I saw a Starbucks commercial on TV that used “Deceptacon” as background music (and to add insult, it included a Family Guy clip). I blame Hillary for this.
The Death of "Selling Out" :
Anonymous :
34 days ago :
№ 13048
>>13052
>>13048 (OP) Anyway, my initial post was a bit glib, but I wonder a number of things:
1) Was being anti-selling out always a pointless affectation, rather than a meaningful way to resist the encroaching conformity of mass consumer capitalism?
2) Did the promotion of identity politics by both the left (as exemplified by leftist artists like Le Tigre) and major corporations make accusations of selling out problematic?
3) Did the loss of gatekeeping inherent in consuming media via streaming make identifying, policing, and avoiding sellouts impossible?
>>13081>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13056
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
Anonymous :
34 days ago :
№ 13049
>>13051
>>13049 The album is copywrite Le Tigre records on Spotify (and Mr. Lady Records, but they apparently shut down in 2004), so it seems likely the band itself are responsible.
I can sort of excuse that as often the label has rights to lease music to advertising etc, not the band itself.
My favorite Le Tigre factoid (besides the infamous Hilldawg single) is one of the wammen that has a mustache but still insists on female pronouns and identifying as a woman, meanwhile a generation younger than her scores of females more feminine than her identify as male with male pronouns. Sorry to bring tranny discourse again into this godforsaken place but just had to get that little contradiction out of my temporary memory once and for all
>>13049
I can sort of excuse that as often the label has rights to lease music to advertising etc, not the band itself.
The album is copywrite Le Tigre records on Spotify (and Mr. Lady Records, but they apparently shut down in 2004), so it seems likely the band itself are responsible.
Anonymous :
34 days ago :
№ 13052
>>13081
>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13056
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
>>13048 (OP) Anyway, my initial post was a bit glib, but I wonder a number of things:
1) Was being anti-selling out always a pointless affectation, rather than a meaningful way to resist the encroaching conformity of mass consumer capitalism?
2) Did the promotion of identity politics by both the left (as exemplified by leftist artists like Le Tigre) and major corporations make accusations of selling out problematic?
3) Did the loss of gatekeeping inherent in consuming media via streaming make identifying, policing, and avoiding sellouts impossible?
Right, but do the band members themselves own "Le Tigre Records"? All of them or just one? They probably do, in this case, but the point still remains. I don't like advertising either but I think it's a rather weak point, and for the Le Tigre case rendered pointless by their I'm With Her single
Anonymous :
34 days ago :
№ 13054
>>13055
>>13054 I think that's a bad-faith misreading of what I asked. It's entirely possible to criticize tendencies in leftism without being a knuckle dragger. I really am interested in how "selling out" used to be a thing in alternative culture, then "selling out" went away, then alternative culture went away. Since alternative culture was mostly (but not entirely) aligned with leftism, it's pretty impossible to discuss without bringing up leftism.
Ah, you just wanted to make a "leftists bad" thread. Sorry for interrupting the chudfest
>>13054
Ah, you just wanted to make a "leftists bad" thread. Sorry for interrupting the chudfest
I think that's a bad-faith misreading of what I asked. It's entirely possible to criticize tendencies in leftism without being a knuckle dragger. I really am interested in how "selling out" used to be a thing in alternative culture, then "selling out" went away, then alternative culture went away. Since alternative culture was mostly (but not entirely) aligned with leftism, it's pretty impossible to discuss without bringing up leftism.
Anonymous :
34 days ago :
№ 13056
>>13081
>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13056
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
>>13082
I can't say much because I grew up in a time where "not selling out" was a joke about pretentious artist types, and I was born in '97 so I think it predates the rise of identity politics or any post '08/Occupy politics. I particularly remember watching Rent sometime in the early 2010s and thinking how pathetic the character Mark comes across as an amateur documentarian that refuses to sell out and make some money for once in his life.
IMO it's a natural cultural reaction to the anti-corporate anti-globalism ADbusters era of the 90s. But now hyperindividualization has eroded any sense of a common artistic identity and I doubt we'll see a major swing back anytime soon.
Anonymous :
33 days ago :
№ 13081
>>13082 >>13089
>>13081 Selling out used to be considered lame even if people didn't have any expectations that the artist would make worthwhile new work, e.g. when a cruise line used "Lust For Life" or when Devo redid "Whip It" for a Swiffer ad. People made fun of that when it happened, despite both artists being basically washed up. It was about principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore.
>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13048 (OP) Anyway, my initial post was a bit glib, but I wonder a number of things:
1) Was being anti-selling out always a pointless affectation, rather than a meaningful way to resist the encroaching conformity of mass consumer capitalism?
2) Did the promotion of identity politics by both the left (as exemplified by leftist artists like Le Tigre) and major corporations make accusations of selling out problematic?
3) Did the loss of gatekeeping inherent in consuming media via streaming make identifying, policing, and avoiding sellouts impossible?
>>13056I can't say much because I grew up in a time where "not selling out" was a joke about pretentious artist types, and I was born in '97 so I think it predates the rise of identity politics or any post '08/Occupy politics. I particularly remember watching Rent sometime in the early 2010s and thinking how pathetic the character Mark comes across as an amateur documentarian that refuses to sell out and make some money for once in his life.
IMO it's a natural cultural reaction to the anti-corporate anti-globalism ADbusters era of the 90s. But now hyperindividualization has eroded any sense of a common artistic identity and I doubt we'll see a major swing back anytime soon.
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
Anonymous :
33 days ago :
№ 13082
>>13083
>>13082
>only place you talk about art is where you prepend it to "identity"
I open up my butt and I shit on you.
>>13081
>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13056
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
I think my post, >>13056I can't say much because I grew up in a time where "not selling out" was a joke about pretentious artist types, and I was born in '97 so I think it predates the rise of identity politics or any post '08/Occupy politics. I particularly remember watching Rent sometime in the early 2010s and thinking how pathetic the character Mark comes across as an amateur documentarian that refuses to sell out and make some money for once in his life.
IMO it's a natural cultural reaction to the anti-corporate anti-globalism ADbusters era of the 90s. But now hyperindividualization has eroded any sense of a common artistic identity and I doubt we'll see a major swing back anytime soon.
, is exactly about your concern of selling out: artists being encouraged to make more commercially viable work. I don't care about the Le Tigre example I'm just talking about the cultural attitude towards selling out so don't include me in here.
Anonymous :
33 days ago :
№ 13084
>>13090
>>13089
>principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore
Since it sounds like you're in this camp, how is artistic integrity broken by a piece of art finding commercial success after its creation? You're talking as if those were the good old days, and I'm not saying the state of art with respect to commercialisation has gotten better, but this take supposes making money from art is bad even if it's almost completely decoupled from the artistic process. I don't think those examples even count as selling out, per what I said before. There's an argument to be made about it betraying the original art, but I think that's pretty flimsy.
>>13084
*prrrrt*
Anonymous :
33 days ago :
№ 13089
>>13090
>>13089
>principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore
Since it sounds like you're in this camp, how is artistic integrity broken by a piece of art finding commercial success after its creation? You're talking as if those were the good old days, and I'm not saying the state of art with respect to commercialisation has gotten better, but this take supposes making money from art is bad even if it's almost completely decoupled from the artistic process. I don't think those examples even count as selling out, per what I said before. There's an argument to be made about it betraying the original art, but I think that's pretty flimsy.
>>13084
*prrrrt*
>>13081
>>13048 (OP)
>>13052
>>13056
None of you seem to get what the concern with selling out is, which is that it will encourage an artist to make more commercially viable work, and that that will compromise their artistic vision/integrity/whatever. Le Tigre isn't making music anymore. Their self-titled is closing in on thirty years old. But OP thinks Starbucks is lame therefore by association this degrades the quality of something (or their perception of the artist, whatever whatever) that already existed for nearly three decades prior.
If something has already been made, selling out doesn't really affect it, so it's hardly relevant to this. Complaining about "dirty money" would be the only political angle here, and I don't think OP gives a fuck about that (or will maybe decide to if it seems less lame than looking like the kind of wheezing faggot that dies from tertiary association to something uncool).
Selling out used to be considered lame even if people didn't have any expectations that the artist would make worthwhile new work, e.g. when a cruise line used "Lust For Life" or when Devo redid "Whip It" for a Swiffer ad. People made fun of that when it happened, despite both artists being basically washed up. It was about principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore.
>>13089
>>13081 Selling out used to be considered lame even if people didn't have any expectations that the artist would make worthwhile new work, e.g. when a cruise line used "Lust For Life" or when Devo redid "Whip It" for a Swiffer ad. People made fun of that when it happened, despite both artists being basically washed up. It was about principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore.
>principles and artistic integrity, concepts that don't really exist anymore
Since it sounds like you're in this camp, how is artistic integrity broken by a piece of art finding commercial success after its creation? You're talking as if those were the good old days, and I'm not saying the state of art with respect to commercialisation has gotten better, but this take supposes making money from art is bad even if it's almost completely decoupled from the artistic process. I don't think those examples even count as selling out, per what I said before. There's an argument to be made about it betraying the original art, but I think that's pretty flimsy.
>>13084>>13083
Yeah that's because I'm not talking about individual pieces of art you antagonistic moron.
*prrrrt*
The Who perfected it, you gotta sell out before you're even offered a contract.
It's the 10th anniversary of I'm With Her. Posting a small vigil for the stinker that has held my visceral hatred/fascination for a whole ass decade. Is there a term for hating something yet not being able to let it go? Am I the loser after all for being triggered by the libs?