Use the system or not?
soundslike1981 said:
Hope to respond to your specific points tomorrow, Cornelius.
what is your opinion of artists who may be materially political--attempting to control their own economic destinies and to contribute only to agencies whose "(material) politics" they share--but who are not expressely interested in "saying something" political? Likewise, what is your take on music that talks a good game but ultimately benefits/benefits from the existing material systems (ie U2, Radiohead, et al). Is it better to go through the system to subvert it; or to languish in martyred, puritanical obscurity?
If I was given the chance to 'go through the system' as you put it, I would most certainly abuse the oppurtunity (in terms of those who provided that oppurtunity) and the limitations placed upon me by those who seek to profit from it, by telling the truth, by speaking truth to power, by exposing the PR process for what it really is. Mass Hypnosis for profit or power.
I am sure that will never happen. That would be my own choice. It is why I have been turning down offers to distribute my music, and why some distributers/labels have turned me down over the years ..... they know where I stand.
As Chomsky says "if you are not upsetting people who deserve to be upset, you are doing something wrong"!
It's not enough to say something political, one has to be seen to walk the talk and for myself that means I must be congruent within myself - therefore I cannot and will not use the mainstream (which re-inforces the programming) unless I can see a powerful strategic use for it that doesn't undermine, in any way, my ultimate intentions. I also know that the mainstream is very, very good at raising someone up, and then knocking them down. And added to that is the awareness that this process of change is a long-term project, extending way beyond my own life-time, and I am but one teensy contributer to the process. I trust that process implicitly. So there is no need for me to panic, to 'achieve' anything, other than be truthfully real and tell it like I see it.
My opinion of other artists is less important than the reality of the effects of my or any other artists actions. Follow the money is the old adage.
With regard to artists who play for the beauty, the joy, the feeling and the emotion, and try to control their own destinies, I say yeah! Go for it. It's not like we don't need the wide ranging beauty of humanity and it replicates the same quality in nature - diversity!
It's not for everyone to be an activist, it's a seriously deep committment,it is a lifetimes work, not to be entered into lightly .. if one is not fully prepared for it, one can actually do more damage than good, and if an artist is genuinely playing their soul, sharing their beauty and taking responsible steps to retain control of the financial side of it then I have no problem with it.
I would love for more people to take on the activist role, yet it is a personal choice, a very serious choice and who am I to judge anyone over that?
And with regards to The Beatles, U2, Radio Head etc, their main aim appears to be to make lots of cash playing music - the cash is the main reason they, for example, play gigs where expensive tickets are sold preferentially to American Express Card Holders under agreements between the Bands and AE whereby AE paid the bands a fee or percentage of those sales - and it is cash they do NOT need!
Just look at Bono's "hard commerce" statement in regard to GAP, ARMANI and American Express 'RED' label (see the 'bob/geldof' discussion on this elsewhere on dissensus).
Arrogant, stupid and possible mendacious in that I find it hard to believe he does not understand or know that it is the historical and current western demands that Africans live like us, that they grow cash crops and produce cheap raw materials for our industries, a process which destroy their eco-systems, instead of growing their own food, drawing their own water and building their own shelter and living as they have done successfully for millenia - even as I write Indigenous Peoples are today being forcibly removed from their lands, their forests, so that those forests can be stripped of lumber for Europen furniture.
That is disgusting, greedy and murderous and yet I have never heard either Bob or Bono refer to it as such. I can only conclude that Bono and Bob are fully complicit or willfully ignorant. Eithyer way they are part of the problem!
And at the same time there are many, many fine musicians who live and have lived lives of relative poverty at the same time as the Beatles, Stones and U2s. They are and were all equally as valid as the ones that became famous, many of them much finer musicians and performers. They did not flood the papers with tales of their exploits with groupies, Hotel rooms and drug use to sell their 'product'! They live good lives most of them, played to many people and shared much beauty. You makes your choices ......
I have made mine and am happy with it - though come to me again when I am 60 or 70 and ask me again .... lol! It is a lifetimes process.