this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
13 points (100.0% liked)
Music
7302 readers
10 users here now
Discussion about all things music, music production, and the music industry. Your own music is also acceptable here.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not sure this is exactly what you're looking for, but it literally a "sell-out" and has always bothered me. Jim Morrison never wanted his music used for any other purpose, but the rest of the band went behind his back and sold a song (I think to Ford) for advertising.
Then there's Bob Dylan. Never literally promised not to do advertising, but "Song To Woody," on his very first album comes about as close to a promise as you can get. And then selling his entire song catalog? Come on!
I think selling his catalog is a smart move. It cements his financial stability for the rest of his life, and probably his children as well. But yes, once he's sold it, they can do whatever they want with it.
He was not in need of financial stability.
I'm not one to rush to Dylan's defense on much, but 50 years can do a lot to change a person's mind.
But it was so meaningless a gesture! It would have been trivial for him to remain true to his own artistic vision. If his message as an artist had changed (as it did many times) that would be different. But shilling for Victoria's Secret was not art. He just traded on his "brand," and that is truly selling out.