Indie rock is dead.

Alright, now that I’ve got the attention of any reader whose favorite… Indie rock is dead.

Alright, now that I’ve got the attention of any reader whose favorite band isn’t Hinder, let me explain an issue that has plagued my mind for a while now.

That problem is indie rock – not the music that is considered indie, since that is what most would consider many of my favorite bands. Rather, I have searched and searched and come to one conclusion: The word “indie” no longer means anything, and it hasn’t for a very, very long time.

So allow me to amend my first statement: Indie rock is not dead, it is just very confused. Indie rock doesn’t know what it really is. A genre of music? A mentality? An excuse to wear scarves and black rimmed glasses? Well, I am here to try to clear up the confusion, and the results may not be pretty.

The word “indie” in association with the word “rock” stands for “independent,” as in “released on an independent record label,” and has been around for decades – there have been record sales charts documenting bands on independent labels in England since the early ’80s.

It was originally used strictly to describe bands not in the mainstream, with little radio play, usually little record sales, sometimes little accessibility and often little shot at scoring a major label contract. These were the bands with smaller, but still passionate, fan bases constructed of mostly college students – The Smiths, Sonic Youth, The Stone Roses.

The sound that many would ascribe to “indie” grew out of the aesthetic that independent labels had less money to spend on production, and so the records were rawer and less produced than the music that was flooding the mainstream, which, at the time, was slick and over-processed bands like Poison, Def Leppard and Bon Jovi. Indie assigned a do-it-yourself attitude to bands that had no other choice.

Then came Nirvana. In 1991, these flannel fanatics brought their independent rock – they had already released records on indie label Sub Pop – and took over the entire world with it. Their self-titled album, put out by major label Geffen, is one of the most iconic and popular records of all time.

Now, Kurt and company didn’t do anything wrong – it’s a hell of an album – but they did throw the world of so-called independent rock into a world of confusion.

Fast forward to today, and “indie” appears to mean a whole lot more than “recorded and sold by an independent label.” And with bands like Death Cab for Cutie and The Killers posing as the poster boys for indie rock while putting out albums on major labels, we come back to one of my original questions – What the heck does “indie” even mean?

Let’s try to figure this out. Well, it seems that any band could be considered indie as long as it falls outside the realm of what can be called mainstream rock – wildly visible acts like U2, Pearl Jam and the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

But that just doesn’t sit right with me – I would rather listen to Creed than call a band like Disturbed indie rock, even though they’re arguably not mainstream.

So we’ve knocked out the possibility that you can be indie as long as you’re not widely known around the world. But what about the band’s label – the whole reason “indie” was called “indie?”

Here we run into two problems. One is a band like The Killers, which is associated with indie music because of its rather unique sound and the musical genre it fits into – not exactly straightforward rock ‘n’ roll, but one that never put out a record in this country on an independent label.

The other is a band like Death Cab for Cutie, which made its name recording independently released records, but then was picked up by a major label. Are both bands indie? Are neither? We can’t say that a band is not indie once it leaves its former label – we call that selling out and tell our friends that we refuse to listen to the band anymore, even though we secretly just bought the new record on iTunes. Well, at least I do that.

Our next possible explanation for indie is the sound of the music. Sure, I can listen to a band and take a reasonable guess as to its status as a major or independent label act, but with so much music bridging the gap (even The Decemberists have signed to a major), there’s no telling if I’d be right.

Plus, there are too many acts actually on independent labels with completely unrelated styles to be able to call indie a genre of music.

And with that argument being invalid, I’m back to square one with only a single realization: There is no such thing as indie. It’s not a sound. It’s not a record label. It’s not a level of visibility. “Indie” just doesn’t mean anything. I’m sorry guys, it had to be said.

If you’ve staked out your ground as an “indie” apologist, enlighten Justin at [email protected].