Michael Jackson-RIP
The Good-Beat It was arguably the single greatest music video ever made and certainly went a long way to make MTV. It is distinguished more by the choreography by Michael Peters than the music, although that’s pretty good too.
The Bad-Michael Jackson’s greed singlehandedly wrecked the music business. In the 60′s and 70′s, even the most popular artists were simply advanced the cost of their recording sessions, which were then deducted from their first royalty payments. After Thriller was such a hit in 1982, Jackson asked Epic Records for a $50 million advance against his next 5 records. They foolishly agreed and the music business which had been totally fiscally sane, took on the characteristics of the movie business with outrageous star salaries with no risk on the part of the artists. That of course led to a “winner takes all” crowding effect, in which record companies had to make very large bets and could no longer afford the small bets (Bob Dylan’s first record sold 5000 copies) that might nurture true artistry.
The Ugly
Jon, you’re forgetting that the record biz turned into a cocaine fueled monster well before Michael Jackson got that dough from Epic. Like around 1976, ’77 or so…Rumours, etc. I was there, literally…
Jon, you’re forgetting that the record biz turned into a cocaine fueled monster well before Michael Jackson got that dough from Epic. Like around 1976, ’77 or so…Rumours, etc. I was there, literally…
76/77 is the year the labels begin to dump decent selling established artists to conquer the world with disco. Some survived on their own and some didn’t. I think Jon has a point about the dealmakers and the destruction. I was hitting the studios in Shoals about that time and the things said, done, suggested were enough to turn me around.
Michael was part of the machine that did that to the industry. He was their avatar.
But he is unique and the only comparison I can think of is Beethoven. Take a puppy and chain it to the doghouse, then every time you give it food, hit it with a board. Beethoven was ripped from his bed at night, splashed with water and made to practice and then beaten about the ears if he didn’t perform perfectly. Jackson’s life had that and then when he became the golden child for all the Jackson fortunes until Janet, he lived a life where little was denied him and he denied himself little.
The karma is searing.
That said, a brilliant talent in a universe of cold energy his was. I’m thankful for the quiet drive into work through beautiful country fields in the solitude of my own Ford.
76/77 is the year the labels begin to dump decent selling established artists to conquer the world with disco. Some survived on their own and some didn’t. I think Jon has a point about the dealmakers and the destruction. I was hitting the studios in Shoals about that time and the things said, done, suggested were enough to turn me around.
Michael was part of the machine that did that to the industry. He was their avatar.
But he is unique and the only comparison I can think of is Beethoven. Take a puppy and chain it to the doghouse, then every time you give it food, hit it with a board. Beethoven was ripped from his bed at night, splashed with water and made to practice and then beaten about the ears if he didn’t perform perfectly. Jackson’s life had that and then when he became the golden child for all the Jackson fortunes until Janet, he lived a life where little was denied him and he denied himself little.
The karma is searing.
That said, a brilliant talent in a universe of cold energy his was. I’m thankful for the quiet drive into work through beautiful country fields in the solitude of my own Ford.
People are dying in Iran and somehow this sad, sad, perverted individual gets all the press.
What’s wrong with this picture?
People are dying in Iran and somehow this sad, sad, perverted individual gets all the press.
What’s wrong with this picture?
As to the schematic of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, I guess that the reality was quite a bit better, and still worse, and even uglier than you let on, Jon, but it’s a tribute of a kind and you’re kind to put it so kindly. Probably the man ought to be buried before his strange life is excavated, but anybody who deliberately trumped himself up as the King of Pop is, I suppose, grist for grist, dust to dust.
I might point to points higher than the “Beat It” video; for example, to Jackson’s increasing role in scripting and choreography. For him the real shot-in-the-arm occurred during his association with Quincy Jones, of course, and it was, you must admit, a pretty glorious collaboration.
Somehow I suspect that Jackson’s perfectionism did him in, owing to a combination of his medications and his choreographic exactitude, and the physical training that such perfectionism requires. I really don’t want to psychoanalize that uniquely complicated fellow. Surely it wasn’t his psyche that killed him.
As to the schematic of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, I guess that the reality was quite a bit better, and still worse, and even uglier than you let on, Jon, but it’s a tribute of a kind and you’re kind to put it so kindly. Probably the man ought to be buried before his strange life is excavated, but anybody who deliberately trumped himself up as the King of Pop is, I suppose, grist for grist, dust to dust.
I might point to points higher than the “Beat It” video; for example, to Jackson’s increasing role in scripting and choreography. For him the real shot-in-the-arm occurred during his association with Quincy Jones, of course, and it was, you must admit, a pretty glorious collaboration.
Somehow I suspect that Jackson’s perfectionism did him in, owing to a combination of his medications and his choreographic exactitude, and the physical training that such perfectionism requires. I really don’t want to psychoanalize that uniquely complicated fellow. Surely it wasn’t his psyche that killed him.
As to the schematic of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, I guess that the reality was quite a bit better, and still worse, and even uglier than you let on, Jon, but it’s a tribute of a kind and you’re kind to put it so kindly. Probably the man ought to be buried before his strange life is excavated, but anybody who deliberately trumped himself up as the King of Pop is, I suppose, grist for grist, dust to dust.
I might point to points higher than the “Beat It” video; for example, to Jackson’s increasing role in scripting and choreography. For him the real shot-in-the-arm occurred during his association with Quincy Jones, of course, and it was, you must admit, a pretty glorious collaboration.
Somehow I suspect that Jackson’s perfectionism did him in, owing to a combination of his medications and his choreographic exactitude, and the physical training that such perfectionism requires. I really don’t want to psychoanalize that uniquely complicated fellow. Surely it wasn’t his psyche that killed him.
Everything Jackson did as a solo artist was disco junk to my ears. “Music video” is useless, synchronized dancing has always left me cold, and the THUMP-thumpa-thumpa-thumpa style of music does nothing for me. Jackson as much as anybody murdered rock and roll and replaced it with repetitive disco pablum.
As a person he became a grotesque caricature, and then a grotesque caricature of a grotesque caricature.
So I guess he was a celebrity trailblazer in two ways.
Everything Jackson did as a solo artist was disco junk to my ears. “Music video” is useless, synchronized dancing has always left me cold, and the THUMP-thumpa-thumpa-thumpa style of music does nothing for me. Jackson as much as anybody murdered rock and roll and replaced it with repetitive disco pablum.
As a person he became a grotesque caricature, and then a grotesque caricature of a grotesque caricature.
So I guess he was a celebrity trailblazer in two ways.
Yet Dan, who else could sing–sing, mind you–”Human Nature”?
Yet Dan, who else could sing–sing, mind you–”Human Nature”?
Yet Dan, who else could sing–sing, mind you–”Human Nature”?
Is the Rick Turner who comments on this blog the same guy who makes amazing guitars and pick-ups (for Lindsey Bucking ham and others) in Santa Cruz or is it a different Rick Turner?
Is the Rick Turner who comments on this blog the same guy who makes amazing guitars and pick-ups (for Lindsey Bucking ham and others) in Santa Cruz or is it a different Rick Turner?
Is the Rick Turner who comments on this blog the same guy who makes amazing guitars and pick-ups (for Lindsey Bucking ham and others) in Santa Cruz or is it a different Rick Turner?
Same guy last time I checked…
Add Penna, Tasmania to where I live part time…very part time and not enough!
Same guy last time I checked…
Add Penna, Tasmania to where I live part time…very part time and not enough!
Same guy last time I checked…
Add Penna, Tasmania to where I live part time…very part time and not enough!
Rick, you are a hopeless romantic!
I’m one of the ‘Jackson Generation’ I guess, but I’m finding it really hard to mourn the loss of this man. The best part of him (the music) will still be around for anyone who wants to listen.
Rick, you are a hopeless romantic!
I’m one of the ‘Jackson Generation’ I guess, but I’m finding it really hard to mourn the loss of this man. The best part of him (the music) will still be around for anyone who wants to listen.
I’m afraid this is more about mass hysteria than any true understanding of another human being. This is more like Princess Diana…about whom I did not “get it”…than John Lennon…about whom I did. Who’s next? Paris Hilton or Perez Hilton or Putz Hilton? This is about how synchophants can enable sick behavior that would not be tolerated in mere mortals. This is just like the previous King…Elvis…who also squandered talent. Too bad, the kid had some moves, but I would not put him up there with Astair or the Nicholas Brothers. You want to see dancing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8yGGtVKrD8
And Cab Calloway, too!
I’m afraid this is more about mass hysteria than any true understanding of another human being. This is more like Princess Diana…about whom I did not “get it”…than John Lennon…about whom I did. Who’s next? Paris Hilton or Perez Hilton or Putz Hilton? This is about how synchophants can enable sick behavior that would not be tolerated in mere mortals. This is just like the previous King…Elvis…who also squandered talent. Too bad, the kid had some moves, but I would not put him up there with Astair or the Nicholas Brothers. You want to see dancing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8yGGtVKrD8
And Cab Calloway, too!
Yeah, but Rick,
Wasn’t Jackson satisfactory as a kind of gateway talent for the young? An onramp?
I’ll take it where I can find it, if you see what I mean.
As for the comparison to Astair, I’d class him rather with the more athletic dancers such as Gene Kelly, and would place him definitely in the Motown tradition, a la the Spinners and the Temptations, of delivering a fuller stage package. I cotton more to your tradition, but his was a solid one and he carried his banner with real panache.
Wagner was a swine too (so was Miles, in a way), but as musicians I can’t fault them. In time we’ll separate outstanding musicians from their foibles and even their perversities, and appreciate their music apart from their sins.
Interesting that you should’ve mentioned Lennon, one of Michael’s heroes. I remember a man-in-the-street interview, broadcast the day after John was murdered, in which a geezer from the Bronx said, “I don’t see what all the fuss is about. It ain’t like Sinatra died!”
Here a guy gets shot on his doorstep, in the presence of his wife, ostensibly for being an insufficient pacifist, and this stranger has nothing nice to say about a body still in the morgue, has no notion of why the victim meant so much to so many who may or may not have appreciated Sinatra also. Let’s talk smack about Michael later.
Yeah, but Rick,
Wasn’t Jackson satisfactory as a kind of gateway talent for the young? An onramp?
I’ll take it where I can find it, if you see what I mean.
As for the comparison to Astair, I’d class him rather with the more athletic dancers such as Gene Kelly, and would place him definitely in the Motown tradition, a la the Spinners and the Temptations, of delivering a fuller stage package. I cotton more to your tradition, but his was a solid one and he carried his banner with real panache.
Wagner was a swine too (so was Miles, in a way), but as musicians I can’t fault them. In time we’ll separate outstanding musicians from their foibles and even their perversities, and appreciate their music apart from their sins.
Interesting that you should’ve mentioned Lennon, one of Michael’s heroes. I remember a man-in-the-street interview, broadcast the day after John was murdered, in which a geezer from the Bronx said, “I don’t see what all the fuss is about. It ain’t like Sinatra died!”
Here a guy gets shot on his doorstep, in the presence of his wife, ostensibly for being an insufficient pacifist, and this stranger has nothing nice to say about a body still in the morgue, has no notion of why the victim meant so much to so many who may or may not have appreciated Sinatra also. Let’s talk smack about Michael later.
@rick:
The only thing we can change today is tomorrow.
@rick:
The only thing we can change today is tomorrow.
Micheal Jackson was another driven, talented nutcase. In the beginning we saw lots of talent and ignored the nutcase part. Later we expected the talent and pretended to be shocked at the nutcase part. He could copy dancing he saw kids doing in the street and he had a talent for hooks, cryptic, narcissistic lyrics and danceable grooves. If pop has a king, he probably isn’t it, but he sold a helluva lot of records. Died under mysterious circumstances, addicted to narcotics and deeply in debt. Can’t get more rock and roll than that. Did he ruin rock and roll? Probably not, but he did prove that you could make serious money selling it and that probably did ruin it.
P.S. Rick Turner: I picked up one of your Renaissance guitars about 2 years ago and haven’t put it down since. I appreciate your artisanship.
Micheal Jackson was another driven, talented nutcase. In the beginning we saw lots of talent and ignored the nutcase part. Later we expected the talent and pretended to be shocked at the nutcase part. He could copy dancing he saw kids doing in the street and he had a talent for hooks, cryptic, narcissistic lyrics and danceable grooves. If pop has a king, he probably isn’t it, but he sold a helluva lot of records. Died under mysterious circumstances, addicted to narcotics and deeply in debt. Can’t get more rock and roll than that. Did he ruin rock and roll? Probably not, but he did prove that you could make serious money selling it and that probably did ruin it.
P.S. Rick Turner: I picked up one of your Renaissance guitars about 2 years ago and haven’t put it down since. I appreciate your artisanship.
Thank you all for the best read of the day, maybe the whole week. There is sanity in the world after all.
Thank you all for the best read of the day, maybe the whole week. There is sanity in the world after all.
Thank you all for the best read of the day, maybe the whole week. There is sanity in the world after all.
My old man always said, “trust the art, not the artist”. At the time, he was speaking of Picasso and Dali, but as pioneers in the art of self-promotion in order to increase their viability as artists – they’re both pretty instructive on the downside of the pursuit of fame.
The cult of celebrity has existed as part of society at least as far back as the Roman Empire (graffiti adulating the exploits of popular gladiators) and the improvements in communication and transfer of information over the millennia have only heightened the impact of it. The weirdly symbiotic relationship between the idol and the idolaters has become more and more warped over the years – to the point where I would suspect that folks like Mister Jackson have no idea what “normal” life is anymore.
While I wasn’t a fan of Jackson’s style of entertainment – I can appreciate that when he was “on”, he was quite the entertainer. He may not have been everyone’s cup of tea and he may not have been an innovator on the level of say, James Brown, but obviously was a crossover artist who’s appeal was strong enough that the music business kowtowed to his demands in regards to contracts, etc. Remember, the execs could always have said “no”.
As far as personal behavior goes – I can’t help but wonder if whatever psychological ghosts he had knocking around in his head weren’t acerbated by both the sycophancy of his fans and associates as well as the ridiculous media attention that was focused on him. Yes, he sought publicity – it’s part and parcel of the entertainment industry, but he obviously couldn’t control it and had no one in his camp willing to keep the controls in place.
In the end, his life seems to be yet another object lesson on fame – one that will go ignored by most people.
My old man always said, “trust the art, not the artist”. At the time, he was speaking of Picasso and Dali, but as pioneers in the art of self-promotion in order to increase their viability as artists – they’re both pretty instructive on the downside of the pursuit of fame.
The cult of celebrity has existed as part of society at least as far back as the Roman Empire (graffiti adulating the exploits of popular gladiators) and the improvements in communication and transfer of information over the millennia have only heightened the impact of it. The weirdly symbiotic relationship between the idol and the idolaters has become more and more warped over the years – to the point where I would suspect that folks like Mister Jackson have no idea what “normal” life is anymore.
While I wasn’t a fan of Jackson’s style of entertainment – I can appreciate that when he was “on”, he was quite the entertainer. He may not have been everyone’s cup of tea and he may not have been an innovator on the level of say, James Brown, but obviously was a crossover artist who’s appeal was strong enough that the music business kowtowed to his demands in regards to contracts, etc. Remember, the execs could always have said “no”.
As far as personal behavior goes – I can’t help but wonder if whatever psychological ghosts he had knocking around in his head weren’t acerbated by both the sycophancy of his fans and associates as well as the ridiculous media attention that was focused on him. Yes, he sought publicity – it’s part and parcel of the entertainment industry, but he obviously couldn’t control it and had no one in his camp willing to keep the controls in place.
In the end, his life seems to be yet another object lesson on fame – one that will go ignored by most people.
People find themselves in the quandary where a culturally significant figure dies and while all the social media signals for mass mourning are being broadcast, they find themselves unable and unwilling to do so. That is cognitively dissonant as well as socially pricey so they dwell on the why of his life and don’t look into the how of their quandary.
People find themselves in the quandary where a culturally significant figure dies and while all the social media signals for mass mourning are being broadcast, they find themselves unable and unwilling to do so. That is cognitively dissonant as well as socially pricey so they dwell on the why of his life and don’t look into the how of their quandary.
People find themselves in the quandary where a culturally significant figure dies and while all the social media signals for mass mourning are being broadcast, they find themselves unable and unwilling to do so. That is cognitively dissonant as well as socially pricey so they dwell on the why of his life and don’t look into the how of their quandary.
Something Jon always pointed out that explains MJ’s fanfare…..never before than in the 80s had mass media in the form of radio and television been so pervasive around the world. That combined with MJ reaching the pinnacle of his talent in the early 80s is what caused the explosion….I would venture to say MJ was as big if not bigger than Coca-Cola as an American export….
I’m also finding it very intriguing how different the reactions of his death are between white and black people, you wouldnt even think it was the same person.
Something Jon always pointed out that explains MJ’s fanfare…..never before than in the 80s had mass media in the form of radio and television been so pervasive around the world. That combined with MJ reaching the pinnacle of his talent in the early 80s is what caused the explosion….I would venture to say MJ was as big if not bigger than Coca-Cola as an American export….
I’m also finding it very intriguing how different the reactions of his death are between white and black people, you wouldnt even think it was the same person.
Something Jon always pointed out that explains MJ’s fanfare…..never before than in the 80s had mass media in the form of radio and television been so pervasive around the world. That combined with MJ reaching the pinnacle of his talent in the early 80s is what caused the explosion….I would venture to say MJ was as big if not bigger than Coca-Cola as an American export….
I’m also finding it very intriguing how different the reactions of his death are between white and black people, you wouldnt even think it was the same person.
Speaking as a white guy, I found the death of James Brown more affecting than that of MJ.
Speaking as a white guy, I found the death of James Brown more affecting than that of MJ.
Speaking as a white guy, I found the death of James Brown more affecting than that of MJ.
Me too. But James Brown was an authentic and innovative genius, whereas Michael Jackson’s art was outstandingly inauthentic (not to say unoriginal; his synthesis was as fresh as could be, within the bounds of the synthetic). Jackson’s dramaturgy was indebted to Brown’s.
And I’m just a sucker for capes.
Me too. But James Brown was an authentic and innovative genius, whereas Michael Jackson’s art was outstandingly inauthentic (not to say unoriginal; his synthesis was as fresh as could be, within the bounds of the synthetic). Jackson’s dramaturgy was indebted to Brown’s.
And I’m just a sucker for capes.
Speaking as a guitar player, the last death that moved me was Jerry Reed. I’m a sucker for a nylon string.
Could someone explain to me the rationale behind taking the cost of the recording sessions out of the artist’s royalties – and not from the record company’s pocket?
If I got the math down right, the record company makes money from the very first record (and it already has distribution costs folded into the price – on top of the profit – thereby handing that part to the consumer).
It seems like the outrageous star-oriented salaries (and subsequent stifling of smaller artists) stems directly from that. Seems almost inevitable under such a system.
What am I not getting about this?
I mean, apart from the music industry being incapable of nursing true artistry anymore and having the consumer pay to have a record distributed (ie. advertised) to her – in essence paying to have more Britney on the airwaves every time she buys a cd – any cd.
@armand:
Access. It is a trading relationship where one side holds all the chips except one. Or did.
Now it is up to the act to find other ways to access label-level resources. Even then, to get better deals you must have the top producer. Music production is fishing. The biggest trout line feeds the most people. As in any business, you have to decide how many trout and where they come from for their troutness. The best producers fish best. See Chet Atkins.
Why? Because in front of the mic, the best make the best music. The best sound. It is that simple.
As a result, the fish are winnowed.
What the web changed was the ability of smaller fish to suddenly grow in the one ultimate retort to top talent and quality: Butts in seats. Customers, Fans, Friends, Following. A web act that goes viral has the price of admission to the bigger fish.
Small distribution clusters are always the case for bands or any act unless they are picked up in bigger clusters. The distribution channels are like e-mail lists in that the social networks are opt-in and identity-out. It’s still a managed database. Blow Morgan off but he is right about that.
Access has changed in degree. A five Grammy award producer and a most authentic artist in his own right has been blogging with you. You and he have acesss, but the degree of that depends on how much he likes you . It’s that simple. On what topics, well, that’s mostly the choice of the host. We do seem to drift back to certain attractor threads which express the local network of shared interests.
They do it because they can.
The industry claims it is about the rarity of the talent then makes deals to ensure the acts are changed as often as possible because the audience wants more of the same thing but different. There are enough absurdities to make it qualify as farce in my book, but then, I’m an artist and have no say.
So I make my art and try to suck up enough that I won’t be asked to leave. To an artist, this is about shared art and the gig, the access to the art determines all we learn therefore all we can express. It is the expression that is our need.
Feed your head.
What about if we did it this way- we have abolished copyright law- now what? Let’s start from scratch.
You draw a picture or you write a song, what are you going to do with it? As soon as you turn loose of a copy, it is gone. Anyone can do anything he wants with it. Now what?
Copyright law is the only property law in show business, and by show business, I mean books, music, movies, television, newspapers, all of it. The Media.
So we have wiped out all media concerns. All of their assets have gone to zero. We live in relative anarchy at the moment. From here on out, we will be in a state of absolute anarchy.
So again, you do a minute and a half animation, that seems to be about the right length right now, or a thirty minute animation with a big story. Or you write a song. And you do it for nothing all by yourself. What will you do with it?
I’ll tell you what I’m going to do immediately- I’m going to write a book called Harry Potter and the DaVinci Code.
T Bone, I’m gonna say it again:
1. Make your music.
2. Distribute it in a staggered way, one song at a time, each time get a couple cents for it (this I can do for you). Keep it all out there to be streamed on demand.
3. Maintain a massive database of ALL the people who ever get even one of your songs.
4. License your music to TV, movies, advertisements, anyone with a pocketbook who wants to use your music for commercial purposes.
5. Tour. A LOT.
The alternative is pretending the digital can be owned, MUST be owned, like the atomic, and thus governed by property rights, that is BAD NEWS…. if we could copy food or oil, you and Jon would be rioting in the streets to ensure the poor got their free sustenance.
We cannot destroy the notion of true atomic property rights, by pretending copying digital works is the same as stealing hard assets.
There are no licenses.
Nor are there movies, or television or any of the rest of it. I’m not putting this in any adversarial way, although it seems there is no need to talk about this when people repeat the same things people have been repeating for many years. I could make a Batman movie without a license if there were any money to make movie, which there isn’t.
T Bone,
I’d far rather see your batman movie than any of the ones heretofore–especially if you were riffing on the Mersey poets–but I believe the last picture cost more than the Stimulus Package. (And probably already has earned more too.)
I say that everyone in the world can use Morgan’s toilet anytime they want to. He gets a couple of cents with every flush.
I’m going to riot in the streets right now for this. The poor and full of crap around the world will see their standard of living shoot up five, six, maybe ten times.
Morgan’s toilet is the Florida of the 1940′s.
T Bone,
those are all good questions and I wish I had answers for all of them. I can only tackle them on a one-by-one basis and try to offer thoughts.
As for Harry Potter and the Da Vinci Code – you and a hundred others will write that. I guess originality and talent might become a premium once more. But Batman will no doubt be enriched by being unencumbered by financial constraints.
Maybe people will make art and music for art’s sake. Making money from their skills/day job so they can keep doing their art in their free time. like in olden times.
I don’t believe Bob Dylan wrote his music to get rich. He did it ’cause he had to. He did it ’cause he wanted to effect political change. And he did it cause he wanted to get laid.
The first and third reasons, being the only good reasons to make music anyway.
Money will come with fame – though probably never again in the form of a $50 million dollar advance.
Maybe live acts will be the future of music. The same way records killed Vaudeville, the death of records might bring back the live act.
The cinematic experience will have to far supersede that of the home theater – so that people will still cough up dough to see movies outside of their homes – or it will die.
Sure this will be a tight race – with home cinema always gnawing at the heels of the real theaters – but it can keep the economy going for at least a generation.
In the process it will drive technological innovations and push prices down. Not such a horrible outcome in my book.
Or we might be seeing the death of cinema – followed by an entire generation of low production-value films – but A LOT more of those. The low cost of failure might actually produce some gems the studios are incapable of producing nowadays.
A veritable golden age might emerge from this profusion of cheap, accessible, unencumbered-by-financial-constraints media.
Art has become cheap – for good and for bad.
I realize what I’ve outlined are hardly concrete answers. In all probability, most of them will never come to pass.
These speculations are just that – speculations. The new cannot yet be born, I guess.
There is very little one can do to prepare for the end of the world – whatever world that might be – except to let it go and hope one lands well.
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind.
Oh please don your batcapes and prick up your bat-ears for this recitation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0GUbAImHuw
Catch you on the batflip, same bat time, same bat channel…
(Hope I didn’t steal this from the poet…)
There have been “the death of…” various types of entertainment, some of which was very expensive, some merely insanely cruel. Spectacles in the Coliseum in Rome…expensive and cruel; bear baiting and bare knuckle fisticuffs; cheap thrills… Oh, we still have virtually bare knuckle fisticuffs…and cock fighting…and dog fighting… Maybe we haven’t come very far yet…
And dream on re. people going out to see live music shows. They do in a few towns, but other than the mega-shows, it’s really hard out there on the road these days. Used to be that clubs had house bands; that’s how the Beatles and the ‘Stones and the Band got so good…playing six sets a night, four and five nights a week. You either figure it out doing that or you’re a goner, but those opportunities barely exist anymore. The struggling clubs rarely have an act in for more than a single night. The big problem is from couch potato syndrome; people would rather sit at home and watch basketball, etc. than go out and see and hear a live band.
“So again, you do a minute and a half animation, that seems to be about the right length right now, or a thirty minute animation with a big story. Or you write a song. And you do it for nothing all by yourself. What will you do with it? ”
Share it. What other choice is there?
The problem of big dollar projects is they require copyright defense. The court doesn’t defend it. The court upholds it but defending it is, as you know, the holder’s problem and expense.
Stealing Batman is likely to incur expenses. Stealing the Illiad won’t so the media gets to make O Brother.
Stealing fidelity copies seems to be simple case. On the other hand, should the owner’s or Rick Astley’s “Never Gonna Give You Up” be pursuing the people who did the videos using the song as a way to parody? Perhaps. The videos are parody but the song isn’t. It’s along for the ride. Considering no one younger than us knows who Rick Astley is (or cares), what is the point of defense?
So the way this works, the holder has to decide to defend the work. The laws appear to be sufficient and the corner cases (eg, is P2P ‘distribution’ of copies) are being filled.
Like you, I don’t like the attitude that our works are there’s to take for the taking. I just don’t know a way to fight GUI and win technically, or to drag a generation hell bent on destroying the legacy away from doing that anymore than it was possible to drag the people who burned books in Germany or Beatles albums in Birmingham away from their fires.
So a library is one way to protect the works if not the monies invested, and even then, multiple representations stored in multiple locations is one way to do that and that IS what the web does well.
Question: in all of this, no one has cited where revenues are falling except CD (ie, fixed form) sales. Where are the losses?
No, Morgan, you can’t ask everyone to go out on the road A LOT. A goodly number of people involved in the projects don’t tour or even perform.
I’m not sure if people are after a change of law, a change of heart, or a change of revenue or all or none.
@rick: Yes, they need more live local venues. Hasn’t that always been a scarcity? In the 70s when we had them the complaint was garage bands taking gigs for less money and reducing the income of the high earners. Nothing changes. Then the Boys started burning each other’s clubs down. Then…. disco. Now… BluesNazis. We turned into a mob too much like the Beltway: “if you’re up, I’m down. So job one is to put you down.”
And that got us the zeitgeist we have today where respect comes at the point of a legal brief. Very sad. Glad I’m a hack. No one is stealing from me and no one is suing me for money I don’t have. If someone ever does, then my career may change.
FWIW, the virtual gigs are one way to get known because they may be presented in cartoons but they are played live. See Metaplace. Raph Koster has a good thing going over there.
Rick, T Bone, Jon, len et al,
I used to listen to Metheney at the Catalyst, with all the rest. Though my father was a jazz musician I probably wouldn’t have found Pat nor have come to understand his music had I not the opportunity to hear his live performances at a price I could afford. Same goes for Los Lobos, who for some years would perform down at the high school football stadium in Watsonville. Both those acts went on to do great things, and to capture my dollar both at de rekkid sto’ and online, but in retrospect I’m so glad to have met them first as a member of the live audience.
While I’m hugely sympathetic to the point you guys are making about market pressures on aging musicians who now have to hit the road whether they like it or not, I do want to sound the other note, in favor of live performances (though preferably for younger acts).
It’s very interesting to learn from you musicians here how the times they are a-you-know-what. Owing to Jon’s background there’s a running motif on this blog about how America might do a better job of sustaining its brilliant art heritage, and I just wish we could hit the issue directly some time: what might be a smarter way to sponsor the arts in the USA?
Excuse me, please, for misspelling Pat Metheny’s surname.
“I’m not sure if people are after a change of law, a change of heart, or a change of revenue or all or none.”
Thoughtful post, Len. No one stole Batman- copyright is abolished. One can use Batman as an icon in a white supremacist recruiting campaign and neither Bob Kane nor Bill Finger nor DC Comics will have any recourse.
Welcome to the BNW. It’s going to be a wild ride. A lot of downward pressure.
I know what kind of change I’m after- spare. For a shot of Chinaco.
And by the way, The Depression killed vaudeville.
And we are in a similar zeitgeist.
That thing about Harry Potter and The DaVinci Code, that was a joke. I’ve only been joking around about all this, but if I may be serious for a minute, I have been familiar for some time with the views you wrote above, and I’m very fond of them as they have a lot of Ulysses Everett McGill to them, what with the veritable Golden Age and what not. The essence of copyright law is that by virtue of having written something, it is your property. You own every right to it. If you own no rights to it, you have nothing to sell or to license besides the one physical book. Once you sell the book, the buyer can do whatever he wants with it. If you don’t sell it, but authorize a copy, that authorization will be new copyright law. When you buy a house, you don’t buy the house- you buy a bundle of rights. Those rights, like copyrights, have evolved over a long period of human history.
So one reason it was a joke, and the reason I won’t be writing Harry Potter and The DaVinci Code is the same reason nobody will write it- there is nothing to do with it. But let’s say, for the sake of trying to construct something, an unknown person has written that book. Or a book.
What would be the going price for the original book and all rights of an unknown author? What would a fair price be? Would he retain credit? Say he retained credit, but relinquished all rights. This is a book you want to buy. Why do you want to buy it? What would you pay him for all rights? What would you pay for the digital rights alone? For the hardcover rights alone? What would you pay for the physical book if he retained the rights to copy it?
Or let’s say he wrote a movie called Harry Potter and The DaVinci Code. No one will pay the $50,000,000 it will take to make it, because as soon as they release one copy, they no longer have any control over the investment. The investment is unprotected. So there is no investment. But that’s a whole long other story. All of this is.
Maybe the future of music will be people playing music in their homes. That, to me, would be a great result. Has this been on here?
http://www.ted.com/talks/jose_abreu_on_kids_transformed_by_music.html
Everyone’s opinion is not of equal value. If one’s car broke down he would benefit most from the opinion of a good mechanic.
It’s all and only electronic mail. This and all the rest of it.
AA Don’t you think it would be in one’s best interest to have answers to the questions above (and about 10^10^10^10^10^7 more- how many is that?) before one advocates abolition of a law that will protect him and his work?
We may be being a little rash.
But I don’t give a damn. Seriously.
We won’t have any books or music or art, but we will have plenty of information.
At least we’ll have that going for us.
As we evolve into data- ready for search obliteration.
“The rise of Idiot America … is essentially a war on expertise … In the new media age, everybody is a historian, or a scientist, or a preacher, or a sage. And if everyone is an expert, then nobody is, and the worst thing you can be in a society where everybody is an expert is, well, an actual expert.”
– Charles P. Pierce, from “Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free”
I don’t entirely agree that there’s no demand for music venues. I just went to a local place last Friday to see a cover band that varies from mediocre on some stuff to simply great on others. (Their cover of “Tequila Sunrise” is flawless.) The place was jammed to capacity. They have bands three nights a week. I’ve been there maybe a dozen times and it’s almost always packed. I saw Rare Earth there a few years ago and it was one of the best shows I’ve ever seen.
On the other hand, a place right here in town that was billed as a “jazz club” when village funds were granted to help develop it rapidly degenerated into a thrash-metal place for the young and brainless. If they had bands whose image was something other than a putrefying Satan come to scourge the lost souls of death-metal hell, I’d probably be down there most Saturday nights, especially now that smoking is banned.
I have alas failed in my attempts to get my wife to go see Lyle Lovett at an outdoor venue next week, because it’s on a weeknight and we wouldn’t get home until about 1. We saw him there last year, with lawn seats, where everybody carts in chairs, tables and ice chests, and creates their own little space, with thousands of candles glowing all around. About as peaceful and relaxed of an experience as you can hope for. That place also packs ‘em in three or four times a week. Like, five or six thousand people.
There are plenty of people who will go to the expense and effort of seeing quality entertainment.
Cube (or c3) is a 3D expert and artist. He made a cogent comment on raph koster’s blog: what we are seeing is the rise of the technologist over the scientist.
One of my early bosses in the technical writing trade said, “We used to document down to atoms.” meaning, even to work in the technical field as a writer, one needed deep expertise. Then to reach further, we took all of the theory that supported the technology out of the manuals and only described effects and procedures. Now they provide a glossy brochure, a few basic troubleshooting tips, and a URL.
Are we dumbing down? Perhaps. Most of that theory was inscrutable but it was accessible; yet note that as the trend continues the rise of the cloistered class of consultants that can demand ever higher prices for ever more specialized knowledge and in too many cases with no noticeable effects. So technologies intended to ensure all that desire it can access knowledge indeed do that, but the cultural effect is availability results in reduced desire. The answers are there but no one cares because an intermediary is Johnny On The Spot to care for them.
We’ve leased out our thoughts to give us more time to comment on our passions.
No one has to be blown off. Some people, however, have yet to add. The idea of digital being a non-atomic medium is not helpful I don’t know what the substance of bits is, but we perceive media atomically. We copy and play media on atomic instruments. A copy is a copy in any medium. The same reality applies to all reproduction.
Managing a data base that does not require a back room has not proven economically viable. All these thoughts have been around and implemented on various scales for many years.
I’m certain that there is a place where it all scales, but not at an individual artist level. There will have to be some sort of society. Or company. Even the biggest music acts are partnering with large companies (with back rooms) for advances in the hundreds of millions of dollars against all revenues- touring, merchandise, media.
As everyone knows, we don’t buy digital copies from iTunes- every transaction is a license. That’s all there is in digital distribution of music. There is no doubt copyright law has to be revisited. We have to come to a new agreement about fair use.
I’m all ears. So to speak.
As the man says, “You’re innocent when you dream.”
Origins of the Moonwalk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxZcLWAmdco&feature=player_embedded
Too bad…MJ had nothing on any of them…to say nothing of the Nicholas Brothers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8yGGtVKrD8
It’ll be a long time before that it topped.
And right above it is a short video to teach us all how to Moon Walk. Prior art so no IP and an educational follow on. Good trifecta. Fair use.
Your papers are in order. Next!
Hippie-dippy it is, JTM. Quite right.