honeyisfunny wrote:I think you're confusing people suggesting that bands-that-aren't-well-known play, with people suggesting bands-that-aren't-any-good-play. And in that is the root of this whole discussion. There's a cultural arrogance in suggesting that because you haven't heard it it simply cannot be any good and that sums up much of what's been talked about so far.
No, I'm not confusing the 2.
Noise Pop here in SF used to work very hard to but together bills with lesser-known acts and bigger bands, to give the younger bands a shot at that audience. So bands like Zmerzlina, Chantigs, and Alaska got put on bills with Spoon, Mission of Burma, etc. This theory didn't work out, which is why nobody knows about these bands.
Maybe it's different over there, but this strikes me as an ineffective way to expose people to new music - you can lead a horse to water, etc etc etc.
I obviously agree that it's arrogant to assume that if someone hasn't heard something it can't be any good, but there's a pretty big gap between that assuming that people want to hear something new versus something known. They're paying for a ticket, after all. And, if it really were an obligatory thing (ATP! NOW WITH 20% BRITISH BANDS!
), it's going to end up being broccoli. And if I know the Brits, you all would be saying, "Oh, them. They only got to play this show because they're British."
Obviously a quota is way more draconian than anyone here has suggested (I think you all would be fine if one of the curators was hip to a few young British bands), but I don't know if there's a successful way to programatically address the problem.
I try to live a life as much like Kerble as possible, even though he was just a regular guy like me.