The 27 Club

Self-destructive patterns in creative work seen as the neoliberal path to salvation

In 2011 Amy Winehouse followed in the footsteps of a group of musicians whose tragic premature death made the age of 27 a mythical age. In line with rock 'n roll stars Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, and 90’s grunge founder Kurt Cobain, Winehouse her death was caused by alcohol and drug abuse. Besides the ill fate of an overdose, what does Winehouse have in common with the members of the 27 club considering their creative process and emotional investment in their artistic work? If investment in work leads to addiction, what are the limits of "self-exploitation"? Was dying young and tragic a mere coincidence, or does it relate to the general experience of creative labour in our day and age? And how do the tensions between creativity and commerce pushed these musicians to high levels of stress, misery and anxiety?

In this blogpost, we will analyse the creative process relating to the anxieties that come with being a musician and the damage it can inflict on the artist. The main argument is that Amy Winehouse dramatic lifestory is a recurring narrative in the music industry today, as is indicated by the 27 club. We will argue that the public struggle is part of the artist’s reaction to market pressures on creative work. Researcher Vicki Mayer, in the Introduction to the book Making Media Production Visible, refers to ethnomusicologist Timothy D.Taylor who connects this growing pressures and lack of autonomy of artists. The way musicians like Hendrix, Morrison, Joplin, Cobain and Winehouse experience the creative process seems emblematic for creative workers in general, especially in the way they deal with commercial aims overruling at times their artistic autonomy. Struggle is seen as part of a performance of the dichotomy between commerce and creativity. In the case of the 27 club, these are performance gone awry.

Amy Winehouse her musical background was linked to the underground scene, she was not unfamiliar with the (ab)use of drugs and alcohol. However, when she became part of the mainstream music industry, she was obliged to deal with huge audiences, fans, journalists, interviews, talk shows, photo sessions etcetera. The recurring intoxication at public appearances and the lyrical references to her substance abuse problems in songs like ‘Rehab’, make it seem that addiction was part of the promotional image she wanted to convey as a musician. At a certain point this new reality blocked her capacity to create, when eventually her addiction worsened resulting in her death. As we will see, these facts relate to a sustained myth of the suffering artist. This myth is not only part of the culture of production but also has a clear function in the modern economy as a whole.

          

A CNN Espanol journalist approached Amy Winehouse, who was just 23 at the time, when she released her first album Frank in June 2007. The reporter started the conversation with an awkward joke referring to Winehouse’ drug (ab)use, when he said he felt that ‘something was missing’ when he listened the album and heard the phrase “so I took a bottle of red wine…” The Media’s interest in Winehouse’s personal life is driven by a society who is increasingly interested to hear personal details about celebrities. Today’s society seems continuously affected by voyeurism and is characterized by the pleasure in watching behaviours that invite for the disapproval of the audience, but at the same time are joined by the enjoyment thereof as entertaining performances of extreme excess.

While celebrity culture takes a toll on artists, the depiction of relatable elements from their personal life is important and indispensable for artists to present themselves to the audience.The interviewer interpreted Winehouse her behaviour: “and it's simply like [...] she wishes to say: 'I'm a human being, just a singer'.” Winehouse confirmed: “Just a singer!” Therefore, fame and the public portrayal of personal life, is an offer artists seemingly have to make in order to pursue a successful career as a creative performer. If an artist does not engage with celebrity culture, there is the danger of invisibility or falling into oblivion. Winehouse explicated her worries about the audience being unaware of her products. Winehouse: “My greatest fear is dying with no one knowing of any contribution I have ever made to creative music […] If I die tomorrow [...] you know I would still feel fulfilled in a way [...]”.

So the image of Winehouse as a publicly struggling and tortured artist, was actively pursued by the media. But still, it was not resisted by Winehouse herself. When the reporter asked how she felt about the music business at the time and how she places herself within this business; Winehouse keeps to her short, laconic answers. Winehouse’s celebrity status was for a large part based on her ‘rock-and-roll’ lifestyle of drugs and alcohol. Winehouse therefore did not resist the image the media gave her, giving answers like: I don't know... Again I don't know” and “It's nice. It's nice”. The editing and montage of the interview further framed Winehouse as unprofessional and passive. Because of the absence of long answers, the interview is edited with lots of video clips of Winehouse. The footage of the interview is edited with film fragments which constantly interrupt the interview. This makes it look as though Winehouse is unprofessional on a personal level, while at the same time it symbolized her profession as an successful artist.

    Besides Winehouse and the media, the music industry’s agents like executives, managers, producers, have a clear gain of Winehouse self-exploitation. As a fan commented on the youtube post: "She wasn't drugged! She was drunk for days and her managers kidnapped her and made her perform against her will." Although this is a rather dark depiction of inner workings media industries, it is true that by celebrating singular artists as 'stars', the industry tries to ensure investment return. If there is one thing the 27 club proves, it is that celebrity drama greatly influences album sales. Here we are presented with the tensions between creativity and commerce, and the thigh hold commercial enterprise has over creative activity.

Back in the 70s, Jimi Hendrix, guest in a British talk-show, describes his work as a process of trial and error.

“Hendrix: I like to play for myself. [...] Whenever I feel like down or depressed or whatever, you know. [...] I am just gonna play. [...] I can practise and it's always constantly like a jam [...] I'm constantly trying  to create other things, that's why a make a lot of mistakes.

Anchor: You read music?

Hendrix: No, not at all.

Anchor: Ah... (pause).”

Jimi Hendrix’ performance of his music has strong personal meanings, for instance when he jams when he feels depressed. One of the distinctive characteristics of creative work, is the level of personal involvement workers feel for their job. Moreover, in music there is a strong connection between feelings of personal identity and the creative production. Artists like Hendrix, Morrison, Joplin, Cobain and Winehouse do not only put in the hours, but they also pour their heart and soul into their work. The identification and emotional investment of the creative worker with his labour is an essential part of the figure of the artist. The artist doesn’t work, he ‘creates’ something that is deeply personal and part of a personal and progressive development. This falls in line with David Hesmondhalgh, Professor of Media, Music and Culture. In the book Labor and the Media Industry he emphasizes that "self-exploitation" results in "long working hours, high levels of stress and anxiety" and "where people invest themselves emotionally and physically in their work to a damaging degree". These elements make up for what we call the myth of the suffering artist; a story that ends with the artist sacrificing his life for the job.

It would be plausible to state that the profession of being a successful musician in the commercial music industry is restraining. These artists have chosen to face this high level of anxiety and stress with the help of drugs and alcohol (or both). For Hendrix, Morrison, Cobain and Winehouse the damage of their creative labour was irreversible.The public drama of these artists, of dying young because of addiction, is a result of their personal relationship to work and their artistic self-presentation. Because of the recurring appearance of these dramatic stories, it could be implied that these artists are performing certain societal schemas. In this performance the suffering creative genius is opposed with the oppressive commercial industry. In order to be taken serious as a creative authority and a legitimate artist, artist have to perform according to these schemas which are part of the myth of the suffering artist.

The myth of the artist is highly compliant with the modern economic system. As Max Weber stated, in capitalism work was revalued according to the Calvinist ethic as the path to salvation. In the modern economy human creativity and individual enterprise are increasingly seen as a source for growth, and (neoliberal) society is organized according to these concepts. The artist’s lives can therefore be seen as examples of the internationalization of neoliberal organizational goals, of autonomy, creativity and personal investment and progress. Expert in Management Studies Gideon Kunda stated: “The result of a combination of self-direction, initiative, and emotional attachment, and ultimately combines the organizational interest in productivity with the employee's personal interest in growth and maturity” (Kunda 1992, 10). The figure of the suffering artist is central to today’s society, and functions as a legitimation of capitalism and an example for labour in sectors elsewhere. The tragic stories are therefore not exceptions, but there’s a strong relationship to present day ideology: a view of labour with personal investment, even if it’s to a damaging degree.

During Winehouse her last performance she was booed by the audience several times. Winehouse laughs, this was alternated with some moments it seems as though she starts the cry and eventually she scoffs the audience. How far are cultural producers willing to take advantage of this “self-exploitation” and its grim consequences for commerce’s sake? In spite of the apparent privileges of cultural and media workers, we should not neglect some of the difficulties they face. Winehouse artistry is part of an all-too-familiar narrative of the self-harming and unstable artist. It’s an image that manifested itself in the tragic stories of the members of the 27 club. As we’ve seen, this image was actively pursued by the artist, the industry and the media. The celebration of these’ individuals creative genius relates to the concept of ‘work’ in neoliberal society. The narrative of the artist’s drama is central to capitalism, and functions as a legitimation of the hidden costs of flexible capitalism or liquid modernity. An uncertain society places the emphasis on creativity and individual enterprise and identification attachment to labour. The stories or the members of the 27 Club are not idiosyncratic, but are the result of the contemporary path to salvation through creative work.  

Initials: 

A.D.

E.T. 

J.M.D.O.M.

M.v.d.V

M.v.R

Twitter: Death by work-induced complications. The members of the 27 club must’ve gone to heaven, because they hiked along today’s path to salvation. #neoliberalism

Bibliography:

- Hesmondhalgh, D. and Baker, S., 'Toward a Political Economy of Labor in the Media Industries', Wasko, Janet and Gragham Murdock & Helena Sousa (eds.), The Handbook of Political Economy of Communications. Blackwell Publishing, pp. 381-400.

- Mayer, V. Making Media Production Visible, p.9, in: Vicki Mayer (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies, Volume II: Media Production. Blackwell Publishing, 2013.

Through London Eyes 
Multiple perspectives on a city in time and space

As a tourist walking through London you’re likely to visit popular places like The Big Ben, London Eye and Westminster Abbey. These places represent London in its glorious past, but what if you don’t want to go to these tourist hotspots and you want to see London from a different angle? When you, for example, want to discover London from Sherlock Holmes’s point of view or you want to see where your favourite movie was shot. Nowadays you don’t have to pay lots of money to be professionally guided through the city; you could simply download an app for that. How technology can intervene in a person experience and how he/she will interpret the urban environment will be the main subject of this blogpost. To answer this question two apps will be analysed, namely Movie Map London (IOS) and Magic in Modern London (IOS).

        Before we can dive into the world of apps and urban tourism we have to introduce the concepts used in this blogpost. Let us start with the notion of ‘lieux de mémoire’ (places of memory), a concept introduced by French historian Pierre Nora in the mid-1980’s.[1] Nora stated that certain places are bound up with a society’s culture of memorialization. These places include physical places like monuments or memorials, but could also be metaphorical places like a song or a celebration. According to Nora, modern Western society has a obsession with the past because of the growing need for individuals and groups to historically root their shared identity. Nora challenged the Durkheimian notion of collective memory as a ‘living’ organic system, because the concept of ‘LDM’ show how social institutions consciously and subconsciously influence the way a society recollects its past and gives form to this recollection. Through these locations and objects we ‘see’ the past, connect with it and give meaning to it. The connection to cultural memory provides a way of understanding the city; to cultivate and direct the ‘gaze’ of the city visitors. It is for this reason when we are in London, we collectively behold the Big Ben or London Bridge. When visiting these monuments, a tourist enters a much larger network of ascribed meaning that’s superimposed on the city map.

        The London Tourist Office and other tourist institutions in London like museums want a ‘new generation’ of visitors to experience London as a cultural and historical city. Moreover they want them to personally relate to the cityscape. One of the ways of achieving this is by using modern technology. An example of this is the app Magic in Modern London. This interactive app makes it possible to experience London in the Edwardian Time, by taking the user back to 1908. With the app the user embarks on a quest through London to (digitally) find several amulets which originally belonged to amateur Folklorist Edward Lovett. Every time you have found an amulet, a story will unfold. These stories could be an old wives tale or information about a superstition from that period. Thereby the located amulet provides you with historical knowledge about the location you’re standing, which could for example have been an old hospital. Once you are at there, you will gather information about tuberculosis and how people thought that an amulet would protect them against this disease. Since modern London has gone through major changes, chances are that some historical spots are now modern buildings, like a police office or a shop. The makers have found ways around this by using augmented reality technology and a 20th century map [2] So when you look around, you see modern London with elements of the past, but on your screen you see London from more than 100 years ago. The app symbolically connects the ‘real’ world of modern London, of office buildings and clothing shops, to the collective memory it must denote. Therefore the app is part of the museumization of London, in which ordinary objects and buildings are taken out of their everyday context, in order to receive new institutionalized meaning. Although the app adds a historical layer to the experience of the ‘real’ environment, and could therefore be related to Nora’s concept of Lieux des Memoires, there is also a clear difference. The app also refers to an ‘imagined’ world, because a lot of the folk tales are fictional and haven’t truly occurred.

        This problem between imaginative memory and the past in combination with the Lieux des Memoires concept is also noted by Dutch historian Stijn Reijnders. In his article ‘Places of imagination: an ethnography of the TV detective tour’ Reijnders introduces the new term ‘lieux d’imagination’ (places of imagination). He explains: “Lieux d’imagination’ are physical points of reference, such as objects or places, which for specific groups in the society provide the opportunity to construct and subsequently cross the symbolic boundary between an ‘imagined’ and the ‘real’ world.”[3] For example, the stories you hear in the Magic in Modern London app are mostly folklore, which our elements out an imaginative world which can be experienced in the ‘real’ world by using the app.

The App Movie Map London will be used to clarify Reijnders’ concept. This app shows over 110 film locations from more than 40 movies, like Harry Potter, James Bond Skyfall and Notting Hill. These locations exist and you are able to go there and watch what has happened there. [4] So if a scene is shot in a pub, you can enter the same pub. When you point your camera phone towards such locations, it will automatically show a scene shot on that exact location. The enhanced view of reality with the help of technology is also called augmented reality cinema. So the imaginary world of a movie becomes intertwined with reality, and ‘real’ places and objects invite a temporary transgression of the symbolic boundary between the ‘real’ and the imagined world. As a bonus feature you also get more information about the production of the movie and backstage footage.[5] Through this movie app that particular place is becoming a ´Lieux d’imagination´.

        So both the apps provide an easy and cheap way to see London from a different perspective, but as the apps form new ‘lieux d’imagination’ and ‘lieux de memoire’ it attributes locations and objects an active role.[4] Elements in the physical environment get ascribed meaning, which is being emphasized by the apps mentioned above. The LDI and LDM both structure our imagination and our collective memory, but this is the result of a complex process of appropriation where all involved parties defend their own interests. [5] Magic in Modern London shows how the app is part of a reconfiguration of collective historical memory. Movie Map London moreover shows how the app plays an important role in deciding how to imagine the city in relation to existing fictional narratives.

The providing of information on the spatial environment, makes it seem that the objective of the app is to teach audiences about the city. Thereby it would serve a public interest.[6] Although, in actuality the apps are part of a commercial effort to generate profit. Therefore both the apps have to be related to the Market model of David Croteau and William Hoynes. This model is based on the dynamics of supply and demand.[7] So in this case the modern youth demands an app which replaces the guide, by which the creators of the app supply this app. With of course a commercial goal. Not only do you have to purchase the app, you are further stimulated unconsciously to purchase other products. [8] The main target of the app is to enforce consumer behaviour of the participating tourists. For example the Magic in modern London tour is based on an amulet exhibition in a museum. They show you the amulets exhibited in the museum, only you then see them on your mobile screen. If you are not interested to visit the museum, you still have a positive connotation to the museum because they showed you a new perspective of London. The entertainment aspect of the app therefore also promotes the exhibition. Furthermore, The Movie Map London also is focused on the consumer. This app shows you film fragments, which could trigger you to become more interested in the film and later on buy it on DVD/Blue-ray. Thereby your memory of that tour is connected to both the place as to the movie. It gives you an unique feeling, such as watching a Notting Hill scene while you are in Notting Hill. The chances are that you buy that movie, so you can say to your friends: “I’ve been there” or you just watch it as a keepsake as a reminder of the memories. Still the market value of the apps have another aspect to it as well, namely these apps provide jobs. People can become an entrepreneur by creating their own app in their own city. In this way they can make money, but they can also impose their own view of the city on the people downloading and using the app.

        We can conclude that apps like Magic in Modern London and Movie Map London are able to change one’s perspective on the city. The apps mentioned above surely change the way people view London, by providing historical and imagined backgrounds to the cityscape. Thereby the apps are able to strengthen the city’s identity, for both its inhabitants as for city branding. Which could also raise new questions. For example are the discussed apps creating a simulacrum of London? Whereby your own reality will only be based on something of the imagination of other humans. [9] For example in the Magic of Modern London app. Thereby the media of apps eventually take over the experience of the real world and your personal reality. With the ultimate result that London can only be fully enjoyed with the intervening of a mobile device or even without being physically in London itself? Or will the apps always be a cheap and handy guide to view London from a different perspective and will the imaginative and reality easily be separated. That is something only the future can answer. Till now we can only conclude that London wouldn’t be the same without the apps.

Tweet: Your perspective and memories about London can be changed by using various apps. #MovieMapLondon #MagicinModernLondon

Initials: 

A.D.

E.T. 

J.M.D.O.M.

M.v.d.V

M.v.R

[1] Reijnders, S. (2010) ‘Places of the imagination: an ethnography of the TV detective tour’, in: Cultural Geographies.p.39.

[2] Welcome Collection(2015) Magic in modern london http://wellcomecollection.org/magic-modern-london

[3] Reijnders, S. (201) ‘Places of the imagination: an ethnography of the TV detective tour’, in: Cultural Geographies.p.40.

[4] Moviemapapps (2015) Movie Map London App for Iphone. http://moviemapapps.com/. (01-05-2015).

[5] Gordon, K. (2011) Augmented reality app takes you to the movies. http://www,psfk.com/2011/07/augmented-reality-cinema-app-takes-you-to-the-movies.html

[6] Reijnders, S.(2010) ‘Places of imagination: an ethnography of the TV detective tour’, in: Cultural Geographies.p.39.

[5] idem:40.

[6] Croteau, D. & Hoynes, W. (2006) ‘Media, markets and the public sphere’, in: The Business of Media: Corporate Media and the Public sphere. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press.p.23.

[7] idem:17.

[8] idem:27.

[9] The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) Simulacrum. Clarendon Press: London.