There. They said it themselves. I just can't think of any better introduction for this great band. They are "math rock" (for lack of a better term), they are "post rock", they are an instrumental band (one that does not bore me, yay!), and they kick ass. They have released an album called Decomposition of Movement, a 7", and a split with Auxes. I love them.
This is an interview that was never finished. But the points that were made were just too valid to disappear on a hard drive forever.
(This is my friend Emil. He is not in the band anymore.)Obstacles? Why? And which ones? Which decomposition of what movement?
Thomas: The title Decompostion Of Movement has two sides to it; a concrete and an abstract one. First of all it's the name of a brain lesion, which means that your gestures are broken up into individual segments instead of being executed smoothly. Second, it refers to the idea that music is not about linear movement, but movement in a mass of directions. To say it briefly, it's songwriting - anti songwriting. Mathrock, as I see it, is a matter of decomposition in general, a break down of the framework of "classical songwriting". Leaving more room for playing around and turning things upside down, therefore making it more interesting, more creative and less predictable. We're not really interested in trying to write or reinvent the perfect rock song. To me, that seems so unambitious and boring. I'm not saying that what we do is super original and never-been-done-before like, but more that what we're doing is simply putting together small pieces of noise and music in formations that seem challenging, new and exciting to us. It's a collage: everything's already been done, now it just needs to be messed up!
Niels-Peder: Obstacles, as in the things we encounter in the process of writing songs, but also in a more general term. The things that are all around us, other people, trains, buses, our computers, all the obstacles that meet us everywhere we go. For me the thing is that we tend to see these obstacles as things to be passed, getting over things, getting well, the way we tend to ignore the obstacles at hand. I think we need to be more aware of all these obstacles, investigate them and then decide what is going on with them. There I think, we can truly find out what we hate and what we love. Obstacles are there to be studied, to be seen as the things that - in a strange way - make up our very life.
Obstacles does not have a vocalist. Was that a conscious decision? What are the pros/cons about this? Do you sometimes find yourself having a hard time getting your message across only with instruments?
Thomas: Can't really say it was a conscious decision. In the beginning we tried several vocalists out, but it never really worked out. It was fun and all, but we never got that 'yes' feeling. So after while we trashed the idea. I guess we wanted to do something new and different from what we had done before, and the vocalists we tried out didn't really contribute to that.
One of the things I love about being an instrumental band is the way it leaves space for the instruments (or maybe it's just an ego thing!). When we write music, we often go, "Oh, this part sort of needs a lead figure", because there are no vocals. And then it's always really interesting to try and figure out what exactly it is that's needed, what instrument, and how to play it. So in some ways I think the creative process is a bit more challenging when writing instrumental music. For us "the message thing" is just as much a matter of how we choose to be a band and be in a band as it is about writing, let's say, political songs. We play music that's relevant and means something to us. Music that moves us, be it protest songs or love songs.
To tie right into that, what sets obstacles apart from your run of the mill "postrock"-band in my book is that you are very DIY and very political - by choice, and not by necessity. Want to eloborate?
Thomas: The way I see it, there's a huge difference between being an indie band that is really independent right until a major label shows a bit of interest, and a band who wants to run it themselves, because they believe in doing it that way. Of course a band is a business in some ways, or at least it becomes one when you release a record or go on tour. But for us it's important to bear in mind that, when we got involved in music - touring and releasing records. We were only able to do so because people were ready to help us get started, you know, booking tours, doing shows, releasing our music and so on. And it's still like that. We did a tour in Russia some months ago, a really great tour. And again, we could only do that because people over there worked their asses off to bring us there, without getting anything but the experience in return. To me, that's really something. It's not just about chords and beats, but about deliberately choosing alternative ways of organization. A subversive approach to the whole promotion thing is, as I see it, the core element in being a "political" band.
Niels-Peder: Being political is in essence, as I see it, not about saying the right things or having a radical attitude. To me, the political side to the project is, as Thomas puts it, about deliberately choosing another way. The meeting between people and the exchange of ideas and experiences this brings.
Obstacles will play at the Rhiz in Vienna on August 16, together with Alarma Man.
www.obstacles.dk
