due to my excitement at the prospect of seeing the walkmen live, i somehow neglected to remember a key component to that band’s continued existence and success: they are willing participants in the sham that is corporate sponsorship.
this was brought to my attention fairly early on in my introduction to the band, which was seeing them as an opening act for hot hot heat. they burned through their set with a ton of sweaty energy and musicality and as impressed as i was, i couldn’t stop wondering where i had heard them before. then, i heard the nickelodeon-style piano chords that opened up their last song and immediately recognized it from the toyota commercial it was prominently featured in.
in the years since, i have followed the band, enjoyed their music and watched them chip away larger chunks of their credibility in my eyes by allowing car companies, alcoholic beverage companies and other corporate entities fund their artistic efforts.
so, why should i have been surprised to see two brand new toyota maxis sitting out in front of the doug fir, one with a flat screen TV in the back which two very bored looking guys used to “perform” soundgarden’s “black hole sun” as part of the rock star game? or the awful silkscreening station where folks could get a free t-shirt silkscreened with the toyota maxis logos on them? or the big white tour bus festooned with dell computer advertisements?
my biggest concern is that i can’t dismiss the band entirely. setting my anger and hatred towards john mayer and mates of state for allowing their visages and songs to be used to sell cell phones and blackberrys is easy because i think their music is paltry to begin with.
but the walkmen continue to put out amazing work. their latest album is easily the best thing they have done as a band, and their live show made the songs even more intense and even more heartfelt than their recorded versions. so, as much as i love them and no matter how good they get, i don’t know that i can support them by buying their records or paying to see them in concert (i was on the guest list for the show on wednesday in case you were wondering).
i bring all this up to open up the discussion to you, dear readers. do any of you struggle with separating the art from the artist(s) or am i alone in my struggle to understand if i am justified in feeling that the walkmen’s music will be forever tainted to me? please leave your thoughts in the comments section and let me hear what your thoughts are on this.
August 29, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Personally, if corporate influence doesn’t change or affect the music a band is making (but how would you know if they left out a message or toned something down because of that), and the company isn’t horrible, I don’t think it’s that big of a deal. I don’t think it’s great, but people have accepted advertising paying for tv shows, newspapers, magazines, radio and other entertainment, so I guess I don’t see how this is much different. I think potentially harmful products shouldn’t be supporting bands (alcohol, cigarettes, guns, etc), since a lot of fans are impressionable youth and it could help sway them to get into things they really aren’t mature enough for.
I think if they’re picky about who supports them and they can avoid being filtered by the company, it’s one of the few ways out there that an everyday band can actually exist outside of someone’s basement.
August 31, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Solid points, my wife. I can understand and almost begrudgingly accept the idea of bands using the money from these corporate sponsors to do what they want to do, but all too often, I feel like it deludes the music in some cases. They start playing it too too safe lest they distress their benefactors. It may not happen right away, but if they keep vacuuming up the money, they will do it eventually.
As for bands doing it simply to get their names out there, that’s foolhardy logic in my opinion. I point first to the entire career of Fugazi. An obvious example, yes, but they rewrote the playbook, proving that you don’t need to play by the rules that the major labels and even the more stringent indie labels (most egregious examples – Tooth & Nail, Victory) to get ahead. I will also point to this very prescient and funny essay by a musician about why bands should give up on the idea of trying to get their music sold and make money playing music in this day and age: http://www.musicthinktank.com/blog/please-buy-my-record-the-futility-of-flogging-music.html
September 3, 2008 at 4:01 am
I’m really annoyed by this.
Regarding songs on commercials: I discovered The Walkmen through that stupid commercial. Does that make me a lemming or slow to catch on? Oh well. I’ve been ahead of the curve on many other bands. At a time when a large percentage of music is stolen, I have no problem with bands making their money elsewhere. What else are they supposed to do? Charge more for live shows? Is that a better alternative?
Also, you have no idea if the band made any money off the display or even sanctioned it . Corporations are sponsoring venues now and if the band wants to play there they might have no choice in what is advertised. Indie bands like The Walkmen surely don’t. They could go all Pearl Jam and refuse to play venues that do that, but we all know where that went.
Finally, aren’t we all intelligent enough to USE corporate sponsorship? I’m sure that no one reading this blog is going to be responsive to advertising just because if features a particular band. If the corporations want to underwrite our favorite music and get no return on it, I am completely for that. And if you feel like YOU can separate the band from the ad but others can’t, you are full of it.
Hope you aren’t on the guest list next time.
September 22, 2008 at 2:11 pm
[...] of the heavy, dense, nearly inescapable corporate sponsorship of this event. As my friend Bob Ham has noted recently (with appropriate disdain), a great many acts, tours, and events are propelled by Big Money. And, it seems that his opinion [...]