'...On a personal level, I have witnessed the impoverishment of many critically acclaimed but marginally commercial artists. In particular, two dear friends: Mark Linkous (Sparklehorse) and Vic Chestnutt. Both of these artists, despite growing global popularity, saw their incomes collapse in the last decade. There is no other explanation except for the fact that “fans” made the unethical choice to take their music without compensating these artists.
Shortly before Christmas 2009, Vic took his life. He was my neighbor, and I was there as they put him in the ambulance. On March 6th, 2010, Mark Linkous shot himself in the heart. Anybody who knew either of these musicians will tell you that the pair suffered from addiction and depression. They will also tell you their situation was worsened by their financial situation. Vic was deeply in debt to hospitals and, at the time, was publicly complaining about losing his home. Mark was living in abject squalor in his remote studio in the Smokey Mountains without adequate access to the mental health care he so desperately needed.'
I hardly think that Mark Linkous and Vic Chestnutt suffered addiction probs bcause of people 'stealing' their music...as for VC facing money problems due to his health would have thought that had more to do w/ the American (lack of) medicare. Could be wrong...
Although the point the author is making is not that the artists suffered addiction problems because of people stealing their music:
ReplyDelete"Both of these artists, despite growing global popularity, saw their incomes collapse in the last decade. There is no other explanation except for the fact that “fans” made the unethical choice to take their music without compensating these artists."
And Chestnutt's medical debt, although certainly more connected with the lack of medicare in his country, would explain an increase of his expenses, not the decrease in his income itself.
Although I was a rabid enthusiast of "liberated" downloads back in the late 90s/early 00s, in my, ahem, old age I've come to realize it was a sucker move to not support the artists you love. We also have a responsibility as fans, I think: if possible, not only attending their concerts but also purchasing their albums (preferably from them). I don't know if you have you seen the initial four or five articles on the Collateral Damage column on The Wire, and the letters they generated, but it seems lots of people have (d)evolved into thinking they are absolutely entitled to downloading music without compensating its creators, even going against the musicians' explicit wishes themselves. Not cool.
Of course, unless its substantiated by some kind of proof, there is no way to know if, as the author says, "there is no other explanation" to these musicians' collapsed income. That would be a scary thought.
Thanks for posting this. Your blog is consistently a source of thought provoking material and has saved me from having to depend on the horrendous and ultimately banal Huffington Post to get my info.
Marco
2Marco/
ReplyDeleteThanx for the good words about the blog but as for file sharing...hmmm! Just been having a long discussion about this on FB!
Jury still out in my head!
Regards/
Not sure I'm comfortable with the links being made between fans downloading music without payment and addiction and suicide. I attempted suicide last year as a result of depression around impoverishment following redundancy and my inability to find paid employment. Should I, therefore, blame the employers I sent CVs to for not hiring me? The welfare state for not paying benefits that one can actually live on? I think not.
ReplyDeleteMy experience showed me that there are many, many reasons why people attempt, and complete, suicide and I find the simplistic reductionism of the o.p. both presumptive and offensive.
As for file-sharing, that is another complicated area. DL a new album for a 'try-before-you-buy' taster, sure - if you like it, buy a legit copy, if not then delete the DL. But where does the argument go when it comes to out-of-print back catalog, live recordings, etc - stuff which is unlikely to see the light of day in an official release. And who would get the putative royalties in the case of a band that had split up or a musician who's now dead? Can we be sure that royalties from Mark Linkous and Vic Chestnutt's songs will definitely go to their states?
And then, of course, there's the argument that just maybe record companies should pay a decent royalty rate in the first place.
I dunno, there are so many sides to this debate, I'm not sure how or if it can ever be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.