Royal Orchid

What exactly does it mean to be "mainstream"? How can we define this most tarnishing of labels, which if given to many bands is a death sentence in the eye of cool? Popular opinion will state that if a band goes "mainstream", tags follow such as sell-outs, commercial and ultimately become uncool. When no-one knows that band which you own all the original EPs, the handprinted tee and who who you've met 3 times at the local Wetherspoons, you feel insanely cool telling this to people. For them, you are on the brink of revolutionary new music and influential new bands. Just think Zane "I love what this band do" Lowe. And that's his job. You better hope they don't actually sell some records and have some commercial success. Telling people they're your favourite band would then look like a you're simply clutching NME's coattails. Not moving off topic, what does "mainstream" mean? I have two proposals and when trying to answer this question. Mainstream could mean airplay on Edith Bowman, MTV charts, massive selling singles and hearing a band's songs in Marks and Spencer on your weekly "nice" food shop. This is one theory, and usually incorporates pop(ular) inoffensive music, and bands which are good to know for a conversation with the GateCrasher DJ. But, surely "mainstream" is more than this. A band can be "mainstream", even if not being playing on Radio 1 24/7, time has it's influence, can a band ever fall from the dizzy heights of "mainstream success"? and airplay tends to revolve around more break through acts.

However, I have a different theory, I will focus on the band Radiohead to explain my thoughts. I believe that within genres, circles, styles (whatever) of music there are "mainstream" bands. Just because a band hasn't got a sound or style which everyone listens to does not make them "unmainstream". A band at the fore-front of an alternative genre, can still be "mainstream". This is the Radiohead theory. Although Radiohead have evolved like no other band in the last 20 years, and the sound isn't pop(ular) as such, as a band they are, I maintain that the record sales, gig sales, admittedly limited airplay and mass following means they are a "mainstream" band. Furthermore, there is the grey area of popularity and "mainstream"? Surely if a band can sell a platinum album, then they are "mainstream" because a huge amount of people are listening to them. Although a band's sound may not be considered "mainstream", a band can still be considered guilty. I appreciate the sound of In Rainbows is alternative and certainly not "mainstream", don't get me wrong, however the band as a name or brand are. It is a marred difference between judging a band by name and reputation or musically. Unfortunately I believe the former dominates. Hence, explaining why when that small band with a great new original sound which you love, becomes world famous, there's a part of you that resents it, and that indie kid in Snobs will always prefer the early stuff, and why didn't you buy that ultra rare import from Tokyo? Honestly it's amazing.