I work for a music house, writing music that is intended to be used in advertisements, and every time I receive a royalty check in the mail, I feel as if I’m pulling something over on someone. It’s not that I don’t think my work is deserving of credit, but the little kid in me is saying “I can’t believe someone is paying me to do this!”

What I do is a craft, not an art, and I make a distinction between the music I make and the music someone makes out of a necessity to create a personal piece of art. Someone who has chosen to write music for themselves and/or for their fans as a life’s calling, and does it well… you’re damn right they deserve to make some money from licensing. If you are lucky enough to have someone hear your work and find something they can connect to, whether it be to get through a nasty break-up, or make an Apple commercial memorable, you are doing something right.

In this day and age, it seems, making music is a right, but getting paid for that music is a privilege not afforded to everyone. Congratulations to anyone who finds a way to make ends meet through their music.

I would just like to make the exceedingly marginal, link-related point(s) that:

a) though it has not aged all that well, Aretha’s “Freeway of Love” is not in the same category of lameness as Stevie’s “Don’t Drive Drunk”; and that

b) neither one of them is in the same universe of awfulness as “Kokomo.”

That is all.

I think music’s role in society has changed significantly in the last 15 years (just to put an arbitrary line in the sand). Music just isn’t serving as artistic expression or as a primary form of entertainment anymore; it’s been relegated to being a compliment to other forms of art or entertainment, albeit a vital compliment.

And that’s not the case for everybody or for every musical artist, but as the idea of “listening to music” gets cheapened then the appropriate contexts for it expand immensely.

I may be a “Lincoln/Douglas debates” sort of person in a blipvert world, but if I ever hear Laurie Anderson doing a commercial, then I think I’ll lose all hope.

Or when the company doesn’t bother to license the original and just hires a voice-alike (Tom Waits v. Doritos).

And Cortney, I’ve had TV placements pay nearly 40k, which is no small change.

And really selling out is giving me a major 90s flashback. Maybe it’s because I don’t watch TV, but I really don’t care anymore if all my favorite bands sell their song for commercials. It just doesn’t change a damn thing fr me these days. Perhaps because as I’ve gotten older and tried my hand in some bands, I know how tough it is to do anything other than lose money as a musician. Or maybe it’s that I’ve grown up and learned to appreciate the music for what it is and the enjoyment it gives me and not some set of ideals and rules I’ve grafted on to the artist.

Obviously, this varies by artist, depends on the brand and campaign, who owns the publishing, and a million other et ceteras.

I guess as a wannabe musician I’ve always seen any way an artist can get paid for being an artist is a good thing. People get up in arms particularly about the private concerts thing and I just think “Um, yea, because without private patronage none of the greats of Classical, Baroque, or Romance music would have been able to create the wonderous works they did.” I’d much rather see some rich kid pay MIA $100K to play their sweet sixteen party than have them hire Paris Hilton to show up and be ‘cool’.

In a sense it’s selfish: if an artist can make a living by selling their songs for commercials or movies or playing private parties then they can continue to be a professional musician and keep cranking out music for me to enjoy. The licensing deals and ‘selling out’ subsidizes that because I sure as hell can’t afford to hire Tanya Donelly to play my anniversary.

Really, in all seriousness, you’re really painting the picture here. It is really apparent that the landscape is outrageously different from the 80s/90s indie scenes. I remember when it was a big deal that Sonic Youth signed to DGC… now it’s kinda funny, but not unthinkable, that they’re partnering with Starbucks.

I had a little back-and-forth with Mike from Clap Clap a couple weeks ago and he said something to the effect that it’s unfortunate that most critics/bloggers come from a 90s hardcore background. That’s where this whole sellout conversation is coming from.

Again, it’s all tied up in a really simple equation: artists need to find the people who will pay them. That’s why they’ve turned away from record labels and radio because labels and radio are proving ineffectual. Coffeeshops sell records so artists go to coffeeshops; ad companies pay so artists license their music. Fans pay for concert tickets, so artists tour. But most fans don’t pay for recorded music, so they lose their justification for whining about a band’s loyalty to its fanbase.

These days I tend to think of selling out as a baby-boomer concept tied to hearing the music of their youth used in commercials decades later. There you might have an argument that an artist is selling out their old ideals for quick cash. But is a band really turning its back on its old ideals by selling a two-year old song? Doubtful, but maybe I’m just old and “sold out” myself, so I don’t judge anyone else for doing the same thing.

All of that said, that “Let’s Go Outback Tonight” was total crap I think made Of Montreal look stupid. Not for selling out, but for contributing to a horrible jingle.

Anyway.. I like Santogold, great mix of stuff on that album, I hope to see more videos forthcoming.