Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[peppamintdynamo]

The issue is not who is hearing or feeling the music, but who is buying the music.  The implication is that rich white kids are using Mommy and Daddy's money, and that Mommy and Daddy might not share the same taste in art, philosohy, or politics with their children and/or the artist who now has their money.

At what point does it cease to be "mommy and daddy's money"? Seriously.

Yeah, if we're looking at rich white kids, they probably cant get a good job, or really don't want to, and I honestly don't blame them, so if they're rich white kids, its BECAUSE their parents are rich. Thus, where they get the money. I just don't see the big deal. It's music. Someone is buying it. Someone is listening to it, and loving it. Who cares if that person is the same? It's better than pirating.

[Breschau]

The rich parents support their rich white kids (in the form of money and the freedom to choose what to spend it on) and then the rich white kids support their chosen artist(s) (in the form of money to pay the rent).  In each case the support comes from the supporter - the money changes ownership as it changes hands.

Otherwise why are we starting with the rich parents, shouldn't we trace the money back to whoever had it before them (and before that, and so on) to find out who *really* should be getting the support?

[Rob]

It only matters in the context of the original post. 

Would there be such a prevalence of "subversive" art if the money to support such art was coming directly from the patrons/fans rather than from some deep pocketed benefactor, be it rich parents, the NEA, etc?

Would those who rail against "The system" be as inclined to do so if they had a stake in it's existence?

[peppamintdynamo]

It only matters in the context of the original post. 

Would there be such a prevalence of "subversive" art if the money to support such art was coming directly from the patrons/fans rather than from some deep pocketed benefactor, be it rich parents, the NEA, etc?

Would those who rail against "The system" be as inclined to do so if they had a stake in it's existence?

Honestly, as an artist, sometimes producer, and director, I say "BRING ON THE BENOFACTORS! I hope their pockets are real deep, just so long as they don't ask me to change what I'm doing and expect to get a result." As said before, when money changes hands, it changes ownership. If someone wants to support me because their kid loves what I do, I am thrilled. I mean, clearly I'm more thankful to the kid for getting their parents to pay, than the actual parents, but come on..... everyone needs to eat. Subversive art is subversive not because of who pays for it, but who calls the shots. If the person paying is demanding changes, or more or less than what you want to give, than fuck them. The people to take the money and the changes that are against their concept are selling out. The people who are taking the money and continuing to do whatever the fuck they want are still subversive, in my mind.

[CeeGBee]

At what point does it cease to be "mommy and daddy's money"? Seriously.

I think, and this could just be me, when you've killed them and buried the bodies in the cellar,
and you're just cashing the Social Security checks to buy more smack...  I think at that point
it's okay to call it your own money... 

[jupiter or japan]

You know, I keep seeing this thread title rise to the top and the first thing I think is "I WISH".

The second thing I think is there sure seems to be a lot of reverse class-ism going around(NOT IN THIS THREAD, but in the world) and it is fucked. "You didn't suffer like me in life, so your life isn't valid". Fuck that shit in the ear.

I love these people who say they'd rather have a crappy job than be born into wealth and not have to do anything they don't want to pay the bills. THEY LIE.

People who suffer, survive and rise up though honest means have a reason to be proud and thankful. Yet some become bitter fucktards who think the world owes them something because of their suffering and inflict suffering upon others to get ahead.

People who are born with a silver spoon in their mouth may be the most giving caring people in the world, or they might choose to expand their wealth at the cost of others misery, or just be worthless sack of crap that do nothing with their lives.

[lil' lindsay]

its my motherfucking money as soon as i get to choose what to do with it. if im the one who wants to buy a tupac album, it doesn't matter to tupac who earned the money. well nothing matters to tupac now but y'all catch my drift.

[SloppyLessons/Figment]

How's 'dis?
a kid is gifted cash on a birthday instead of the album itself because Mom & Dad feel that perhaps their choice in music isn't necessarily something that their child will enjoy.
Perhaps he's going through a rebellion phase, or maybe billy holiday just isn't his cup of tea. Therefor cash is given as a substituted gift instead of the actual present itself. I do not blame the parents for taking perhaps "the easy way out", they would rather the money be spent on something the kid actually enjoys- instead of having an album sit in the corner gathering dust out of respect.
The cash traded hands, thus trading ownership. Therefor, hereby, and thus unto him- he selects the album of his choice-hopefully profiting someone who "deserves" it.
In my opinion, the parents Should take a more active role in their childs music tastes and points of spenditure- growing and learning more about their child in the process....but you know- nuclear families, the internet, television..blah... blah.... blah...etc...etc..etc.
We can only hope to be educated enough to know that there are so many more artists outside the box, than in. 

And To the other point-

Aesop Rock and Nike. Nike paid Mr. Rock for use of one of his instrumentals in one of their commercials. I know many people who are on both sides of the fence here- throwing dynamite at each other over this issue. If you are aware of Mr. Rock, then you are aware of the conflicted nature of this anti-corporate persona taking money from a Very corporate company -for use of his still, very anti-corporate music.
I say go for it, personally. If a company such as Nike would like to inadvertently pay Me to spread my own anti-corporate propaganda, -no strings- yes, i believe I would do it. This agreement would not include sporting their goods, appearing in their commercials, or performing on the backs of laborers. And by letting them use my music, -the music itself has the potential to reach and even larger fan base through nike- a fan base that could potentially listen to what I really have to say
-which leaves the listener with a choice of the the possibility of saying "Yeah! Fuck Nike!" all together, and Smashing the Smoke & Mirror Concept that they so desperately hold on to.
"Nike" and Aesop Rock just being the example.
Though the money has been bloodied, I believe there is a way to make it clean again.
We CAN take it back.
 But then again, i can be an optimist.

I Love these discussions. Rawk On! -

[jupiter or japan]

I always felt conflicted over bands like "Rage Against The Machine". Here is a band that makes a rather bold statement with their band name. Yet they ended up on Sony, who is one of the biggest representations of "The Machine". The band became huge, which is great when you are trying to spread political ideas that make people think. Yet, this band broke up right at the time Bush and Co. started to give us real reasons to rage. Now they are back? Where were they when it actually became pretty dangerous to spout those "RATM" ideas? When talk like that got you called a terrorist?

They should have called the band "Rage Against The Machine, when it is safe to do so..." LOL.

Now I realize that they had internal squables, and most likely a few drug problems that drove them apart, but still. It seems pretty weird that the rest of the band's next project involved a singer that didn't want to write political lyrics. PUSSIES!

The real question is: how do you Rage Against The Machine when the only way to get heard seems to be becoming part of it?

[SloppyLessons/Figment]

ah,- times they be 'ah changin' my friend. thank god.   

[louon]

In our most ancient record man was paying artists to create signpost for good to make life more glorious or just more functional so I will never be ashamed of getting paid plus babies need food huhh and fuck this is the world it seems commercail if you stare too long at the commercails I change the station when they come on but Im no rich kid I paid for my levis in the 80s with my paper rout we worked and I got my 200.00 amanda skirt and sweet libertine ukehead shadow for christmas from my boyfriend whos at his pincha job now Im white and can read speak and understand proper english thoough so education is  possibly a factor like ? anachronism ?? some people cant understand big words and theatrics are french and some cultures dont get the makeup You are who you are white kids but you are also openhearted performers you create a reality I can float in if I had money I would keep you ,,support you as your patron and you would create my happy places My art is apealing too my peeps most of all

[Pope Totalfrog]

can read speak and understand proper english

Really?

[Captain Oblivious]

can read speak and understand proper english

Really?

Exactly what I thought tbh

[CeeGBee]

can read speak and understand proper english

Really?

Exactly what I thought tbh

Hush, you two... 

[louon]

can read speak and understand proper english

Really?

Exactly what I thought tbh

Hush, you two... 

Is someone taking a piss at me then.....hmmm If you need a fight might I suggest inserting your head a bit deeper up your ass and then you can fight for air...