Tour Dates
Past Shows
Records
Press Folks
• News •












Thrasher, Feb. 2004 • Interview by Al Burian

Why decide form Challenger instead of focusing MM?
Dave Laney started bringing fast punk songs into Milemarker practice, and it wasn't really working for that band. At the same time he got a pro-tools set-up and wanted to try doing some recording with it. He and I decided that we'd record the stray songs. I ended up adding a lot of guitar and vocal parts, and by the end it sounded different enough (we thought) from Milemarker that it warranted its own name. We sent the recorded demo to Jade Tree, they liked it, and all of a sudden we had started a new band.

What kind of creative outlet does Challenger give that MM doesn't?
There is an element of spontaneity and an element of rigidity in Challenger that I like. The songs were relatively easy to write initially, and then most of the work was put into making demos, doing structural adjustments, trying out different vocal patterns and things like that. I guess in recording you call it "pre-production-" something which Milemarker has never done much of. The Challenger record maybe sounds more spontaneous than Milemarker records do, and in a certain way it was, but in terms of the technical execution it's kind of the opposite.

Are you afraid that two fairly big musical projects will leave you too busy or with too much stuff on your hands?
Having a lot of stuff to do is not so bad. I'm uncomfortable with being unproductive. Having multiple projects can help, actually, because it helps you increment your time, it varies your creative energies, and it takes the pressure off of any one thing to be the thing that's successful, or that people know about. Focusing too much on any creative endeavor gives you this imperialistic mindset, like "everyone must have my band sticker on their lunchbox," but for me the goal of making things isn't to achieve hegemony, it's more just making as much cool stuff as you can in the time allotted.
I sense a bit more aggressive tone with Challenger. What prompted this style of playing/sound?
I would say hearing too much quiet music around. A lot of our contemporary bands and musicians, who started playing music in the hardcore scene, have moved towards slower, more melancholy and introspective type of music. I think that's a natural progression- you can't be angry all the time, there's more to express than that. On the other hand, for me personally, there's still plenty of reasons to be up in arms about everything- I'm constantly pissed, constantly fighting the urge to stand on a street corner and yell at people passing by. The function of playing music for me has always been aggressive and confrontational.

I've read reviews that compare you to Husker Du- do you find credibility to these comparisons, or do you feel the sound comes from a more unique sensibility?
I'm the least objective person you can ask, obviously, but I think of it as coming more out of where we're from, the North Carolina hardcore and punk scene. And then, I think a lot of the stuff going on where I grew up was influenced by SST bands. So maybe indirectly, that comparison seems valid, but it's also pretty general-- when people say "sounds like Husker Du" they mean up-tempo, melodic, with guitars in front, and that describes lots of music which doesn't sound anything like that band. And when you say "I was influenced by SST bands" that often only means "I'm over 25."Why the name challenger for project?

We had a list of band names, and Dave said, "OK, the top contender right now is so-and-so," and I said, "Until we get a challenger." Then we both thought, hey, that's a good band name. It seemed like it summed up the idea of the band, which is to push ourselves, to give ourselves a challenge. And then of course, five seconds later we realized, oh wait, everyone will just think of the space shuttle. But then, that seemed good too, that the word itself has become sort of corrupted, that there is a lingering guilt or national shame to this supposedly powerful phrase. So the official line on the name now is that we weren't thinking about the space shuttle at all, but if you do, that's your hang-up.You guys are in two musical projects together.

What do you bring out in each other that makes you want to create so much music together?
I feel comfortable with Dave's motivations. I think we have the same general attitude, ethics, and pace of productivity. We have similar schedules. Also, it helps me a lot that Dave has good organizational abilities and a rudimentary understanding of finances, as I have neither.

I know MM has been known for having a somewhat political aesthetic over the years. Are you trying to get that across w/ challenger at all?
Milemarker definitely has worked on having a "political aesthetic"- although the value of being aesthetically political is up for debate. More important than what you say is what you do, I think-- not playing Clearchannel venues, for instance, or not playing shows sponsored by cigarette companies, not letting your songs get used in car commercials. It doesn't hit people over the head as much as a big Che Guevara banner behind your band or something, but I think in the long run your actions are what makes a difference. I don't really care that much about aesthetics. Challenger is trying for a more straightforward or uncontrived approach. But, sure, the politics in music come out of our personal political convictions. That expresses itself in almost anything you do.

Speaking of politics what is your take on current state of US political affairs? Has this influenced your music of late? If so, how?
Right now seems like the worst, most demoralizing time I can ever remember in US politics. It seems like a lot of people are dissatisfied, and would like to be part of a movement for change, but it's very difficult right now to align ourselves and recognize our common interests. The right wing has done a good job of organizing themselves, and they recognize that political struggle is long-term. On the left we need to get this attitude as well, articulate our common interests, and gear up for a long struggle for realizing them. One of the easiest things to organize around, for instance, would be universal health care, since our lack of decent health care in this country effects everyone.

As far as influencing the music–the song "unemployment" was written after seeing unemployment statistics in the paper as a cheap shot at something a lot of people would be able to identify with. Political music is problematic because it simplifies things into sound bites or slogans. But I realize that I'm a person with some sort of audience and platform to speak, so I try to address politics and social change in some way, usually, just to get people thinking about it or talking about it.

You guys have been involved in the underground/indie scene for some time now. Biggest changes? What are your feelings about these changes?
I think the primary difference I see is that independence is now an option, not a necessity. The very term "indie," short for independent, denotes a musical genre, whereas it used to denote a financial state. The co-option of the "underground" has been really thorough, so that most people in bands on actually independent labels consider it inconvenient or an act of selfless martyrdom, while the people who run the labels by and large seem to be getting comfortable with the idea of being farm teams. To me, it seems like the independent scene has gotten about as much from affiliation with the dependent scene as Mexico has gotten from NAFTA.

Meaning of the title of your album?
The idea that humans are not much more sophisticated in their basic circuitry than the rats that will push a lever to administer cocaine over and over until they die, or the way that goldfish can overeat themselves to death. The emptiness of the American psychic landscape, where eight per cent of the world population consumes a quarter of the resources and then take anti-depressants to deal with our body issues. That kind of thing.