From: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org (mad-mission-digest) To: mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Subject: mad-mission-digest V3 #73 Reply-To: mad-mission@smoe.org Sender: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-mad-mission-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * mad-mission-digest-request@smoe.org * with ONLY the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * For the latest information on Patty's tour dates, go to: * http://www.spectra.net/~ducksoup/pattyg/patttyg.htm * OR * go to http://www.amrecords.com * then click "tour" and fill in the blanks :) * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: mad-mission-digest V3 #xxx or the like gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. mad-mission-digest Saturday, March 20 1999 Volume 03 : Number 073 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: MM: RE: Art of Sellin' Out? [rblack1@io.com (Ronda Blacksher)] MM: Art of Sellin' Out? [Wendy J ] MM: Re: Art of Sellin' Out? ["Victoria Chenevey" ] Re: RE: MM: Desperate [SaucyBoy@aol.com] MM: sticking up for Mark! (long and incoherent) ["Paul Russell" Cristina writes: "I'm sorry Mark, I don't mean to rain on YOUR parade, >but when you look at who is getting exposure these days (i.e. the "Divas," >and the teenage "sensations") it has nothing to do with how talented they >are at the business side of music." > >Mark replies: Cristina, no apologies are necessary, when it comes to >raining on my parade. My ego always carries an umbrella ;-). > >I find it difficult to debate any issue when the issue itself is so >subjective. Words like "talented", "true artists/musicians", defy any >meaningful definition.....so any meaningfull debate is really impossible. >Those of us that are passionate about music are already doing all we can. >We do our part to affect change buy supporting those artists that we think >are talented,by buying their music, supporting radio stations that play >their music and by spreading the word utilizing whatever technology is at >our disposal. I love Ani Defranco and what she's done and I've bought all >of stuff just to express my support (because really not all of it is good, >in my opinion). But I also like Celine Dion (one of the Diva's) and I have >all here CD's including those in French. > >Oh, just for the record (no pun intended)I am not an attorney. I work for >the largest law firm in Nashville and many of our clients are in the music >industry, but NO, I do not directly profit from the "Music Biz". I'm just a >guy in his mid forties, who is, has always been and forever will be in love >with the female voice. I don't know what "true talent" is, I only know what >stirs my heart. > >Have a good weekend, everybody. > >Regards, >Mark >Nashville,TN > >-----Original Message----- >From: James P [mailto:jasepru@home.com] >Sent: Friday, March 19, 1999 11:44 AM >To: Mad-mission@smoe. org >Subject: MM: Art of Sellin' Out? > > >I agree with Joe. I tend to be an optimist when it comes to global change >and how it can manifest itself. But not all artists are as business savvy as >Ani DiFranco. What she did and what she's doing is brilliant and I hope that >it has inspired other artists to go on that same path by subverting the >music mega-corporations and their looks-based industry. She needs to write a >book on how she did it. I'm sorry Mark, I don't mean to rain on YOUR parade, >but when you look at who is getting exposure these days (i.e. the "Divas," >and the teenage "sensations") it has nothing to do with how talented they >are at the business side of music. Chances are they have no clue how it >works. They look pretty and sing uncomplicated, unchallenging songs and that >is why they have record deals. It has nothing to do with talent in either >regard. I think that Milli Vanilli and C&C Music Factory proved that to us. >What insults me the most is that music companies have some little outdated >demographic that tells them I want this kind of music shoved down my throat. > The true artists/musicians that do "fall through the cracks" and get >exposure in the mainstream (i.e. Sheryl Crow, Tori Amos, Shawn Colvin, Dave >Matthews,etc.) and even the occasional Grammy, have worked their asses off >for YEARS to get where they are. And I'd bet quite a bit of money (if I had >it) that every one of them had to go through some kind of "image makeover" >before they were allowed to make their first video. > Where does this leave Patty? I know that among musicians her work is >respected and admired. Yet, at a concert here in Nashville, a guy sitting >next to me said, "I hope it's not Patty's looks that are keeping her from >the exposure she deserves." Does his comment reflect the (let's face it) >male-dominated music industry? I and many others think that Patty is not >only incredibly talented, but incredibly beautiful, too. But is she not >going to get more exposure and respect because she doesn't look like Mariah >Carey? > The priorities of this mutated form of capitalism are very disturbing, >indeed. Yet, we (I mean this collectively/societal, not we on this list) >demonstrate our support by purchasing records by the Untalented, by >purchasing our goods at places like Wal-Mart and any big-chain/mega-store. >Many of us work for these places, but know that if we went to work for an >individually owned place, we'd get paid less because they, too, are trying >to compete. Where does that leave us? How does one get the word out? How >does one get people to realize that their choices and money are influenced >by corporations? More importantly, how does one get people to CARE that >corporations rule the world? > If any of you on this list want more info on how corporations rule our >lives, there is a wonderful website that you can go to for more informative >arguments on the salvation of our culture: > www.adbusters.org > >I hope I haven't rambled too long. I have much more that I could say about >all this but I'll let someone else have the cyber-floor now. > -Cristina >"As long as this women-in-rock movement is treated as a novelty, we're still >looking at it as something that's not here to stay." > -Sheryl Crow > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 13:29:27 -0800 (PST) From: Wendy J Subject: MM: Art of Sellin' Out? ditto, ditto, ditto! there's just one thing i'd like to say about the looks-obsessed music industry and that is: i agree that the more sexy and slutty you are (i.e. mariah carey) the more exposure you'll get on mtv and in rolling stone. however, i do think that things are changing, albeit s-l-o-w-l-y, in that there's just a wee bit more room than there used to be for strong, talented, unglamorous women (i.e. sarah mclachlan, sheryl crow, tori amos). we just need more women to get out there and kick some ass! go patty! onward tori! keep jammin', jonatha! (there's my $.02) ~wj - ---James P wrote: > > I agree with Joe. I tend to be an optimist when it comes to global change > and how it can manifest itself. But not all artists are as business savvy as > Ani DiFranco. What she did and what she's doing is brilliant and I hope that > it has inspired other artists to go on that same path by subverting the > music mega-corporations and their looks-based industry. She needs to write a > book on how she did it. I'm sorry Mark, I don't mean to rain on YOUR parade, > but when you look at who is getting exposure these days (i.e. the "Divas," > and the teenage "sensations") it has nothing to do with how talented they > are at the business side of music. Chances are they have no clue how it > works. They look pretty and sing uncomplicated, unchallenging songs and that > is why they have record deals. It has nothing to do with talent in either > regard. I think that Milli Vanilli and C&C Music Factory proved that to us. > What insults me the most is that music companies have some little outdated > demographic that tells them I want this kind of music shoved down my throat. > The true artists/musicians that do "fall through the cracks" and get > exposure in the mainstream (i.e. Sheryl Crow, Tori Amos, Shawn Colvin, Dave > Matthews,etc.) and even the occasional Grammy, have worked their asses off > for YEARS to get where they are. And I'd bet quite a bit of money (if I had > it) that every one of them had to go through some kind of "image makeover" > before they were allowed to make their first video. > Where does this leave Patty? I know that among musicians her work is > respected and admired. Yet, at a concert here in Nashville, a guy sitting > next to me said, "I hope it's not Patty's looks that are keeping her from > the exposure she deserves." Does his comment reflect the (let's face it) > male-dominated music industry? I and many others think that Patty is not > only incredibly talented, but incredibly beautiful, too. But is she not > going to get more exposure and respect because she doesn't look like Mariah > Carey? > The priorities of this mutated form of capitalism are very disturbing, > indeed. Yet, we (I mean this collectively/societal, not we on this list) > demonstrate our support by purchasing records by the Untalented, by > purchasing our goods at places like Wal-Mart and any big-chain/mega-store. > Many of us work for these places, but know that if we went to work for an > individually owned place, we'd get paid less because they, too, are trying > to compete. Where does that leave us? How does one get the word out? How > does one get people to realize that their choices and money are influenced > by corporations? More importantly, how does one get people to CARE that > corporations rule the world? > If any of you on this list want more info on how corporations rule our > lives, there is a wonderful website that you can go to for more informative > arguments on the salvation of our culture: > www.adbusters.org > > I hope I haven't rambled too long. I have much more that I could say about > all this but I'll let someone else have the cyber-floor now. > -Cristina > "As long as this women-in-rock movement is treated as a novelty, we're still > looking at it as something that's not here to stay." > -Sheryl Crow > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 14:33:36 -0800 From: "Victoria Chenevey" Subject: MM: Re: Art of Sellin' Out? Is the best way to change a system to work within it? In other words, even though you abhor that money rules the world, if your goal is to get more exposure for artists like Patty, then what works to get her that exposure is to buy her albums, go to her concerts, listen to the radio stations that play her music.....spending enough money so the record companies will notice and will promote Patty in place of someone else, perhaps a diva, therefore gaining popularity for Patty, which equals money for Patty, which then makes her mainstream, which according to some posts here, would then be an unhappy circumstance because we're now contributing to capitalism. Catch 22? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 12:06:32 -0500 From: "Michael C. Gay" Subject: Re: MM: RE: RE: Awards shows and the biz.of sellin' out Joe, Mark, and anyone else who's still listening (I happen to enjoy this discussion, but I realize many MMers may be starting to lose interest by now. anyway.. ) The music business is ruthless capitalism. It chews up and spits out lots of people, artists and "suits" alike. There is only one goal of this business, like any other, and that is to sell product. I'm beginning to worry about Patty a little, having seen the impatience of the industry with great artists who don't sell (and i mean sell 100,000+). But before I start singing "workers of the world unite," remember, as Mark mentioned, this is a system that artists enter into freely, though often naively. Enter, in fact, with ideas of fame and fortune as motivation rather than social change or even artistic expression. Yes there are many exceptions, and usually that is the music which is worth a listen. But there is no viable alternate system for those people... yet. Watch for the MP3 revolution, comrades. MP3 allows CD quality music to be easily sent across the internet and it has the industry scared shitless. After all, take away manufacturing and distribution and the only "business" left is the recording process and sales/marketing/promotion. Things that many artists and their management would be willing to provide, and often do already. So there is hope for all the good, and terrible, artists out there who can't get a deal, lost their deal, or can't even spell deal. Still capitalism, but in a better form I think. Hope to see some of you at the Nashville Riverstages show. ~ mike (in atlanta) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 16:53:56 -0600 (CST) From: rblack1@io.com (Ronda Blacksher) Subject: MM: Re: Art of Sellin' Out? Well, it seems the trouble with working within the system is that gravy tends to be the end result (one woman's opinion only). I guess I want Patty to be ragingly successful but not lose the fire that seems to inevitably go or lessen. A definite Catch-22 it seems. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:30:36 -0600 From: "James P" Subject: MM: let's put it this way... Your right, Victoria, there is a Catch-22. I don't despise capitalism, I despise what it's become. I despise how young girls are targeted by cosmetic and fashion companies and made to feel inadequate just so the company can convince them to buy a product they don't need. (But that's a whole 'notha argument) The way I handle it is this: I don't grow my own food. I have to buy it, but I have a choice of what to buy and who to buy from. I don't want processed, pesticide-ridden fruit & vegetables that are more harmful than good. Therefore, I choose to buy organic foods from independently owned businesses. If I have to give my money over to a company, I'd rather give it to one that supports a healthy lifestyle (for humans and animals) and environment-friendly products. It's the same with music. I don't wish to work outside the system by stealing or bootlegging for profit. Patty would get no money/support if I did this and I would end up in jail. Therefore, the only way to handle it is to support Patty's music by going to her shows, buying her records, and spreading the word about how fantastic she is. Money does rule the music industry and is always the bottom line. I understand this. I would rather have money being generated towards Patty and others in her position than to the gravy (as Ronda appropriately calls it) that is poured all over the radio stations. -Cristina ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 21:03:07 EST From: SaucyBoy@aol.com Subject: Re: RE: MM: Desperate Well said..as usual Mark.... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 21:43:15 PST From: "Paul Russell" Subject: MM: sticking up for Mark! (long and incoherent) Danger!! Danger!! Will Robinson!! too long! and not terribly PG! Filled with anger! GRRRRR! angry tomato seed am I. red with anger I tell you. Grrrrr. I am an angry seed of tomato type. hey hey hey y'all! Spring break season is in full swing down here in FLA with all them pasty white yankees frying themselves on our white sandy beaches. (was that a run-on sentence? It seems awful long.)Anyway, on with the countdown... I know this discussion that that's been taking up all the RAM in my computer is not-exactly Patty Griffin, so I appologize in advance for keeping the thread going...but it's so darn interesting. ;) I for one am sticking up for Mark. Not that it's a great system, but it is what it is. Potaytoe, Patahto. This might be hard to fathom, but I actually like quite a few bands with no talent. Sometimes it's just noise, and that's okay with me. It's the thought that counts. Reading all the emails reminded me of a recent interview BET had with Prince (oh, I'm sorry, the artist FORMERLY known as Prince...or symbol...or whatever). There was a part in the interview that was very eye-opening. He said that he never changed his style of music. It is just that the popularity of his albums depended on who he acknowleged. Whenever he gave credit to certain people, "the right people" (whoever they are) were called and his album would sell like a 3-dollar whore. I'm not talking about "certain" certain people, I being general. (that sounds batty I know). And I thought about his different albums and said, "hey, he's right. It does all sound the same, more or less." The point is, the more people he would involve, the more successful his album was...however, the less money he would make (spreading out the dough a little thin). On the albums in which he would pay less people, magically that particular album wouldn't do well in the stores. Coincidence? Conspiracy? Capitalism? Communism? Viagara related? :P This grammy stuff, and the art of selling out...I mean, come on. If it's so obvious to everyone that the people in charge of the grammys are giving these awards to their "show-biz" bands, then why pound your fist demanding something other than the show that it is. Don't try to change an old, rich, and possibly crumbling empire. Start a new one. We could band together (not us personally, but generally) and come up with a new award to really recognize new talent. I know if I were in charge, that Kevin Costner dude wouldn't be making cent one (I like to watch people who can ACTUALLY act...and not make incredibly stoopid movies like "The Postman"). Sorry, I'm on a roll here. hmmmm, rolls. bread. corned-beef. So you got your television industry telling YOU what to watch, you've got your Film industry telling YOU who has talent, you've got your recording industry telling YOU who's good, and you've got your fashion moguls telling YOU what to wear and how to look. If I were so concerned I would choose to ignore it, and do so on many occasions. Besides, I think Tom Waits and Iggy Pop are incredible artists. They never won awards (to my knowledge) for obvious reasons (hell, I can sing better than Mr. Waits, but I don't have that pazaz or artistic quality that he has). Why do I need them to win an award to prove to everyone else that they have talent? I think Patty Griffin is just incredible. Do I think she should have won a grammy? Why? If Milli Vanilli can win a grammy, how prestegious is that award, really? I know that one point is Milli Vanilli should never have won a grammy in the first place, but who are you to decide? Do YOU own the "grammy corporation of america"? I'm addressing no one in particular of course. But as always, I've probably offended someone in this sensative world we live in (don't tell Rob Fab I'm making fun of him lip-syncing). :P I'm sorry, but it is the way it is. too many people are trying to start revolutions, and it ends up being a lot of small battles easily won by the mega-corporations. I have to admit that I'm a capitalist pig in this capitalist society. I would make money any way I possibly could. Money to buy everything in this material world. Personally I beleive that anarchy is the true way to go, and Communism is just too idealistic and Utopian (USSR proved that, and China is proving it now...those in power don't wanna give it up). Things will change when I take over the world and become Emperor and dictator-for-life. ;P I'll stop writing now. I've gotta drive freaking home and I'm starting to fall asleep and write incoherently. Of course, many people could say that I've ALWAYS written incoherently, and in the words of Stewart Smalley, "and that's....okay." Working on Friday nights is starting to monica. I've said my babbling. Now I can go back to my padded room. :P Oh, and for the record, I like the slutty look. ;) I shall close with lyrics from a great artist Wally Pleasant(who has never won a grammy, go figure): "I was walking down hate street, in San-Francisco, when a counter-cultured youth encountered me. She had a freshly died purple mohawk, a pair of 120-dollar Doc Marten boots, so in other words she was wearing as much equity as I made so far this year. And with a wanting look, on her pale face, she asked me for some change. I said Change comes from within." --"Alternateen" peace, love, and vegetable rights forever! paul **************************** * If it's tourist season, * * why can't we shoot * * them? * * --Steven Wright * **************************** Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of mad-mission-digest V3 #73 ********************************