deceptive, because rather than announcing their
profundity in a rock type way, the words are encased in this kind of blissful
pop exterior… What were the chief influences and experiences which inspired
them?
I
have never made a big deal of my lyrics though I do spend a lot of time working
on them! I have to be happy with what I am singing and they have to fit the
feel of the music. The lyrics are usually inspired by the structure of the
music. An idea has to inspire me in the first place. I can’t really say where
they come from as each song is quite different from another. I spend time in
quiet contemplation and concentration until I settle upon a subject that can
unfold into a song. Something like Thundertunes reflects upon the village where
I was born and grew up - a place that no longer exists. I try to look at things
from all angles but ultimately the subject matter has to fit the framework of a
song and flow with the vocal melody. I think my lyrics are quite deep but the
tunes and singing are accessible but perhaps unsettling to the casual listener!
Many of the lyrics were written through the night when everyone is asleep and
there are no distractions.
The mixing up of dreams and
reality is a recurring theme; not just in Dream Sequence, but in Sympathy,
“imagination seems to be real, reality is just a dream”, and elsewhere. Was
this a ‘conscious’ decision or did it just emerge? Was it a case of real life
seeming unreal and the creative rush of the imagination?
This
theme of dreams and reality was something that just emerged. Dream Sequence and
Sympathy were written before the album. The line “somebody wake me before I go
to sleep” just popped up of its own accord but the song was inspired by
recurring dreams.Sometimes dreams and
reality can come together. Creativity is opening yourself up to bring dreams to
reality. Pulling ideas out of the air and arranging them into solid matter for
a while.
Another theme is suspicion of
fame and celebrity, in Shoot You Down and most obviously in Mr X. Does this
reflect a pressure for punk or alternative culture to become part of the
showbiz machinery? Was it something you feared happening to you or saw
happening to other people? What are your views on fame, then and now?
Punks
generally steered away from the showbiz machinery. I’m quite a private person
and would struggle with the pressures of fame. We are in a society where people
will do anything to be famous. This celebrity culture is driven by the media
and to stay famous you have to be in the public eye on a regular basis.
Everybody watches everybody else, passes judgement and projects their thoughts
onto who they think someone is. I’ve always preferred to be myself than be
famous. Fame means everybody looking up to you until you fall from grace and
are fed to the lions!
When Will We Learn is
interesting: “This restless feeling falls upon the humble/stupid people”, “Mother
Nature’s face is scarred to death...” Is this about a general frustration with
humanity, or is there a sense of some wider threat - environmental disaster,
war, even nuclear annihilation (the track ends with a sound like missiles
falling...)?
When
Will We Learn is a comment on the ignorance of the human race and how people
never take responsibility for their own actions. It has gone on for forever
where the majority don’t question anything and are led into the next drama.
People will only notice that something is wrong when it is all too late and
wonder how this has happened. We have used and abused nature and it will always
have the last say. I see the breakdown of structures that hold everything
together.
The album seems to move from a
mood of personal or existential anxiety towards a feeling of impending doom,
through the warnings and wilderness of Thundertunes, and When Will We Learn
where “the end is coming”, to the ominous bassline of Mr X, and finally
Judgement Day. It is as if the people making it thought it might be the last
record ever made (and what a record!). Is that theme and direction something
you were aware of during writing/recording, or am I imagining it?
There
was no conscious theme to the album. The songs were written separately and put
together at the end. It was a very organic process. Maybe subconsciously I felt
all of those things you mentioned, as my life was about to change and we were
about to enter Thatcher’s Britain
which can never be underestimated. I could maybe sense that I wouldn’t get a chance
to make another album. The songs and production came together at a point in
time, never to be repeated. There’s lots of intensity in all the records I’ve
been involved in. I’ve always felt that every album could be the last.
Listening again to Judgement Day;
“You have no possessions, you have no illusions, no arrangements and no future
plans…There’s no breathing space inside this place, there’s no escaping…” It is
an extraordinary set of images and an astonishing cliffhanger on which to end
an album. Can you say anything about where that song came from and what it was
pointing towards?
My
grandmother had died while I was still with Penetration and Judgement Day was
my observations of the final scenario. She was in hospital, had given up her
home and had nothing other than the fact that she was leaving this world. It’s
very close up. We will all be in this position one day and I have seen the same
with parents and friends. It came last on the album as it’s really intense and
definitely a final song.
Was there much encouragement from
other people in the indie sphere after the album and follow-up single, when RSO
went out of business? After such an innovative but still commercial-sounding
album, you’d think that some of the established labels would have been keen to
get involved. Or did you decide, after this phase of intense activity, to take
a step back for a while?
None
of the singles were hits, which makes a big difference. There were companies
interested but at that time I was going through a massive personal crisis.
Everything around me had changed and I couldn’t focus on anything. I was
perhaps mentally and physically burned out as I hadn’t had a break for five
years. I got half way through a vocal take and just gave up, walked out and
turned my back on everything and everyone connected to music.
Later with Robert you set up
Polestar Studios, which is still going strong, and the Storm Clouds album came out in 1989. Did you get involved in the technical side of
production, and have you been pursuing other interests and doing other things
alongside music?
Polestar
was originally set up as a record label to release our own material in the
early ‘80s. In 1990 I took on the lease of a building and set up music
rehearsal studios and a recording studio. Robert is the technical maestro in
the recording studio as I have never had any interest or ability in the
production side of things. We bought a derelict building almost four years ago,
undertook a massive building project and relocated the studios. I have managed
bands, promoted gigs, studied reflexology, formed a community choir and brought
up two very fine children! I am always busy with one thing or another.
In recent years you have reformed
Penetration and also played some solo shows. What has that been like?
I
think the band has been better since it reformed as the songs and playing have
matured in a good way. It was perhaps unfinished business as we split up very
abruptly but people have had the chance to see us over the past few years. We
have always been a good live band and have done some great shows. We manage
ourselves, operate independently and still play for the enjoyment and
connecting with people. We’ve put out a couple of singles but are reaching a
point where we need to make an album to challenge ourselves!
I
have been doing solo acoustic shows with new material. It’s a whole new thing
for me. The songs are written on acoustic guitar and cover topics such as
family history, depression, people going missing and being plugged in to
technology. This is work in progress as I plan to write more songs, record them
acoustically and then experiment with the music. At the moment I am
concentrating on Penetration, writing and recording a new album.
What do you think of music today?
Are there any performers who still inspire you and are there any current
artists who get the Pauline Murray seal of approval?
Music
today is very fragmented. There are so many different genres, labels and
specific interests and the mainstream is unintelligible. There’s nothing that brings
people together in an emotional way. The digital format means that we can
access music very easily but it’s more disposable and doesn’t hold your
attention.I have to say that there is
nothing in particular that excites and inspires me at the moment but there are
many creative individuals swimming against the tide. I am lucky to have heard,
first hand, the great music of the ‘60s and ‘70s, which was the soundtrack to
my youth. Most things have been done before but genuine passion and energy will
always have an impact.
Rather than
identifying what it is that makes us ‘special,’ we would do well to remember
what it is we have in common, including all the time and resources that have
been stolen from all of us, and given back piecemeal to some. How to divide and
conquer those who seek to divide and conquer us? Only a strategic mass identity
can save us now.
Coincidentally, in the final section of my forthcoming essay
on the naturalised subjugation of 'employability’ I argue similarly that resisting
this pernicious and divisive discourse means positioning collective desire against
individual 'aspiration'. It also involves discovering a new unemployability, and
attacking fake positivity with a radical negativity (aiming for a real social
happiness by destroying the coerced, isolated, miserable simulation).
If a genuinely rebellious cultural movement/moment/whatever is
to emerge from this era of digital precarity and competitive compliance, it could
usefully coalesce around these elements: it would be anti-individual,
anti-positive thinking, anti-aspiration, anti-employability. Such a position would
also shun self-promotion and maintain a sceptical distance from online hype and
revolutionary posturing. This attitude would primarily circulate in places and
conversations rather than in tweets and opinion columns. Rather than preaching to
the converted, it would directly (or obliquely) confront its targets - the
bosses, team leaders and entrepreneurs, the executive guardians who deny
responsibility for the misery they inflict - and seek tactical alliances not
with verified career lefties but with fellow inmates sentenced to debt in warehouses
and call centres, hotels and restaurants, agencies and job centres. Such
communication would be concerned not so much with activism as inactivism, actively not doing; refusing, rejecting, withholding,
demurring, declining, ignoring. We would prefer not to.
Of course the individual yoked to the mechanisms of
i-capital cannot afford to refuse work and the performative labour involved in
getting and keeping it, so unless one is in a position of privilege one cannot
make oneself literally unemployable, much as one might fantasise about doing
so. Rather it is the latent negative energy behind the job interview smiles and
the upbeat social media profiles, the shared ecstatic destructive desire to
sweep away this vile charade, which is unemployable and irrecuperable, and
which, if unrepressed, could overflow into those everyday spaces and
interactions of discipline and control*, irritating/irrigating and gradually
eroding them, cultivating conflict and channelling dissent through instances of
micro-resistance and, to borrow a term of Foucault's, counter-conduct.
Obviously anti-aspiration here does not mean the inane
Hollywood slacker stereotype (this would be to perpetuate the post-political entrepreneurial
subject position by way of its supposed opposite, in fact its apathetic twin).
Anti-aspiration means intense desire, concentrated and collective (in)action which
transcends those imposed models of self-help and happification and rejects the
bombardments of inspirational gurus, lifestyle pedlars and lying politicians.
*I also agree with NP’s point here on societies of
discipline and control existing concurrently or within each other, rather than,
as is sometimes said, the latter being the sequel to the former. I have in the
past noticed this dual effect in the mutually supportive hard and soft
discourses of employability, the quasi-police stateof welfare ‘conditionality’, sanctions and
workfare, and the language of CV-building, corporate networking and
self-presentation which has become a supposedly essential field of scholarly
knowledge in university curricula.