If somebody offered a recording contract, you think he would take it? Or would he be happier working a job-type job to make ends meet and scrapping together the means to make CD’s?
[/quote]
What? He stops selling as soon as he has the means to record the next one? If one were to generate some interest, you think he’d put a few more out there to sell?
You’ve changed, man! It used to be about the music!
Slag off! [hurls whisky bottle at Manduck]
I’d like to know who popularized the offending term ‘sell-out’ in the OP’s rant.The Who?
Zappa & The Mothers?
The anti-capitalist, Woodstock-era Hippies?
The underground/proto-punks like MC5?
The 1970s Brit punk bands?
Unpopular artists who couldn’t get a record deal?
The critics?Whoever it was, it’s my assumption that selling-out (and any negativity that arises from such an act) probably originated in the music business itself. Any complaints about the ‘ass holes’ in the general public who are simply parroting what they hear coming from high above are misguided. MHO/YMMV.
Being into underground music, I hear accusations of bands selling out all the time, as well as the whole “well I was into these guys a long time ago and all you Johnny-Come-Latelys can just kiss my ass” attitute as well. Then again, some of these same people also try to convince me that they’re punk because they listen to Sum 41 and Avril Lavigne. :rolleyes:
Just because you don’t like a band’s new stuff doesn’t mean they sold out. All it means is you don’t like their new stuff. Get over yourself.
Coooooool…
The earliest accusation of someone “selling out” I can think of is when Bob Dylan “went electric” in 1965 and that charge came from hardcore folkies not rock n’ rollers. The fact Dylan “sold out” by supposedly becoming a rocker is what upset them. As for before that, I’m fairly sure there was always some grumbling among jazz musicians if one of their brethren seemed to be going for a more “sweet” or commercial sound. I don’t think listeners to rock n’ roll during the 50’s and early 60’s really complained that much about performers “selling out.” (“Oh, Elvis was okay during his “It’s Alright, Mama” period but he sooooo sold out when he did “Love Me Tender.” Next thing you know, he’ll be making movies or serving in the army or some establishment-thing like that.”)
Hard to believe, but he’d laugh at whomever offered him a recording contract and he gives not a fig for money beyond the minimum needed to provide for his family and put together his next cd. As for selling the cds, he has as many made up as he figures he’ll need to fund the next cd. Then my aunt and cousins sell them at fairs, his performances, and on-line to a pretty decent fan base he’s built up over the last twenty years. Sometimes he’ll have a second run made up if there’s demand, but he ends up giving away a bunch of them.
This is the man who gave up a full professorship at a damn good university to become a dog catcher, among other things, in Alaska. He walks his own path, to say the least.
Some quotes from early interviews with the Beatles:
Question: How do you add up success?
John, Paul, George and Ringo: Money.
Question: What will you do when Beatlemania subsides?
John: Count the money.
Question: What do you think about the pamplet calling you four Communists?
Paul: Us, Communists? Why, we can’t be Communists. We’re the world’s number one Capitalists. Imagine us, Communists.
Question: What do you believe is the reason you are the most popular singing group today?
John: We’ve no idea. If we did, we’d get four long-haired boys, put them together and become their managers.
Elvis didn’t have any problem getting rich. Neither did the Stones, CSN&Y, John Fogerty, Roger Daltry, Roger Waters. Rock stars are rich and basically royalty. I think some are more surprised than others at their fame, but many are in it for girls, booze and cash. That’s the image people see. There are a lot of people just trying to be heard and have fun, but there are a lot more who want to make the big time. Nothing wrong with that.
This sums it for me, too. That hardcore fan pose can get very pretentious very fast.
As was pointed out by several folks already, a band/singer can absolutely sell out. (Rod Stewart, anyone?) But the fact is some artists just beome craftier songwriters with experience, possibly even through no conscious effort on their part (!) So the songs on their third album may simply turn out five times catchier than the ones on their first. Or they’ve grown homicidally bored of the two-guitar-and-drum thing and start experimenting with Hawkwindy keyboards and synths to see where it takes them. This is not selling out. This may be simply growth.*
Obviously, anyone has the right to say that an artist’s later period flat-out sucks-- as long as they’re judging the work on its artistic merits, not the artistic choices that spawned it.
*Having defined it in these terms, my conscience now wonders if maybe you file the career of one R. Stewart under growth.
Nah, fuck him. Rod’s a whore; that actually may be part of his appeal.