[rumori] commodification of our 'alternative'? (was re: genre)

kevin leeeeee [rumori] commodification of our 'alternative'? (was re: genre)
Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:29:16 -0800 (PST) (00913454956, v01530504b2977aefe15cat[])

obviously we should be able to make a living however we want (this is the
US of A) but i think there is a good point to consider that anyone who
becomes a part of the media "flow" can no longer be an outsider commenting on the "flow". they sure can try, i just watched some bits of this cheezy U2 rocumentary on VH1 where they were showing clips of the zoo tv shit
where supposedly bono was playing a character mocking the media and pop
stars and himself... it just seems so hypocritical and lame, basically.
hey everybody, i'm a pop star, the biggest pop star in the world, but i'm
"cool" y'see cos i know i'm a pop star and i'm commenting on it and even criticizing "the media" for turning me into a pop star... excuse me, bono, but don't you and your label pay millions of dollars in publicity and
advertising in order to insure that you become and remain the biggest pop
star in the world? what the hell is that???! it's like the ultimate
hypocite... super-hypocrite.

the more i think about it, the more i think that if one's chief goal is to
use the media flow against itself in order to comment, highlight, make fun
of, bring attention to, etc... something in the media... then one can't
really be part of that media flow. not that i've analyzed this completely,
but the reason seems to me that you, like bono, would be to some extent a
hypocrite... i'd like to elaborate but it's late. maybe someone else can
elaborate. the difficult thing is determining what the line is between
outsider and contributor. what about the indie label outsider who has
distribution (like bob ostertag perhaps)... is he part of the flow? how
many cd's must he sell to not be?

is one only an outsider if NO ONE hears his/her music/art?

as far as the thing about making a living on your art debate... after over
2 years working in post production in the film biz, i've come to the
realization that the only way for me to do my music/art/whatever is to quit
and find some easy going day job that's not 60-100 hours a week slave labor
that saps not only my physical and mental energies but my creative juices
as well. before i worked at this job, i'd dreamed of doing away with my 2
vcr system of video collage editing and finally get my hands on some heavy
duty digital editing system... so what happens? after working 14 hours
editing, the last thing i want to do is stick around work and fiddle around
on my fucking art. sad, really, cos i have access to some nice equipment,

steev's right. there's like 1% of the artist-type population of the world
who love their creative moneymaking work. the rest of the 99% pretty much
would't mind doing something else with their time if they didn't need to
earn money to live. i bet if you asked even someone like jim cameron if
he'd have made titanic for free, for the pure love of the job, he'd laugh
his ass off.

did someone say something earlier about leaving "the rock", as in the earth??? where did that come from?