last week i watched 16 documentary films as part of my role as a juror for the tribeca film festival.
we, my fellow jurors and i, gave the documentary award to ‘when i came home’, a movie about returning iraqi vets.
it’s an amazing movie, about the hardships that soldiers face in iraq, and then the hardships that they face upon returning home, and how the bush administration(in addition to lying about the reasons for the war and then waging it with egregious hubris and
ineptitude)have no plans in place for returning veterans.
the bush administration have treated the soldiers with utter contempt, as this moviedemonstrates.
we also gave an honorable mention to ‘jack smith and the destruction of atlantis.’
jack smith was a photographer and filmmaker in new york in the 50’s and 60’s and 70’s.
he was a huge influence on andy warhol and john waters and fellini.
he also very earnestly and roundly rejected capitalism and it’s influence on art.
which raises some germaine and pertinent questions, especially for me.
one of the questions that it raises for me is, ‘when i release a song or a record i’m aware that i’m releasing it into a music marketplace. to what extent does this influence the composition and recording and promotion of the music that i make?’
i sometimes wonder what sort of music i would make if there was no commercial
outlet for it.
or, to a greater extreme, what sort of music would i make if i had no audience for it at all?
another question is, ‘does the marriage of art & commerce have an innately positive or negative effect on art and music?’
i don’t have an answer to this question. i don’t know if an answer exists.
the marriage of art & commerce is always complicated, or so it seems.
my stock answer has been that the marriage of art & commerce is benign so long as it doesn’t swing too far in one direction.
too far in the ‘art’ direction and you end up with 15 minutes noise solo’s while someone reads the phone book in urdu, and too far in the ‘commerce’ direction and you have crass, soul-less, garbage(i.e-98% of the music heard on the radio).
but what if an accomodation of the commercial music marketplace is innately destructive and bad?
i mean, sure, great music has resulted from the marriage of art & commerce(i.e-radiohead, donna summer, the clash, massive attack, pulp, etc).
but what would the state of music be today if there had never been any way for music to be commercially exploited?
has the potential for commercial exploitation corrupted music to the point where none of us are even aware of the corruption due to it’s ubiquity?
or has the potential for commercial exploitation forced musicians to hone their craft in order to create work that has a broader utility?
i don’t know.
i do wonder what sort of music i would make if i never had to think about whether or not there was a commercial audience for my work.
again, i don’t know.
moby
