Art VS. Product

[Johnny Swallow]

How fine is the line between these two?

Sometimes I sit here and complain about how there is 'no good music coming out these days, the music industry is producing a bunch of crap' etc etc. (I know it all comes down to each individual's taste in music but I know many feel the same as I do).

I've been thinking about the music industry, even asking is the problem the music industry itself? Think about it, how absurd does it seem to say 'the poetry industry', 'the post-modernistic painting industry'...seems like an oxymoron to me at least. Art, product, industry, where does one start and the other begin?

But when you think of the great artists of other mediums, Picasso, Van Gogh, Shakesphere, Michealangelo et. al. they were not part of an industry. While their art may have provided their living, it wasn't squeezed out by an industry. They didn't have to deal with producers, record execs, A&R people, experts on which demographic their art should be targeted toward, managers telling them which markets to focus on. Their inspiration wasn't on a timetable, their genius didn't have to meet any schedule. Shouldn't we expect the same from those we look to make artful music? No wonder this same old pile of shite keeps being crapped out by the music industry on to the willing public. How can originality, creativity and genuine emotion be expressed through music when it is churned out like a million songs before it.

Record execs need to learn that making good songs is not a damn math equation. And professional songwriters sap all that is pure and honest about what music can be.

Are we kidding ourselves? THE MUSIC INDUSTRY, what a joke.

------------------
This post brought to you by: Me "Don't hate me because I'm bitter."

AIM: JuanSwallow

 

[foray]

No, it's been like this far longer than you think. Picasso, Michaelangelo and Shakespeare -- they were all commissioned by big boots to produce their art. Sorry but your idealistic world of art never existed; only in our hopes.

foray

 

[Saracene]

I'm pretty sure all those artists you've mentioned had other people breathing on their necks all their lives and had to make compromises because of the whims of the powerful people their positions depended upon. In fact, I've once read a very interesting article about Michelangelo which put all those romantic notions down by saying that in reality he was very enterprising and business-like.

Also, when people think of art or literature, they immediately think of geniuses like Shakespeare or Rafael, but if you really take -all- books that have ever been written and -all- paintings that have ever been done, artists we appreciate and remember now probably wouldn't take 1% of the whole! There's been plenty of books, plays, paintings, etc. churned out for the single purpose of amusing the public for a little while, only to be forgotten forever the next day. So the other mediums aren't really that different to the music.

[This message has been edited by Saracene (edited 04-03-2002).]

 

[Angela Harlem]

Johnny you said that inspiration isn't on a timetable. I probably agree with that, but that point got me to thinking that everything has a time. Art and music in particular run through a cycle. And in that, I think there are 2 parts to them. Every style like I said has its run of popularity and they overlap each other and last for a bit. But there is what I call fashionable music and art, those which have a very short life span. If you look at a recent history of music, even in our short years on the planet we have seen them come and go, and come back again. But there is always that pretentious factory made, supply and demand tripe produced, that is forsaking quality.

Perhaps we are just in a lull. I cannot wait for this diva epidemic to go. I detest female singers. I believe Celine Dion is our generation's Barbara Streisand. But she will have her day and fade away. I just have to wait patiently. I just hope she and her buddies (the other diva's) take the girlie groups and boy bands with them.

 

[Lilly]

We do live in a capitolist society, I don't know if you really could expect that no one would market things everyone likes. Music industry, art industry, whatever industry, they make what we want. And if it's good, should we complain that we think it has too much advertising? I guess the word 'industry' doesn't bother me as much as product does....but that's quite a different rant altogether.

------------------
"Just tell 'em what they wanna hear & nobody will complain."

 

[foray]

On the contrary, Lilly, there are artists who do make art entirely for themselves, like my friend's friend who shuts himself up at home and makes hundreds of paintings til there are piles and piles of it around the house. But he never sells them. And he never uses canvas and oils as he can't afford it. These people form a very very small minority of the minority and are basically poor and underfed.

(last phrase hyperbole)

Johnny, geniuses on a timetable? I think geniuses thrive on timetables; barriers are an artist's best friend.

foray

------------------
so bounce, basketball, bounce

 

[The Wanderer]

what about God, foray?

 

[foray]

What about God?

 

[brettig]

What about Bob?

 

[KevM]

THE RIAA ARE A BUNCH OF ASSHOLES!
http://www.stoppoliceware.org/ http://www.boycott-riaa.com/

they pay radio stations shit loads of $$$ to play their over hyped crap and then complain about ppl using napster etc. to find good stuff becuse the stuff they pay the radio stations to play sucks.

Their only hope now is to get thease stupid copyrite because in the digital age they have become redundant.

Instead of inovating with new technology they are fighting it. If it wasn't for the internet i whould still only buy U2 stuff. And I will never buy a copy protected cd.

Now i just need to find a job so i can buy more vinyl

------------------
-KevM
-----------------------
Vote U2 - http://vote.u2.wox.org

 

[The Wanderer]

foray, I'm sick of your signature, and to tell you the truth, I never really liked it at all

 

[Johnny Swallow]

Originally posted by KevM:
they pay radio stations shit loads of $$$ to play their over hyped crap and then complain about ppl using napster etc. to find good stuff becuse the stuff they pay the radio stations to play sucks.

That's what I think is so horrible about the industry. A bunch of suits who don't know anything about music pushing for what they think will make money. 'Who cares if it sucks as long as it makes a buck.' I They don't know what's good, they just know what has been popular for the past 5 minutes.

I know that I'm railing against a capitalist system but I still think that art should not be so dependant on the bottom line. I know people have to make a living and such but this is my little communist dream.

 

[tackleberry]

Originally posted by brettig:
What about Bob?

I'm sailing....I'm SAILING!

------------------
"You gotta put the women and children first, but you've got an unquenchable thirst for New York..."

 

[joyfulgirl]

Johnny, you always bring up interesting and thought-provoking subjects--just wanted to commend you on that. Unfortunately, I'm not well-versed enough on this one to comment intelligently but what foray says makes sense to me. I also worked briefly for a record label many years ago, and have many friends in the business--enough to share your disillusionment and frustrations.

 

[Lilly]

Originally posted by The Wanderer:
foray, I'm sick of your signature, and to tell you the truth, I never really liked it at all

I like foray's sig.

And foray, I see what you mean. I write, but you'd never know it since I rarely share the stories. I guess what I meant was art that is sold is marketed and whatnot.....sorry I was vague there.

------------------
My cat's breath smells like cat food.

 

[melon]

Art is art, and you can never expect people to agree on what it is.

It is always interesting how we romanticize the Renaissance artists. Much of their work was contracted. Michaelanglo was, pretty much, a servant to Lorenzo de Medici (incidentally, one of my very distant relatives

) and Pope Julius II. Even then, the Sistine Chapel angered him, as it was seen as "pornographic," and they spent centuries painting loincloths (thankfully, with most of them removed during the recent restoration, minus the 1521 Council of Trent alterations). Not much has really changed when it comes down to it.

Melon

------------------
"Still, I never understood the elevation of greed as a political credo. Why would anyone want to base a political programme on bottomless dissatisfaction and the impossibility of happiness? Perhaps that was its appeal: the promise of luxury that in fact promoted endless work." - Hanif Kureishi, Intimacy

[This message has been edited by melon (edited 04-05-2002).]