so when target sells a band's music that band becomes a sell-out?
Nope. Instead, when a band sells their music almost exclusively through a major corporate retailer, like Target, this would help lend support to anyone who says they've sold out. Plus, when they have commercials with the target logo, it seems quite sell-out'ish.
i don't like sell-outs either but i don't believe pearl jam are sell-outs.
That's awesome... good for you. I do believe their sell outs. This lead singer was ridiculously anti-corporation. He wanted no part of allowing them to control his destiny. That was great... I mean, they even took on Ticket Master... Listen to Vitalogy. But, that was then... now, he's sporting spots for his album through a major corporate retailer, the Ten Club charges for everything they can. The band is now selling anything they can to make bank. I do believe they are sell outs... the irony is I don't care. I think they are great musicians that deserve the money they are making.
you can be a multi-millionaire musician and not be a sell-out.
Agreed... Pearl Jam and Ed, in particular, WERE multi-millionaire musicians that WERE not sell-outs. Key words "WERE". They aren't any more. They haven't been for a number of years now.
ed can drive a beater or a luxury car and still not be a sell-out can he not? selling posters and zippos doesn't make ya a sell-out does it? what makes a band labeled as sell-outs?
I think what makes a band a more recognizable sell-out is when they say they hate something then they do it. To quote Not For You... "if you hate something, don't you do it too". This band was completely anti what they are doing now. If Ed saw another musician do this sort of thing 15 years ago, he would have called them out... which is exactly what he did to Adam Duritz for allowing his music to be in a Coke commercial. Once again, that's quite ironic now.... considering how many TV shows and whatnot have I heard their music in lately?
That's awesome... good for you. I do believe their sell outs. This lead singer was ridiculously anti-corporation. He wanted no part of allowing them to control his destiny. That was great... I mean, they even took on Ticket Master... Listen to Vitalogy. But, that was then... now, he's sporting spots for his album through a major corporate retailer, the Ten Club charges for everything they can. The band is now selling anything they can to make bank. I do believe they are sell outs... the irony is I don't care. I think they are great musicians that deserve the money they are making.
you alluded to this thread pointing to the fact that pearl jam are sell outs. Did you read my first post? All I said was I don't need all the stuff I have. Do you own everything from every band you like? No, they put out stuff that some people will like and other things that other people will like. Some fans, like fans of this band, seem to want everything they put out, and that's fine. that's their perogitive. when they don't sell enough merch, the board becomes a riot, when they sell too much, the board again, becomes a riot. they can't win.
and my main point was at the end, that I shouldn't have as much as I do based on my income level. it's a personal choice, not a societal statement on consumerism.
I was ranting not at the band or anyone else, but at myself. I felt like a fraud for buying stuff just because Ed would approve. Like he gives a fuck if I own vinyl or not. And like it should matter if he does.
All I was saying is that if you enjoy what you collect, more power to you. I don't, so there's no point in me keeping it.
Now, onto your second point about the band selling out. Yes, Ed was anti-corporation. He still is. But at some point you have to realize that in order to say "fuck you" to the giant retailer, you may have to partner with another retailer. They had two choices:
1) sign another record deal and be slaves to another label or
2) sign a DISTRIBUTION deal that allows the band to keep contol over their product and make more money at it.
so they are now fine with promoting their own product. It's not kool aid. It just makes sense if you want your music to be heard. Most people who liked Ten don't even know they still exist.
why is it that any time someone defends the band or the ten club all of a sudden they are "drinking the kool aid"? like the anti-position is the only one that makes sense?
ludicrous.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,431
The question about bands selling out (which wasn't Hugh's point in the first place, but since we've gone there...) has come up on other band boards. It could be argued that bands that play for charity only or barter- say, we'll play you feed us or give us beers or whatever- are the only bands that haven't "sold out". There's a blue grass band in our area that plays at the local Farmer's market for free. They would fit that category I suppose. Under this definition, as soon as a band sells one tape, cd, lp, MP3 download etc, they've "sold out". True, that's taking the argument to the extreme, but who's to say what it mean's to "sell out"? Maybe it's all relative to your point of view. To me, Pearl Jam has done more good than most bands and their music is some of my favorite. I don't think we should expect any more of them- just be thankful they're still doing it!
As an aside, I was looking at PJ vinyl on Ebay this morning, just out of curiosity. Damn, there must be a lot of PJ fans who have a LOT of discretionary income or are even more hooked on vinyl than I am!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I think the whole idea of a band selling it doesn't really exist. I mean, like you said Brian, once you take the first paycheque from ANYONE in ANY FORM, you have sold out.
My band put out a 4 song EP, but imploded before we even played our first show. I put out the cd on my own dime and lost money on it, and gave all sales to charity. Not much, but I wanted something good to come out of a horrible experience.
But, if someone had asked us if we wanted a million dollars to put our song in an ad, I wouldn't fucking hesitate.
I don't care if the band is established or not. Look at U2. Do I like their music? Not really. But the amount of money they make is staggering. But the money they give away is even more staggering. So the more Blackberry ads they do the more people in Africa they help.
And even if they just took the cheque, who cares? Isn't the main point just getting your music heard, no matter if it's a super bowl commercial or a town fair in the mid afternoon?
do you think any actor dreams of winning an oscar? I doubt it. they dream of being seen on a stage or a big screen. but if win an award for their craft, does that make them a sellout? Nope.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Now, onto your second point about the band selling out. Yes, Ed was anti-corporation. He still is. But at some point you have to realize that in order to say "fuck you" to the giant retailer, you may have to partner with another retailer. They had two choices:
1) sign another record deal and be slaves to another label or
2) sign a DISTRIBUTION deal that allows the band to keep contol over their product and make more money at it.
Or option 3... they could have started their own label, sold thier through a multitude of retailers and maybe not sold quite as much. Or option 4... they could have sold their album digitally and physically through their own website only. I'm sure there's a few more options too. The truth is they wanted to make money, and they didn't like that with option #1, some of the money went to a record company. I understand that, but they weren't in this or making this decision for anything other than....
... money. It's greed. Which, once again, is fine. Most of us would do the same. They wanted their money. And in my opinion, they were entitled to it. But, I am also entitled to say they are hypocrites of what they once were and stood for.
so they are now fine with promoting their own product. It's not kool aid. It just makes sense if you want your music to be heard. Most people who liked Ten don't even know they still exist.
why is it that any time someone defends the band or the ten club all of a sudden they are "drinking the kool aid"? like the anti-position is the only one that makes sense?
ludicrous.
Pearl Jam is a huge band. They would have had their music heard if they wanted it heard. They did not have to go through TicketMaster to do that. The Ten Club didn't have to start charging people to post here. The story goes on and on... They wanted money.... and yes, in my opinion, it is kool-aid because there's a huge section of people here, especially on MT, that are anti-corporation... they are all about doing things the small way (which is fine with me, if they are consistent)... these folks aren't consistent when it comes to the reason we are all on this message board = Pearl Jam. That rock band is violating that concept that some here repeat over, and over day after day... yet, these same people can't even see there's at the very least a touch of hypocritical behavior here with their favorite band.Saying you don't agree with everything your favorite band does, does not mean you have to dislike their music... It's a natural thing within a relationship. I'm calling Pearl Jam out. I think their music is still great and I never 100% agreed with their politics, but I always had a deep respect for a band that followed through with that. I personally lost a bit of respect for the band over the past 5 years or so due to the whole Ticket Master, Ten Club, selling everything they possibly can type stuff....
It could be argued that bands that play for charity only or barter- say, we'll play you feed us or give us beers or whatever- are the only bands that haven't "sold out".
I disagree.
I think a band that basically said a big F you to:
1) MTV
2) Ticket Master
3) even the Grammys...
4) and more...
...and the band that has repetitively been against corporate growth is being slightly hypocritical to what they "said they were". This is the same band that wrote Not For You, Corduroy and Blood. Have you listened to those songs lately?
That young guy who wrote those lyrics would laugh at what this band has become. He, in my opinion, would be first to say they sold out. Kurt Cobain would prolly say that too. The irony, to me, is... Kurt Cobain would have done the same had he stayed alive.
They were young and ideological. They were innocent. Yet, I really respected the integrity Ed, for instance, had. He actually did what he said he would in the beginning. They stayed away from MTV, they didn't sell out for forever it seemed.
To me, this band sold out with the record Pearl Jam and that worsened with Backspacer. Ironically, to me, these two CDs were better than the two previous, so the music wasn't effected negatively. It was simply the management.
Pearl Jam is a corporation of sorts now. They are what they once hated. All I am doing is pointing it out and saying I don't care... but, I don't see how some of you anti-corportists are ok with it.
It could be argued that bands that play for charity only or barter- say, we'll play you feed us or give us beers or whatever- are the only bands that haven't "sold out".
...and the band that has repetitively been against corporate growth is being slightly hypocritical to what they "said they were". This is the same band that wrote Not For You, Corduroy and Blood. Have you listened to those songs lately?
That young guy who wrote those lyrics would laugh at what this band has become. He, in my opinion, would be first to say they sold out. Kurt Cobain would prolly say that too. The irony, to me, is... Kurt Cobain would have done the same had he stayed alive.
They were young and ideological. They were innocent. Yet, I really respected the integrity Ed, for instance, had. He actually did what he said he would in the beginning. They stayed away from MTV, they didn't sell out for forever it seemed.
Pearl Jam is a corporation of sorts now. They are what they once hated. All I am doing is pointing it out and saying I don't care... but, I don't see how some of you anti-corportists are ok with it.
You didn't know any of the band then and you don't know any of them now. They're not your friends. You're projecting. If the music's good, listen to it. If the shows are great, go. If you want a t-shirt, buy it. But holy hell can we stop judging the personalities and intentions of people we've never met.
Or option 3... they could have started their own label, sold thier through a multitude of retailers and maybe not sold quite as much. Or option 4... they could have sold their album digitally and physically through their own website only. I'm sure there's a few more options too. The truth is they wanted to make money, and they didn't like that with option #1, some of the money went to a record company. I understand that, but they weren't in this or making this decision for anything other than....
... money. It's greed. Which, once again, is fine. Most of us would do the same. They wanted their money. And in my opinion, they were entitled to it. But, I am also entitled to say they are hypocrites of what they once were and stood for.
Pearl Jam is a huge band. They would have had their music heard if they wanted it heard. They did not have to go through TicketMaster to do that. The Ten Club didn't have to start charging people to post here. The story goes on and on... They wanted money.... and yes, in my opinion, it is kool-aid because there's a huge section of people here, especially on MT, that are anti-corporation... they are all about doing things the small way (which is fine with me, if they are consistent)... these folks aren't consistent when it comes to the reason we are all on this message board = Pearl Jam. That rock band is violating that concept that some here repeat over, and over day after day... yet, these same people can't even see there's at the very least a touch of hypocritical behavior here with their favorite band.Saying you don't agree with everything your favorite band does, does not mean you have to dislike their music... It's a natural thing within a relationship. I'm calling Pearl Jam out. I think their music is still great and I never 100% agreed with their politics, but I always had a deep respect for a band that followed through with that. I personally lost a bit of respect for the band over the past 5 years or so due to the whole Ticket Master, Ten Club, selling everything they possibly can type stuff....
ok then, since I'm drinking their kool aid, I guess I'll just say from now on anytime someone hates on them that they're drinking kurt cobain or courtney love's kool aid. that makes about as much fucking sense.
Have your views on the world stayed 100% the same from when you were 25 to when you were 50? I don't know how old you are, but if you don't mature and grow and change, then you haven't really lived. You can't compare how they distribute their music now; the industry is completely different now. If they were doing this in the 90's, then fine, I guess you coulc call them hypocrites if you want to, but now? Start their own label?
I'm not going to sit here and claim, as you seem to be doing, that I know what their motivations are for their business decisions. But do you know how much work it is to start your own label? It's a 24/7 job. These guys have families. They wanted to get a deal with a major distributor who they felt they could deal with and still sleep at night instead of working through it.
Selling everything they possibly can? Are you nuts? This band has probably one of the smallest amount of merch of any major band going right now. They have a few shirts, the shoes they were selling were going to charity, some vinyl that their fans demand, and stickers. Yeah, they've turned into Kiss all of a sudden.
Maybe we should start a new thread, as this is actually, I now realize, completely off topic.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I don't care if the band is established or not. Look at U2. Do I like their music? Not really. But the amount of money they make is staggering. But the money they give away is even more staggering. So the more Blackberry ads they do the more people in Africa they help....
the money they give away they get from us or the record company... so why do they need us to buy their friggin' branded blackberry or whatever so they can give away to charity??? dont they have enough money they can give away without us giving more 'to the cause'??? i am so fuckin' against this line of charity. its encouraging people to give via consumption. but this product and feel good cause the proceeds go to chairty.. oh really????? how many millions do you need guys???? i/we dont have it, you do, and youve got it cause of me/us in the first place, so....
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
the money they give away they get from us or the record company... so why do they need us to buy their friggin' branded blackberry or whatever so they can give away to charity??? dont they have enough money they can give away without us giving more 'to the cause'??? i am so fuckin' against this line of charity. its encouraging people to give via consumption. but this product and feel good cause the proceeds go to chairty.. oh really????? how many millions do you need guys???? i/we dont have it, you do, and youve got it cause of me/us in the first place, so....
against charity if the money is evil. shouldn't you just not give a fuck as long as it's helping people.
and your last comment bugs the fuck out of me. no, they don't have money because of you. you didn't give them the money out of the goodness of your own heart. you bought something in return. they are millionaires because you/someone liked their music enough to buy something they created.
by your logic, my boss could turn around and say "well I gave you that car you drive". No you fucking didn't, I worked for it! Just like Pearl Jam and U2 (and unfortunately) Nickelback have done.
I don't give a shit how many millions someone has or wants. that's their perogitive. I'm lower middle class. I don't have a lot of money. Why care about how someone else lives their life and how much money the aspire to have? to me, that hints at a sign of jealousy. reminds me of my wife. always wanting to catch up to the joneses.
and you wouldn't put a song in an ad out of, what, some type of moral objection to getting money for something you worked on? it's their job. and their art. anyone who loves their job still gets paid for it.
maybe I wouldn't do it if the song is painfully personal to me (which I don't see PJ or U2 doing), they put their fun rocking songs in ads. I really don't understand the problem with that.
everyone was up in arms when Van Halen put one of their songs in a Pepsi ad for some ungodly amount at the time, a million bucks or something. I never understood that. people seem to think they own the rights to a song/album a band makes, and maybe they do emotionally, but come on, the more money a band makes, the more money a lowly tour grip probably makes, so isn't that all good?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
It could be argued that bands that play for charity only or barter- say, we'll play you feed us or give us beers or whatever- are the only bands that haven't "sold out".
I disagree.
I think a band that basically said a big F you to:
1) MTV
2) Ticket Master
3) even the Grammys...
4) and more...
...and the band that has repetitively been against corporate growth is being slightly hypocritical to what they "said they were". This is the same band that wrote Not For You, Corduroy and Blood. Have you listened to those songs lately?
That young guy who wrote those lyrics would laugh at what this band has become. He, in my opinion, would be first to say they sold out. Kurt Cobain would prolly say that too. The irony, to me, is... Kurt Cobain would have done the same had he stayed alive.
They were young and ideological. They were innocent. Yet, I really respected the integrity Ed, for instance, had. He actually did what he said he would in the beginning. They stayed away from MTV, they didn't sell out for forever it seemed.
To me, this band sold out with the record Pearl Jam and that worsened with Backspacer. Ironically, to me, these two CDs were better than the two previous, so the music wasn't effected negatively. It was simply the management.
Pearl Jam is a corporation of sorts now. They are what they once hated. All I am doing is pointing it out and saying I don't care... but, I don't see how some of you anti-corportists are ok with it.
Did Pearl Jam say they hated all corporations? or just corporations functioning with only the bottom line as what drives them? They were aware that they we're functioning under to corporation of Sony, and spoke to it in interviews that I recall. They spoke out about Ticketmaster because of its monopoly, not because it's a corporation making money off of artists. Going against MTV was about setting boundaries and MTV functioning as a corporate entity attempting to squeeze money from other artist's work.
It doesn't make sense that you think the band sold out after self-titled and backspacer, when they were free of Sony. If anything, they moved toward the less sell out end of the continuum. You should define your definition of sell out, because one could say that Fugazi are sell outs because they've made money on albums and shows. You just come across as being argumentative.
Did Pearl Jam say they hated all corporations? or just corporations functioning with only the bottom line as what drives them? They were aware that they we're functioning under to corporation of Sony, and spoke to it in interviews that I recall. They spoke out about Ticketmaster because of its monopoly, not because it's a corporation making money off of artists. Going against MTV was about setting boundaries and MTV functioning as a corporate entity attempting to squeeze money from other artist's work.
It doesn't make sense that you think the band sold out after self-titled and backspacer, when they were free of Sony. If anything, they moved toward the less sell out end of the continuum. You should define your definition of sell out, because one could say that Fugazi are sell outs because they've made money on albums and shows. You just come across as being argumentative.
my thoughts exactly.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Did Pearl Jam say they hated all corporations? or just corporations functioning with only the bottom line as what drives them? They were aware that they we're functioning under to corporation of Sony, and spoke to it in interviews that I recall. They spoke out about Ticketmaster because of its monopoly, not because it's a corporation making money off of artists. Going against MTV was about setting boundaries and MTV functioning as a corporate entity attempting to squeeze money from other artist's work.
It doesn't make sense that you think the band sold out after self-titled and backspacer, when they were free of Sony. If anything, they moved toward the less sell out end of the continuum. You should define your definition of sell out, because one could say that Fugazi are sell outs because they've made money on albums and shows. You just come across as being argumentative.
Not meant to be argumentative... seriously, it's a thought I have... and since, this is a forum for political thought... it was worth mentioning, particularly in a thread about the abundance of PJ goods. Anyway, I know I'm not alone in my feelings that PJ sold out.
Pearl Jam never said, to my knowledge, "they hated all corporations"..\. But, I think you an I would agree they've been outspoken in their distaste for corporations and greed in general. Further, I'd argue, and I think quite successfully, that all corporations operate with the bottom line as their number 1 goal. They can BS you all they want saying other aspects are more important, but they need to make profit to remain alive. So, due to that, I'd say your first two sentences are in opposition to one another. In that sense, if you say you dislike corporations for functioning with the bottom line as their number 1 goal, you probably dislike all successful corporations.
Sony, Ticketmaster, and MTV aren't the only issues. There's also the Ten Club. There's also the re-issues. There's the zombie shirts. There's the toe nail clippers. There's.... TARGET. Like I said before, they could have gone about getting out of their deal with Song and not gone to Target. Do you think Target is a great corporation with excellent corporate interests? Let me ask you this.... does Target NOT operate with their bottom line as their number 1 goal?
In this sense, it makes complete sense that PJ sold out after S/T and Backspacer. Even the albums themselves were more commercial.
I've said it once, I'll say it again, I like that they sold out. I think Ed, in particular, is a bit of a hypocrite, but I have no problem with what they and their mini-corporation (The Ten Club) are doing. They deserve to retire happy. They were successful and deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success. I love Pearl Jam as much as anyone here... but, I also am not afraid to call them out when they aren't who they said they were.
My issue with bringing this up here, was those HERE on Moving Train... who are super anti-corporate... and how they just cast a blind eye to this, because it just so happens that Pearl Jam touts their agenda frequently.... my point is, they don't always act on it... where's the realization of that?
Not meant to be argumentative... seriously, it's a thought I have... and since, this is a forum for political thought... it was worth mentioning, particularly in a thread about the abundance of PJ goods. Anyway, I know I'm not alone in my feelings that PJ sold out.
Pearl Jam never said, to my knowledge, "they hated all corporations"..\. But, I think you an I would agree they've been outspoken in their distaste for corporations and greed in general. Further, I'd argue, and I think quite successfully, that all corporations operate with the bottom line as their number 1 goal. They can BS you all they want saying other aspects are more important, but they need to make profit to remain alive. So, due to that, I'd say your first two sentences are in opposition to one another. In that sense, if you say you dislike corporations for functioning with the bottom line as their number 1 goal, you probably dislike all successful corporations.
Sony, Ticketmaster, and MTV aren't the only issues. There's also the Ten Club. There's also the re-issues. There's the zombie shirts. There's the toe nail clippers. There's.... TARGET. Like I said before, they could have gone about getting out of their deal with Song and not gone to Target. Do you think Target is a great corporation with excellent corporate interests? Let me ask you this.... does Target NOT operate with their bottom line as their number 1 goal?
In this sense, it makes complete sense that PJ sold out after S/T and Backspacer. Even the albums themselves were more commercial.
I've said it once, I'll say it again, I like that they sold out. I think Ed, in particular, is a bit of a hypocrite, but I have no problem with what they and their mini-corporation (The Ten Club) are doing. They deserve to retire happy. They were successful and deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success. I love Pearl Jam as much as anyone here... but, I also am not afraid to call them out when they aren't who they said they were.
My issue with bringing this up here, was those HERE on Moving Train... who are super anti-corporate... and how they just cast a blind eye to this, because it just so happens that Pearl Jam touts their agenda frequently.... my point is, they don't always act on it... where's the realization of that?
do you have any suggestions on how they would have gone about getting their album out to the masses without a major label deal and a distribution deal? saying that 10C could handle that kind of burden at that scale is laughable. we all know it's a tiny organization, and they are maxed out as it is.
Target was the only major chain that would allow them to still have their cd's/records in indie record shops. was that not a moral decision to make? maybe walmart offered them more money. maybe best buy did. who knows? how does a band of this magnitude distribute their cd's themselves? it just can't be done.
and the zombie shirts. is a band not allowed to have fun? holy christ.
they were signed to a MAJOR LABEL FOR MOST OF THEIR CAREER. how is leaving the major labels behind, starting your own, taking control of your own art, and getting someone else to distribute it, selling out? please tell me, because this isn't really making sense to me, whether you say you are glad they sold out or not is irrelevant. I still want to know how this is selling out, and even simpler than that, you have failed to define what it means to sell out in the first place.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,431
On any given day any number of Pearl Jam songs gives me a million damn dollars (as Dave would say) of joy, inspiration, pleasure or comfort and that's happened at least a thousand times or more. So until each member of Pearl Jam becomes a multi-billionaire, I don't feel like they've sold out. Even then I'd be more interested in their music than their income.
As far as selling out by not being more aggressive politically/philosophically, I don't see that as relevant. They're older and wiser. They've learned to more subtle, more spiritual, and certainly live much safer lives I'd think and thank goodness for that. And again, they're band. They make music we love. What more could we or should we expect?
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Not meant to be argumentative... seriously, it's a thought I have... and since, this is a forum for political thought... it was worth mentioning, particularly in a thread about the abundance of PJ goods. Anyway, I know I'm not alone in my feelings that PJ sold out.
Pearl Jam never said, to my knowledge, "they hated all corporations"..\. But, I think you an I would agree they've been outspoken in their distaste for corporations and greed in general. Further, I'd argue, and I think quite successfully, that all corporations operate with the bottom line as their number 1 goal. They can BS you all they want saying other aspects are more important, but they need to make profit to remain alive. So, due to that, I'd say your first two sentences are in opposition to one another. In that sense, if you say you dislike corporations for functioning with the bottom line as their number 1 goal, you probably dislike all successful corporations.
Sony, Ticketmaster, and MTV aren't the only issues. There's also the Ten Club. There's also the re-issues. There's the zombie shirts. There's the toe nail clippers. There's.... TARGET. Like I said before, they could have gone about getting out of their deal with Song and not gone to Target. Do you think Target is a great corporation with excellent corporate interests? Let me ask you this.... does Target NOT operate with their bottom line as their number 1 goal?
In this sense, it makes complete sense that PJ sold out after S/T and Backspacer. Even the albums themselves were more commercial.
I've said it once, I'll say it again, I like that they sold out. I think Ed, in particular, is a bit of a hypocrite, but I have no problem with what they and their mini-corporation (The Ten Club) are doing. They deserve to retire happy. They were successful and deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success. I love Pearl Jam as much as anyone here... but, I also am not afraid to call them out when they aren't who they said they were.
My issue with bringing this up here, was those HERE on Moving Train... who are super anti-corporate... and how they just cast a blind eye to this, because it just so happens that Pearl Jam touts their agenda frequently.... my point is, they don't always act on it... where's the realization of that?
do you have any suggestions on how they would have gone about getting their album out to the masses without a major label deal and a distribution deal? saying that 10C could handle that kind of burden at that scale is laughable. we all know it's a tiny organization, and they are maxed out as it is.
Target was the only major chain that would allow them to still have their cd's/records in indie record shops. was that not a moral decision to make? maybe walmart offered them more money. maybe best buy did. who knows? how does a band of this magnitude distribute their cd's themselves? it just can't be done.
and the zombie shirts. is a band not allowed to have fun? holy christ.
they were signed to a MAJOR LABEL FOR MOST OF THEIR CAREER. how is leaving the major labels behind, starting your own, taking control of your own art, and getting someone else to distribute it, selling out? please tell me, because this isn't really making sense to me, whether you say you are glad they sold out or not is irrelevant. I still want to know how this is selling out, and even simpler than that, you have failed to define what it means to sell out in the first place.
They bailed on this major label to go sell their product exclusively through a major corporate retailer, which to many is only one step above the worst out there: (Wal*Mart). Anyway, I've said why I believe they sold out repetitively now. But, I'll humor you with a definition...
Wikipedia's definition of sell-out:
"Selling out" is the compromising of (or the perception of compromising) integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined). It is commonly associated with attempts to tailor material to a mainstream audience. Any artist who expands their creative path to encompass a wider audience, as opposed to continuing in the genre and venues of their initial success, may be disdainfully labeled by disapproving fans as a sellout. Sometimes a sellout is seen as a person that is disloyal to one's group that he or she belongs (usually ethnic group) in order to gain money or become "successful". Selling out is often seen as gaining success at the cost of credibility.
I think their recent moves since S/T fit that definition. They were searching for a bigger audience. I mean the reissues alone are a clear and evident money grab.
I would put selling out in simpler terms, however... it's acting against what you once said you were or were perceived to be. Listen to corduroy, listen to not for you... then ummm... i guess listen to the fixer. Actually, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-QYAWXK7fo
This is the perfect analogy for what I am saying. They were Corduroy... now, they are that Fixer commercial.
I used to get involved in these "selling out" discussions, but I just find them irrelevant now. Who really cares? The guys have evolved over time and I think that's the healthiest thing in retrospect. Sure we can complain they're not as anti-corporate as they once use to be, but should we really hold them to standards of the past? I just don't think it's fair, nor do I analyze the band for their actions because it's all speculation and what the band chooses to do, in the grand scheme of things, isn't something I'm going to get all bent about anymore. They're a corporation doing what's necessary to stay profitable (hence all the merchandise). It's not something I necessarily agree with, but it's their business. I just simply don't buy the merchandise.
They bailed on this major label to go sell their product exclusively through a major corporate retailer, which to many is only one step above the worst out there: (Wal*Mart). Anyway, I've said why I believe they sold out repetitively now. But, I'll humor you with a definition...
Wikipedia's definition of sell-out:
"Selling out" is the compromising of (or the perception of compromising) integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined). It is commonly associated with attempts to tailor material to a mainstream audience. Any artist who expands their creative path to encompass a wider audience, as opposed to continuing in the genre and venues of their initial success, may be disdainfully labeled by disapproving fans as a sellout. Sometimes a sellout is seen as a person that is disloyal to one's group that he or she belongs (usually ethnic group) in order to gain money or become "successful". Selling out is often seen as gaining success at the cost of credibility.
I think their recent moves since S/T fit that definition. They were searching for a bigger audience. I mean the reissues alone are a clear and evident money grab.
I would put selling out in simpler terms, however... it's acting against what you once said you were or were perceived to be. Listen to corduroy, listen to not for you... then ummm... i guess listen to the fixer. Actually, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-QYAWXK7fo
This is the perfect analogy for what I am saying. They were Corduroy... now, they are that Fixer commercial.
yes, you had stated why you believe they sold out, but until now, you never defined what selling out actually means to you. the wikipedia definition was very informative, though. :roll:
talking down isn't the way to get someone to listen. just a suggestion.
the reissues was not the band's idea, from my understanding. it was Sony's, who said they were doing to reissue the band's back catalogue whether the band liked it or not, so the band said "ok, if that's the case, then we need to be involved in it".
To put my thought process in simpler terms for you....a wise man once said "the times, they are a changin". If the music industry as we knew it in 1994 was still intact now, I'm sure the band wouldn't have changed a thing. you could say they are a victim of commercial evolution. they were forced to adapt to a completely overhauled landscape, and they've done it quite successfully.
I don't see how evolving as a human being or as a business can only be perceived as negative. to claim that the only reason they do what they do is for money and money alone is preposterous. no one can know why they do what they do and that's just a plain fact.
to call someone clueless because they don't agree with you is flat out ignorant.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Props to the OP for realizing that he doesn't want/need certain things anymore and is making a move to rid himself of them because that action can be very liberating. I'm not one of the folks who has to have all the boots and vinyls and yadda yadda..mostly because it takes up space and costs alot of money. The CDs I have are just fine for me to hear the music. I do however, get alot of shirts because I love the band, and I like to represent them in that way; it makes me happy. I don't need everything and anything PJ to appreciate the band. I don't want to touch the sellout thing that has been brought up; it's whatever. Like someone else said, I don't know them or why they make decisions..that's their business. People change, times change, things evolve. I like to think that the essence of who they are is still the same, but ya gotta pick your battles because they're not all worth fighting. Viva la PJ!
I don't see how evolving as a human being or as a business can only be perceived as negative. to claim that the only reason they do what they do is for money and money alone is preposterous. no one can know why they do what they do and that's just a plain fact.
anyone who thinks pearl jam has sold out by not being anti-corporation, not being as outspoken or political, or whatever, start a fucking band and do those things yourself.
people evolve over time. people mature over time. people learn when it is appropriate to speak up and when it is appropriate to shut up. people learn to pick their battles and learn that fighting a battle that they have no chance of winning is counterprodictive (see ticketmaster)...that is part of being an intelligent human being. just watch pj20 and look at when ed fucked off and was traveling by van on his own and doing mokeywrench radio. they thought they were going to break up over that. watch single video theory when they talked about nearly breaking up and noting that being in a band is like being in a relationship. "it's all about giving it up". if they had stayed on that superoutspoken course, been beholden to a record company and contract, had to do it any other way than the way they wanted to their entire career they would have self destructed years ago. sometimes you have to compromise your position for the sake of the band if you want the band to continue.
anyone seeking validation of their own positions or opinions and projecting that onto a band has a serious problem.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
anyone who thinks pearl jam has sold out by not being anti-corporation, not being as outspoken or political, or whatever, start a fucking band and do those things yourself.
I think they sold out to their own words of who they were. I never wanted them to be outspoken or political, but who am I to say what they can do. I just have my own taste. My take on Pearl Jam is they've always been better when they are not political. I don't go to PJ shows to hear Ed rant about corporations or even hear anti-corporate songs. I prefer songs with non-political stories like Elderly Woman to songs like World Wide Suicide. But, they've always been political to an extent. I accept that and know it's part of their identity. In fact, despite the fact that I don't always agree with a songs or rants message... I've always admired it. I admired Ed's, in particular, ability to hold back and not be greedy. To feel so strongly about something... I really admire that, even if I don't 100% agree. I mean when I listened to Not For You or Corduroy... I got something. I connected. I felt that's a guy who is authentic. He means what he's saying. That feeling stayed with me for years. It's changed recently, and for me, that's ok... I understand why it's changed for him/them. They were not really quite as authentic as I once thought,.... and that's ok.
people evolve over time. people mature over time. people learn when it is appropriate to speak up and when it is appropriate to shut up.
I also agree and understand this.... but, do you think there's a lot of people HERE in MT learn when it's appropriate to speak up and when it's appropriate to shut up? Do you think you know that? I'm not sure I do... I don't think pretty much anyone here does... everyone here consistently states opinions... So, just saying...
people learn to pick their battles and learn that fighting a battle that they have no chance of winning is counterprodictive (see ticketmaster)...that is part of being an intelligent human being. just watch pj20 and look at when ed fucked off and was traveling by van on his own and doing mokeywrench radio. they thought they were going to break up over that. watch single video theory when they talked about nearly breaking up and noting that being in a band is like being in a relationship. "it's all about giving it up". if they had stayed on that superoutspoken course, been beholden to a record company and contract, had to do it any other way than the way they wanted to their entire career they would have self destructed years ago. sometimes you have to compromise your position for the sake of the band if you want the band to continue.
They didn't have to be super-outspoken or pick battles to not sell-out. They would have just had to not try to get bigger, and make more money through Target and the Ten Club. They could've been content with their own label, free posting on pearljam.com and not selling quite as much records.
anyone seeking validation of their own positions or opinions and projecting that onto a band has a serious problem.
I find this hysterical. You and I, my friend, are on that rock band's message board. The reason we all are here is because of that rock band. A lot people, including you, are very frequently in this section of the forum. This is a political section of a rock band's message board. A ton of people here are very anti-corporate and even anti-capitalistic.... except, ironically, when it comes to certain entities, including Pearl Jam and Target. Some may have even first been introduced to anti-capitalistic thinking through Ed or his favorite writers. These guys don't seem to notice the change in the bands behavior and have reasons and rationales for every move. They have their opinions, I have mine.
I'm willing to bet there's a few "real" anti-capitalists who understand what I'm saying. One can't pick and choose when capitalism is OK if you're really against it to begin with. Capitalism is capitalism. Pearl Jam was anti-capitalistic in word, and sometimes in deed early in their career. Yet, now, when they act much more like a capitalist via ties with Target and others I've mentioned.... and here when someone brings it up, there's either silence or upsetment... here... on the "political section" of PJ.com. In fact, it's now almost deemed inappropriate to bring it up. I find that funny.
I like Pearl Jam. I have no problem with them being capitalists. In the end, like other posters said, it doesn't really matter to me. I don't know them personally and I bet I would like them personally if I did. I bet we wouldn't talk politics at all. And I'm sure, they've matured and probably changed a bit politically. But, I wasn't really trying to hammer anyone in PJ with this point. What I was trying to point out was the inconsistency with some HERE in Moving Train. Some support what Pearl Jam did, yet, in the next thread post against a similar thing. It's hypocritical.
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,431
Believe me, aging will make you more fiscally conservative. It's called self-preservation and family-preservation. And when you're super famous you need more money for security. I can't imagine going gout in public and not being hounded or having people try to drive their car into my living room. In their shoes, I'd want lots of money too. I don't think that's selling out. And like others here have said, it's all speculation. We don't know these guys personally. My advice would be to enjoy their music or listen to something else if you don't like what they're doing.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Led Zeppelin, the Rolling Stones, have also sold out. Someone on this thread mentioned Van Halen, who not shortly after going commercial so to speak, churned out the same song over and over album after album. Sell out or not, the quality of music is at the heart of the matter.
This bands been with me throughout most of my life. A bunch of good times and a bunch of bad. They have been the one constant in my life and i have much respect and admiration for them as musicians. I don't expect them to solve any problems that may arise in my life, i don't expect them to solve the problems in the world or to be a voice for my beliefs. I can do that for myself. I owe them far more than they will ever owe me.
Me, I figure as each breath goes by, I only own my mind. I am mine.
Pearl Jam was anti-capitalistic in word, and sometimes in deed early in their career. Yet, now, when they act much more like a capitalist via ties with Target and others I've mentioned.... and here when someone brings it up, there's either silence or upsetment... here... on the "political section" of PJ.com. In fact, it's now almost deemed inappropriate to bring it up. I find that funny.
that's where you are wrong in my opinion. they were anti-corporate greed at the expense of humankind and our habitat. they were never anti-capitalist. Eddie himself has stated he loves the USA, he just thinks your government is irresponsible and so are a lot of big corporations. But they went with Target for the distribution of Backspacer because they share SOME of the same core values. One of them being one of the most important one: that Target allowed the album to be sold ON THIS WEBSITE TO ITS MEMBERS and at indie record shops. Is that your version of selling out?
To me selling out is doing something for money that are personally against. I don't see they have done anything like that.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Comments
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Nope. Instead, when a band sells their music almost exclusively through a major corporate retailer, like Target, this would help lend support to anyone who says they've sold out. Plus, when they have commercials with the target logo, it seems quite sell-out'ish.
Umm... well, I'd argue this lends more credence towards those who argue the band has sold out. So, yes, they may be.
That's awesome... good for you. I do believe their sell outs. This lead singer was ridiculously anti-corporation. He wanted no part of allowing them to control his destiny. That was great... I mean, they even took on Ticket Master... Listen to Vitalogy. But, that was then... now, he's sporting spots for his album through a major corporate retailer, the Ten Club charges for everything they can. The band is now selling anything they can to make bank. I do believe they are sell outs... the irony is I don't care. I think they are great musicians that deserve the money they are making.
Agreed... Pearl Jam and Ed, in particular, WERE multi-millionaire musicians that WERE not sell-outs. Key words "WERE". They aren't any more. They haven't been for a number of years now.
I think what makes a band a more recognizable sell-out is when they say they hate something then they do it. To quote Not For You... "if you hate something, don't you do it too". This band was completely anti what they are doing now. If Ed saw another musician do this sort of thing 15 years ago, he would have called them out... which is exactly what he did to Adam Duritz for allowing his music to be in a Coke commercial. Once again, that's quite ironic now.... considering how many TV shows and whatnot have I heard their music in lately?
They sold out long ago, this is old news.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
you alluded to this thread pointing to the fact that pearl jam are sell outs. Did you read my first post? All I said was I don't need all the stuff I have. Do you own everything from every band you like? No, they put out stuff that some people will like and other things that other people will like. Some fans, like fans of this band, seem to want everything they put out, and that's fine. that's their perogitive. when they don't sell enough merch, the board becomes a riot, when they sell too much, the board again, becomes a riot. they can't win.
and my main point was at the end, that I shouldn't have as much as I do based on my income level. it's a personal choice, not a societal statement on consumerism.
I was ranting not at the band or anyone else, but at myself. I felt like a fraud for buying stuff just because Ed would approve. Like he gives a fuck if I own vinyl or not. And like it should matter if he does.
All I was saying is that if you enjoy what you collect, more power to you. I don't, so there's no point in me keeping it.
Now, onto your second point about the band selling out. Yes, Ed was anti-corporation. He still is. But at some point you have to realize that in order to say "fuck you" to the giant retailer, you may have to partner with another retailer. They had two choices:
1) sign another record deal and be slaves to another label or
2) sign a DISTRIBUTION deal that allows the band to keep contol over their product and make more money at it.
so they are now fine with promoting their own product. It's not kool aid. It just makes sense if you want your music to be heard. Most people who liked Ten don't even know they still exist.
why is it that any time someone defends the band or the ten club all of a sudden they are "drinking the kool aid"? like the anti-position is the only one that makes sense?
ludicrous.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
As an aside, I was looking at PJ vinyl on Ebay this morning, just out of curiosity. Damn, there must be a lot of PJ fans who have a LOT of discretionary income or are even more hooked on vinyl than I am!
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
My band put out a 4 song EP, but imploded before we even played our first show. I put out the cd on my own dime and lost money on it, and gave all sales to charity. Not much, but I wanted something good to come out of a horrible experience.
But, if someone had asked us if we wanted a million dollars to put our song in an ad, I wouldn't fucking hesitate.
I don't care if the band is established or not. Look at U2. Do I like their music? Not really. But the amount of money they make is staggering. But the money they give away is even more staggering. So the more Blackberry ads they do the more people in Africa they help.
And even if they just took the cheque, who cares? Isn't the main point just getting your music heard, no matter if it's a super bowl commercial or a town fair in the mid afternoon?
do you think any actor dreams of winning an oscar? I doubt it. they dream of being seen on a stage or a big screen. but if win an award for their craft, does that make them a sellout? Nope.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Or option 3... they could have started their own label, sold thier through a multitude of retailers and maybe not sold quite as much. Or option 4... they could have sold their album digitally and physically through their own website only. I'm sure there's a few more options too. The truth is they wanted to make money, and they didn't like that with option #1, some of the money went to a record company. I understand that, but they weren't in this or making this decision for anything other than....
... money. It's greed. Which, once again, is fine. Most of us would do the same. They wanted their money. And in my opinion, they were entitled to it. But, I am also entitled to say they are hypocrites of what they once were and stood for.
Pearl Jam is a huge band. They would have had their music heard if they wanted it heard. They did not have to go through TicketMaster to do that. The Ten Club didn't have to start charging people to post here. The story goes on and on... They wanted money.... and yes, in my opinion, it is kool-aid because there's a huge section of people here, especially on MT, that are anti-corporation... they are all about doing things the small way (which is fine with me, if they are consistent)... these folks aren't consistent when it comes to the reason we are all on this message board = Pearl Jam. That rock band is violating that concept that some here repeat over, and over day after day... yet, these same people can't even see there's at the very least a touch of hypocritical behavior here with their favorite band.Saying you don't agree with everything your favorite band does, does not mean you have to dislike their music... It's a natural thing within a relationship. I'm calling Pearl Jam out. I think their music is still great and I never 100% agreed with their politics, but I always had a deep respect for a band that followed through with that. I personally lost a bit of respect for the band over the past 5 years or so due to the whole Ticket Master, Ten Club, selling everything they possibly can type stuff....
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
I disagree.
I think a band that basically said a big F you to:
1) MTV
2) Ticket Master
3) even the Grammys...
4) and more...
...and the band that has repetitively been against corporate growth is being slightly hypocritical to what they "said they were". This is the same band that wrote Not For You, Corduroy and Blood. Have you listened to those songs lately?
That young guy who wrote those lyrics would laugh at what this band has become. He, in my opinion, would be first to say they sold out. Kurt Cobain would prolly say that too. The irony, to me, is... Kurt Cobain would have done the same had he stayed alive.
They were young and ideological. They were innocent. Yet, I really respected the integrity Ed, for instance, had. He actually did what he said he would in the beginning. They stayed away from MTV, they didn't sell out for forever it seemed.
To me, this band sold out with the record Pearl Jam and that worsened with Backspacer. Ironically, to me, these two CDs were better than the two previous, so the music wasn't effected negatively. It was simply the management.
Pearl Jam is a corporation of sorts now. They are what they once hated. All I am doing is pointing it out and saying I don't care... but, I don't see how some of you anti-corportists are ok with it.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
You didn't know any of the band then and you don't know any of them now. They're not your friends. You're projecting. If the music's good, listen to it. If the shows are great, go. If you want a t-shirt, buy it. But holy hell can we stop judging the personalities and intentions of people we've never met.
ok then, since I'm drinking their kool aid, I guess I'll just say from now on anytime someone hates on them that they're drinking kurt cobain or courtney love's kool aid. that makes about as much fucking sense.
Have your views on the world stayed 100% the same from when you were 25 to when you were 50? I don't know how old you are, but if you don't mature and grow and change, then you haven't really lived. You can't compare how they distribute their music now; the industry is completely different now. If they were doing this in the 90's, then fine, I guess you coulc call them hypocrites if you want to, but now? Start their own label?
I'm not going to sit here and claim, as you seem to be doing, that I know what their motivations are for their business decisions. But do you know how much work it is to start your own label? It's a 24/7 job. These guys have families. They wanted to get a deal with a major distributor who they felt they could deal with and still sleep at night instead of working through it.
Selling everything they possibly can? Are you nuts? This band has probably one of the smallest amount of merch of any major band going right now. They have a few shirts, the shoes they were selling were going to charity, some vinyl that their fans demand, and stickers. Yeah, they've turned into Kiss all of a sudden.
Maybe we should start a new thread, as this is actually, I now realize, completely off topic.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
They did.
Monkeywrench records.
Good idea, Hugh.
Let's talk about the ontological implications of the Neil Young/Pearl Jam collaborations on "Rockin' in the Free World".
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
nor would i... id tell them thanks but no thanks.
the money they give away they get from us or the record company... so why do they need us to buy their friggin' branded blackberry or whatever so they can give away to charity??? dont they have enough money they can give away without us giving more 'to the cause'??? i am so fuckin' against this line of charity. its encouraging people to give via consumption. but this product and feel good cause the proceeds go to chairty.. oh really????? how many millions do you need guys???? i/we dont have it, you do, and youve got it cause of me/us in the first place, so....
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
against charity if the money is evil. shouldn't you just not give a fuck as long as it's helping people.
and your last comment bugs the fuck out of me. no, they don't have money because of you. you didn't give them the money out of the goodness of your own heart. you bought something in return. they are millionaires because you/someone liked their music enough to buy something they created.
by your logic, my boss could turn around and say "well I gave you that car you drive". No you fucking didn't, I worked for it! Just like Pearl Jam and U2 (and unfortunately) Nickelback have done.
I don't give a shit how many millions someone has or wants. that's their perogitive. I'm lower middle class. I don't have a lot of money. Why care about how someone else lives their life and how much money the aspire to have? to me, that hints at a sign of jealousy. reminds me of my wife. always wanting to catch up to the joneses.
and you wouldn't put a song in an ad out of, what, some type of moral objection to getting money for something you worked on? it's their job. and their art. anyone who loves their job still gets paid for it.
maybe I wouldn't do it if the song is painfully personal to me (which I don't see PJ or U2 doing), they put their fun rocking songs in ads. I really don't understand the problem with that.
everyone was up in arms when Van Halen put one of their songs in a Pepsi ad for some ungodly amount at the time, a million bucks or something. I never understood that. people seem to think they own the rights to a song/album a band makes, and maybe they do emotionally, but come on, the more money a band makes, the more money a lowly tour grip probably makes, so isn't that all good?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Did Pearl Jam say they hated all corporations? or just corporations functioning with only the bottom line as what drives them? They were aware that they we're functioning under to corporation of Sony, and spoke to it in interviews that I recall. They spoke out about Ticketmaster because of its monopoly, not because it's a corporation making money off of artists. Going against MTV was about setting boundaries and MTV functioning as a corporate entity attempting to squeeze money from other artist's work.
It doesn't make sense that you think the band sold out after self-titled and backspacer, when they were free of Sony. If anything, they moved toward the less sell out end of the continuum. You should define your definition of sell out, because one could say that Fugazi are sell outs because they've made money on albums and shows. You just come across as being argumentative.
my thoughts exactly.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Not meant to be argumentative... seriously, it's a thought I have... and since, this is a forum for political thought... it was worth mentioning, particularly in a thread about the abundance of PJ goods. Anyway, I know I'm not alone in my feelings that PJ sold out.
Pearl Jam never said, to my knowledge, "they hated all corporations"..\. But, I think you an I would agree they've been outspoken in their distaste for corporations and greed in general. Further, I'd argue, and I think quite successfully, that all corporations operate with the bottom line as their number 1 goal. They can BS you all they want saying other aspects are more important, but they need to make profit to remain alive. So, due to that, I'd say your first two sentences are in opposition to one another. In that sense, if you say you dislike corporations for functioning with the bottom line as their number 1 goal, you probably dislike all successful corporations.
Sony, Ticketmaster, and MTV aren't the only issues. There's also the Ten Club. There's also the re-issues. There's the zombie shirts. There's the toe nail clippers. There's.... TARGET. Like I said before, they could have gone about getting out of their deal with Song and not gone to Target. Do you think Target is a great corporation with excellent corporate interests? Let me ask you this.... does Target NOT operate with their bottom line as their number 1 goal?
In this sense, it makes complete sense that PJ sold out after S/T and Backspacer. Even the albums themselves were more commercial.
I've said it once, I'll say it again, I like that they sold out. I think Ed, in particular, is a bit of a hypocrite, but I have no problem with what they and their mini-corporation (The Ten Club) are doing. They deserve to retire happy. They were successful and deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success. I love Pearl Jam as much as anyone here... but, I also am not afraid to call them out when they aren't who they said they were.
My issue with bringing this up here, was those HERE on Moving Train... who are super anti-corporate... and how they just cast a blind eye to this, because it just so happens that Pearl Jam touts their agenda frequently.... my point is, they don't always act on it... where's the realization of that?
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
do you have any suggestions on how they would have gone about getting their album out to the masses without a major label deal and a distribution deal? saying that 10C could handle that kind of burden at that scale is laughable. we all know it's a tiny organization, and they are maxed out as it is.
Target was the only major chain that would allow them to still have their cd's/records in indie record shops. was that not a moral decision to make? maybe walmart offered them more money. maybe best buy did. who knows? how does a band of this magnitude distribute their cd's themselves? it just can't be done.
and the zombie shirts. is a band not allowed to have fun? holy christ.
they were signed to a MAJOR LABEL FOR MOST OF THEIR CAREER. how is leaving the major labels behind, starting your own, taking control of your own art, and getting someone else to distribute it, selling out? please tell me, because this isn't really making sense to me, whether you say you are glad they sold out or not is irrelevant. I still want to know how this is selling out, and even simpler than that, you have failed to define what it means to sell out in the first place.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
As far as selling out by not being more aggressive politically/philosophically, I don't see that as relevant. They're older and wiser. They've learned to more subtle, more spiritual, and certainly live much safer lives I'd think and thank goodness for that. And again, they're band. They make music we love. What more could we or should we expect?
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
They bailed on this major label to go sell their product exclusively through a major corporate retailer, which to many is only one step above the worst out there: (Wal*Mart). Anyway, I've said why I believe they sold out repetitively now. But, I'll humor you with a definition...
Wikipedia's definition of sell-out:
"Selling out" is the compromising of (or the perception of compromising) integrity, morality, or principles in exchange for money or "success" (however defined). It is commonly associated with attempts to tailor material to a mainstream audience. Any artist who expands their creative path to encompass a wider audience, as opposed to continuing in the genre and venues of their initial success, may be disdainfully labeled by disapproving fans as a sellout. Sometimes a sellout is seen as a person that is disloyal to one's group that he or she belongs (usually ethnic group) in order to gain money or become "successful". Selling out is often seen as gaining success at the cost of credibility.
I think their recent moves since S/T fit that definition. They were searching for a bigger audience. I mean the reissues alone are a clear and evident money grab.
I would put selling out in simpler terms, however... it's acting against what you once said you were or were perceived to be. Listen to corduroy, listen to not for you... then ummm... i guess listen to the fixer. Actually, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-QYAWXK7fo
This is the perfect analogy for what I am saying. They were Corduroy... now, they are that Fixer commercial.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
I am really glad it is there though for those who enjoy the goodies ... the more the merrier
and everything PJ!
yes, you had stated why you believe they sold out, but until now, you never defined what selling out actually means to you. the wikipedia definition was very informative, though. :roll:
talking down isn't the way to get someone to listen. just a suggestion.
the reissues was not the band's idea, from my understanding. it was Sony's, who said they were doing to reissue the band's back catalogue whether the band liked it or not, so the band said "ok, if that's the case, then we need to be involved in it".
To put my thought process in simpler terms for you....a wise man once said "the times, they are a changin". If the music industry as we knew it in 1994 was still intact now, I'm sure the band wouldn't have changed a thing. you could say they are a victim of commercial evolution. they were forced to adapt to a completely overhauled landscape, and they've done it quite successfully.
I don't see how evolving as a human being or as a business can only be perceived as negative. to claim that the only reason they do what they do is for money and money alone is preposterous. no one can know why they do what they do and that's just a plain fact.
to call someone clueless because they don't agree with you is flat out ignorant.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
people evolve over time. people mature over time. people learn when it is appropriate to speak up and when it is appropriate to shut up. people learn to pick their battles and learn that fighting a battle that they have no chance of winning is counterprodictive (see ticketmaster)...that is part of being an intelligent human being. just watch pj20 and look at when ed fucked off and was traveling by van on his own and doing mokeywrench radio. they thought they were going to break up over that. watch single video theory when they talked about nearly breaking up and noting that being in a band is like being in a relationship. "it's all about giving it up". if they had stayed on that superoutspoken course, been beholden to a record company and contract, had to do it any other way than the way they wanted to their entire career they would have self destructed years ago. sometimes you have to compromise your position for the sake of the band if you want the band to continue.
anyone seeking validation of their own positions or opinions and projecting that onto a band has a serious problem.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I think they sold out to their own words of who they were. I never wanted them to be outspoken or political, but who am I to say what they can do. I just have my own taste. My take on Pearl Jam is they've always been better when they are not political. I don't go to PJ shows to hear Ed rant about corporations or even hear anti-corporate songs. I prefer songs with non-political stories like Elderly Woman to songs like World Wide Suicide. But, they've always been political to an extent. I accept that and know it's part of their identity. In fact, despite the fact that I don't always agree with a songs or rants message... I've always admired it. I admired Ed's, in particular, ability to hold back and not be greedy. To feel so strongly about something... I really admire that, even if I don't 100% agree. I mean when I listened to Not For You or Corduroy... I got something. I connected. I felt that's a guy who is authentic. He means what he's saying. That feeling stayed with me for years. It's changed recently, and for me, that's ok... I understand why it's changed for him/them. They were not really quite as authentic as I once thought,.... and that's ok.
I also agree and understand this.... but, do you think there's a lot of people HERE in MT learn when it's appropriate to speak up and when it's appropriate to shut up? Do you think you know that? I'm not sure I do... I don't think pretty much anyone here does... everyone here consistently states opinions... So, just saying...
They didn't have to be super-outspoken or pick battles to not sell-out. They would have just had to not try to get bigger, and make more money through Target and the Ten Club. They could've been content with their own label, free posting on pearljam.com and not selling quite as much records.
I find this hysterical. You and I, my friend, are on that rock band's message board. The reason we all are here is because of that rock band. A lot people, including you, are very frequently in this section of the forum. This is a political section of a rock band's message board. A ton of people here are very anti-corporate and even anti-capitalistic.... except, ironically, when it comes to certain entities, including Pearl Jam and Target. Some may have even first been introduced to anti-capitalistic thinking through Ed or his favorite writers. These guys don't seem to notice the change in the bands behavior and have reasons and rationales for every move. They have their opinions, I have mine.
I'm willing to bet there's a few "real" anti-capitalists who understand what I'm saying. One can't pick and choose when capitalism is OK if you're really against it to begin with. Capitalism is capitalism. Pearl Jam was anti-capitalistic in word, and sometimes in deed early in their career. Yet, now, when they act much more like a capitalist via ties with Target and others I've mentioned.... and here when someone brings it up, there's either silence or upsetment... here... on the "political section" of PJ.com. In fact, it's now almost deemed inappropriate to bring it up. I find that funny.
I like Pearl Jam. I have no problem with them being capitalists. In the end, like other posters said, it doesn't really matter to me. I don't know them personally and I bet I would like them personally if I did. I bet we wouldn't talk politics at all. And I'm sure, they've matured and probably changed a bit politically. But, I wasn't really trying to hammer anyone in PJ with this point. What I was trying to point out was the inconsistency with some HERE in Moving Train. Some support what Pearl Jam did, yet, in the next thread post against a similar thing. It's hypocritical.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Me, I figure as each breath goes by, I only own my mind. I am mine.
that's where you are wrong in my opinion. they were anti-corporate greed at the expense of humankind and our habitat. they were never anti-capitalist. Eddie himself has stated he loves the USA, he just thinks your government is irresponsible and so are a lot of big corporations. But they went with Target for the distribution of Backspacer because they share SOME of the same core values. One of them being one of the most important one: that Target allowed the album to be sold ON THIS WEBSITE TO ITS MEMBERS and at indie record shops. Is that your version of selling out?
To me selling out is doing something for money that are personally against. I don't see they have done anything like that.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014