Making New Zealand's Pop Renaissance

State, Markets, Musicians

Michael Scott

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317102304
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Mezzi di comunicazione e arti performative
• Subtopic: Musica rock

Since the early 2000s New Zealand has undergone a pop renaissance. Domestic artists' sales, airplay and concert attendance have all grown dramatically while new avenues for 'kiwi' pop exports emerged. Concurrent with these trends was a new collective sentiment that embraced and celebrated domestic musicians. In Making New Zealand's Pop Renaissance, Michael Scott argues that this revival arose from state policies and shows how the state built market opportunities for popular musicians through public-private partnerships and organizational affinity with existing music industry institutions. New Zealand offers an instructive case for the ways in which 'after neo-liberal' states steer and co-ordinate popular culture into market exchange by incentivizing cultural production. Scott highlights how these music policies were intended to address various economic and social problems. Arriving with the creative industries' discourse and policy making, politicians claimed these expanded popular music supports would facilitate sustainable employment and a sense of national identity. Yet popular music as economic and social policy presents a paradox: the music industry generates commercial failure and thus requires a large unattached pool of potential talent. Considering this feature, Scott analyses how state programs induced an informal economy of proto-pop production aimed at accessing competitive state funding while simultaneously encouraging musicians to adopt entrepreneurial subjectivities. In doing so he argues New Zealand's music policies are a form of social policy that unintentionally deploy hierarchical structures to foster social inclusion amongst growing numbers of creative workers.

Chapter 1
New Zealand’s Pop Renaissance

Since the mid-1990s governments have sought to develop policies to enhance the contribution the arts and culture make to national economies. Nations from the UK to Australia, Sweden to Singapore and Canada to Japan were swept along in this creative industries policy turn. New Zealand’s fifth Labour government (1999–2008) likewise followed the trend. Upon election Labour quickly signalled there would be renewed state engagement with the arts and culture. Also initiated in New Zealand’s political shift to the centre-left was a new paradigm in state–economy relations. As Prime Minister Helen Clark (2002) later declared, the proceeding 16-year period of political economic governance – what she labelled neo-liberalism – was over. Legitimated by the strategic rationales of economic development and the promotion of national identity, Labour instigated an innovative range of policies and programmes to grow New Zealand’s arts and cultural sector; no longer was their fate to be left to market forces. The effects were startling. Unprecedented public funding combined with tax breaks, state institutional innovation and entrepreneurial vigour produced widely celebrated results: films such as Lord of the Rings (2001, 2002, 2003) and Whale Rider (2002); the emergence of domestic haute couture under the vanguard of Karen Walker; venerated television shows such as Outrageous Fortune (2005–09); and music industry success exemplified by the Grammy-winning rock group Stereogram. Simultaneously, frequent media observations of artistic achievement on world and domestic stages gave ‘ideological uplift’ to the government, further legitimating its expanded support for the creative sector (Yudice 2003: 10). Commenting on this nascent cultural explosion, then cabinet minister David Cunliffe declared New Zealand was ‘fizzing and buzzing’ to the groove of an ‘arts and cultural revival’ (New Zealand Herald 2005a).

Popular music was at the forefront of this revival. In 2000 Helen Clark (2000a) claimed ‘we want young New Zealanders to be able to hear more of their country in their music and for us all to experience the cultural and economic advantages that brings’. Duly, with new forms of state assistance, Kiwi pop emerged from the cultural and economic shadows cast by imported artists. By 2005 music made by New Zealand nationals accounted for a record 20.8 per cent of music played on domestic commercial radio with these airplay figures continuing into 2012. Although this was only a 2.2 per cent rise from 2004 it was nevertheless a dramatic 18.2 per cent increase from the 1995 domestic airplay figures of 2.6 per cent (Maharey 2005). One notable result of this increased broadcasting was domestic artists’ royalty payments from airplay rose from $NZ7 million in 2000 to $NZ16.5 million in 2005 (Smith 2005). Sales boomed too. In the face of withering global demand for compact discs the sales of domestic artists almost doubled from 5.8 per cent in 2000 to 11.5 per cent in 2005 (Shuker 2007: 27), going on to capture 20 per cent of the domestic market in 2010 (New Zealand Music Commission 2010a). These figures also reflect the growth in the number of New Zealand based ‘star’ acts. For example, in 2007 more than two dozen artists sold over 60,000 albums each with growing numbers reaching platinum (15,000 units) and gold (7,500 units) status (Shuker 2007: 21). In addition to this domestic success the state was involved in assisting the export of artists such as Scribe, The Datsuns, Fat Freddy’s Drop, The Black Seeds and Bic Runga: artists who together have shifted hundreds of thousands of units in overseas markets. Now over the summer months Kiwi musicians fill New Zealand’s burgeoning festival circuit with many fitting these performances into their international touring schedule. Admittedly, New Zealand is rather small. With a population of 4.4 million it has been estimated to contribute just 0.3 per cent to the global music market (New Zealand Music Industry Development Group 2004: 28). Nevertheless in a small place like New Zealand any such achievement against international odds can seem larger than life; to many, the hype was being realized. New Zealand was undergoing a pop renaissance.

Such commercial and cultural success is in stark contrast to the fortunes of domestic popular music during the 1980s and 1990s. This is not to claim there is no history of Kiwi pop on the domestic or international hit parade, but despite sporadic success stories the domestic trend was one where imported artists dominated (Shuker 2007: 20). Nor is it to elide the vibrant underground music scenes prior to Labour coming to power, such as the feted alternative rock of the Flying Nun label or the then nascent hip-hop emerging from New Zealand’s Maori and Polynesian communities. Nor is it to suggest there was no state support for popular music prior to Labour, although these supports can now be seen as piecemeal in comparison to recent policy innovations. Matt Heath of domestic rock band Deja Voodoo prosaically summarizes the dramatic cultural shift under Labour:

When I was at high school ‘New Zealand music’ was like a bad word, it was a like an insult for something. If it was New Zealand music it was like – no, sounds terrible. Whereas now people are almost religious about it – ‘I’m going to support that because it’s New Zealand music and I’m going to make an effort to like it’. (TV3 2008)

As airplay, sales and export opportunities increased so too did the numbers of people seeking a career in the music industry. During Labour’s tenure, popular music-making and its associated industries came to be seen by both state policy-makers and young people as valid domains of employment and endeavour. Consider the comments of a manager at Independent Music New Zealand, an organization representing domestic independent labels and distributors:

I get people ringing up all the time saying: ‘I’m thinking about starting up a label what do I have to do?’ It is every week or every couple of weeks someone is coming along and saying ‘I’m starting up a record label’ and it’s like … my god, another one! (Interview 5)¹

While a state administrator involved in the development of the domestic music industry observes:

People are starting to see music as a pathway to employment at an earlier age and they are starting to think about it as more than a hobby. The kids are gravitating to it a bit earlier and whether it’s as musicians or as other roles they are seeing it as a viable industry to move it into. (Interview 11)

This combination of new state music industry supports and the growth in young people seeking to form music industry careers is best summarized by popular music researcher Roy Shuker (2007: 27) who asserted that New Zealand’s:

Music industry and those working in it are in a very different economic and cultural space from twenty years ago. In a stronger and viable music scene than existed two decades earlier, local talent can be encouraged and musicians can make a living from their music. It is the interaction and synergy of various contextual players, policies and influences that have enabled local music to flourish.

How then should we think about these contextual players, policies and influences? Clearly, like New Zealand’s other celebrated creative industries such as film and fashion, the contemporary popular music scene has not appeared through the automatic workings of the capitalist free market or solely through a ferment of populist sentiment. Hence the core questions for this book are why and how the fifth Labour government constituted the pop renaissance.

There has been growing academic and policy interest in the role of the state in promoting cultural production (Frith and Cloonan 2008, Hesmondhalgh and Pratt 2005, Miller and Yudice 2002). This literature observes how policy-makers and governments have re-imagined the arts and cultural sector as the creative industries: a ‘political re-branding’ of the cultural industries of music, film, fashion, design, new media, visual art, drama and their contemporary cross-fertilizations (Gill and Pratt 2008: 2). These creative industries have been widely claimed to possess untapped potential in addressing persistent state concerns: sustaining economic growth, creating employment opportunities and fostering national identity in the wake of the ideological and material forces of globalization (Kong 2000: 387, Yudice 2003).

The case of New Zealand’s pop renaissance speaks to and augments this creative industries research by addressing why and how the state, in a small semi-peripheral nation, came to support the production and dissemination of domestic popular music – a question that is also a core concern for popular music researchers (Bennett 1993, Berland 1991, Breen 1999, Cloonan 1999, 2007, D’Arcy and Brindley 2002, Eling 1999, Makela 2008, McLeay 2006, Power and Scott 2004, Rutten 1991, Strachan and Leonard 2004, Wallis and Malm 1984, Wright 1991, Young 2004). Following in this research strand, this book explores a range of pertinent problems raised by leading popular music researchers Frith and Cloonan (2008). They ask how the ‘different ways state power is organised and understood’ sees music policies become ‘determined by quite different ideologies of what we might call governance’ (Frith and Cloonan 2008: 189, emphasis in original). As a leading nation of neo-liberal state and economic reform between 1984 and 1999, New Zealand provides a unique case through which to investigate how the legacies of neo-liberal ‘market governance’ have come to influence the state constitution of the pop renaissance (Larner 2000: 5). Importantly, the development of New Zealand’s ‘viable’ music industry occurred for the most part without direct intervention (through legislation or other forms of cultural protectionism) in the ideological sanctity of the market economy.

Considering Frith and Cloonan’s (2008) stress on the ideologies of governance, this book argues that Labour’s popular music policies illustrate an emerging state orientation: ‘after neo-liberalism’ (Larner and Craig 2005, Lewis, Larner and Le Heron 2008). By way of introduction ‘after neo-liberalism’ is a conceptual framework to understand state responses to the social and economic outcomes of neo-liberal reform. Here ‘after neo-liberal’ policies can be observed to be responding to the multiple social dislocations of the ostensibly laissez faire market economy and its small state in two broad ways. First, the ‘after neo-liberal’ state illustrates a shift from the putative role as ‘night watchman’ to become an ‘enabling state’ in order to create ‘opportunity’ for agents in the market economy (Giddens 1998). It does so by acting as a partner, facilitator and partial funder of economic activity, including cultural production (Bevir 2005, Hodgson 2004). Second, there is a policy focus on those who were in some ways marginalized by neo-liberal reforms and now appear as ‘problematic persons … such as young people’ (Rose 2000: 164). The ‘after neo-liberal’ state does this in the first instance by facilitating the social inclusion of these agents, which primarily means inclusion in the labour market and by also fostering problematic persons’ sense of self-identity, notably through engagement with cultural activities (Belfiore 2002, Daykin et al. 2008, Levitas 1996, Rose 2000). As the following illustrates, Labour’s popular music engagements are exemplars of ‘after neo-liberal’ policies and as such offer new ways of understanding the operation of creative industry policy and its subsequent social outcomes.

One significant consequence of this enabling ‘after neo-liberal’ state is that it problematizes what appears to be a durable narrative in the popular music literature. That is, the binary between ‘government intervention in the market place versus the operation of the free market’ (Kong 2000: 289, see also Cloonan 1999: 200, Shuker 2005: 288). Or as Breen (2008: 206) states with pathos: ‘inevitably, popular music policymaking will struggle with the challenge to create policies that intervene in the increasingly taken for granted world of the market’. However, New Zealand’s pop renaissance is a case where – rather than seeking to ‘defy the market’ – the state has aligned its supports to existing market institutions and practices and thus became another player in the music industry (Cloonan 1999: 204). As we will see in subsequent chapters, Labour oversaw the state constitution of an ‘institutional ecology’ – an assemblage of subsidies, informal broadcast quotas, state-sponsored and coordinated social networks, formal and informal education programmes, and promotional activities that, in conjunction with shifting cultural norms around the value of domestic culture, founded the pop renaissance (Nee 2005: 66). By considering this ‘institutional ecology’ the following analysis illuminates the highly inventive ways a state conducts ‘intervention without intervention’ to facilitate musicians, and other creative workers, into market exchange. For these reasons New Zealand’s pop renaissance seems to be a case contradicting Volkering’s (2001: 446) suggestion that ‘it is more difficult to point to evidence of effective implementation of [cultural] policies’.

In addition to the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of state music supports this book offers an analysis of these policies social effects. It does so by asking what are the consequences when Labour’s music policies flow outwards to influence the practices of youthful musicians, managers and independent label owners. Therefore the following also addresses what Frith and Cloonan (2008: 190) call ‘the otherwise neglected question. Who is music policy for?’ It could be readily argued music policy articulates ‘banal nationalism’ (Billing 1995; Zuberi 2007) or the prestige and economic interests of music industry elites; both of which were notable elements infusing the pop renaissance. Frith and Cloonan’s question, however, directs attention more closely to how music policies are always a melding of the state’s economic and social aims as ‘cultural policies are social policies by other means’ (Oakley 2006: 256). Thus, Labour’s music policy can be reconsidered as a form of social policy intended to deal with, in part, state concerns ‘after neo-liberalism’: youth employment and social inclusion in a small, isolated, relatively low-wage and commodity-dependent nation.

Due to the focus on the relations between state institutional arrangements and New Zealand’s aspiring music industry actors this book is more closely situated within the ambit of political-economic sociology than the cultural sociology of ‘New Zealand’s popular music’. For this reason there are many aspects that are necessarily touched upon but regrettably beyond the scope of analysis. These include how individuals and groups use music to create nationalistic distinctions, construct meaning through sub-cultural identities and the cultural hybridization/glocalization of popular music genres in the antipodes (Robertson 1997). In discussing the formation of Labour’s music policies there is little room for detailed investigation of the global policy networks bringing the creative industries paradigm to New Zealand (for this see Prince 2010) or the shadowy political patronages and inter-ministry debates that established state music supports. Yet, as the concern here is on the interstices of state music policy, the practices and subjectivities of popular music-makers, and societal conditions ‘after neo-liberalism’, this relative neglect of cultural dimensions will hopefully be forgiven or offer impetus for new avenues of research.

As a final point, how can popular music be defined? Influential popular music researcher Simon Frith (2007: 168) suggests, ‘pop music is a slippery concept, perhaps because it is so familiar, so easily used’. The core feature of popular music, regardless of stylistic or genre variations, is that it is ‘music produced commercially, for profit, as a matter of enterprise not art’ (Frith 2007: 168). Nevertheless, although most popular music has commercial intent only a small percentage of artists make noticeable economic returns (Jones 2003). ‘Popular music’ is also a contested term, with some researchers arguing for the dropping of the ‘popular’ adjective (International Advisory Editors 2005). Considering these conceptual issues, popular music can be defined as any genre of music produced and intended for sale in the market no matter how meagre the economic return. The phrase popular music also seeks to capture the diversity of stylistic forms: the range of electronic dance music; R’n’B, reggae, rap and hip-hop; heavy rock and heavy metal in all its varieties; ‘mainstream’ commercial pop music driven primarily by a solo artist and their image; superstar acts; ‘indie’ or alternative rock; ‘world music’; and new forms influenced by roots and folk traditions. For stylistic variety pop, pop music and popular music are used interchangeably throughout.

Organization of this Book

What follows develops over two broad sections. The first (Chapters 2 to 4) addresses conceptualizations of state and market economy relations, the rise of the creative industries in policy-making, and the development and application of New Zealand’s music policies and programmes under Labour. The emphasis here is on explaining the rationales behind music policy and how these worked with existing industry practices. The second (Chapters 5 to 7) analyses the macro–micro social dynamics of the pop renaissance. In these later chapters, influential French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu is utilized to analyse the informal economy of music production prompted by state supports and how state music programmes can also be considered a form of social policy.

More specifically, Chapter 2 explicates relevant theories of the state to set the context for understanding how popular music policy sits within the modus operandi of government. Because there is no such thing as ‘the state’ acting in a unified, omnipresent or coherent way, this chapter develops a conceptual and relational understanding of the state and popular music. The main objective is to enhance Cloonan’s (1999) popular music-specific ‘promotional state’ (a state that actively seeks to boost the cultural and economic significance of domestic sounds) by bringing this typology into dialogue with some significant state-theoretical literatures: pluralism, institutionalism, neo-Marxism, feminism and post-structuralism. In addition, particular attention is paid to New Zealand’s historical state-institutional shift from neo-liberalism to ‘after neo-liberalism’ and how this reformulation of state functions created new opportunities for popular musicians to engage in market exchange through supply-side, new institutional and social inclusion policy modalities. By synthesizing these strands the conceptual framework of the ‘after neo-liberal promotional state’ is proposed as way of understanding Labour’s motives for engaging the popular music industry.

Chapter 3 describes the historical trajectories of New Zealand’s arts and cultural policy, and popular music’s place within these. Also reviewed is the rise of the creative industries discourse and its influence upon policy-making in New Zealand in the 2000s. Through this appraisal it is noted how popular musicians became re-framed from ‘amateurs’ to actors with global economic capacities, and how policy-makers drew on existing music industry expertise to develop new music supports. Moreover, attention is drawn to how Labour’s popular music policies were brought into alignment with the core state objectives of youth employment, the development of entrepreneurial subjects and micro-enterprises with export potential.

With these theoretical and historical elements in mind Chapter 4 examines the ‘after neo-liberal promotional state’ in action. Central here is the application of new institutional and supply-side policy to the problem of how the state can build a domestic music industry without intervening, in a heavy-handed way, in existing market structures. Therefore, this chapter investigates the substantive work of the state agencies producing the pop renaissance: New Zealand on Air (NZOA), the New Zealand Music Commission (NZMC) and to a lesser extent Creative New Zealand (CNZ). NZOA was, and remains, integral to the pop renaissance. It has evolved from a minor funding role to, under Labour, a central agency ‘joining-up’ musicians with commercial radio. It does so through the combination of a voluntary radio quota and expanded recordings subsidies, promotional video funding and brokering services. Formed in 2000, the NZMC’s mandate is to grow the music industry within New Zealand and overseas. To this end, the NZMC emerged as a key agency in the annual New Zealand Music Month promotion event and developed public–private funding programmes to assist the export of local artists. Of particular interest are the ways both NZOA and the NZMC deployed social networks and relations of trust with music industry cultural intermediaries. This explanation illustrates how state policies came to be performed ‘on the ground’ and how state-funding arrangements served to incentivize musicians and independent labels. In conclusion, it is argued that these state agencies came to act like a cultural intermediary by regulating, through consultation with music industry gatekeepers, which artists were able to access vital state fundin...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Tables
• General Editor’s Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1 New Zealand’s Pop Renaissance
• 2 The ‘After Neo-liberal Promotional State’
• 3 The Development of Popular Music Policy
• 4 The State and Popular Music Markets
• 5 Musicians and the State
• 6 Popular Music as Social Policy
• 7 Conclusion: Governing through Popular Culture?
• Appendix
• Select Bibliography
• Index