hey... you anti-huge corporation people who are freaking out

U R A Crazy Breed

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"image" would imply fakeness...it's more we were like-minded in their ideology..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

for me.. i love the music...but it was the like-mindedness that made me an uber fan...that extra something that seperated them from all the other useless rock douche-bags out there!!! :twisted:

dunkman

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"hey norm.. i couldnt agree more"

Noam Chomsky - 1998 ©


Ed likes Noam.. i now borrow all his books from the library

slightofjeff

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

slightofjeff wrote:

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

All I know is if Green Day or Coldplay or whoever teamed up with Target.....you'd all be calling them corporate sell-outs.

Nah. I genuinely wouldn't have a problem with it. Especially if neither of those bands had record companies.

I think Green Day might be sell-outs for other reasons.

How can you say Green Day might be sell-outs and defend PJ at the same time?

The whole "guyliner makeover" thing just doesn't sit right with me. That's the main thing.

That, and I thought the timing of their "let's bash Bush" album was a little curious ... it came out when Bush bashing was fashionable, not when Pearl Jam and the Dixie Chicks were getting death threats. But that might just be a coincidence.

slightofjeff

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"image" would imply fakeness...it's more we were like-minded in their ideology..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

You sound young. Get back to me in 15 years and let me know if everything that is important to you now is as important to you then. I promise I won't call you a hypocrite.

norm

dunkman wrote:

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"hey norm.. i couldnt agree more"

Noam Chomsky - 1998 ©


Ed likes Noam.. i now borrow all his books from the library

redrock

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

Has the world stood still for the past 15 years? Are you the same person you were 15 years ago (rhetorical question as you were probably still sucking your thumb trying to get the round peg in the square hole...). The world around us has changed, people change, people adapt.

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

slightofjeff

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

slightofjeff wrote:

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

All I know is if Green Day or Coldplay or whoever teamed up with Target.....you'd all be calling them corporate sell-outs.

Nah. I genuinely wouldn't have a problem with it. Especially if neither of those bands had record companies.

I think Green Day might be sell-outs for other reasons.

That Verizon text message screen at MSG last year was one of the biggest sell-out moves I've ever seen.

So your definition of "sell out" is ... what? ... making money?

To me, when we're talking about music, selling out means sacrificing your artistic integrity -- ie, your music -- in order to make money. On the purest level, it means writing songs you don't believe in and you don't even like, in order to fit in with whatever the flavor of the month is.

You can sell out without ever taking a dime from Verizon or Target or whoever.

And, you can also taking money from Verizon and Target and the fucking Republican National Committee, and so long as your music stays pure, and you are writing songs you believe in, you are not a sell out.

When Target starts telling Pearl Jam what can and can't be on their record, then I'll start to think about the sell-out word.

Ledbetterman10

redrock wrote:

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

Has the world stood still for the past 15 years? Are you the same person you were 15 years ago (rhetorical question as you were probably still sucking your thumb trying to get the round peg in the square hole...). The world around us has changed, people change, people adapt.

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

The times are a-changin' alright. Ticket prices were $35 in 2000 and they were $85 in 2008. and please don't say that it's just because of inflation.

slightofjeff

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

redrock wrote:

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

Has the world stood still for the past 15 years? Are you the same person you were 15 years ago (rhetorical question as you were probably still sucking your thumb trying to get the round peg in the square hole...). The world around us has changed, people change, people adapt.

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

The times are a-changin' alright. Ticket prices were $35 in 2000 and they were $85 in 2008. and please don't say that it's just because of inflation.

Nah. It's because Pearl Jam is a band for old people now. That's what happens when you get to that point. Your ticket prices go up.

See The Who. And The Stones. Etc Etc.

Also, all bands are more dependent upon touring to make their money these days than they were in 2000. Demise of the record industry and what not.

redrock

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

The times are a-changin' alright. Ticket prices were $35 in 2000 and they were $85 in 2008. and please don't say that it's just because of inflation.

Of course not just inflation, everything has massively gone up... goods, gas, electricity, salaries, etc.

Ledbetterman10

slightofjeff wrote:

So your definition of "sell out" is ... what? ... making money?

To me, when we're talking about music, selling out means sacrificing your artistic integrity -- ie, your music -- in order to make money. On the purest level, it means writing songs you don't believe in and you don't even like, in order to fit in with whatever the flavor of the month is.

You can sell out without ever taking a dime from Verizon or Target or whoever.

And, you can also taking money from Verizon and Target and the fucking Republican National Committee, and so long as your music stays pure, and you are writing songs you believe in, you are not a sell out.

When Target starts telling Pearl Jam what can and can't be on their record, then I'll start to think about the sell-out word.

You're contradicting yourself here because you said in an earlier post that Green Day wearing eyeliner made them sell-outs. But wearing eyeliner didn't make them sacrifice their artistic integrity musically. and I doubt they made any money by wearing eyeliner...unlike PJ who cashed in on the Verizon text message screen.

Ledbetterman10

slightofjeff wrote:

Nah. It's because Pearl Jam is a band for old people now. That's what happens when you get to that point. Your ticket prices go up.

See The Who. And The Stones. Etc Etc.

Also, all bands are more dependent upon touring to make their money these days than they were in 2000. Demise of the record industry and what not.

But The Who and The Rolling Stones never made it a point to be for the "little guy" as Pearl Jam has in the past. And I think that the reason that ticket prices started going way up in the 2000's is because that's when their album sales started going way down.

Jeanwah

slightofjeff wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Thorns2010 wrote:

Really??? Who put out that album?? Pearl Jam themselves? No, it was *gasp* a record label called Sony

Did Sony sell those albums??? NO.

Um ... yes they did. They sold them to Target. And Best Buy. And (horror of horrors!) Wal-Mart.

Duh. See, this is the reason I don't like trying to reason with you, because you know what I'm talking about, yet like to twist it so it sounds like you don't.

Jeanwah

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"image" would imply fakeness...it's more we were like-minded in their ideology..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

for me.. i love the music...but it was the like-mindedness that made me an uber fan...that extra something that seperated them from all the other useless rock douche-bags out there!!! :twisted:

I really think that a lot of fans don't know what the band's social issues were all about. That's a big reason why I like them and respect them. But like Crazy Breed says, they suddenly decide to hop the fence and are suddenly not who they used to be. That's not simply image.

Lostdogsinthegarden

Sellout defined: the act of shooting a commercial for Target.

Just because Pearl Jam is selling out, it doesn't mean the music is going to suck or anything. They would never change their style to make money... at least I hope.

U R A Crazy Breed

slightofjeff wrote:

You sound young. Get back to me in 15 years and let me know if everything that is important to you now is as important to you then. I promise I won't call you a hypocrite.

no, i am not "young" and integrity will never cease to be important to me!!!

see..that's what happens when you assume..you make an ass out of you and you alone.

Jeanwah

slightofjeff wrote:

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

norm wrote:

ugh! i really believe some of you like the band more for their image than their music...and that's sad

"image" would imply fakeness...it's more we were like-minded in their ideology..and when they suddenly change it after 15+ years it is hypocritical...

You sound young. Get back to me in 15 years and let me know if everything that is important to you now is as important to you then. I promise I won't call you a hypocrite.

You're the one who sounds very young here. You shop at Walmart first of all and don't have much social awareness at all. You also sound like you have no idea how to think for yourself: you let the TV tell you how to think, don't you?

U R A Crazy Breed

redrock

Jeanwah wrote:

slightofjeff wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Um ... yes they did. They sold them to Target. And Best Buy. And (horror of horrors!) Wal-Mart.

Duh. See, this is the reason I don't like trying to reason with you, because you know what I'm talking about, yet like to twist it so it sounds like you don't.

Sony did sell/distribute those records to those stores.. PJ had a contract with Sony who sold those records (obviously knowing how and were they would be distributed). PJ pocketed money from these deals. Here PJ cut the middle man (Sony). The deals are similar. If you're saying when PJ entered a contract with Sony (global corporation), they did not themselves (PJ or PJ corp.) talk to Target and arrange the deals - you may be right - that's what Sony was for. OK, here PJ corp. are dealing directly with Target and that's what bugs you? Is that the difference you are making? Thinking that maybe while a distribution company was making the deals, PJ were not directly involved and therefore stayed 'clean'?

PJBuckeye

U R A Crazy Breed wrote:

slightofjeff wrote:

You sound young. Get back to me in 15 years and let me know if everything that is important to you now is as important to you then. I promise I won't call you a hypocrite.

no, i am not "young" and integrity will never cease to be important to me!!!

see..that's what happens when you assume..you make an ass out of you and you alone.

What lacks integrity in the Target deal? PJ still has integrity. That is silly. If you imply that you must be a poor schmuck that never engages in a capitalistic transaction to maintain "integrity," then fuck integrity.