Art and commerce have a very intimate yet separate relationship with each other. Like illicit lovers there is a feeling of wrongdoing, yet they rely on each other for their own existence. Artists pour their creative heart and soul into making an object of art; yet that object (and the future creative life of the artist) is essentially worthless unless someone wants to buy it.
Essentially creativity is measured in terms of commerce; for artists it is the monetary value of their work; for musicians it is record sales. Without a product to sell the music industry wouldn’t be able to function. Without record companies to finance their musical creations, bands would not be able to exist; not in a full-time rock ‘n’ roll way, anyway. Therefore a delicate balance has always been struck between the artists and the companies that bankroll their creativity. Artists naturally want creative freedom and likewise record companies want a large return for their investment.
Now the internet is changing that balance as artists are free to give their music away and promote themselves online. A popular example of the MySpace music revolution is Lilly Allen; yet she was only able to properly play the game by signing for Parlophone, a major record label. Today it seems like everyone has a copy of the Lilly Allen album; her modern and cool take on catchy pop music appeals to NME teenagers and Q reading dads alike.
In the recent and excellent final episode of the Seven Ages Of Rock series, Noel Gallagher admitted that it wasn’t until ‘the squares’ started buying (What’s the Story) Morning Glory? that he became seriously rich. ‘The squares’ are the people who buy one record a year. Lilly Allen has sold so many copies of her debut album because her music has appealed beyond the music magazine reading fans; last year her album was the one that people who only buy one album a year bought.
For the single album buying public there is a hole in the market. If they just buy one album by the year’s biggest “alternative” act then they end up missing out on all of the songs that they hear on mobile phone and car adverts. This hole is filled by the compilation album; the major record label executive’s wet dream: a collection of hits that is directly aimed at the Chris Moyles listening masses.
The latest in a long line of indie rock compilation albums is the simply titled Just Great Songs. Now there’s a product that promises to do what it says on the tin; a collection of 40 songs that all the family can listen to. On the promotional advert Jamie Theakston enthusiastically exclaims that it’s ‘the only album you’ll need to buy this year’. Not that this is a collection of great songs, but it’s the only album that you (the annual solo album buyer) will need to buy this year. Essentially it is a perfect example of music being a commodity; something that is produced on a large scale in exchange for money. Therefore by packaging a song with a group of others as an item for monetary exchange, it ceases to be a work of art. Compilation albums therefore represent the ultimate example of the commodification of music.
But their large sales mean increased funds for the artists on the album, thus meaning that they can carry on creating music that will be potentially loved by an audience of millions. And at the end of the day that’s what every musician wants. 99% of the unsigned bands on MySpace Music aren’t on there so that they can give their music away for free. Like Lilly, they hope that their music will reach a large audience and they’ll get a record deal. Being on a compilation album might not be an aim, but it does signify that you’ve made it.
No comments:
Post a Comment