View from the Cheap Seats is an extension of the newsroom, which is frequently a site of heated debate on topics ranging from the extremely serious to the utterly ridiculous. This web edition features the views of print edition columnists Thom Barker (Wednesday) and Calvin Daniels (Saturday), as well as web exclusive content by Michaela Miller (Thursday) and Devin Wilger (Friday).
This week: What musical artist(s) do you consider to be sellouts?
Changin’ times
I couldn’t think of any egregious cases off the top of my head except maybe Bob Dylan and Cadillac so I decided to peruse some lists on the Internet. What I noticed is a lot of the artists, whom people list as sellouts can’t really be considered such.
First of all, you have to have had integrity in the first place in order to sell out so bands like the Rolling Stones and KISS don’t count because they were always about the money.
Secondly, selling your name or your brand for commercial gain is not in and of itself constitute selling out. Is there anything really wrong, for example, with U2 fronting for iPod? After all, how many U2 fans were already listening to the band’s music on their iPods?
Finally, there is the ends justifying the means argument, such as Bob Geldof and his infamous razor blade peddling, which he did for African famine relief. It is an age-old question. Does motivation matter?
Personally, my whole attitude toward the concept of selling out changed after Bruce Cockburn, my favourite artist of all time, got flak in 1991 for “selling out” because he signed with a big label (Columbia) and recorded his Nothing But A Burning Light album in the United States using American producer T-Bone Burnett and guest artists such as Jackson Browne.
When pressed by a Canadian interviewer Bruce said something along the lines that he had devoted his life to the Canadian music industry, but wasn’t getting any younger and needed to make some money. Really, could anyone begrudge him that?
Now, if Bruce started schilling for say, the oil industry, that could raise my eyebrow.
I guess I keep coming back to Dylan because he was so counter-culture and considered so authentic. When songs intended to be anthems for social and political change, such as Times They Are A-Changin’, start getting used to promote big banks and insurance companies, you really do have to start questioning an artist’s integrity, however.
After all, it was Dylan who once sang: “Advertising signs that con you/Into thinking you’re the one/That can do what’s never been done/That can win what’s never been won.”
Then again, it’s not just times that change, so do people.
-Thom Barker
Accurate Name
I don’t think you can be considered a sellout individually when the entire music industry itself is a sellout. Producing music used to mean something; now it’s all about the almighty dollar. Being an artist now means becoming a brand. That being said, one artist that stands out to me before the downfall of the industry is 50 Cent. The man used to rap about everything, especially where racial injustices were concerned. His content was meaningful and catchy. In an effort to gain more followers, instead of fans, he started rapping to the masses. He cranked out tunes rapping about women’s gyrating hip movements, about free falling money and about driving in luxurious cars. At this point he was still good to listen to, but this content didn’t sound completely like him. Then he decided to put some shares into Vitamin Water, a brand of flavoured water masquerading as a healthy alternative…that’s a whole ‘nother ballgame for another day. Anyways, 50 Cent made more money from the sales of this brand of water than he ever did rapping. That, to me, is a sellout. He had a huge ego from making so much money that he decided to enjoy his profits. So he spent some money on strippers here and drugs there, and now he’s broke with a drug addiction. He sold out and he burned out. Call me cold-hearted, but I can’t have sympathy for people like this.
-Michaela Miller
I can stop this feeling, actually.
Selling out is about compromise. It’s making a song that fills a checklist of what you think will sell rather than what you think is actually good. Making commercial music isn’t necessarily a bad thing – I’ve been known to enjoy the Monkees, after all – but sometimes you get a piece of music that exists seemingly exclusively because the artist behind it really wanted a new house.
Justin Timberlake’s latest single is an example of that. The song is called “Can’t Stop the Feeling!” It was written for an animated film, Trolls, which is about those weird little dolls with long hair that were popular in the ‘90s. The video has people doing wacky dancing, because that’s something that could get grandmas dancing as part of a viral video campaign for the eventual album. The lyrics are basically nothing, generic uplift about being happy – much like last year’s “Happy” – or about dancing. Timberlake and his team of songwriters do break out some of his ‘70s soul influences, which are fine but make one kind of wish they were just listening to Stevie Wonder instead. It sounds like it was designed to sell people cell phones, and that’s why I absolutely hate it.
It’s also an example of the other part of selling out, that you know the artist behind it could have done much better if they weren’t chasing the almighty dollar. Back to Stevie Wonder, he used these same sounds to say something about the world he was living in. Timberlake is using them to make a dance party sequence for a third-rate animated movie selling a fourth-rate toy line. He’s made good songs before, and clearly can make a good song if he wants to, but “Can’t Stop the Feeling!” is just so insipid. There’s nothing personal, creative, inspired or unique about it. This is a song created to fill a hole in Timberlake’s bank account.
It’s not like Timberlake is a stranger to nakedly commercial songwriting. His career began with *NSYNC, and boybands are not popularly associated with artistic ambition. He also sung a jingle for McDonalds at one point. One could argue that Timberlake’s entire career has been an example of selling out. But that’s not entirely fair, he did have a string of artistic ambition and growth, and has generally reacted to his personal wealth by mostly doing what he wants to do, whether that means acting in a variety of unexpected films or putting together some relatively good albums. But this latest song is the kind of passion-free checklist that defines selling out, there is no reason for the song to exist beyond filling the artist’s bank account. It makes me hope that Timberlake’s new bathroom is really nice, because his song belongs in the toilet.
-Devin Wilger
Intrigued
The idea of what band might be a sellout in my mind was intriguing.
I of course recognize many people look at certain artists, in particular musicians, as selling out when they opt for popularity over the ‘art’ of their efforts.
It is not something I see as particularly relevant in terms of what I listen too.
It’s great to write music for the ‘sake of the music’ whatever that exactly means I suppose, but if it’s only the fly on the window pane, your mother and your best friend who hear it, you have not accomplished much of a ripple in the business.
There are of course bands which create a ‘buzz’ by doing something weird, new, obscure, or strange, which captures the ear of a sort of underground crowd.
Suddenly the band achieves some notoriety, and along comes a recording exec who suggests a few tweaks to take the sound more mainstream and early listeners scream sellout.
Meanwhile the artist recognizes a few things. A tweak, or two, and they are likely to have more ears listening. That is not generally a bad thing for an artist, to have more people following their work.
And while some altruistic music listeners might not like to hear this, but there is the crass concept of money. Toiling in obscurity and living in the parent’s basement, practising in a garage, driving a beat up 1990 van to gigs where after the bar bill you have to take up a collection for gas home may have certain legendary charm, a seven-figure bank account is not to be sneezed at either.
If a musician opts for popularity and money I cannot argue with the choice, nor do I resent the decision.
You can always ‘net search for the next band nobody has heard of to feel good about your listening choices if that is important.
In my case Garth Brooks, KISS, Bon Jovi and dozens more are just fine thanks.
- Calvin Daniels
