Artist? Try Marketing Exec...
May. 16th, 2008 08:12![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
viktor_haagCopyright has, for many years, been a bastion against (oddly enough) commodifying art. But Terry McBride ("top music manager and label boss" according to The Register) says that's over, baby. Forget creativity. Forget art. Embrace the new wondrous corporate feudal state where art becomes "an upsell technique for [art] related products, e.g. ... clothing ... branded physical products".
What really bothers me about this attitude is that it favours ephemeral art. Why the heck would a writer want to toil away on a lengthy, deep, detailed novel? Embrace the word-bite! Blog yourself! Become a celebrity! Use your clever wordsmithery to shill for hip high-tech commerce!
I do not claim the novel is dead, or that film is dead, or that theatre is dead. But the destruction of copyright removes the principal way in which artists directly control the means of production, and are compensated for their efforts.
Do we really want a full-bore return to the patronage system?
(I am not unaware of the irony of asking this question, in this way, in this forum....)
What really bothers me about this attitude is that it favours ephemeral art. Why the heck would a writer want to toil away on a lengthy, deep, detailed novel? Embrace the word-bite! Blog yourself! Become a celebrity! Use your clever wordsmithery to shill for hip high-tech commerce!
I do not claim the novel is dead, or that film is dead, or that theatre is dead. But the destruction of copyright removes the principal way in which artists directly control the means of production, and are compensated for their efforts.
Do we really want a full-bore return to the patronage system?
(I am not unaware of the irony of asking this question, in this way, in this forum....)
