I’ve been following my cousin’s blog and tracking how his career goes. He is finishing his 3rd year at University of Illinois, Chicago in the art department and wrote this today:
I can’t wait to be done with the semester. I don’t know if all this art stuff is for me or not…It’s always been my ‘plan B,’ but now I’m pretty sure my plan A (Rockstar) is going to have to work b/c if I’m stuck behind a desk animating some crappy game, I might have to shoot myself.
Here is my response:
Hell yeah! Rock the music scene! The thing about people always saying “have a backup plan” always bothered me. The part I understand now, and/or have moved beyond the naysayers is understanding making art and music sustainable…meaning, how to get paid from the craft…
While that is often viewed as selling out, or something, figuring out how to do all different threads of music to get paid and survive is key.
So, wouldn’t it be better to play music at clubs, DJ shows, be in multiple bands, etc, rather than rely primarily on one “I will not bend to not play my music” attitude, and/or be chained to a desk doing animations.
I hate pixar. I hate disney. I really hate toy story. (I will save this for another post, about having the top technology and minds, but the worst and most basic stories…all talk and no trousers).
On a positive note, 70-80% of all large artists make their money off of licensing it to companies, film, commercials, etc…if that path can be mastered, then you have the sustainable music career down.
Check out http://magnatune.com for more on this.
I often use my all mid-west middle class family as a barometer for america, and I think it is interesting to consider my cousin’s attitude and interest in music as representative of an American drive towards bettering one’s self and also participating in culture. I’m just curious, what is the most sustainable way to do this?
My 2 cents on this is that a lot of the Pixar, Disney, ‘minds and tech’ situations is very different from being a full-time (or at least part-time profitable) artist/musician due to one thing: reputation. So whereas the skills you learn at whatever university/trade school you go to can become immediately transferred to a job pushing pixels (or whatever), it becomes difficult to make a direct correlation to skills/abilities = rockstar.
The tricker part is transferring your abilities and talents into a kind of symbolic social capital. Because how ‘good’ you are as a musician or artist is purely subjective. Your reputation matters (as does your bank account). And that is only built through time and experience.
Yes, I completely agree. The idea of becoming a rockstar is nearly impossible to achieve and is near equivalent to saying one wants to be a dictator, president, or world leader.
I actually question further the social importance of this goal versus one who might see their position in the landscape of society as co-dependent on other individuals.
I agree with you that the old “sold out” terminology is a bit passe’ and beside the point now, a hold-over from a way at looking at the world and at the market that did not really work very well. I am all for people licensing and selling if they choose to sell, and do not consider marketing a derogatory term.
Yet I think that a day job to facilitate a career in the creative arts is still a great and good thing. The all-or-nothing “can’t be behind a desk doing graphics I despise”/”can’t make it as a rockstar” dichotomoy is far too all-or-nothing. The notion of “rockstar or corporate creative drone” as life’s eternal choices seems to me a false choice.
I believe that there is worthy and worthwhile work in which one does not get famous or noticed. I don’t believe that creative people are unable (or worse, “exempted”) from marketplace thinking like fallback positions.
To me, the problem comes in when one believes things like “I’m stuck behind a desk animating some crappy game, I might have to shoot myself”. It’s said in fun, of course. Yet,there’s more to life than being a rockstar, designing shooter games or living in a garret.
It’s important to try to make a living doing what has meaning for one. I think that if one defines the world, even in a light vein, as rockstar or vidgame drone, then it’s the horizons of the chooser that need expanding, more than a serious choice process.
There’s a world of worthy work out there, and even would-be rockstars can make a difference by doing it.
Rockstar Games. (the company)
Gurdonark, you are right on point with this commentary. I think it is very interesting to think about this idea of a rockstar in line with the old American ideal of “self-made man.” Also, is it a ladder at the end of a tunnel for those with limited horizons?
I remember being in this same position and it took the scaling of compliments and reality harshness before I decided that rockstar-itis is not constructive to build society on solely. Oh, and also many flaky band members who can’t be relied upon
Actually, on an anti-rockstar tip, the more one ‘becomes’ a rock star, the more one becomes a commodified spectacle for others to behold, trash, idolize, worship, throw-away and consume at will. At this point it becoms image (and damage) control. The more one becomes divorced from everyday reality, the more one might pull a Britney Spears, or Kirstie Alley in Fat Actress, where the damage control for her binge eating becomes a tv show for everyone to see.
Actually, this brings up another trend: The vicious-underbelly-of-celebrity-neurosis shows like Breaking Bonaduce, or even Larry David’s Curb Your Enthsiasm, where the whole point is to show how the trappings of celebrity do divorce these guys from everyday life, where they are living in a world of extreme wealth, neurosis, paranoia, envy, and greed (and turning it into a product for the rest of us to watch).
If you want to become a rockstar, get ready for the Rise and Fall, the Crash and Burn (Elvis, Jim Morrison, Hendrix, Cobain, Britney, etc.). The rest just fizzle out.
Jon, you’re right on the point. I have to admit, though, that I rather envied the fellow I met who, when the alternative band he drummed for began to make regional waves, dropped out of the band. “I didn’t want to make it big because of the overnight travel”, he pragmatically explained. I love the “hear my song, make me famous” sheer exuberance of myspace, because, it rather translates to “if you really, really love me, then someday the excesses I commit will be on “Behind the Music”. An interesting career choice. I’d rather be an actuary, but then, the math is too hard. Life, what challenges.
I like instead the ways of ambient “stars”, who count their albums sold in three and four digits, and follow the Mennonite way of fame rather than the televangelist way. They make interesting sounds, collaborate on one another’s albums, and engage in endless theological debates about who is truly ambient, who is actually–[shudder]–new age, and whether the presence of beats render something tribal ambient, or merely–[shudder]–downtempo chill. I like the idea that the best kind of fame is the kind when only 12 people, none of whom are on your continent, know who you are. I suppose I like the poet kind of fame better than the rockstar.
Seriously, though (and I appreciate your sense of fun),
it would have been fun at 20 to have known that the world is not fun-but-unattainable career v. drone-job. For me, the choice was not music v. graphic art, but liberal arts professorship v. law. It was far easier to get to be a respected alternative band in 1981 than to get tenure with an English Ph.D.
But my how the world has changed, now that it turns out that the internet has made the written word worthwhile :).
Also, isn’t it great that so many solo artists have realized that you don’t need more band members, you just need a band name? It’s all so simple–no more undependable bass players, just Reason 3.0 and a little skill with nomenclature!
Gurdonark, you are totally spot on. Flaking band members is one of the great selling points of new software that is always on time, real-time!
Also, Tim, I totally agree with you on so many points.
I feel like in America, I’ve had the be famous ideology jammed down my throat forever. Do those guys make a good society? Can they even function?
No doubt, over the next 5-20 years, with the diversification of cultural exposure, seeing what happens to the old fame/rockstar model, interests me much.
Until then, I hate going to concerts and other events where space is feudal with a breakdown between king/performer/rockstar and servants/audience/consumers…
Never dreamed I’d write so often on this thread, but your last statement resonated with me, jon.
I really related to the part about king/serf/audience/fan. Who will watch the Watchmen, indeed?
Y’all folks who move CC forward are one step in the direction of moving from a music of rock gods to a music of collaborators. The results will be breathtaking.
Who would have imagined that all it took was a bit of technology and some imagination to move us from tape exchange and (the amazing) R. Stevie Moore to redefining the broad culture? It’s like the Miracle on 34th street…I believe, I believe, I believe….
True. I’m really interested to see collaborative processes move to live performance to break things wide open too! Very cool Gurdonark!