Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   General Music (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/)
-   -   What Is Your Definition Of A "Sell Out"? (https://www.musicbanter.com/general-music/49974-what-your-definition-sell-out.html)

mr dave 06-16-2010 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 884177)
This notion that artists should make "pure" art, isolated from the influence of their audience is a pretty recent invention and is kind of at odds with the role of art over the millennia of human history.

i think that stems from the modern attitude that only people who are both creators and performers are legitimate artists. if all you do is one side of that coin then you're some sort of fraud.

keith! 06-16-2010 07:08 PM

weezer are probably one of the only bands i'd actually call sell outs.
it's probably just because of how much i love pinkterton and blue, but i honestly don't understand how a band that made this can go on to make this.

clutnuckle 06-16-2010 07:16 PM

I'd consider Rivers Cuomo one of two things -- He's either a sell-out who purposely makes such terrible music now to appeal to twelve-year olds, or he's simply gone through some sort of mental deprivation that makes him think what he's doing is still good. Sell-out or idiot, your choice!

Engine 06-16-2010 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 884177)
Sure. But I'm perfectly happy to simply have an occupation that I not only enjoy but I feel is "my calling" in a way.

And that's really good. I envy everybody who makes real money doing what they feel compelled to do naturally, especially in the arts. If you think about it, that could be more satisfying than making ridiculous amounts of money just because you get noticed by the gallery crowd or whatever. But I do think a lot of creative people get crushed a bit by the realization that they must produce things they have little to no interest in to make a living

Quote:

I see your point, but I think adapting to your audience has been a part of all forms of art since people first started making art. Michelangelo knew that when he was painting the Sistine Chapel. James Brown knew it when he was making music to move butts. This notion that artists should make "pure" art, isolated from the influence of their audience is a pretty recent invention and is kind of at odds with the role of art over the millennia of human history.
y'know I thought about Rembrandt and his school as I was typing what I said. I don't think that his students were not making 'pure' art (don't believe in the concept of purity in general) and I don't romanticize art all that much. Still, I bet a lot of Rembrandts' student wanted to paint something really cool and imaginitive instead of what they had to paint just to make enough money to subsist.

I wonder if cave paintings were made for profit by cavemen who really wanted to paint something different that we have never seen or even imagined

Janszoon 06-16-2010 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engine (Post 884201)
I wonder if cave paintings were made for profit by cavemen who really wanted to paint something different that we have never seen or even imagined

I'm willing to bet they at least didn't have to do the hunting or gathering that day. Maybe that was payment enough. :)

And maybe the ones who got creative are the reason for all those mythological creatures from throughout history.

FaSho 06-16-2010 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keith! (Post 884188)
can go on to make this.

This is better:


Also, new Weezer isn't that bad. The Red Album especially was just as good as their old stuff.

Engine 06-16-2010 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clutnuckle (Post 884197)
I'd consider Rivers Cuomo one of two things -- He's either a sell-out who purposely makes such terrible music now to appeal to twelve-year olds, or he's simply gone through some sort of mental deprivation that makes him think what he's doing is still good. Sell-out or idiot, your choice!

Haha I agree. I actually did love and still love the first Weezer album (although people made fun of me for that even in 1994)

I always wondered what exactly motivates that guy. He's definitely got a knack for making rock songs - but why does he do it that way?

keith! 06-16-2010 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FaSho (Post 884209)
Also, new Weezer isn't that bad. The Red Album especially was just as good as their old stuff.

gonna have to strongly disagree with you there, although Red is waaaay better then Make Believe or Raditude.

So people also consider Green Day sellouts? I'm not a big fan of them but from what people tell me American Idiot is pretty highly regarded among Green Day fans. Why are people upset that they are more popular if the quality is still high?

CanwllCorfe 06-16-2010 07:46 PM

I don't think I've ever called any band/artist a sell out. I usually just think of it as a term for an artist or band that's left a fan embittered by their new style or popularity.

Janszoon 06-16-2010 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanwllCorfe (Post 884224)
I don't think I've ever called any band/artist a sell out. I usually just think of it as a term for an artist or band that's left a fan embittered by their new style or popularity.

I think I used to call bands sellouts back when I was about 14. Now I just say they suck if I think they suck.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:46 PM.


© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.