This interview was conducted via emails with Guy Fixsen of the band Laika on Too Pure Records <http://www.toopure.com>. This interview took place over the course of October, 2000.

TR- Generally what do you think about the prevalence of mp3s and the whole Napster Phenomenon?

Gus- I guess the one thing that bothers me most about it all is the misunderstanding of the concept of copyright. I think most people think it's some kind of corporate protectionism thing invented by and for big record companies, whereas in fact it's the one thing that an artist has that they can't take away. Some of my friends think that music should be free, which I'm fine with as soon as groceries and rent are free...

TR- Do you believe that the "record" is going to become obsolete in favor of structures like the subscription system that some labels are toying with, and how do you think this change in music delivery changes the way the public looks at bands.

Gus- I don't know exactly what the subscription system you're talking about is - I assume labels let you download individual tracks from their catalogue for a flat monthly fee? The only problem I have with it is that I like albums as an artform. I like how well a constructed album can really take you somewhere and has depth to it.

TR- Do you believe the labels, both major and indie, had the responsibility to see this coming and should've prepared themselves better?

Gus- It does seem that they've been pretty complacent and are now running around like chickens with their heads cut off trying to find a way to impose themselves on it. I'm sure with a bit of thought they could have come up with a system that would be fair to both artist and audience before the whole thing even became an issue.

TR- What do you think is in the future for small labels in relation to Napster?

Gus- Ideally, a way will be found for money to come directly to artists from people who want to hear their music. I'm sure some deal could be struck with Napster or whoever. That way more interesting artists will be able to make music, because people will be able to afford to buy more CDs and therefore experiment more with their record buying. If we were to earn only a couple of pounds from each sale, we would be doing better than we are now, with record companies, distributors and shops taking far larger cuts than goes to the artists.

I'm into any system that promotes creativity and the current system strangles it. I'm hopeful that when all this shakes out we will have a better music culture overall.

TR- Do you believe there will ever be any regulation, any royalty paying system for downloaded mp3s?

Gus- It seems pretty easy to envision - There could be a system much like the demo versions of software that let you 'try before you buy' and then if you want to continue listening, you pay for it by credit card or whatever.

TR- Do artists lose credibility the more music becomes easily stolen and/or easily downloaded?

Gus- I don't think so, people who are into their music know where influences come from and when people rip other bands off it gives the originators more credibility if anything.

I do think it could have the effect of devaluing the records in peoples' minds. When you get something for free, you tend to assume it's worth the price you paid and no more.

TR- Does music have a significant cultural value that is a necessary element in the survival in a culture like in the US?

Gus- A good sized part of 20th century music came from the US, in the sense that blues, rock and jazz have all been major building blocks of popular and experimental music. It certainly defines a good deal of what people call "american". Without its musical culture, that creates whole lifestyles, the US would certainly be a boring place.

TR- Do you believe in the theory that every band has to have a hit single in order to make it?

Gus- It all depends what you mean by 'make it'. If 'it' means money then sure, if you can't get that one song forced down people's throats, then it is hard to make much of a living. Then again we do OK and we've never had some big hit or anything. We make good albums and people are gradually coming to realise it and value us for it. We may never be millionaires, but we are in the privileged position of doing what we love to do and not having to have other jobs. If we end up with no income it will all become pretty tenuous.

TR- Why aren't more indie bands actively involved in political discussions?

Gus- From our point of view, we don't get asked many political questions in interviews and that's our main forum for debate. Journalists and DJs are as disinterested in politics as everyone else.

TR- Why have politics become so "uncool"? Could this be a reason why so many fans out there download mp3 files without thinking twice?

I think it's in large part down to the perceived failure of the so-called 'third way' politics of Clinton and Blair et al. Instead of mainstream politics being polarised into left and right, they have been amalgamated into a pragmatic centre that works from focus groups and ignores ideology and anything long term. It's an inevitable result of the combination of democracy and information technology. Basically, it's so easy for the majority's opinion to be heard that the politicians feel them breathing down their neck. Should be a good thing, in theory, but the sad fact is that the majority opinion is generally fucked up self-interest and what they really need are representatives who have some long term vision and who aren't afraid to fly in the face of opinion polls once in a while.

The mp3 thing is nothing new - I don't think it is related to politics - I always used to tape records and swap them with friends. The difference now is that 'friends' can number in the millions and the CD format is so plastic that people don't see it as something much better than a tape.

TR- Why does it seem the bands we look to for inspiration, the so-called revolutionary underground, have become eerily silent?

Same answer as 'why have politics become uncool'. Also it's down to music not being nearly as culturally significant as it was in the more politically active 60s, 70s and early 80s. Since pop music is no longer new and is a much smaller part of what people spend their money on, so it's influence has waned. Musicians have retreated into a safer world of background or formula music.

TR- Are indie bands even the underground anymore? And if not them, who is?

They are still underground but, as I said, music as a whole takes itself less seriously. The co-opting of indie music in the late 80s/early 90s with the fake major indie label and the rise of so-called alternative rock contributed to this. When people say 'indie' now they don't mean 'on an independent label' they mean a certain sound. This undermines the credibilty and potential audience of 'real' indie bands who cannot compete financially.

TR- Do you believe politics should be left out of music, or is music inherently political, and if it is then does the lack of political aggression within today's music scene point to a real lethargy within the youth culture? What are the long term implications of this?

Everything in life is political and that includes music. The most important politics these days are consumer politics - what you buy and consequently which global corporations you choose to support. In most people's minds these companies are outside their control - you can't vote them away, so what good are conventional politics?

I believe there is a real lethargy in youth culture right now, but I'm not convinced that it's to blame for it. The political world today is vastly more complicated since the demise of the cold war. The issues are more subtle and economics-based. It's harder to make bold political statements. Basically when people are comfortable they become less interested in politics - if times get harder things will change considerably. After all, the youth culture we had a few years ago came out of almost nowhere and it can do the same again. I'm sure in other parts of the world quite the reverse is happening.

TR- If we say that the album is going to go away, it wasn't until the Beatles and Sgt. Peppers until an album outsold the singles of a band, what would the next form be?

Singles compilations. With ads between each track because nobody will pay for them. Then people will realise how shit that is and go back to albums that you pay for.

TR- Should the indie labels be trailblazers, finding this new form? Or is the album that important? Should we be rallying around the 60-72 minute album with 3:30 minute long songs?

Indie labels should just concentrate on quality - it doesn't matter what format - good music is the only thing that will stand the test of time.

TR- Does this preference for the album come from a generational prejudice? Or is the album like "Jazz" and art form that can be developed but within specified parameters; like a sonnet?

Albums are for people who want more from their music. You can only explore so much in a 3.5 minute song. Albums are something that you can live with grow on you and define whole periods of your life. It's all a question of what you use music for and how important it is to you. In that sense it is a generational thing as music is less important to people now and so they just want quick fixes of music - that's what singles are.

If you're asking does the album have a future as an artform, then my answer is yes, of course. The format inherently has more room for experimentation and expression. It just maybe a less popular artform.

TR- Why do songs have to be around 4 minutes? Is this a natural occurrence or a product of the radio?

Album tracks can be any length people like, but singles have to be less than four minutes to get radio play 99 per cent of the time. When artists write records, the pressure is always there to write singles, as that is what sells LPs, so even album tracks tends to be in that format as a lot of the time they are singles that didn't work out.

I do think that condensing ideas into a shorter format is a good discipline and stops people making overly self-indulgent music. There just needs to be a balance and people need to be more self-critical. That's why editing is such an important and underrated part of music making.

TR- Do you believe in radio? Is radio the only truly public form of music (free and easy to access)?

I like the fact that it is 'try before you buy'. That, in theory, should promote quality. Playlists and commercial prssures are the enemy.

TR- Do you think the greater presence of booking agents, distributors, and publicity crews have made indie-rock in the mirror image of the type of musical organizations indie labels were trying to remove/distance themselves from?

In order to compete in a dwindling market, smaller labels have to get more 'business' on their side. If the market were a bigger one there would be more space for interesting music.

Don't kid yourself that indie labels are necessarily better than majors.

They all need to make money and when it's harder to, as it often is at a small label, people become less idealistic. All the _real_ exploiting nazis I have met in this business have been at small labels.

TR- Do labels become obsolete in the future? A future where a band can inexpensively afford to record two songs and post it on the Internet, and possibly eventually stream their live shows through high speed cable wires?

I hope so. Anything that removes the barriers between us as artists and our audience only make what we do more 'us'. It will mean that records can cost about one tenth of what they do now and we will still make a better living. That lower price will mean that people will be able to experiment more with their buying which will give rise to more creative music. With the outrageous price of CDs now people have to buy very safely and only what they have heard several times thrust upon them by the media.

Do booking agents become the real force in the industry since they have the power of who gets to play with the bands that draw the crowds?

Possibly. When a band is it's own label, it will need a press/radio/tv/net officer who works to raise the profile of the band above all it's competitors. That's what will get the band shows and sales. I can imagine various PR jobs including booking agents' merging.

TR- Should labels be joining forces to buy their own venues to make sure their artists get playing time?

Ultimately it's about people wanting to see the bands, not whether they have a show. So it's a commercial, profile thing.