Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen
Absolutely right. But that is not the question. The question is, what is the aim of people who make music period? That'll differ depending on who it is. The way I see it there are two options:
1. You make music because you cherish it as an art form and wish, as an artist, to make a statement and present your artistic vision to the outside world.
2. You make music because it's a BILLION DOLLAR industry and as a carefully manufactured product within that industry, you could potentially make a lot of money out of it. Artistic exploration? Psst. You couldn't give a monkey's!
3. Something that oscillates between the two extremes.
|
again. this whole thing is dependent on publicly accepted definitions for art and music. which no one has provided yet.
your first point seems rather contrived and pretentious. why would anyone want to make a statement and present their vision besides trying to influence the world to spin more along with their ideals? which would ultimately lead to greater success and (oh no!
) a betrayal of their ideals.
your second is rather close minded. the amount of money involved in making music for a living is substantially more than most people expect (especially once you start considering the time
spent creating and rehearsing). i've got friends releasing their first album next week totally DIY but they still want to break even. they still need to make a good $1000 just to cover the recording and duplication fees, they get $0 for their hard work and dedication to writing and rehearsing their tunes. just because someone is trying to break even or (god forbid) turn a marginal profit does not mean they're automatically corporate shills. even the ones who are usually don't realize it. does timbaland think he makes bad music? i doubt it. would we agree on what music is? i doubt it. would it make him a less worthwhile musician in my book? no.
the 3rd option is where you'll find the vast majority of musicians out there today. the idealists from the 1st option will have its crowd of elitists keeping it legitimate. the 2nd option will have the suits making sure it remains profitable. and the 3rd option will just do it's thing and let the crowd fill itself as it sees fit.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen
I don't think being an entirely commercial craftsman is necessarily a BAD thing. It just should not EVER be confused with art, nor should their work be compared to the work of real artists. It's a totally different profession, and a totally different output. And as such, it should be seen for what it is: part of the mass consumerist market. That doesn't necessarily make it crap. But crucially, from an artistic standpoint, it is determinedly worthless. And that should not for a moment be doubted.
|
so you going to spill the beans on just what 'art' is?