Section one: ‘survival among the remnants and playing with the pieces’Footnote ²

Einstürzende Neubauten (as a product of the idiosyncratic circumstances of a divided Berlin) have consistently produced a variety of innovative and experimental music over the years which has developed as a distinctive soundscape of complex polyrhythms and environmental noise. This is due to the musicians' unusual application of objet trouvé for instrumentation, the theatrical physicalization of their performances, the apocalyptic and metaphysical concerns of their texts, and Blixa Bargeld's diverse use of voice which includes non-phonemic vocalisation and screaming as well as the compound word strings of the German language. These attributes have given their work a complexity very different from Anglo-American rock as well as from their German contemporaries, and hence makes ‘pigeon-holing’ their music a precarious activity.Footnote ³

However, their methods and philosophies of music making reflect the tumultuous and expanding post-war period in European art, thought and politics; this is inherent in their name, which translates as ‘Collapsing Newbuildings’ and their consistent use of the term, Architektur. It is present from their earliest performances (as die Nachgeborenen)Footnote ⁴ which were designed to collapse the ‘displacement activities’ of the Wirtschaftswunder, its amnesiac Schlager and imported Anglo-American culture.Footnote ⁵ This guerrilla attack, created in abject sites from the city's debris and building materials, took the form of imploding noise-music (a reaction to, and an adaptation of, the ‘failed’ destruction/explosions of their older politicised contemporaries)Footnote ⁶; it focused interference, freeform, painful listening and Artaudian motifs of disease and fire. An essential aspect of this (from the Kreuzberg–Schöneberg Geniale Dilletanten days)Footnote ⁷ is the group's belief in foregrounded process, music as research and participatory listening which can ‘infect’ not just the performer but the recipient too. Recognition of these aspects of Neubauten's roots, coupled with their desire to facilitate self-production and maintain autonomy over their work, is central to my subsequent argument.

Section two: ‘that the dark end of the music industry doesn't squeeze the little space there is left for musicians to live and work as they choose to and not according to some twerp in a marketing room’ (The Bays 2007)

The main thread which links Jacques Attali (my key theorist in this discussion) with the other theorists and artists cited below is their shared condemnation of the recording industry's standardisation of music to fit a formula, the market and a perceived audience. This is summed up by Bargeld:

There are extensive discourses on popular music's production and consumption. These discourses began with Adorno's (Reference Adorno1941, Reference Adorno1944) indictment of popular music and the culture industry's repetitive standardisation and pseudo-individualism which he saw as resulting in effortless, regressive listening and a negation of any critical reflection. His pessimistic views have frequently been challenged by those who maintain the presence of active, disruptive subcultures and critical, discriminating listeners (who can create their own meanings) and those who strive to minimise the conflict between commerce and creativity, such as Grossberg's claim that ‘affective alliances’ felt by fans can afford some sense of personal empowerment (Grossberg Reference Grossberg1992, pp. 85–87). However, these discussions primarily focus the listener as a consumer of the finished recording and/or of the public gig, whereas I will discuss Neubauten's listener as a participant in the creation and dissemination of the music independent of the mainstream market and without the backing of a record label. It is within this context that I am using Attali's Noise: the Political Economy of Music (Attali Reference Attali and Massumi2006), because it offers an excellent theoretical framework for engagement with non-commercial music, especially within a cottage industry format. This format, I argue, can be applied to Neubauten's creation of their virtual and actual ‘family’ network between 2002 and 2008.Footnote ⁸

Attali's Noise: the Political Economy of Music divides the development of music into four phases (Sacrifice, Representation, Repetition and Composition)Footnote ⁹ although, for the purpose of this study, it is only the third phase and, in particular, the fourth, which are referenced. The advent of recording led Attali to describe Repetition as the silencing (through mass production) of all other noises. If Representation (phase two) had introduced the idea of music as a commodity, it had at least communicated an energy and a performing presence. Attali (Reference Attali and Massumi2006, pp. 106 & 119) concludes that Repetition squeezes out error, stammering, hesitation and noise; gone is the festival and spectacle for abstract perfection with its ‘stars […] disembodied, ground up, manipulated and reassembled on record […] in repetition that passes for identity, and no longer for difference’. In Composition, however, the musician creates and organises sound for his own enjoyment and self-communication as a non-commercial act. What is heard by others is therefore a by-product of what the author wrote/performed for the sake of hearing it. This, Attali believes, leads to new social relations and an end to the distinction between musician and producer; here is music produced by the creator for his/herself, for pleasure outside of meaning, usage and exchange; ‘to be lived not stockpiled’ (Attali Reference Attali and Massumi2006, p. 145).

It is this concept of ‘new social relations’ which is most relevant. Attali's Composition is not aiming for the ‘extension of the bourgeois spectacle to all of the proletariat. It is the individual's conquest of his own body and potentials’ (2006, p. 135). Self-awareness and self-governance must precede any political change – a viewpoint also frequently expressed by Beuys and Cage in relation to their own work. Thus my interpretation here of music's political struggle against commodification and its ability to empower the recipient is not primarily as Brecht's Umfunktionierung – as argued in Benjamin's ‘The Author as Producer’ of 1934³⁷ or as advocated by Cornelius Cardew (Reference Cardew1974/2004). It is rather as an anarchic social act for inclusion and self-change as expressed by Peter Sellars in his speech to the American Symphony Orchestra League in January 2007. The centrality of music's social aspects were constantly expressed to me by the group; for example, Bargeld prioritised the social relationships inherent in Grundstück (Bargeld Reference Bargeld2004–2008), Zhu (Reference Zhu2007) called the Supporter Initiative a ‘Social Sculpture’, Alexander Hacke (Reference Hacke2006) stated that the ‘social aspects’ were his driving force for being a musician and Andrew Unruh (Reference Unruh2007) described his communal drum tables as an inclusive social activity.

An important aspect of these new social relations is how the listener listens. Within ‘the network of composition’, Attali stressed the importance of the listener as an ‘operator’ – ‘to listen to music is to rewrite it’ (Attali Reference Attali and Massumi2006, p. 135). Neubauten have always striven for the recipient's willingness to work at the art of listening, not for correct meaning but for each sound's potential; they wanted their music to be a difficult and painful listening experience (‘Hör mit schmerzen’ 1981). However, during 2002–2008 Neubauten's demands on the listener were not only in terms of reception but included a commitment to being online at certain times, a willingness to engage with the music's process (and failures) during the web-streamed investigations and, in terms of distribution, to offer localised information or expertise. Hence, it is Attali's reference to new social relations that can evolve from participatory listening (and thereby help to create a DIY network of support similar to that of a cottage industry) which is relevant to Neubauten's recent strategies for independence. It is these aspects which are central to my argument for the uniqueness and the innovation of Neubauten's web experiment.

I use the word ‘uniqueness’ with some hesitation because I do not intend to explore the Internet's use by other musicians, nor is it the purpose of my argument to examine the fractious question of the Internet's role in music's ownership or dissemination (see Bob Ostertag's (Reference Ostertag2007) The Professional Suicide of a Recording Musician). The fact that the medium primarily offers a global display window, both for fledgling musicians hoping to attract a label and for encouraging music as shopping, is not contested. The argument here is that very few musicians have used the Internet as creatively as Neubauten did during 2002– 2008. I acknowledge the use by those international artists with large fan bases who have web-streamed ‘live’ concerts (for example, Paul McCartney's 1999 Cavern gig)Footnote ¹⁰ or provided pre-release or pre-gig album download offers like those by Wilco, Radiohead and Eno and Byrne.Footnote ¹¹ But Neubauten's use has less in common with these and more in common with artists, producers and distributors who were/are working at a grass roots level in making and sharing music with a known and sympathetic community (hence my use of the descriptors ‘cottage-industry/extended family’). In view of this I argue that it is more relevant to cite the work of artists who in their different ways exemplify these aspects of Attali's anti-commodification strategies. Such approaches can be seen in earlier artists like Les Razilles Dénudés (1967–1996) and former producers like Factory Records (1978–1992).Footnote ¹² At present The Bays (as artists) and ReR (as producer-distributors) are notable working examples. The Bays (1999–) are four musicians who come together only for live improvised gigs. They dismiss as a myth the idea that MySpace and similar sites can be credited with liberating musicians from the clutches of the industry, stating that: ‘The marketplace remains the same, the process of making music to sell is unchanged in all but the cost of production and display’ (2007). The Bays maintain that since they do not manufacture a product, their ‘music is about experience rather than shopping’. Chris Cutler of Recommended Records (the ‘recommended’ means personal choice and not commercial viability) sees ReR as an artist-led service which is about ‘research as well as entertainment’; he rejects what he calls the ‘fast food presentation’ (of the Internet) for the ‘careful preparation’ of the beautifully produced album which is what he aims for with ReR.Footnote ¹³ Such activities and philosophies can be read as small strikes against the bigger power structures of the cultural industry and a contribution toward Bargeld's view of music as possessing at least ‘five degrees of the horizon of utopia’ (Sharp Reference Sharp1996, p. 21). These small strikes, Cutler believes, help to ‘change, however slightly, the status quo’ (all citations from Cutler Reference Cutler2008).

The above mindset has always been present in Neubauten – in particular, Cutler's dictum on research as well as entertainment. This was present in the communalism of the 1980s Kreuzberg arts and squatter sceneFootnote ¹⁴ of their early days and the interchanging local networks of artists-audience based around Eisengrau (Blixa Bargeld's and Gudrun Gut's second-hand shop/meeting place in Schöneberg).Footnote ¹⁵ Here it took the form of using West Berlin for an objet trouvé site and instruments. This involved investigating the noise-music possibilities of almost anything, from the metal interior of an autobahn flyover, a discarded taxi-cab partition and building site remnants, to a discussed water-tower and, of course, fire – ‘You could say that we actually wanted to play with fire like you'd play with a guitar’ (Dax Reference Dax2005, p. 7). Twenty years later this investigative approach continued with the group inviting its virtual witnesses to take part in the web-streamed sonic research in the Bunker – an acoustic space which looked more like a workshop than a recording studio – as they experimented with a range of objects from free-falling aluminium sticks and amplified wine glasses, to plastic pipes and polystyrene (Figures 1 and 2).Footnote ¹⁶ Bargeld summed up this commitment to the constant question – what noise will this make? – early on in Stimme frißt Feuer (1983) with a statement which resonates with the ideas of John Cage:

Figures 1 & 2.

Andrew Unruh and Rudi Moser creating instruments in the Bunker Studio, Berlin. Photographs taken by the author, October 2006.

Section three: ‘to be no part of it’ (1987)

The open studio

In August 2002, Neubauten launched a website called Neubauten.org Phase One. This became known as the Supporter Initiative and, although it operated internationally through the world wide web, it remained at heart a virtual ‘local’ family affair. It rejuvenated the following which Neubauten had built up over the previous 22 years and through greater exposure via the website (Neubauten had tended to produce only one album and one tour every 36 months). It enabled the group to secure a cohesive system of followers – many of whom chose to work voluntarily for, or to donate their specialist skills to, the shared artistic endeavours of the group. Footnote ²¹

The concept was based on a Subskribentenmodell. This subscription format meant that supporters paid the band directly to produce an album for an agreed date while access was provided (2002–2007) via the Neubauten website to the group's sometimes painful, often endearingly funny but sincere struggles to craft and organise the promised music. This created a new relationship between artist and recipient – that of being an Unterstützer (‘Supporter’) – a term deliberately selected. Andrea Schmid (2006)Footnote ²² stressed that Anhänger, normally seen in an English/German dictionary for a supporter, was not appropriate in this instance. Anhänger suggests a fan, a passive follower, a ‘hanger-on’, whereas Unterstützer describes a proactive person within a ‘community’ of like-minded others, who is actively supporting an idea or a project from underneath (‘unter’).

The idea of being able to help the band make their music became a driving force for some followers. For example, there is the dedicated voluntary work of American supporter, Abby Zane, who has compiled a very extensive archive of rare recordings and bootleg work which she catalogues and makes available to other supporters for blanks and postage. She has also consistently used the Internet and Neubauten's website to raise awareness and appreciation of their work through postings, answering questions, maintaining and establishing contacts. Another supporter, Karl J. Palouček, initiated and organised the creation of Alles was irgendwie nützt (‘Everything that's of any use’) during Phase Two of Neubauten.org. With a group of like-minded subscribers, including Zane, Palouĉek decided to produce a live Neubauten album (outside the band's periphery or control) created from illicit bootlegs which he requested from other supporters. From about 50 submitted bootleg concert recordings, 27 tracks were selected (by six representative supporters chosen by Palouĉek) that it was felt best articulated the musicians' development from 1980 to Silence is Sexy in 2000. The compilation was released to supporters on Neubauten's white label during the Spring of 2006.

Danielle de Picciotto's (Reference Picciotto2006) DVD documentary, On Tour with Neubauten.org, offers another example of supporter work. She filmed the 2004 tour, focusing on the development of the Supporter Initiative. A series of interviews demonstrated both the musicians' commitment to the project and that their supporters came from a range of countries, ages and professions. The frequently quoted attractions of being a supporter included seeing how a particular sound was created, the pleasure in researching the enigmatic lyrics and discussing meanings with others, sharing ideas of independence or a Cageian ‘life-changing’ response, of learning to close-listen to one's environment, the supporter-only post-show meetings with the musicians to further discuss the work or points arising from postings on the Forum and, most importantly, ‘chatting’ with a community of like-minded people from around the world. The supporters all stressed the importance of being active members, not passive consumers or followers; many spoke of the satisfaction in knowing that their money went directly to the artists for their work and not to an intermediary company. Likewise the musicians expressed pleasure in knowing that the listeners and concert-goers were informed, knew about the work, had probably watched and commented on its process and hence cared about the outcome far more than they might otherwise have done. Admittedly the de Picciotto film is hardly impartial, but it does reflect what I experienced from both the musicians and several interviewed supporters – a genuine enthusiasm for the project and a shared commitment to the music. The Forum (an ongoing facility for communication about the music) and the Chat Room (available during the web-streamed rehearsals) were positive features for many supporters, especially the opportunity they offered to discuss the work with members of the band. Australian supporter, Elizabeth Cooke, who became responsible for Supporter Relations, explained that she had gained her position through ‘chat’ with Erin Zhu (Reference Zhu2007).

As much of the work for the band – the merchandise, logistics and design – was taken over by subscriber-volunteers, this support was then available in 2007–2008 for the distribution, marketing and subsequent European tour of Alles Wieder Offen. These activities owed much of their success to active supporters who in each country or city provided information, interviews and links for the group to access. For example, one web communication from the musicians asked supporters to email names and contact details of their local independent record retailers who might be persuaded to take copies of the album. This extensive international ‘Indie’ list provided an invaluable resource in its own right. Supporters were also asked about any influence which they might have with their local radio stations or newspapers which could lead to an interview or article about Alles Wieder Offen and Neubauten.org. Through the unpaid efforts of Raquel Lains, a supporter from Lisbon and a freelance music promoter of Lets Start a Fire, the audiences at the Porto and Lisbon gigs were both informed and attentive, and the sales of the Alles Wieder Offen album were very high.

The slightly transmuted supporter logo is testimony to this two-way relationship; it depicts the red sun/person (originally black, dancing and un-tethered) streaming roots, veins or branches from his/her body which reach out in all directions, perhaps like sound waves, supporting the puppet-figure as well as suggesting a reciprocal feeding in and out. Many supporters explained their freely offered commitment in terms of the positive impact of the group's work on their lives; Palouček described his commitment as a result of ‘the group's steadfast adherence to high artistic standard’ (Palouček Reference Palouček2007). Zane (Reference Zane2007) explained that Neubauten's philosophy and music had a profound effect on the way she listened to and thought about sound; she also stressed the group's sincerity and hard work as admirable qualities and Lains expressed her identification with Neubauten as being centred on a shared stance which she summed up as: ‘I only promote what I like, the music I would buy for myself. … I don't sell myself for the money I can earn’ (Lains Reference Lains2008).

The idea for the Supporter Initiative was originally born during 2000–2001. It was the brainchild of Erin Zhu, whom Bargeld had met in 1999.Footnote ²³ She is cited as an executive producer of much of the recent work and was the Webmaster of Neubauten.org. About 2,000 followers signed up in 2002 to take part in Phase 1; they paid 35 dollars or Euros to participate in the experience via live streaming and receive the results as downloads and exclusive recordings sent out on CD on a self-produced white label. Neubauten had estimated that they needed 1,000 subscribers to make the project viable. One of the main attractions of the project for many subscribers was the web-streaming. These live-stream sessions which offered interaction with the group in the working process, occurred about four times a year; the dates were emailed to the supporters and posted on the website. Each period spanned about six to eight days and was usually made up of one or two 90-minute sessions per day, mid-afternoon or evening. As most of these were then archived, it was possible to watch them at a later date at any convenient time; hence, one could build up quite a comprehensive picture of how the group had constructed a particular piece.

The radical nature of this initiative lay in the open studio aspect of the work which made these webcasts much more than carefully prepared rehearsals. They seemed to epitomise Attali's hope for the future of music as ‘no longer made to be represented or stockpiled, but for participation in collective play’ (Attali Reference Attali and Massumi2006, p. 41). Work was already taking place when the web cameras went live and usually continued afterwards, so the transmitted rehearsals were never self-contained, prepared units; they were (as I witnessed first-hand) unstaged and unedited. Nothing was added or manipulated in the timetable in order to transform the streamed 90 minutes (sometimes longer) into a performance – unless that was the intent, as on two occasions with a performance piece entitled Weingeister from Musterhaus 8 and a dress rehearsal for the mini tour of April 2007. Hence, sometimes the supporter would get an uneventful double session on the same overdubs or cascading of metal bars; then Bargeld would apologetically comment ‘another boring webcast’ or ‘everything will be better next time’. This added to the sense of ‘liveness’ and authenticity of the struggle. My experiences of being in the Bunker during webcasting did not differ greatly from participating via my laptop, but it did differ greatly from being present at the carefully stage managed and timed rehearsals for a recording of Nico's Desertshore by Throbbing Gristle at the ICA in June 2007. Throbbing Gristle's rehearsals did not invite discussion or share the problems with the viewers; we were silent witnesses to process-performance which seemed all too easy and self-congratulatory.Footnote ²⁴

In contrast, Neubauten's webcasts consisted of startlingly honest, often slow, sometimes fraught experiments which paid attention to minute detail and were conducted in German and English, with Bargeld, acting as moderator, contextualising certain activities in English. There was a sense that this was the group at work and not a demonstration for the spectator. The process was fully understandable and sympathetic for those who had been involved in the frustrating repetitiveness of, for example, a theatrical rehearsal; however, for some supporters who enjoyed attending a polished, rock-based gig, these webcasts were a negative and irrelevant experience. This was a risk which the group had acknowledged and which they admitted lost them some followers. Bargeld explained:

As the idea of the open studio was not just to invite witnesses but also to stimulate comment, discussion and criticism during and after the sessions (in the Forum and Chat Room) video question-and-answer sessions were also set up with the musicians. Here the group declared their excitement at the surveillance of their work, claiming that it accelerated progress from the normal 36 months' gestation that it used to take them to produce an album. Neubauten also maintained that the webcasts stopped arguments and encouraged punctuality and attendance. The concern that one would imagine some artists would harbour, that their mystique would be lost in the ‘pixellated glare of all-access webcams’ (Keenan Reference Keenan2004, p. 44), has again been tackled by Bargeld:

Neubauten's web-streaming did not entail a loss of the auraFootnote ²⁵ to which they aspired (the vulnerable, authentic, inquisitive artist), but rather confirmed a transmuted version of this as supporters believed that they were active co-participants of the webcasts in the same Central European time zone and hence were potential makers of meaning. With these clear intentions (‘constant answering, questioning, redefining’) thus foregrounded, and echoing Cutler's comments (on ReR) about striving ‘to help to define new problems through the presentation of imaginative solutions’ (2008), it is clear that the web-streaming never became the reality show which some feared. There was no manipulation, bad behaviour or implied disdain for the viewer, but an almost neurotic concern on behalf of the group to know what the supporter-viewer was thinking about the work and whether there were any positive or critical comments appearing on Zhu's laptop.Footnote ²⁶ The musicians also always stressed the simplicity and cheapness of the technology used in the Neubauten enterprise, describing it as ‘three webcams, USB cables and my (Zhu's) own laptop’ (Zhu Reference Zhu2007).Footnote ²⁷ This was part of their intention to have a ‘creative paradigm designed to be easily exploited by other fringe artists and musicians’ (Keenan Reference Keenan2004, p. 44). Bargeld explained:

I argue that this use of web-streaming by Neubauten stands in stark contrast to that analysed by Duffett which he states ‘gives consumers absolutely no opportunity to interact with each other or the performer’. Hence, he suggests that web-casting can be just another ‘corporate application of the Internet’ (Duffett Reference Duffett2003, p. 308).

Phase Two of the Neubauten Supporter Project finished in August 2005 and the official site was taken down in September. The Grundstück album and the DVD containing footage from the November 2004 performance in Berlin were dispatched to supporters in October 2005. Phase Two's 120 webcast hours had also included the introduction of solo workshops of sonic research which further declared the group's process – for example, Andrew Unruh's Air Show demonstration on how he builds and uses sonic objects to create ethereal sounds. These workshops continued into Phase Three with Arbeit's exploration entitled Stupid Green, followed by Bargeld experimenting with the Chinese duo FM3, Boris Wilsdorf's ENgineering in which he explained some of his approaches as the sound engineer, and Hacke's electronic sound/visual investigation, The Story of Electricity.

Phase Three of the Supporter Project began in February 2006 with a speech of thanks and intent from Bargeld. He included the comment (regarding Phase One: August 2002 to September 2003) ‘you helped us to make the record … you pushed us through’ (Neubauten.org, accessed 12 February 2006). Bargeld expanded on this to stress that it was not just the money which was important to the group but the time, interest and comments given by the supporters. Phase three ended in October 2007 with the completion of Alles Wieder Offen, and its distribution leaving a public site and one on MySpace. This phase had also made transparent a card-based chance technique used by Neubauten as an investigative stimulus for musical ideas. The ‘Dave’ cards, which Bargeld calls ‘a navigation system not a strategic system’ (3 Jewels, October 2007), were used in this case for the creation of 15 short pieces called Jewels. Initially these were monthly downloads for the supporters (they were described by Bargeld in the accompanying notes as ‘two/three minute miniatures’. At the close of Phase Three they were sent out to the supporters as an ‘art object’ compilation, beautifully packaged with a detailed, illustrated booklet explaining the ‘Dave’ procedure and the particular card stimuli for each piece.Footnote ²⁸

Grundstück: ‘a small utopia’

The second key strand of my argument revolves round the Grundstück project which developed out of Phase two of the Supporter Initiative and which Bargeld described as ‘playing the building (and) a few steps toward a small utopia’ (2004–2008). The balancing of what was on offer virtually with actual experiences was always seen as very important by the group; hence, this was designed as a shared actual experience for the Supporter community in return for their commitment to Phase One and their subscriptions to Phase Two. The discussion here focuses on the radical/experimental nature of this project as a free, independent, site-specific concert for voice, machinery and architecture. However, firstly it is important to clarify the problematic nature of the chosen site. The building, partially degutted by western demolition work at the time of the concert, was the East Berlin Palast der Republik (completed in 1976). At the time (2004) and during the subsequent years of its gradual demolition, the Palast became the centre of much heated debate concerning the West's often insensitive and over-hasty removal of the East's traces, symbols and identities post-1990. The Palast had been one of the GDR's most prestigious buildings as its purpose had been quite unique; it had housed within its huge, bronzed, mirrored exterior, the East German parliament and a public ‘leisure centre’ consisting of restaurants, two large auditoriums, art galleries, a bowling alley and spaces for family celebrations and anniversaries (Figures 3 and 4). Hence, for many East Berliners it had much personal significance. Its gradual Rückbau (‘removal’)Footnote ²⁹ by the Berlin government was met with ongoing protest and a surge of Ostalgia. Neubauten have always stressed that their use of the Palast as a site and instrument for this particular concert was not a political act but a social one (Bargeld 2004–2008). A quotation from John Cage (a practitioner frequently referred to by Neubauten) aptly sums up their expressed view:

Figures 3& 4.

The exterior and interior of the Palast der Republik, Berlin. Photographs taken by the author, November 2004.

However, there were intentional touches of irony; first in Neubauten's appropriation of a musical motif from Hanns Eisler's GDR national anthem Auferstanden aus Ruinen (which translates as ‘rising up out of the ruins’) for use in the title song, Grundstück Footnote ³⁰; secondly, in placing their home-made logo inside the empty circle left by the removal of the GDR's emblem on the building's front façade, and finally with the design of the Grundstück poster. This suggested both an aerial street plan radiating out from a red square (Honecker's failed dream of transforming the Imperial Schloss Platz into Marx-Engels-Platz, a Red Square) and a ground plan for a building or a person with its heart linked by the lifelines of Neubauten's supporter system and social bonds which Bargeld intended the event to emulate. The voided political, public utopia became a small, social, personal utopia (see Figures 5 and 6).

Figure 5.

A collage created by supporter Ian Williamson (February 2008) from self-portraits submitted by supporters. Reproduced here with kind permission of Ian Williamson.

Figure 6.

The Grundstück Poster created by Johannes Beck (2004). Reproduced here with kind permission of Johannesbeck, minus design, Berlin.

The concert, as already stated, was intended as a gift to the supporters for their subscriptions, interest and attention, as well as offering the opportunity to meet each other and to make noise together (as part of the Social Choir and on Unruh's invented drum tables). There was also the opportunity for some supporters to reciprocate with practical help for the event. In the weeks before the event, postings appeared on the Neubauten.org site explaining the procedure if one wanted to become a member of the choir and requesting help with transport, accommodation, the get-in, the strike and refreshments. A major part of this communalism lay in the decision to reconfigure the usual end-on rock concert space into a shared arena and to remove the bouncer-dominated barricade between musicians and spectators. Neubauten had, through web-streaming, already encouraged a new art of spectatorship (Die Neue Zuschauerkunst) and had created an international network of known and actively engaged supporters which rendered redundant the need for bouncers and barricades.

Not only did the event physically deconstruct the ethos of a rock gig, it achieved this musically too, with its experimental, unfinished, untitled pieces involving the use of the building's half-demolished interior structures and the supporters' voices and drumming. Hence it resonated, in its aims to be a social act and a few steps toward a small utopia, with the belief of Joseph Beuys (another mentor figure for the group) that ‘everyone can and must participate in the social being so that transformation can be carried out as quickly as possible’ (quoted in Stachelhaus Reference Stachelhaus1987, p. 66). All this enhanced the ‘family and friends’ grass roots feel of the event and created bonds of shared responsibility and cooperation. During rehearsals, Bargeld discussed this in architectural terms, talking about the supporters holding up this building (the musicians) – in this case, not a structure which Neubauten wished to subvert or collapse.

Grundstück did involve some risk; there were the strategic problems in organising the first 100 supporters who arrived (from around the world) at the Club Pfefferbank in former East Berlin, in order to be members of the Social Choir – let alone rehearsing them in two days – and early access to the site proved to be problematic. This meant that the Social Choir had to adapt immediately from the confined space of the small club to the massive hollow interior of the Palast; this they did with a consolidated commitment because, as supporters, they already had a stake in the work.Footnote ³¹ The success of the event, in these terms, is best exemplified by the only gesture of disobedience which did occur from the supporters. This was an act of creative defiance by the 550 present, who had been provided with Unruh's 50 self-invented drum tables consisting of a variety of sound objects, and asked to join in the final reprise of one experimental piece, ‘Fiver’. They entered this with undiluted enthusiasm. (A posting on the website had encouraged supporters to bring percussion-type sticks with them.) On Bargeld's countdown to cease after several minutes (in order to close the event) the supporters momentarily stopped their drumming but once the musicians had left the performance circle, they renewed their efforts with fresh excitement and energy. This act of disobedience continued for several minutes and the degutted building vibrated furiously (causing me to wonder if collapse was – after all – imminent). Finally, the musicians returned. Bargeld's request for a cessation was obeyed immediately and the supporters departed leaving the Neubauten team obviously delighted with this spontaneous supporter act of music.Footnote ³²

During the event Neubauten (in particular, Bargeld) constantly revealed themselves as vulnerable artists who had not yet finished some of the work and who were willing to restart a piece or admit their uncertainty or dissatisfaction. Bargeld's opening words, ‘We are going to play a lot of things we don't know yet’, set this tone immediately. This use of exposure coupled with Bargeld's relaxed friendliness and willingness to give time to the supporters helped to create an aura radically different from that usually associated with the front man of a rock band and more one associated with an experimental theatre directorFootnote ³³ or a dedicated teacher. His rehearsing of the 100 members of the Social Choir for two days before the get-in demonstrated this. He knew exactly when to praise and when to demand more, when to reprimand and when to accept, and his student-choir responded accordingly with high quality, committed work which was disciplined, focused and able to adapt to last minute changes in performance. Zane explained to me that Bargeld had devised with the choir 20 different facial and hand signals for mid-performance communication.

The set list included some older works, all of which had a strong Berlin theme (for example, ‘Haus der Lüga’, ‘Youme and Meyou’, ‘Dead Friends’, ‘Die Befindlichkeit des Landes’) but of greater interest were the new, experimental pieces which Bargeld prioritised and rehearsed with the choir. Some of these works consisted of only a phrase or a non-phonemic utterance which was intoned or used as call and response with the choir. The use of air compressors, taut springs, plastic bins, a jet turbine part, pipes and polystyrene created an ethereal, melancholic sound which was replicated by the half-demolished state of the once-grand building. Bargeld's use of a range of vocal sounds from screaming, clicking, humming, throat-based and guttural noises, as well as the intoning of incantatory sequences, helped to create a sense of dislocation and loss. Despite a courting of stillness and silence there was still present Neubauten's familiar Artaudian quality of ‘controlled frenzy’ (Headcleaner, 1993).Footnote ³⁴ Where fuller, new texts existed, these often bore the familiar theme (for Neubauten) of Berlin's memories, ghosts and voids; in addition there was also a new focus on the collective (reflecting the event's ethos) through the frequent use of wir (‘we’). The new works emphasised a perpetual journeying or waiting, or questioning of identity or a ridding of ballast; these themes are also present in Perpetuum Mobile (2004) and become even more prevalent in the subsequent Alles Wieder Offen (2007).

There was a visceral counterpart to this in the Palast, created not only by the group's physical relationship with the site, but also by the coldness of the November night and the sharp, directional white light which cast shadows and fashioned impenetrable, dark recesses and eerie pockets of bottomless space receding from the safety of the small, peopled performance circle. The site, which represented the failure of a national political utopia, became a metaphor for Beuys' Honigpumpe (1977) and an actuality of his statement that ‘everyone is an artist’ (quoted in Fineberg Reference Fineberg1995, p. 234). In stark contrast to Attali's derided rock concert experience – ‘only to be reduced to the role of an extra in the record or film that finances it’ (Attali Reference Attali and Massumi2006, p. 137) – everyone was a participant in Grundstück's play. This play was captured both in the Social Choir's version of the 1996 utopian song, ‘Was ist ist’, with its connotations of Hesse's dictum that to achieve the possible one must constantly reach for the impossibleFootnote ³⁵ and in one particular constructed instrument (apart from Unruh's 50 drum tables) – a set of three large, amplified metal tables each of which vibrated hundreds of small polystyrene chips. The soft rhythmic thuds emulating from these tables greeted the supporters on arrival; when they ascended the once grand central staircase the playful spectacles were there to be watched and touched.

One key, lengthy (mainly textless) piece involved the playing of amplified sections of rusting girders, abandoned metal banisters and exposed piping with Bargeld conducting the choir who had been separated into four groups and allocated sounds, pitches, sequences and screams. The final permutation of this extensive work was a version of ‘Grundstück’ which revisited the theme of Berlin's troubled ghosts of ‘history not easily chased away’. During this work the space came close to the Artaudian concept of a performance hangar as well as one big instrument encompassing everyone present. Another extensive work, temporarily named ‘Fiver’ due to its insistent beat (but later called ‘Vox Populi’ in deference to the Choir's input) had a dominant place in the event because of its sustained focus and excitement. The complexity of these works rendered Grundstück one of Neubauten's most important achievements. However, for the group, the achievement was less about the music and more about the fact that the concert (organised virtually) had been (actually) managed, financed and experienced totally independently with, and by so many of the extended ‘virtual’ family. It was this achievement that Bargeld emphasised to the audience of the screening of Grundstück at the ICA on 14 December 2006.

Musterhaus: ‘what we do is research’ (Hacke Reference Hacke2006)

In April 2005, Neubauten offered their supporters a new opportunity to take part virtually in the process of creating eight experimental albums over two years. This was also based on web subscriptions but accessed separately from the Supporter Initiative site, although this did provide a web link. The intention for these eight Musterhaus albums was to allow the band to move further away from the ‘art-rock/electronic cabaret arena’ of some recent work, back into Musique Concrète noise and vocal research. The resulting eight works included: 40-minute tracks of layers of moving noise which flirted with Xenakis and Varèse where the voice was either peripheral or accidental; earlier pieces reworked with the jazz/minimalist Redux Orchestra; treated found samples and cut-ups of old ‘concrète’ recordings; group members' individual piano compositions; Dadaist vocalisations and Fluxus sound pieces which included a composition created from the swallowing, sampling and drinking of various wines (Weingeister 2007). Each Musterhaus CD could be downloaded as well as received as a carefully packaged ‘hard copy’. The musicians frequently expressed to me their enjoyment in Musterhaus which particularly emulates one of Attali's key aspects of Composition – that the music created by the musicians should be for ‘self-communication’ too.

Alles Wieder Offen: ‘everything open again’

The final strand of the argument concerns the independent creation, distribution and touring of Alles Wieder Offen carried out by the Neubauten team, who (as Attali advocates in Composition) blurred the roles of producers, distributors, tour managers and consumers by learning ‘on the job’ with their supporters:

The closing statement in Mote Sinabel's issue of The Attachment (which contains a series of monochrome photographs of Neubauten by the Japanese artist) clarifies the situation:

Alles Wieder Offen Footnote ³⁷ was rehearsed with the supporters via the web and financed entirely by supporters' subscriptions. When it was released in the Autumn of 2007 on Neubauten's own Potomak label, it had no commercial record label involvement at all. The supporters' involvement went far beyond the financial.Footnote ³⁸ They could choose to watch the album's development via webcasting, have live online input about this with the group which, at times, did influence the artistic decisions made, and they could and did volunteer for free (or for basic expenses incurred) any expertise or influence they might have within the music world, to aid the promotion and distribution of the work. This ranged, as already mentioned, from providing details of local radio stations, press and neighbourhood independent music retailers, to working directly with Constanze Pfeiffer (Andrea Schmid's co-worker) in setting up databases of relevant media contacts in each major European city both for the album's distribution during the Autumn of 2007 and for the tour in the following Spring 2008 (as Raquel Lains did in Portugal) (Figures 7 and 8). The progress of the two-way relationship between the band, their immediate associates and the supporters prior to the album's release could be found on the ‘Work in Progress’ pages on the Alles Wieder Offen website archives during the late Summer and Autumn of 2007. One poignant posting from the musicians sums this up:

Figure 7.

Alles Wieder Offen performances, Brussels and London, May 2008. Andrew Unruh pulls on the rope to cascade aluminium bars. Photograph taken by K. Shryane for author.

Figure 8.

Alles Wieder Offen performances, Brussels and London, May 2008. From left to centre: Alexander Hacke, Unruh and Blixa Bargeld amidst machinery and lanterns. Photograph taken by K. Shryane for author.

The website provided a running commentary which was often witty, peppered with varying degrees of desperation, the admission of fallibility, ignorance, confusion and celebration; it appeared to make the group even more accessible and to emphasise their strike against studios ‘designed to shut out the outside world’ (www.Neubauten.org). Neubauten's actual and virtual studio, the Bunker-workshop in Berlin, had successfully challenged this concept with ‘everything open again’ (the album's title) for (virtual) witnesses to their process, its successes and failures.