Outtakes | Jason Jules talks music/fashion and blurred lines
Now I'm back to interviewing interesting people for SL I decided I should start posting outtakes from these interviews. I caught up with oracle of knowledge Jason Jules for an article that'll be on Selectism soon. Here's one outtake that I couldn't find place for in the article. Enjoy Jules's insights and my ramblings.
JD: So you think those two worlds (music and fashion) are the same now?
Jason Jules: Yeah, and I learnt a lot of that from Lynne Franks. And the way she would, synergise stuff. To me, that's what it was about, if you're dealing with journalists, the way to understand them is to be a journalist.
JD: Is that why, going back to culture, you can't really tell what music people are into by their dress anymore? Because it's all so linked
Jules: That demarkation doesn't exist anymore. Or maybe it does but it's so niche that you don't see it. Or maybe it's just subtle, I don't know.
JD: I feel like maybe it's just me not paying attention anymore. There's lines, but the lines are so blurred it's hard to tell. I used to look and be able to tell, that girl likes hip hop, the girl likes indie but now I can't tell much anymore.
Jules: But I also think it's the way people consume music. Whereas once people would listen to a hip hop station or go to hip hop clubs, now they listen to their ipod and this ipod shuffle culture. Now it's a bricolage, an assemblage of all sorts of influences and that's what people wear.
JD: Yeah, a shuffle for clothing pretty much. I like this, this and that, put it together.
Jules: Instead of iPod shuffle it's i-Wear shuffle.
JD: Yeah. Pretty much to the extent, to the most extent. It's that culture. I remember reading NME and they cover hip hop all the time and I was thinking this is NME, why are they covering hip hop? That's weird.
Jules: It's hard to figure out. There was a point where there was a huge ideological battle at the NME for whether they can put in black music or whether it needs to be this indie rock stuff.
JD: I feel like these barriers have been set up by people in charge as opposed to the consumer. Most people are like I like this and I like that. If I were to ask people what music do they like now, they'd all say 'I like a bit of everything'. Everyone says that.
Jules: When I was a kid that was an insult, that meant you knew nothing.
JD: Yeah, that was like saying you support everyone. What football team do you support? Everyone. That meant nothing. But now everyone says that and it's acceptable. I think that's good.
Jules: I don't know. On one level it's good because the end product should be more interesting, a bit more complex. But what that also means is that music is taken out of its cultural context. It doesn't mean much apart from some some listenability. Like, if you were into hip hop at a certain point then all these other things would apply.
JD: Yeah, there were rules and boundaries and you liked this, this this and that if you liked this. Yeah. Now if you like a song, you like a song and that's it. On one hand I like that but on the other hand I see your point that there's no ideological ground and you rob the artist of a subculture.
Jules: It's tricky because at some level, the championing of that catholic taste was to get to that point but now we're at that point.
JD: yeah, now everyone's at that point, where do we go now? Everyone's dreamt too far and we're stuck with everyone liking everything. And you go by, I don't know what you go by. Everyone's an individual now. Albeit in a very homogenised way but everyone's a individual now.