What would Marx have thought of Dubstep?

My gut reaction is that Karl wouldn’t be a fanatical follower of Skrillex, and neither can I picture him “skanking” out on a club night at Cable. Yet even if he wouldn’t have found the heavy bass palatable to his 19th century ears, Marx and the later Gramsci can offer much in explaining the phenomenon that is Dubstep. They can help explain why now in the midst of one of the worst recessions in world history the revolutionary and confrontational genre has emerged. They can explain why it became the soundtrack to the student protests last year with Students being labeled the “The Dubstep Generation” by BBC journalist Paul Mason. Similarly, they can take steps to explaining the Counter-Cultural side to Dubstep that has given it status as the 21st century’s Punk.

Marx claimed that all culture emanates from the material basis of society. In other words, you cannot separate culture (such as music) from the society from which it is produced. In Marx’s eyes, not only culture but institutions (such as parliament) make up a form of “super-structure” located above, but created by, the society below. Culture and society are therefore inextricably linked in a form of symbiotic relationship, and so when it comes to a point where the society changes then, inevitably, so will culture.  Marxist analysis of Dubstep is consequently not about claiming that artists like Skream, Benga, Flux Pavilion and Kode 9 are all potential Socialist revolutionaries, or indeed that the artists intended their music to have any socio-political meaning. What matters when we look at Dubstep is not necessarily who makes the music or where it originates from, but what the music represents; to me that means disaffected youth not only fed up with the sterile scene of popular music but also filled with a form of nihilist anger at their surroundings which subconsciously they let out through their music.

Working on from Marx was Gramsci. He claimed that culture itself is the main determinant in the cohesiveness of modern society which he said works through a phenomenon he called “cultural hegemony”. By culture, Gramsci meant everything in the ideological sphere, whether that was “common sense” values, art, the media or music. This culture is dominated by a “ruling class” of people, whether they be the media elite who work for the major media organisations, the politicians we see on the news, or the record company big shots who set the tone of our music. They are all able in their separate ways able to influence our culture, most of the time re-enforcing stereotypes and discouraging deeper self criticism of society even without intending to do so explicitly.

Gramsci said that in all societies there is the mainstream culture. In musical terms we can call it “Pop” or “Top 40”, of which artists such as Elvis, Cliff Richard and Lady Gaga are or were all part. Yet behind this is what he called “Counter-Culture” which resembles cultural movements which move against the tide of popular culture, often reinventing whole genres or ways of thinking. If we look at the history of Counter-Cultural music then we can see that Dubstep is not unique. Bob Dylan, Tracy Chapman and The Specials were all part of countercultural movements which represented part of the zeitgeist of the time, all taking on such wide-ranging issues as the civil rights struggle, youth unemployment and apartheid. Similarly Punk in the late 1970’s and 1980’s went against everything that was sacred in the musical and societal orthodoxies at the time (note the lyrics of God Save the Queen by the Sex Pistols). Just as Punk was reacting against the sterile music scene and volatile political climate of the 1970‘s, so Dubstep seems to be a response to similar circumstances. In fact, Dubstep seems to be an antidote to bands like Coldplay-the New Labour of contemporary music. Their heavily ambiguous lyrics, easy on the ears sound, and, indeed, their entire chronology pay striking resemblance to one another.

Dubstep, in my eyes, can join the Counter-Cultural genre without shame. Some may say it is merely a post-ideological substitute for more the obvious Counter-Culture of previous decades, or simply a music for dark clubs and people who take illicit substances. Personally I think there is more to Dubstep than meets the eye, and although the genre is not going to create the spontaneous revolution Marx envisaged, it is through his analysis of society and culture that we can appreciate not only Dubstep but all types of music to its fullest.

(Published in the Oxford Student, 29th October 2011)