After having read Steve Albini’s “ The Problem With Music” I became very surprised at how manipulative the entertainment industry really is. Albini describes, what I understand to be, record labels as “faceless industry lackey”, which made me imagine organizations that are able to avoid and divert all responsibility, and thus all blame. For instance, Albini discusses the A & R reps and how record labels strategically select young, hip, relatable, “warm” individuals for these positions, as a means of tricking the musicians into thinking that the A & R rep is worthy of their trust. The A & R rep is “as naive as the band he's duping. When he tells them no one will interfere in their creative process, he probably even believes it.” If that is the case- that the A & R rep is not to blame, and the record company is “faceless”, then who is responsible?
Albini discusses the process through which bands sign with record labels, which was by far the most appalling to me of all. The band meets with the deceiving, yet naïve A & R rep, and signs a letter of intent on the spot. Although shocking, the letter of intent does not actually translate to an intention to sign, but rather an obligation to sign. Albini writes “once a band has signed a letter of intent, they will either eventually sign a contract that suits the label or they will be destroyed”, because the band has given up the right to sign with another label or put out its own material.
At one point Albini discusses how the label has the upper hand, since there are plenty of other bands who would die for the opportunity to sign with them. One must then analyze why this is the case. If record labels are so manipulative, then why are their services in such demand? The answer is money, or rather the illusion of money. We see in “The Problem With Music” that record labels emphasize the projected or actual income figures, yet neglect to stress the cost of expense. In reality, the band member income is very low, especially in comparison to that of the record company. We discussed a potential solution to this problem in lecture today. It was suggested that record companies will be obsolete in the future as technology eliminates the middleperson. After reading Albini’s essay, I not only agree with this transition even more (record companies deserve extinction!), but I also understand that investing in the services of a record company are, in the end, not even that profitable.
Yikes - this sounds like an interesting article. I must say, the situation as you described it is a bit sickening. But then, business is business.
ReplyDeleteStill, why do we need business - middlemen - to make a profit on intellectual works? The answer just might be that we don't. I would encourage you to read my blog entry, A Common Theme. Well, actually you already know about Creative Commons. What you might not realize, though, is that it is still possible to turn over a profit on your work as an artist using the Creative Commons license. For some reason, people don't seem to realize this.
Aside from selling the work directly, I found what Clay said in class interesting - namely that many artists were able to make a good living just surfing the waves of their free-sharing popularity by performing live concerts. Sounds like a good life to me, especially when you look at how much record companies are really going to help (or hurt) you as an artist.