You can see it everywhere around you, bands and music artists taking a popularity hit with their central crowd of hardcore fans from the moment they make it big. Some of these artists are accused of selling out, others are said to be suffering from the affliction of having attracted fans who themselves suffer from an elitist snobbery that doesn't allow them to appreciate music that has acheived mainstream success.

So, is it the Fans or the Band?

Both arguments make valid points, and both can be easily justified by giving simple examples.

Some artists, usually from the heavier, darker or more underground genres (Rap, Metal and Goth) tend to soften their sound when seeking mainstream exposure and approval. These artists run the risk of compromising their artistic integrity and thus ostracisizing their core fans by abandoning the music they're associated with. Their chances of mainstream acceptance is, obviously, elevated, but the mainstream is fickle and when the glamour wears off the hardcore fans may not be there to catch these artists when they fall.

Artists like Metallica and Snoop Dogg, whose sound all but changed completely after having tasted commercial success are examples of the trend of artistic integrity crumbling before the promise of money and popularity.

Indie artists generally experience the other kind of backlash from fans. Death Cab for Cutie, for example have (though not to the same negative extent as some of their contempries) seen a great deal of Indie fan indifference since having attained greater critical success. These artists attract fans who, for some reason, feel special by knowing of a band that is both talented and largely unknown. When they are no longer unknown, those same fans will  boycott the group as though success is somehow sinful.

Losing the Edge, Musically

Another potentially accurate theory is that artists need to suffer in order to continue producing true art.

It must never be forgotten that music is an art form and, as such the people creating it need to be in the correct mindset to produce works of art. In this case it is quite possible that being softened by success, fame and comfort leaves artists without anything worth saying, unable to create compelling art.

Art is attractive because of it's unique ability to relate to the viewer (or listener), nothing serves as a greater example of this than music. The best music is more than just a pleasant distraction, an audibly-aesthtic series of beats and rhythms to which we can dance, drink and party. The best music is the music that helps us get through the tough times, lets us know that no matter what we're going through, we aren't the only ones.

It's hard to relate to music whose lyrical content is that of a spoiled little rich girl with impulse control issues or a wannabe tough-guy whose songs are so fantastical and contrived that he can't even live up to what he's preaching. We relate to real people, with real problems - people who occupy the same world as us. The rich and famous are not those people. So is it possible that when artists become rich and famous, they stop being artists?

Comments

Name *
Email (For verification & Replies)
URL
Code   

Submit Comment