Commercialism, or comedy as those disgusted prefer to shout, chase for money, artistic bottom, et cetera, et cetera… To be honest, I really do not like pretentiousness – both among artists and their critics. And after all, each of us considers himself a specialist, so it is not difficult to fall into a similar line of reasoning. That’s our human nature. In addition, apparently everyone is to have the right to their own opinion… but to the point.
Quite often we hear about the commercialization of virtually everything; Music, of course, is no exception in this area. Therefore, we also often hear the term that a given music, artist or album is commercial. The problem is that this word, which is already quite abstract, thrown left and right, loses its meaning. I write all this because we often overuse the term because of this unbearable pretentiousness or ignorance. Most often, when someone says that some music is commercial, he means that:
1.He just doesn’t like the music.
When someone, for unknown reasons, cannot admit that certain climates simply do not suit him, and fit into the broadly understood mainstream – it is enough to shout with triumph: because it is komercha! Thus, we will let our colleague know what kind of people we are enlightened by the underground musical culture. The very attitude that something that is commercial is not immediately liked is simply ridiculous. Ultimately, there is no musical genre called “Commerce”, despite the fact that for some strange reason the term “India” was born, which also does not make much sense.
An interesting situation is the choice of a new direction by a given artist – when he suddenly begins to create music with completely new elements, or in a different genre. Then we will often hear the accusation of commercialism, when the new trend does not like more hardened fans. The problem is that in the opposite situation – when the artist stubbornly creates copies of his previous achievements, the same conclusion can be drawn – that he is commercial because he is afraid to take a risk. The evolution of musicians and bands is something extremely interesting and controversial. In the metal environment, most often the further into the forest, the more subdued, less aggressive, less raw the music. Then the word “commerce” is often mentioned. And I prefer this scene, because for me it is usually just more mature.
2. The artist creates for the public.
The line between fidelity to one’s convictions and submission to the voice of the crowd is very thin. Can we blame the artists for not being deaf to fan comments? That while working on a new album they wonder what can captivate crowds coming to concerts? A lot depends on the type of music itself. For example, Jon Shaffer – the leader of the power metal band Iced Earth – bluntly admits that if there were no crowds at concerts, he would stop doing what he does. Is this a sign that Iced Earth is commercial? No! Power metal is music that feeds on the concert energy of a crowd that is supposed to appeal to that crowd. The words of the leader of this band simply reflect that – and they are not faithful to commercial values, but simply to the spirit of this kind of music. The voice of the audience, the voice of the fans, is something that the artist – even out of pure gratitude – cannot just ignore.
3. The artist became popular.
The mere fact that someone has become commercially successful and well-known does not necessarily mean that the music itself has become commercial. Yes, what is known inevitably becomes an object of trade, a cog in the powerful machine of the music industry, which can cause disgust and general nausea. But the mere fact that someone has become a star does not negate his artistic achievements. So just because our beloved artist from the underground suddenly became the subject of conversations of friends from work or the main topic of pink Internet portals, is he supposed to deprive us of the pleasure of enjoying his music?
4. The band recorded (horror!) a music video.
A long time ago, in a casual conversation, someone brought such proof of the commercialization of a certain band. Now it’s rather out of date, but it is worth mentioning that there is nothing wrong with promoting your work. Following the opposite line of reasoning, we should consider the band’s Facebook profile, giving interviews, signing contracts with the label as commercial… In fact, if someone is a true artist-musician, his work should not come to light at all.
To sum up, I don’t like it when someone uses such an abstract word as commercial, when they don’t have the slightest idea what drives the artists, how much work was put into the album, or generally speaking: what goes on behind the scenes. It’s easy to accuse commercialism, harder to cite more concrete arguments: that the arrangement of the songs is the same over and over again; that words on one hoof; that the single stands out from the rest of the album; that someone clumsily copies another musician. Ultimately, the commercial envelope around the artist is unimportant. Music should defend itself – the rest is just a lure that we should not pay much attention to. When I listen to an album, I don’t care how popular it is, whether it’s played on the radio, or even if the singer was really thinking about his pain or the amount on his contract crying into the microphone – I care about the end result and my personal feelings. I think that with this approach it is much easier to appreciate music and also talk about it.