SXSW is a Parasite

Michael Corcoran interviewed SXSW co-founder, Ronald Swenson, about SXSW's battle against "pirate parties," "fringe entities," and "entities improperly using the SXSW name or trying to compete with sanctioned venues."

Swenson's defense, which makes it seem as if SXSW is fighting for its survival, includes this:

SXSW exists only because more entities choose to pursue a symbiotic relationship with us rather than a parasitic one. However, every year more marketing groups representing huge multinational corporations and their local proxies choose to feed off of us.

Mr. Swenson, thank you for the handy biological metaphors, because SXSW has ALWAYS been parasitic upon the city of Austin itself -- all in the guise of symbiosis. Your attendees swamp the city. Traffic swells; the restaurants are jammed. You receive city largesse. The SXSW promotion machine sucks the air out of coverage of anything else locally for weeks. And yet, as SXSW made clear last year, the festival isn't for the locals, who might get a hold of wristbands but complain that they can't get into venues for all the badgeholders. No, it's an industry conference (you said), it's not for anyone who might want to catch some of the overflow vibe or, heaven forbid, some music.

Not everyone picks cotton for the music industry in Austin, you know.

In your defense of SXSW's brand purity to Corcoran, you muddle two sources of competition: one, from outside money, big corporations using the festival to market their own stuff; two from local venues and businesses with an indie spirit, such as all the businesses on South Congress, like Yard Dog and Home Slice, that have bands play. A couple of years ago I watched Billy Bragg in a crush of people in Yard Dog's courtyard -- an amazing show -- and Magic Surprise at Home Slice -- even in the rain, a great show. Are these the events that you want to crack down on?

I don't care about your fight with big music promoters booking other bands, but if you go after other locals, that's plain offensive. Because those events are creative response to SXSW's own exclusivity -- why shouldn't local bands, brands, and businesses benefit from the celebration without SXSW taxing it?

SXSW has already taken its piece of the city; it doesn't need to skim off any more.

The delicious twist worth noting: because Austin Chronicle co-founder Louis Black also co-founded SXSW, you won't read any smart, critical coverage of the festival or its relationship to the city in those pages. So where do you have to turn? To the Statesman, which traditionally sides with the big money on most other things.

Update: typo fixed in last paragraph.

Update update: The comment thread at the Statesman piece contained this gem supporting the parasite argument:

A big problem is SXSW’s reputation for strong-arming competitors and sponsors rather than engaging them in discussions that might bear something mutually beneficial for everyone. They have an almost universally bad rep among local musicians regardless of whether their particular bands play the fest. How can they repair that image? How about re-investing in the local music community upon which it depends? Earmark a percentage of their profits to SIMS (every year,) lend their name to some charity events, and hold something during the summertime when clubs are hurting, and advertise these efforts so everyone remembers them when festival time comes around. A little responsible corporate citizenship goes a long way for whole lot of our local businesses. Such behavior might help SXSW garner the local support it obviously needs to help it survive.

Paraphrased: how about some symbiosis, Swenson?

Update update update: This comment was good, too:

the KARL ROVE look-alike gets: *VOLUNTEERS to work his festival *priority access to every venue in town *huge corporate sponsors PAYING to be involved *a monopoly on all downtown hotels at a DISCOUNTED rate for headlining acts only. *bands PAY THEM to play the festival in exchange for a wristband that doesn’t guarantee anything *free press and media coverage which increases corporate sponsorship money as the festival grows in popularity year after year.

Windsor Park Spa Rumor!

You now won't have to leave the neighborhood for spa services, as Signature Touch day spa is opening next to Randall's. I always knew that Windsor Park needed a spa, especially after a long day of mowing the grass or nailing up plywood after those guys broke in my house.

Nomad

This is going to change Windsor Park as we know it. For the better. The much, much better.

Brunch

One significant thing happened yesterday: we had a brunch date. It was the first social engagement we've had since Christmas Day, and before that? I can't remember. It's been so long. We met David and Lisabeth at an awesome Thanksgiving feast my brother and some of his friends put together in Keene, and since they were visiting Portland they got in touch, and we had a great visit. (Food highlight: pea sprouts in the omelette, and very salty butter on the English muffins. Good coffee, too. Local 188. Remember that one.) There's so much to learn, because we don't know them hardly at all, except that she's from Corpus Christi and they met and married in Austin, Texas, before moving to New England in the late 1990s, but they felt like more intimate acquaintances. Plus we, or I, was hungry for social interaction. Misty and I are mostly hunkered down together, which has been a lot of fun & good for The Relationship, but brunch reminded me not to go too long or believe I can go too far without social time. What constrains me is a sense that, why meet anyone we'll have to leave? And building a social circle -- even a social dot -- can seem like a distraction from the work we both know we need this time to do. It's an old tension. But as it's familiar, it's workable. And as we're not overwhelmed with social opportunities, the tension remains productive and in balance.

Portland Rave

This guy raves about Portland:

Besides the good feeling I got from the conference, the charm of Portland Maine was the icing on the cake. Coming from Indianapolis, I am used to the standard set of strip malls, mega discount superstores, and chain restaurants. In fact, a visitor who was dropped in the middle of Indianapolis would be hard pressed to figure out where they were because, frankly, it looks like every other metropolitan city. Same billboards, same neon signs, same putrid grease smells, same everything. Not Portland. Granted, they had a few Starbucks but the real charm of this city comes from the small business owners who take great pride in their history and connection to the people. Walking downtown, I didn't see Office Max, instead I saw "Wigon's Office Supply" - a quaint supply outlet in the heart of downtown Portland. I did not see homeless people, I saw everyday people enjoying the sun and relaxing in the public areas with their well-groomed dogs.

Bike Box

Portland, Oregon is doing an interesting thing to promote bicycle commuting: making intersections safer by painting "bike boxes" on the road where cyclists can wait for traffic lights to change.

Calling it a "bike box" makes it seem really involved. Folks, it's paint on the street. Which is to say, 1) it's cheap 2) you don't have to physically change the road and 3) enforcement against auto drivers is going to be tough. Still, I don't see why Austin couldn't do something like this on its existing roads.

That said: apparently cyclists in Portland can be pushy, mean, and rude, just like drivers anywhere. But I'll never stop believing that cyclists are just more enlightened than auto drivers.

I believe that any one who wants a driver's license should have to spend 1 month riding a bicycle, so they can learn to give the proper right of way when they're driving their screaming tons of metal deathbox off to pick bluebonnets for baby. This is apropos of nothing; I just wanted to write "screaming tons of metal deathbox."

Food & Place

I'm in Chicago for business meetings and a conference, and food came up twice in conversations. The first one was about Chicago supermarkets, Austin supermarkets, Portland restaurants; the second was about the new word "locavore," or "eating around one's place," which is the Oxford University Press's new word of the year. On that theme of food versus place as a cultural focus of the moment, "locavore" blends the two -- though notice that it's the food that's chosen, not the place. And I fell asleep trying to think of the inverse word, where it's the place that's chosen for its food. I didn't get far -- I was tired -- but will continue thinking.