Mommy, Can I Grow Up To Be a Sellout? Pleeeeease? – Tom Rossi

Because I’ve been alive during this particular period in music history, I’ve witnessed a transformation – one that tells us a lot about the direction our society, as a whole, has gone in the last couple of decades.

It used to be that a musician, being “sponsored” by some name brand, or letting a song appear in an advertisement, was completely taboo. Not too long ago (maybe 30 years or so?), your peers (other musicians) would have looked down on you with disgust if your song appeared in a commercial for Nike or Coca Cola.

But gradually, that’s exactly what became “normal”. We now are bombarded with fake art – music that was created to make money, and so “selling out” no longer has any meaning. I’m sure that some of this music was created with selling out as its true purpose.

There is very little “art for art’s sake.” Yes, succesful musicians have always made money – sort of. But nothing like today, which leads me to believe that most future musicians didn’t start taking lessons, in the good old days, with the goal of millions of dollars in mind. Now it really seems that it’s mostly about money.

And… these days it’s about MORE money. We now see musicians’ and other “artists'” work appearing in commercials even though these “artists” are already millionaires. I keep wondering, how much does a company has to pay a big star like __________* to have his song in their commercial? Or to have him appear on a commercial personally? I sure hope it’s a lot. I’d hate to think we’ve “progressed” to the point where a millionaire will commercialize his or her work for practically nothing.

(*note: I’ve decided not to give any sellouts any extra advertising space here. If anybody wants it, they can pay me. Wait… no, they can’t. They can go to hell.)

But maybe it doesn’t bother me so much that some people choose to commercialize their own creations. What really bothers me is when a musician has passed away, or just doesn’t own the rights to his or her own creation, thanks to a crappy deal with some giant, ever-greedy record company, and that creation is turned into an advertizing campaign.

I’ve heard songs by The Beatles, The Doors, and all sorts of other bands and solo artists used in commercials in the last few years. This makes me sick. No matter what you say to me, no matter what arguments you make, I will NEVER, NEVER, EVER believe that John Lennon would be OK with the use of any of his songs to sell something – and certainly not shoes.

Neil Young feels the same way I do. Here’s his great video for his song “This Note’s for You,” that was, for a while, banned from MTV:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJiUEr4045o

-Tom Rossi

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Rossi is a commentator on politics and social issues. He is a Ph.D. student in International Sustainable Development, concentrating in natural resource and economic policy. Tom greatly enjoys a hearty debate, especially over a hearty pint of Guinness.

___________________________________________________________________________

iReligion 3.12

What I’ve suspected for years is now official – Apple is now…

a religion.

A group of neuroscientists has scanned the brains of Apple maniacs and found that their brains react to the sight of an ipod or an ipad the same way the brains of devout Christians react to images of Jesus on the cross. I call it “iReligion 3.12” because it’s been around for quite a while, though until now undiscovered by science.

This has been pretty obvious for a long time. Ever try to tell an Apple person that an Apple product is not so easy to use or is flawed in any tiny way, whatsoever? Better bring your boxing gloves.

I think that you can extend this definition of a religion much more broadly that just to Apple-maniacs. I think the same reasoning (or lack thereof) excretes a species I will call “brand-o-philes” into the world. Brand-o-philes are people who worship a brand name, like Nike or Adidas, or even a team, like the Cowboys or the Lakers. As I have said in a previous post, these are the elements of fake individuality.

People love to put stickers on their cars – actually PAYING to advertise some corporation’s wares. How many times have I seen a giant Nike “swoosh” sticker in the back window of a pickup truck? How many times have I seen a plain-old t-shirt made to look “cool” by the word, “Abercrombie” or “Hollister?”

But many people go way beyond trying to look cool. They believe so thoroughly in this fake individuality that they convince themselves that this is a form of expression, when it’s not expressing anything but the almost random choice of who or what to follow like a sheep.

But they will defend their brands furiously – sometimes even willing to get into fist-fights over which team is “better”, even if neither team has won a game in the past month.

People feel like winners when their team wins. It’s a sort of vindication for “sticking with the team” through bad seasons in previous years. They feel like winners when they wear the latest styles, attracting the admiring gazes of other fashion-victims. They feel like winners when they drive a new, shiny car down the street. They feel like winners when they outwardly imitate or show allegiance to winners.

And of course I am not innocent in all this. I have proudly worn my Boston Bruins, pro-weight hockey jersey to many a hockey game, emblazoned with the name of one of my all-time favorite players, Ray Bourque, #77. But I draw the line at advertising. I’ve even gone as far as to blacken out logos on clothes or hats because I refuse to advertise for free. Hell, some companies I wouldn’t advertise if they paid me!

Here is a list of our country’s top religions:

1. materialism

2. winner-worship

3. brand-worship

4. celebrity-worship

5. worship of shiny things

What it all adds up to is that we worship coolness and we worship image. We want to look and seem cool, but we also want to FEEL cool. We want to become the “Third Person Singular” as Don DeLillo coined in his novel, Americana. What Delillo meant was not the pronoun we were taught in English class (he, she, it) but the “sublime other” – whose image we long to inhabit. “To consume in America is not to buy; it is to dream.”

And there we are – lost sheep, dreaming and pretending that we are or will be the eagles soaring overhead.

-Tom Rossi

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Rossi is a commentator on politics and social issues. He is a Ph.D. student in International Sustainable Development, concentrating in natural resource and economic policy. Tom greatly enjoys a hearty debate, especially over a hearty pint of Guinness.

Tom also posts on thrustblog.blogspot.com

___________________________________________________________________________