In this section I wish to look at several areas, starting with the history of fanzines before moving onto the more ideological aspects of zine publications. My appraisal of fanzine history is only a brief outline of the relevant changes throughout their development as has impact upon music fanzines, but is still necessary in providing a background to the establishment of fanzines and an understanding of how fanzines' current situation came to be established.

History and Development

Fanzines have existed for a considerable amount of time, the first one generally recognised as being The Comet, originally published in May 1930. This publication was created by the Science Correspondence Club, the first ever science fiction fan organisation to be founded, and its content was grounded in that genre. Science fiction had a dominance over fanzine publications for many years after this as more genre fans developed the desire to create their own publications. As Duncombe notes, "[t]hey sent letters to Amazing Stories [pulp SF magazine], then began writing to each other, and finally, pushing one step further, started writing their own stories and producing their own publications, eradicating the distance between consumer and creator" (1997: 108).

Music fanzines are commonly recognised to be a direct result of the rise of punk music and culture in the late 1970s. As Atton states, "it was the advent of Punk in 1976 that began the self-publishing revolution we see today" (1996: 23). The punk ethic stated that anyone could do things themselves, regardless of a lack of any 'professionalism' or recognised training, as long as they had the enthusiasm to get things done. This ethic was far reaching, ranging from suggesting that anyone could get a band together to inferring that enthusiasm was the only necessary prerequisite for the production of a publication.

The timing of this movement was also beneficial to self-publishers; photocopiers were more readily available, meaning that once a publication had been created, it had a relatively cheap and accessible means of being reproduced for a potentially considerable audience. These factors therefore combined to create "the access and enthusiasm to produce fanzines" (Haynes 1995: 40) that could then have an impact upon the world of publishing.

It is has also been commented that the wider and more expansive use of fanzines was influenced primarily by the British punk fanzines at this time. Haynes has suggested that "the linguistic and production styles of British fanzines", utilising both working class language and a cut and paste, visibly DIY format, were copied "across the globe", particularly in the United States (1995: 41). British punk self-publishers therefore seem to be pioneers of the fanzine form, and their influence spread further than simply encouraging further music zines. Rowe refers to the militant, challenging side of punk when he writes about "a challenge to the mainstream sports media complex from the fanzine, an informal sports publication 'inherited' from the punk independent rock scene" (Rowe 1995: 145). Here the connection is clearly drawn between the original group of punk self-publishers and the belief, years later, that a degree of the same attitude, DIY ethic and style can make the views of the unrepresented known and provide a voice of expression for those outside of the establishment.

Original punk fanzine cut and paste style in the contemporary Codeye

Original punk fanzines such as Ripped & Torn, Sniffin' Glue and 48 Thrills, in the words of Richard Haynes, "provided graphics and typography that were homologous with punk's subterranean and anarchic style" (1995: 40). However, the method of expression of fanzines was not to remain solely the property of the punks who had originally conceived them. Using these original publications as an example of what could be done by virtually anyone motivated enough to try it, many other fanzines in a variety of different areas appeared. Fanzines appeared to cover almost all other areas of music, as well as also covering other, entirely unrelated areas (such as, for example, the American zines dedicated to seventies television programmes). People interested in any subject matter were then able to self-publish their own zine, providing information on any area that had perhaps been previously entirely ignored by the mainstream media.

Fanzine Culture

As fanzines were produced in ever greater volumes and developed into new areas of subject matter, a form of culture also developed around them. A "fanzine scene" is referred to by zine producers; it is difficult in some ways to conceptualise this scene due to its decentralised nature. In addition to this, fanzines are a particularly unstable area, particularly due their reliance solely on the interest of the publisher; if they have no wish to produce further issues, perhaps even after their initial issue, then the fanzine will just cease to be. Therefore, while it can be said that there is a huge amount of people involved in fanzines, the particular people involved are liable to change frequently.
However, as geographically dispersed as the writers of fanzines might be, together they do represent a form of scene in the sense in which Duncombe refers to a "virtual bohemia" of zine writers exchanging ideas through their publications (1997: 14). I now wish to look at the more ideological aspects involved in the production of music fanzines.

Different Approaches to Fanzines - an Opposition / Alternative to the Mainstream

As noted in the literature review, a number of the texts concerning fanzines and discussing theories related to them suggest that fanzines can act either as an opposition or an auxiliary to the mainstream media. These respective theories of zines functioning as resistance or extensions are consciously reflected in the mindset of fanzine publishers. Their attitudes and perceptions of the mainstream music press are diverse, but can be divided into two rough categories. While some believe that music magazines have nothing to offer and that zines are the only worthwhile channel of music news and information, others respect the mainstream and view their zine as providing information that, for one reason or another, the commercial press is unable to provide. It is also interesting that those fanzine writers who fall into the second category profess an interest in writing for commercial magazines, and are to some extent using fanzines as a training ground for this purpose.

The majority of fanzine writer's complaints about the mainstream music media are that it is a capitalist enterprise, interested solely in making money, at whatever cost to content or truthfulness. Allied to this is a conception of the mainstream music media working in conjunction with a music industry that cynically markets its products with no respect for either music fans or musicians. As Michael Thorn of Maximum Rock and Roll writes, "commercial mags are garbage - they promote what the record company hype machines and spindoctors tell them to" (response to questionnaire). This view of commercial magazines being nothing more than a marketing arm of the music industry that will only inform the reader on music products that will bring profits to the corporations is widespread throughout fanzine writers.

Similarly, Russell Remains of Fracture is also scathing about the financial motivations of commercial music magazines. As he writes, "I have realised from experience over the years that the mainstream glossy magazines are completely controlled by money and sales; the content is secondary" (response to questionnaire). Fracture is also of such a size that it has experienced at first hand attempts at manipulation of coverage. Russell Remains writes about how record companies have offered advertising in exchange for the fanzine interviewing one of their bands, which, because of the status of Fracture, he has been able to decline, therefore keeping the content purely centred on what should be included on its own merit.

It is however perhaps unsurprising that the two biggest critics of commercial magazines as the marketing arm of a capitalist recording industry are from two of the largest punk fanzines in publication. Implicit in punk ideology is a belief of the corruption of money, and a support of musicians and record labels that do not have the backing of the commercial establishment and are perceived as operating for a higher goal than pure profit. The original music fanzines did, after all, come from the initial punk movement in order to provide coverage of a new and challenging sort of music that was directly opposed to the traditional music industry ideas of what constituted music. It is only natural therefore that contemporary punk fanzines should continue an assault on what they view as a corrupt industry.

However, many fanzine writers outside of punk ideology also have problems with the mainstream music magazines. One of the main problems stated here is the mainstream's inherent 'professionalism'. Here, professionalism is given a degraded definition. Professional music journalists are seen as people who write because they are paid to do so, not because they have any particular interest in what they are writing about. Furthermore, that they are viewed as professional writers more than music fans also means that they can write about not what specifically interests them, but what they are instructed to write about, which has clear repercussions in relation to the argument about the commercial motivations of magazine content above.

What is inferred here is that money is just as much of a motivation for music journalists to write as it is for their magazines to publish. Therefore, if the financial incentive for professional writers were to be taken away - if, in short, they were to write under the same conditions as fanzine writers do - then they would simply stop. In addition to this, music journalists are also viewed as being far closer to the subjects of their articles than the "common fan" is. Fanzine writers can claim a far higher amount of authenticity when reviewing a compact disc that they have spent a considerable amount of their own money on than the professional music writer can when they are simply given a collection of albums to review. What fanzines substitute for the "professional" writer is the amateur (and, as Duncombe notes, the roots of that word are in the Latin amator, or lover (1997: 14)), the fan as writer. The fanzine writer is therefore writing from the outside, and gaining a new perspective on his or her subject matter from this standpoint.

In opposition to the professional writer then, is the self-publisher who writes purely for their own interest. As Sid Stovold of Pop Art comments, "I've always thought fanzines are better because they're written by people who really care" (response to questionnaire). This passion for music is one of the most prized attributes of fanzines, as illustrated by another comment by a zine writer; "the more zines I read … the more boring and lifeless and sort of annoyingly "official" commercial music mags begin to look" (response to No38 questionnaire). An experience of a number of zines can therefore be seen to make commercial magazines look far less interesting in comparison.

As Asty Morrison of Heavenly/H adds, "it's a relief. Something totally seperate from national "music magazines" [her emphasis] that caters for fans' needs" (response to questionnaire).

Respect for the mainstream's skills / a more considered judgement of them

However, just as this experience can be seen to have the effect of making some people more critical of the mainstream, in others it produces a more considered judgement of fanzines' commercial counterparts. This is visible in two ways, one that considers the practical skills that are required to write professionally and the second, which is more ideological, as in the following quote:

"I do now see which people and mags are actively trying to make things better for the musical underground and which ones are more interested in their own egos or lining their own pockets, but anyone that reads the press can see that if they think a bit for 2 minutes anyway." (Jockrock questionnaire)

Stuart McHugh of Jockrock is here reconsidering the formerly stated view that the whole of the commercial press has a detrimental effect on music as a whole, stating that while some publications are true to this idea, others are more beneficial in nature.

Some fanzine writers state that they have learnt from their own experience of putting together their publications how difficult such a task is, giving credit to the professionals who are able to do this on a regular basis. As Mark Seager of But First The News says, "I've realised just how difficult it is to write pieces as well written as the ones in the NME etc." In addition to this, he also states that, while him and his friends are able to produce their own fanzine, "none of us think we're good enough to work as music journalists as a career" (response to questionnaire).

As one further example of this, Paul Haworth of Homelovin' writes that, going through the process of putting together articles himself, he is now "less tolerant of bad/confused writing and more respectful of quality music journalism" (response to questionnaire). Seeing the problems involved in journalism and writing therefore give some fanzine writers an insight into the professional world and allow them the ability to be able to tell "bad/confused" from "quality".

Taking an Ancillary Stance

In line with the respect that many fanzine writers have for the mainstream, there is also a conscious belief that zine publications should and do function as supplements to, as opposed to replacements for, the mainstream music media. Views such as those of Xana Charnock of The IndiePendent that "both [fanzines and commercial magazines] have their pros and cons, and there is a place for both" (response to questionnaire) state that mainstream and fan publications can each operate in their own separate spheres. They do not therefore have to come into direct competition and drive each other out of the market.

This is possible because of the variety that is possible within fanzines' range of publications. Any commercial magazine, whatever subject area it covers, can only hold a certain amount of information, which is of course subject to the constraints related to consumer appeal as outlined above. The subject areas of fanzines can also cover, not only music that does not have a broad enough appeal for mass consumption, but also new bands and acts that would be considered too much of a risk to be covered in large circulation magazines. At any given point there are numerous new musical acts playing and recording; whilst some of these may have true commercial potential, it would be beyond any commercial magazine to cover the majority of new bands, many of whom will never become large and therefore commercially viable subject matter. When bands are therefore small and quite possibly not signed to a record label, small-scale publications are the only form of publicity they can generally get access to. If a band does however attain a following through fanzine publicity, then it may grow to such a size that it can then be covered by the mainstream media.

There are therefore a number of contrasting views held by fanzine writers on commercial music magazines. However, whilst some have gained a greater respect for the skills of professional writers, there is only rarely not a sense of caution where commercial magazines are concerned. The cause of this problem seems to be that mainstream magazines, unlike fanzines, are far less direct communications. Fanzines are as simple, and therefore unsusceptible to the corruption of beliefs, as any publication could be. A fanzine is typically the product of one person or a small group of friends who oversee the entire process of publication without complications such as financial matters and audience targeting to get in the way. Because the production process of a commercial magazine is hidden and includes a far greater number of people, there is a concern that at some point in production an agenda enters the publication, interfering with the communication of information.

Zine Community

One thing that has always been a particular attribute of fanzines as a collection of publications is the community aspect that brings all writers together. Sid Stovold of Pop Art refers to fanzines as being more than about the music covered, but also as a direct expression of the writers' interests. He suggests that as well as bringing attention to new bands, zines also exist as "a way of like-minded people meeting and saying 'hey, I'm into that too!'" (response to questionnaire). The production of a fanzine can therefore be seen as, partly at least, as like creating a large-scale classified advertisement for people with similar interests.

However, this method of forming new relationships with people that share the same interests is more than this. After all, if many of the bands that are covered in fanzines are not covered in the mainstream, then a particular sort of relationship is constructed, one that is built around a taste in 'underground' culture; a solidarity around bands that are, in general terms, 'unknown'. Furthermore, the fanzine writer's interest in such music is not merely limited to them stating such an interest; they have created their own publication purely for that purpose. Their dedication is therefore seen as assured.

So it is perhaps only natural that fanzine writers, each enthusiastic about the music that does not normally get covered in the mainstream media, should form a community of sorts. Probably the most visible way in which this community operates is in its tradition of exchanging fanzines amongst writers.

This has been a feature of fanzine culture since its inception. Fanzine writers have always been able to obtain copies of other fanzines by sending out a copy of theirs. This also stands for the process of reviewing fanzines. Didier Becu of The Original Sin states that "there is a sort of zine rule that you review other fanzines while others will do it for you" (response to questionnaire). As much of an unwritten rule as this is, it has endured well as a way for fanzine writers to encourage readers to look further into zine publications and see what others are publishing. Therefore, once an individual acquires one fanzine, they can look at the zines reviewed in it and choose others to send off for, then sending off for more zines reviewed in those ones and so on.

What should also be noted here is that, although these reviews are being conducted in a community of free exchange of publications, the reviews are not always mutually appreciative. The reviews are sometimes critical, but with an extremely small amount of exceptions, do at the same time respect the efforts of the producer, making their criticisms into ways that the fanzine could be improved. The exception is however in Maximum Rock and Roll where the reviewers seemingly have few problems with attacking fanzines that do not live up to their 'purist' view of punk. One review refers disparagingly to a fanzine's glossy cover, use of "promo photos" and "fluff pieces" posing as interviews with commercial punk bands before summing it up as "a complete waste of my time" (Maximum Rock and Roll issue 213).

An additional feature of fanzine culture is not only the encouragement to buy more fanzines, but also to produce your own. The majority of fanzine writers that I contacted were prompted to begin self-publishing after reading various fanzines and wanting to have a go at it themselves. This can be done because not only are the means of fanzine production within the grasp of nearly everyone, due to fanzines not being driven by the market, there is theoretically no limit to the number of fanzines that can be produced at any one time.

Because of the distance between fanzine culture and the mainstream, there is also the opportunity for this community of self-publishers to claim a greater equality in that anyone who wants to publish their own fanzine can. This is at variance with the traditional dominance of music writing by men. However, the equality achieved is only partial; although there is a much more balanced mix of genders in fanzine publishing, other divides still exist. Fanzine producers generally belong to a quite specific social group; as Mitchell states, "most fanzine writers are white, middle class and educated" (online reference). There is therefore a question as to how successful fanzines are as a truly accessible form of expression for all members of society.

It should also be added that fanzine writers are with few exceptions in a particular age range, being either teenagers or in their twenties. Only two of the fanzine publishers I surveyed were outside of this range at 33 and 37. Fanzines are importantly a medium of the young and enthusiastic who, while having ideas, are still learning through experience how to publish them.

There does seem to be a change taking place in fanzine culture as an increasing amount of fanzine writers refuse to trade copies with others. Issue 64 of the American review zine Factsheet Five (after its repackaging as a more commercially viable publication at which point it also refused to trade copies with other fanzines) listed 45 music zines. Of these, 22 state that they're not interested in trading with others, 11 trade selectively, and only 4 are openly willing to trade. It could be suggested that one possible reason for this is the increasing amount of fanzines that are not fanzines in the traditional sense, but more like magazines produced by inexpensive means. It therefore follows that these publications are not so interested in the community aspects of fanzines, and wanting more people to read their own fanzine far more than they are interested in the writings of others.

However, whatever the reason for this change, it can be seen to have a great effect on the nature of an area of publishing that has, in part, always relied on its collective support. Furthermore, this new type of fanzine is not only disruptive to the ideal of community publishing but also puts in its place the traditional relationship between the reader as consumer and the writer as producer, with an inherent distance between the two roles.

The Fanzine Producer as Individual

Due to fanzines being created outside of any commercial constraints and, generally, the constraints of deadlines, it is far more possible for one individual to remain the sole creator of the publication. Of course, they may not wish to, given the community side of fanzine production. But there are still a number of fanzines that can, with a certain amount of pride, stress that the publication is the work of one person exercising their creative skills over the fanzine as a whole. This is demonstrated by the ironic staff list in P'tahk issue 3:

Editor: Doogz
Contributors: Doogz
Advertising Dude: Doogz
Designer: Doogz

Doogz (aka Steve Russell) is proudly able to say that everything in P'tahk is all his own work. It may take him up to six months to prepare each issue, but when it is ready, both he and his readers can be assured that everything within it is from the view of one music fan, with no other influence.

In keeping with the views explored on fanzines' various relationships with the commercial music press, it is perhaps not very surprising that what is valued most of all in fanzine writing is personality. Personality provides verification that the zine is written by a real person and not merely something produced by a professional, and therefore distanced, writer.

This perspective comes up again and again in the comments by zine writers as to what makes a zine good or bad;

"[A good zine needs] personality, otherwise you might as well be reading the NME" (response to No38 questionnaire)

"Good: if it contains its own personality.
Bad: if it's just a copy from the NME" (Response to The Original Sin questionnaire)

"You get people throwing together "fact files" on big bands that contain no original material, just culled articles from popular magazines, and pass these off as fanzines. While no doubt informative and entertaining, the info is usually widely known trivia, thus rendering the whole effort useless." (Response to P'tahk questionnaire)

Included in this idea of the personality of the fanzine writer is their enthusiasm for their subject matter. Several times fanzine writers commented on their questionnaires that they view music as being of primary importance to them. "I would hope [to get into a music related job], music is my life!" writes Deano of Dilemm-ahhh! (response to questionnaire). However, would it be possible for music to still be Deano's life if it was also his job? As another fanzine producer writes, "I like to do all my musical things on a voluntary level to ensure that I never start treating music like work" (response to Fracture questionnaire). Because music is not a source of income for them, fanzine writers can still view albums and concerts as entertainments, as opposed to jobs.

Of course, the fanzine writer is still able to mediate the sides of their personality that they allow onto the pages of their zine. As an example of this, Helen from No38 refers to writing her, now defunct, fanzine, before coming out, and pretending to be attracted to the men featured in various articles. Therefore, despite one dominant personality being the creator of a zine, this personality can still often be adjusted in order to present an image that the zine publisher wants to portray to the readers.

An Isolated World

A major problem that fanzines have is their seclusion and isolation away from the general public. As much as fanzines are full of recommendations for other interesting small-scale publications available, there is little discussion of fanzines outside of fanzines themselves. Solely concentrating on music fanzines published in Britain, there is a huge volume and variety of zines currently being published. But the question does have to be asked as to how people could find out about them without first being inside fanzine culture itself.

The problems of fanzine distribution will be dealt with in the following chapter, but here I wish to briefly discuss the more ideological aspects of fanzines' isolation.

One complaint of the general reading public made by fanzine writers is that "nobody wants to read about stuff they haven't heard of, they want what they already know" (response to P'tahk questionnaire). Therefore, articles on new bands will be of little interest to the majority of the reading public, the only people interested may however be those who are interested in the same or similar bands, possibly publishing a fanzine themselves about them. These fanzines and the music within them will therefore only be able to preach to the converted. Furthermore, they also echo the idea suggested by Rowe that these small-scale publications only serve to confirm their readership's "subordinate status" (1995: 165) by containing this information within a sub-cultural group.

However, as well as this limited readership potential it could also be suggested that the isolation of fanzines is, in part, self-imposed. As will be covered in the section of this dissertation related to fanzine production, there is now a growing number of fanzines that adopt similar production values and layouts to mainstream magazines. This blurring of the boundary between professional and amateur is, however, problematic for the traditional values of the fanzine.

As previously noted, many fanzines now do not accept trades with other publications, which, along with their 'glossy' formats, distances them from what has previously been thought of as a 'zine'.

The main problem here is the extent to which a fanzine can have many of the same characteristics as a magazine without bearing the same criticisms levelled at the mainstream media. While some might say that a fanzine can break out of its traditional bubble and gain greater commerciality without betraying its amateur and honest status, for others any concessions to a wider audience are met with great disapproval; fanzines are supposed to stand against the mainstream, not attempt to be reconciled within it. The theory is that any fanzine writer who is concentrating on his or her audience is not being true to the music they are covering and are just as susceptible to the corruption of content as anything existing in the mainstream. Such publications therefore, whilst bearing some of the characteristics of fanzines, are difficult to describe as such.