"I’ll tell you a secret."
Worlds collapsing, video streams and "sustainable digital tools and practices for the music sector"
Hi there!
How and where are you? I’m sending this off from France, in between gigs, panels and trains.
I recently played on Kiosk in Brussels, an experience I reflect on in today’s essay. It felt naked in so many ways. I shared some of my 2023 tracks and there was something intimate in opening up that musical diary. That Ouenza track contains so much of my Moroccan trip, Minor Science’ music is so deeply precious to me and I’ve listened to that Alex Compton over the top trance track so many times that I felt like I was sharing all my silly little secrets.
I have a few more gigs until the end of the year and I look forward to spending time at home in Berlin in the next weeks. Reach out or share, if you feel like it, and don’t forget to delete this email after you’ve received it. It will also reduce its energy impact.
Take care xx
MUSIC:
Nono Gigsta @ Kiosk Radio 04.12.2023
Fictions #62 w/ Jan Loup & Nono Gigsta 09.11.2023 - At The Micro-Festival
Fictions #61 w/ Nono Gigsta 12.10.2023 - At The Afterz
ESSAY:
In Jean Hegland’s novel Into the Forest, two teenage sisters try to survive in the countryside house where they grew up. Society has collapsed for reasons made more or less clear - power outages, economic instability and pandemics - and their parents have passed away. Shop supplies have dwindled and electricity fails; no phone, no news and very rare (mostly unfortunate) interactions with other humans.
Eva and Nell both struggle in their own ways. The first finds refuge in her hobby, dancing, and she reverts to practicing to the sound of a metronome. The second reads books and tries to develop practical skills, such as foraging. There is tension between the siblings regarding the house’s last bit of remaining gas and how to use it. The elder sister thinks it should be kept in case of an “emergency”, like needing to drive into town. The younger suspects there isn’t even anyone left in town, and has other plans.
When Nell asks Eva: “Why do you keep dancing?”, she shrugs and replies: “What else am I supposed to do with all this time? (…) I’ll tell you a secret. (…) I couldn’t keep dancing if it weren’t for the gas. That’s what keeps me going. I keep dancing because I know we have that gas. And anytime I really, really had to, I know we could use it for music.”
This passage is a reminder that “simple” pleasures, like amplified music, rely on sources of energy that we’re not entirely in control of. When the power cuts out - and it regularly does for many people on the planet - that’s it. For those who, like me, grew up and live in a wealthy country, power cuts of more than a few hours - let alone forever - are hard to imagine. The prospect is terrifying. But leaving the potential horrifying consequences aside, might there also be the fantasy of regaining a certain freedom? When my friend recommended this book to me, he made the point that “when everything shuts down” - which we are both convinced will happen within our lifetime - I will no longer have to “stress about getting through all my promo and Bandcamp emails”.
Most music lovers I know have a somewhat ambiguous relationship to keeping up with the sheer volume of music that is being produced and brought to our attention by its online existence. My anxiety runs even deeper whenever I think about this mass of digital data, as well as the systems and energy required to store and circulate it.
A few years ago, I came across a podcast discussing the growth of e-commerce, the proliferation of data centers and how they result in the expansion of cement and the artificialization of land. As someone who is very sensitive to the soul of places, this cut really deep: what always felt virtual now seemed more concrete than ever. Kyle Devine, whose book Decomposed: The Political Ecology of Music appeared in 2019, notes that “the confusion between the notions of digital and immateriality is a rhetorical trap that allows us to ignore the concrete reality of the ecological and social damage in which the streaming industry is complicit, while it remains impossible to analyse its extent." (https://www.thegreenroom.fr/en/le-guide-outils-durables-pour-les-pratiques-musicales-en-ligne#audio-and-video)
A friend and I have been talking about trying to visit a data center and bear witness to “betonisation”, bruised landscapes and architectural traces of the ungraspable. Maybe I also needed something tangible to contain my bizarre obsession. Whenever I’ve tried to write about the environmental impacts of our digital lives and how music fits into it all, I stumbled on the complexity of the issue and the lack of defining research.
The Green Room made a similar observation1 in its recent report, which does a very welcome job of filling this gap and suggesting Sustainable Tools for Online Music Practices. The report starts by underlining the following paradox: “Responsible for 3 to 4% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions according to various recent studies, digital technology represents a source of environmental impact as much as a tool that is now essential to the functioning of the entire musical ecosystem and its creative value chain, but also to the promotion of music and the inclusion of audiences.” This percentage is huge and constantly growing2.
STOMP is deliberately trying to be political, looking at issues from a systemic perspective. I appreciate this angle and, in this spirit, I won’t dive into all the tiny details of the digital aspect of my practice that I have been questioning in the last years (or at least not today). But I do want to share a specific recent situation that relates to video streams.
Earlier this week, I visited Kiosk Radio in Brussels where I recorded a one-hour radio show. I appreciate the station because it is more than a content-making project: it’s a physical space in the center of Brussels and it’s accessible to all. When I played for them the first time alongside Le Motel, they agreed to blur the video stream and later no video content was uploaded. This week’s show was video streamed but I could choose whether the archive would be uploaded only on Soundcloud or also on Youtube.
On the topic of video streaming, the STOMP report is clear: “Video consumes more bandwidth than other media, but there are several techniques to limit its impact:
Limiting video resolution
Using alternatives to platforms like YouTube (with an extension like Privacy Redirect, FreeTube or PeerTube),
Avoiding using video to listen to music, using YouTube audio only for example
Limiting streaming. If you watch a video multiple times, it's best to do it locally and download the video,
Avoiding watching videos over a 3G, 4G or 5G connection. A Wi-Fi or wired connection is preferable,
Disabling autoplay,
Compressing the videos you post."
As artists, do we have the option to avoid producing all these videos in the first place? Since the pandemic, the pressure to produce filmed content has felt stronger. Boiler Room has been around since 2010 and has generated its own set of controversies, some of which have been reactivated this year. But more radio stations have started filming their shows too; video is integral to some of these platforms’ models.
Berlin based radio Hör, for example, only hosts its content on Youtube. As a performer, you can upload the audio to Soundcloud yourself, but that was never the point. Most people behind the scenes always thought the platform’s model was questionable. Still, the pressure to play on it was huge and I was regularly asked if I’d appeared on Hör, as if it was a rite of passage. Despite a few invitations, something didn’t feel quite right and I never played on the station.
After its appalling response to the genocide in Gaza, there has been a call to actively boycott Hör, and the wider ethical issues at stake in the platform are now being openly discussed. It would be frankly dishonest of me to brag about having stayed away. Call it privilege if you like, but Cashmere’s humble coziness always felt more fitted to my experience as a performer … and as a listener!!
So here are the points/questions I’d like to raise today.
1/ I wonder who profits from video streams and more importantly who enjoys them:
Many of my peers, even those who are filmed with their hands up in the air, confess that they feel weird about performing in front of a camera. Some FLINTA friends often share their discomfort with having to appear a certain way.
I don’t watch video streams. Who does watch them, and I mean, watch-watch? Do promoters even do it? Are streams only for social media clips? Or are they really a space or tool for people who don’t have access to club scenes?
A conversation around digital content and sustainably could and should address well-being. The emotional and aesthetic value of video isn’t simple. I don’t think every video is inherently bad, worthless or even painful but as a whole, how are we feeling?
2/ I think we need to talk about the sustainability of video streams:
Maybe uploading/watching a video stream isn’t as bad as, I don’t know, buying a banana or heating a swimming pool for a day. These things are genuinely hard to quantify3. But the problem is that the lack of conversation around ecological impact doesn’t encourage any research.
Video streams require complex technologies, and as Stomp noted: “This equipment is the result of ever-increasing extractivism which has a significant impact on biodiversity, soil and groundwater, to such an extent that it is predicted that humanity will extract as much ore in the decades to come as during its entire history. It is important to note that electronic devices are the primary source of digital pollution." These issues tie in with violence and land occupation that can no longer be ignored.
Beyond the ever more important issues of emissions and extractivism, how will this model evolve in the future? How is this all going to look in 10 years if we upload all the videos of all the radio shows that are being recorded every second of the day?
3/ I wonder if we can have these conversations in a fair and just way:
Video streams might support inclusivity, for example by offering visibility to marginalised groups. But then again, do video streams always support these musicians and communities? Some musicians - such as Soa420, who came to play Fictions in October and had a difficult experience with Hör - might feel like these platforms are profiting off of them. Despite all the claims of more exposure for a wider set of artists, are our scenes truly more inclusive and diverse? And for how many?
In some cases, video streams could support a green transition. Sometimes, they are envisioned as a virtuous alternative to flying. But as Stomp asked: “is the coupling of ecological and digital transitions feasible?"
As always, artist and community approaches might differ greatly depending on their privileges and positionalities. The report is very careful with the use of the term “responsibility4”. In other words, artists shouldn’t be held accountable for this situation but I do think we should participate in these conversations.
Until now, I’ve only had two videos of my performances online: one for Boiler Room and one for Sameheads. Trying to keep my face offline has contributed to a certain kind of digital minimalism in my practice, an accidental “ecological sobriety”. But it’s also led to some problems, not least my struggle to differentiate myself from two other artists who use the same moniker as me to release music.
After my appearance on Kiosk, I spent ages wondering if I should let the radio upload the video to YouTube. I was very grateful for this, albeit minuscule, sense of agency. Yet once the video is on Youtube, I don’t control that content anymore. What if I’d like to delete at some point? This ties into a wider ongoing debate on platform ownership. Aware that there can be no perfect decision, I eventually let them upload the video. Maybe this document will be an important promotional tool, supporting me in organizing slow tours? I don’t want to rely on music as my only source of income. But when I travel a bit further to perform, I take care to balance time, energy, transport costs and transport-related emissions. Could a video of me DJing help me find a gig on the way? Maybe, maybe not.
When the power cuts out, none of this might matter. I will have forgotten about spending a week wondering if my little Kiosk appearance should be online, this newsletter will have disappeared in the void and I might desperately be looking for drinkable water, wondering if dance music was worth our souls? But today, I don’t know if the answer to this question is so straightforward. I have enjoyed so much music this year that I feel more inspired than ever to fight for a culture I want to feel proud of. For now, it’s the dancing itself that keeps me going. Not the gas.
GIGS:
15.12 : Le Comité des fêtes w/ Elvira, Hewan Aman, Jan Loup, Melocoton, Toulouse, FR
29.12 : Aquabahn, Trésor, Berlin, DE
31.12 : TBA, Berlin, DE
19.01: Club Paint, Arkaoda, Berlin, DE
21.01: TBC, Berlin, DE
02.02: TBA, Düsseldorf, DE
17.02: TBA, Amsterdam, NL
05.03: TBA, Toulouse, FR
15.06: TBA, Bretagne, FR
07.07: TBA, UK
30.08: TBA, BE
NOTE: I received a grant from the Goethe Institut for the period from 02.12.2023 until 17.12.2023, during which I performed in Newcastle, Amsterdam, Charleroi, Rennes, Paris and Toulouse and travelled grounded only. If you are interested in receiving support for sustainable touring, I would recommend checking this Touring Green initiative.
“Professional approaches to measuring the environmental impact of the digital music ecosystem are rare, and academic research on the subject can currently be counted on the fingers of one hand.”
“Digital technology already represents 3.5% of GHG emissions worldwide. It is above all the forecast of a growth of 5% per year in its electricity consumption which leads us to doubt its role as a "solution" in the fight against the socio-environmental crisis.”
“(...) Estimates and orders of magnitude of digital consumption are difficult to quantify, largely because of its complex structure and its multiplicity of uses.”
““We will lean towards using terms like sustainable or user-friendly digital technology rather than digital responsibility. Stemming from our research, this choice arose while we were carrying out this project. We think that the term digital responsibility, or responsible digital, is too associated with the possibility of greening current digital technologies without questioning the models themselves. The 'responsible' aspect currently avoids any political and societal questioning of digital technology, which is precisely the aim of this project.” All the footnotes quote the STOMP report.