Musics in the 21st century, record store versus library or both. Using a segmented market to create an Information empire

OK. I seem to raise some hackles with my last post. I would prefer to be thought a fool for what I was actually saying, so I will attempt to lay out a small corner of my reasoning on the subject at hand.

People want “Hollywood movies and TV shows,”....“they don’t want amateur hour.”

Steve Jobs 9/1/2010

I think Mr. Jobs has succinctly summed up how apple will relate to what culture it will deem feasible to distribute. As itunes is already the largest purveyor of music the world has yet to see, this would be worrisome. However I believe that while in the short run Apple is having huge success continuing this 20th century mode of operation, in the end it will prove it's undoing when technology moves just a few steps further in making information packets smaller, faster to download, and affordable to store. Because in the end it is all about convenience.

With over 13 million songs, itunes sounds like it has an impressive head start on any future competition. But even with it's early entry into the market, and a formidable parent company, that is no guarantee of continuing dominance. So let us look at these salient facts, and see if they are as large a barrier to entry.

Personally, I have almost 13,000 songs in my itunes library (a paltry 70 gigs, including less than a quarter of my CD's, and almost none of my LPs). Thus the itunes store at 13,000,000, has only 1000 times that amount of music as one fellow (me) who buys the majority of his music one CD at a time, and only loads them into itunes sporadically. One can imagining any serious contender for the online music crown closing that gap with just a bit of money and elbow grease. As for the apple itunes vertical integration connection. To some extent this can act as a negative. Apple is competing with other music players, and more significantly, phone providers. As the mobile is well on the way to replacing all other gadgets (camera, laptop, entertainment center) apples has not been motivated to let everyone in to play on their field, and certainly not with their ball. The web is awash in complaints and advice about making itunes work for your Droid, your Razr, or for those unfortunates who are running Vista on their PC. If I were seeking to launch a new web based music emporium, 3 guesses where I would seek my funding

Apple has a formidable R&D team, and a great can do culture. I have many friends there working on a variety of the Apple products/apps. They are a bright, talented, and hard working crew. I have no doubt that Apple can stay a step ahead of the technological competition barring any unforeseen game changers (a leap forward in nano technology for example). Yet we are swiftly approaching a juncture where the scalable base line technology for storing, organizing, searching, and distributing data (musical or otherwise) will be available to a much wider array of players. At that point other much more volatile factors will become decisive in who controls the online music market.

itunes, with over 5,000,000,000 served is certainly making money hand over fist. However we know that the majority of those sales come from a relatively few numbers of items. Much of the rest (like Go Van Gogh) makes only a few pennies a month, or has "not yet" been unearthed. While we were all caught up with the Long Tail concept back in the early days of the web, those with cooler heads, and better business models have concentrated on pushing their users/consumers towards that which makes a sale. However that does not invalidate the long tail theory, more so, it points out that we were not yet ready to make the transition to a more mature web commerce. The briefly lived Lala cloud model had much to recommend it. You could port your whole playlist around with you, and load up what ever you already had in your library (a very slow process) . But they were a bit ahead of the curve, and I certainly wasn't willing to buy a song, even for a dime, if I could not port it to the other parts of my musical world (you need to posses the mp3 file, to make it the soundtrack of your youtube video). So without a stronger revenue model, they died a terrible death. IMHO the cloud/individual ownership hybrid will win in the end, if a savvy player can utilize both the targeted market of the hit parade, and one stop shop of retaining and growing long tail capabilities.

As I said above, it;s all about convenience. Of the 13,000 songs in my itunes library, only 40% are represented in the itunes store. Thus not only are they un-pingable, so a waste from the marketing/social network perspective, but I had to find and purchase 60% of my music from a divergence of non apple sources. "Had I had a single place to turn to for my "destination for music" , I would not be spending so much time down at Amoeba Records, and may have saved many barrels of oil.

Obviously there are issues inherent to having all the recorded music on the planet available from a single source. Take licensing. It's a big world, the music is owned by a plethora of artists and labels, and add to the pot all the market differences between selling songs for a dime online in Ghana, and a buck online in the USA. Makes for a scary set of legal and intellectual logistics. And who will pay for content that generates no revenue, just sitting there waiting to become the flavor of the month. These problems are not insurmountable, but require someone looking at the the long term, not the short payoff. To date, itunes is still using the 20th century business model of an individual artifact selling for a specific fee in a specific market. This is a holdover from the days of records, and radio where access to music was constrained by the physical limitations of time (airplay) and space (retail square footage). At 160 gigs, the ipod can already carry a quarter years worth of continual music Pandora, with its small library of 700,000 songs would take almost 4 years of continual streaming to get through, so while we still have a limited amount of time to learn of music, we certainly are well on the way to solving the space issue,

So why this insistence on selling songs one by one as the only workable model. We know that as individuals we need to have full portability and control before the dollars can be pried from our tight little fists. We also know many of us are only interested in buying a small number of items preselected for us by marketeers, freeing us from the tyranny of choice. But we also know that a significant sub set of us are seeking exposure to more options, and that even the most mundane tastes can still seek a bit of depth in their proclivity, and be shopping for tracks too obscure to fit the itunes bill.

The model with most hope to shoulder aside itunes will succeed with a multi channel approach, like itunes they will sell single downloads, but also offer a subscription service like Netflix watch instantly, married to a pay per extra download function. The consumer can choose to buy the one off, or pay a small monthly fee ($10 is small enough to get a groundswell) which entitled them to unlimited streaming of all content, plus the download of a few tracks (enough to get them thinking about downloads every month, but not so many as to eat up the cost of doing business). If one wishes to download more, they can pay a members rate per extra download. Content providers would be paid based on actual traffic percentage of the pie ( by per stream or per download). Providers like Go Van Gogh would continue to make their pennies, but could attain more revenue by driving traffic to the service for streaming and potential downloads. much as we do with our current song widget which links to the itunes store, This will increase overall traffic, and thus more filling overall in the pie. Apple/EMI would still make their millions off the Beatles as they would still be driving sales.

The consumer will be happy to have the convenience of a one stop shop for all of their music needs. The punters will have their instant Lady Gaga, and the curious will have an endless supply of fresh music. And unlike itunes, with it's anti amateur hour, and lack of musical breadth and depth, as the culture continues to fragment, and tastes become more and more balkanized, the fact that all tastes are catered too will keep this boat afloat.

XXOO

Bobo

Trouble maker

Friend to the band

http://www.govangogh.net

Beatles on Itunes, one old dinosaur climbing aboard one soon to be dinosaur,

Last night the TV commentators were all abuzz. The Beatles will finally be on itunes thanks no doubt, to running out of any other coherent idea to boost Beatles holiday sales this year. Yes, you can now have the same reduced quality audio, and the same 5 computer restrictions (unless you pay the "premium") for the entire Beatles catalog, which most of you already own in one form or another.

Why should we care. The Beatles are as ubiquitous as the bible in a Motel Six. It's not like this ushers in a new age of technological wonder, or a significant broadening of the itunes offerings. To my jaundiced eyes, this is just a further acknowledgment of business as usual over at itunes. A flawed model enjoying it's last halcyon days before someone comes along to eat it's lunch. And in this souped up web crazed world, with a new brilliant idea made possible by the latest fastest biggest yet every other second, this will be a short enough interval that even our attention deficit age will still be awake when the whip comes down.

itunes, sure we all got our product on it. Go Van Gogh make its pennies a month, month after month after month. We are out there, supposedly on the tipity tip of the long tail, garnering the very small benefits of someone else's considerable R&D.

Yet from where I am standing, there are galaxy after galaxy Apple/itunes seems to know nothing about. This was brought home for me in hearts when itunes introduced Ping, their recent move into the social networking sphere. By design, but what I see as a conceptual flaw, Ping is limited to music that can be found in the itunes store. While I am sure the graphs and venn diagrams aplenty that justified this business logic make great sense in a short sighted world, perhaps the MBA's might consult someone with more peripheral vision next time. Less than a third of my itunes library is matched in the itunes store, and thats not because I am a big ACDC fan, or any of the other mega platinum itunes hold outs. It's because the itunes model is not broad, it is looking to sell the same 1000 things to the same Billion people, while using smoke and mirrors to pretend to be something grander than the CD section at Best Buy.

Anyone with half an ounce of discernment has to get their music elsewhere, no matter what flavor that music might be.

And apple can only blame itself when Mark Zuckerberg, or who ever come from left field to make itunes the VHS tape of the 21st century. By not actively seeking to be the complete aggregator of all things musical, in a quality format, heading step by step in a declared manner towards the INEVITABLE subscription service we all envisioned several decades ago, they have set themselves a course to extinction. Whether it's a meteorite hit, or a profusion of flowers, itunes has failed to show how they will be able to go the distance when calamity strikes.

Will apple mend it's ways, invest the time and cold hard cash into creating the inclusive affordable model all artists and music lovers can embrace? Not without some fast and fancy foot work, and bringing in some fresh thinkers to their mix.

XXOO

Bobo Bubalisky

Trouble Maker

Friend to the band

http://www.govangogh.net

Will the Ukulele save us

I was 

listening to the radio this afternoon, and this quote came up 

"art is a hammer to beat the world, not a mirror to reflect it" 

I looked it up, and it's credited to  either Vladimir Majakovsky (the esperantist and assassinated poet) or Nikolai Vladimirovich Nekrasov (the suicidal Russian Futurist) depending who you trust (trust no one). 

The discussion was on the emergence of the avant guard

 artists in Europe  (late 19th early 20th centuries) who sought to challenge the democratization of culture made possible through the mechanism of the mass market. This has become a timely issue once again due to the growing ubiquity of the web. We worship technology.  Each day we try a new widget, get an upgrade on our x or our y and z.  It helps us run faster, smarter if we are already smart, or make it possible to live our science fiction lives in a more science fiction way. CGI  makes for new forms of entertainment.  Internet browsers make restaurant choices for us as we drive to dinner.  And if we look back, this utilization of technology has always been an engine for radical change. For example, the Impressionists sprang from the spread of photography, changing the economic model of portraiture.  Or that Art Nouveau arose as increased industrialization making it possible to create less expensive object of art, and  a burgeoning middle class able to afford them.  The Gatling gun started the

 road away from mounted calvary and frontal wave assaults .

I always looked on these phenomena in a positive light (perhaps not the Gatling gun),  "Oh, now we can do this instead", not "this repressive homogenization of the vitality of human culture".

I am obviously a bit slow,  After all, for Majakovsky and Nekrasov the industrial revolution and mercantile imperialism  had been in full swing for over a century, How could they have failed to view the seeds of cultural homogeny as a threat.  Our historical counterparts were no more slouches, and perhaps less so, than our current crop of radical thinkers.  The Luddites may have arose from concern with the loss of their livelihoods.  Yet there were far reaching negative effect from the changes in their industries.  In 1812 the average person had real need of  more affordable rugs, trousers, and coats.   Unfortunately we long ago passed the point w

here we can produce all that everyone needs at a price everyone can afford, and have moved on to a world almost solely about possessions and economic relations.

Majakovsky and Nekrasov are active at what I consider the tipping point, In my groovy 21st century mindset, I always thought the emergence of phonographs, nickelodeons , and radio to be exciting.  The ability to transport cultural artifacts made for many lively new mixes.  Jazz found it's way around the world. Tango swept the globe, and on and on.  I had failed to see that, much like my own issues with the army of one ubiquity of culture generating and distributing technology, that the flood of modernity might be seen askance by those who wished to not be buried under an avalanche of bakelite and steel. 

So here we are in 2009.  We are nearing a possible artistic endgame of one big culture controlled by whoever owns the filter (buy your ad words here, now with extra zilch), there is less and less to be excited about, and more and more reason to pull at the bit.  One can wish to turn back the clock, but how many clicks. Prior to Democracy Now podcasts.  Before Led Zeppelin's Houses of the Holy.  Earlier than mass produced penicillin.  I think not   We can't go back, so we have to move forward wisely and with a great more vigor than we used  to get on the road we want to get off.  Shorter showers, and composting won't get us there.  The basic precepts we live by need to shift.   The lie is that we all need to continue to consume at faster and greater rates or the world will end.  Maybe the house of cards of centralize corporatism will end, but life will go on, just with less stuff.  We don't need a 762 Billion dollar a year US military, to defend the strategic interests of the riches 500 people on the planet. Nor do we need $150 concer

t tickets, or 8 dollar blouses. The quality of either is questionable.

But, let us get back to the origination of this post, as it got me thinking about what does re

flect our current culture, and how little there is that might smash through societies apathy.

One could say that reality TV, like Real Housewives of New Jersey or American Idol are more than metaphoric mirrors.  I am not so sure, as i have come to distrust my thinking on mass culture, due to my total distain and snobbishness (yet I can't look away from the 100 million car pile up).  

The hammer is also an oddity.  I think it's the Ukulele. A very gentle hammer indeed, but

look at how subversive it is.  It is small, and can be carried everywhere on foot.  It is intimate, meant for small gatherings (perhaps your living room), unlike most of our VERY LOUD AND OBVIOUS corporate culture that needs REALLY BIG SOUND SYSTEMS in GIANT STADIUMS.  It makes a gentle sound, unlike the aggressive aggro of most common fare.  It is amazingly simple (four strings) in an increasingly complicated world. It's made of wood (that alone is a dangerous idea), so can be made with fairly primitive tools.  

Now everyone doesn't need to take up the Uke.  That would just lead to flagship Uke stores on Union Square, and KTELL Uke hits sold on late night TV.  A Uke in every hand, a chicken in every pot, not a  world for vegetarians or Bobos.

 What we do need is that which enliven us, that which brings us together in celebration.  With or without Ukes, REALLY BIG SOUND SYSTEMS, or consideration if you are a mirror or a hammer (I am smashing, I spent a lot of time smashed). Thats why I will be spending this Saturday night at Cafe International.  Go Van Gogh (no Ukes), whether mirror or a hammer, are people sharing their love and efforts with who ever cares to know. I for one can never get enough of such a kind offer. So there I will be, to dance and frolic.  I will have my life energies recharged.  I will relate to my existing friends, who I have real, not virtual connections with. And I will have the opportunity to meet new people, and forge new relationships in an environment that is neither alienating nor hostile. 

XXOO

Bobo 

Purists are really annoying

As I am always willing to put my money where my mouth is, I am sharing with you some of our recent work. In this case it is a tune written in the late 19th century by my great grand father Israel Isaac Shamfrof. I have taken a great deal of liberty with the tune, adding whole sections, and the band has gone off the dub end as well. While there were no recordings made by old Izzy Isaac, there is sheet music which we used to infer his intent. For us, this was a point of departure. Looking at this Klezmer tune as part of my folk tradition, I did what any good folk artist does, and used the tune as a vehicle to move through the musical world we inhabit. That world encompasses Lee Scratch Perry, Tiny Tim, John Coltrane, The Thrills, and legions more.

Within Go Van Gogh we have had disagreements about this process. The fact that I almost always write a new section for the songs we cover is contentious. Everyone is not always down with how I take the song somewhere that the original composer would never have considered. I have different knowledge in my head than they did. As most of them are long dead, I doubt they mind. However one still must contend with the living.

So if anyone is interested, take a listen.

Professional Gear, No talent.

I was watching On The Rhumba River which could be considered a Congolese Buena Vista Social Club.  Papa Wendo (Antoine Kolosoy), a Singer and band leader now deceased, but then in his late 70's, is asked to put the band back together.  Not in any Blues Brother way (as this is real life) but to earn some cash. It's 2004 Kinshasa, the war and the final Mobutu years having taken their toll.

Wendo sets about finding as many of the old group as possible while being trailed by a French film crew.  In themselves, these slice of life scenes would make the film worth seeing, but the music, what little we get, is amazing. Filmed over the course of a few rehearsals, we are let into a world populated by his aging crew of players and dancers. Everyone already knows the material, so songs seem to emerge from the either, set off by a rhythm, or a snatch of melody.  The dancers, who's performance role is never clarified, glide beautifully around the rehearsal room, which made Go Van Gogh rehearsals seem so utilitarian and dull in comparison (who are a lively crew).

There were many stand out scenes, but one specific moment inspired this post.  I have included it here. 

 

This is the first rehearsal shown. The band is just fooling around. They glide into a tune, the dancers and various people are sitting  around chatting, and we are treated to the live take of what is happening in the room.  They are sounding great. They are coaxing beautiful tones out of their instruments,  but please note the instruments themselves. The saxophones are in need of re-corking, mouth pieces held in place with tape.  In later scenes you see the guitar is going through a tiny amp, and at the end of this cut, check out the hand percussionist.  He is playing on an old box missing half it's top.  Yet his rhythm and tone are spot on.

These old cats are making world class music in a concrete and tin rehearsal room, with gear that they have nursed through the privation of war and kleptocratic poverty.  They are well past the bloom of the rose, have not been a functioning group for quite some time, yet they hit the sweet spot.

Let us now venture back to the bay area.  Here one often sees posts

for musicians claiming to have, or demanding you have "PRO GEAR".  It's an absolute must for the aspiring metal head, or hard ROCKIN dude and dudette.  I did a simple search for this illusive "pro gear" in the current CL, and  the first one I came across was posted by a fellow who says "I smoke weed when I play. I’m psychedelic friendly, but not opiate or amphetamine friendly".  Following the link, we discover  his choice of drugs has not enhanced his first tune, which goes on and on, sounds like fuzzy shit, and held my interest for less than a millisecond.   He does include pretty pictures of his instruments.  Unfortunately lacking a clue, or much in the way of musicality, they are wasted on his 29 year old conception of use.  Perhaps when he is in his 70's he may be able to play a balsa-wood box to as great effect as our Congolese friend.  One can hope.

So the point is obvious.  We have become a society all about stuff, and the importance that brings to the process, rather than being all about intrinsic value and the quality of the craft. All about the show, and  not about the substance. 

In the two cases before us, the music says it all. One could say "a great mic makes a better recording".  But in whose hands.  Mr. "pro gear" has a current studio recording. He had the time to go back endlessly to make each note perfect.  Even if you love his music (which I did not), the actual sound quality could not hold a candle to the live recording  made in a cement and corrugated tin room back in 2004 Kinshasa. In fairness, not all the "pro gear" posts were made by people lacking skill (many were, not all)

We have become degraded by the consumerist culture. By the worship of bigger better, fast and faster.  Appearance has taken precedence, all form over function.  Part and parcel in the crisis capitalism we have bought into.

I for one, will endeavor to do more with what I have. My skills and WHATEVER falls to hand. It's the people and what they create that count.  Don't buy the lie.

Thats all for now.

XXOO

Bobo

Revisiting the death of regionalism ( t)

OK maybe I am a Luddite after all.  While flush toilets, and central heating are wonderful, there are some things 19th century I will be sad to never know. Specifically I am on about the lack of local flavor due to the  ever consolidating forces leading to mono culture.

Just to annoy myself, I will dredge up a few boring well known ideas, to enable the getting on with it of todays issue.

1. 99% of all people have contact with some form of neighbors.  Thus no culture exists in a vacuum, as even that 1% will eventually meet someone in the 6 degrees of separation world. 

2, Cultures have been in constant flux for thousands of years.  Sometimes due to political factors, or more likely from the battle between the traditional/digestible, and the weird thing that just came over from next door.

3. Starting well before Alexander, kicked ahead by the Islamic conquest, and them amped up by European imperialism  this process has been gaining speed for thousands of years.  The world shrinks, our neighbors grow more diverse, and the politics of culture become more of an issue as we are subjugating, or fighting off subjugation.

 4. In the early 20th century with the new technologies of waxed cylinders, radio, and Motion Pictures,  "CULTURE" has been portable to the masses to greater effect. Subsequent technologic developments has increased this potential cultural interaction exponentially.

On to the bone I am currently gnawing.

In the post cold war period, the consolidation of all distribution of culture into fewer hands has almost strangled the spread of ideas to the masses, even while the availability of all cultural ideas has become possible to every individual.

Thus the war between the new and the old has taken on a more sinister tone. With the new being introduced from the outside, often simultaneously worldwide, instead of popping out of the imagination of an initiate, or idiosyncratically arrive from down river as an artifact selectively included in the baggage (intellectual or otherwise) of some stranger. The old jettisoned in a race for the perceived benefits of modernity.

This has brought us a wealth of dance floor favorites, and my personal tastes have always been more about the clash of cultures, than the purity of any given milieu.  Yet n

ow I worry that we will soon have no source material to work from at all.  The constant updating and further iterations through the perpetual influx of the same data globally will mean the stew in the pot in Cameroon will have all the same ingredients as the stew in the pot in Boston. Essentially making all our music,literature, film, etc one more BIG MAC experience.

On the flip side of this argument, as my friend Connie from Go Van Gogh expounds, this access to all things, both the latest, as well as all material ever recorded in any form, means that we each have the opportunity to use all source material in our individually odd way.  That creativity is not dependent on milieu, and comes from a much deeper place.  She claims that some artists will always be able to step outside the given box, and bring forth something new and valid.  No doubt thinking of John Coltrane's "A Love Supreme" and "Interstellar Space".

I do not agree. Yes some people will pull from this deeper place.  But a writer will write using a language.  A language will have an underpinning of basic concepts about the world.  Even if you throw grammatical rules out the window.  Even if you make up new words for your new concepts, your writing utilizes some portion of the existing set of ideas, and your innovations still have a connection to all the knowledge you acquired related to that language and the underlying concepts it grew from.

Similarly, Coltrane, while transcending the bop and modal mediums, was directly influenced by contemporaries laboring in similar territory.  That he could take the ball and run so far ahead is a testament to his own brilliance and craft, but not a sign that he made the whole thing himself, unconnected to that which shaped him.

I hear great work every day.  Someone somewhere is always on the ball.  We are an endlessly creative species.  Some of the credit is due to technology.  Clem from Watchaclan throws some tracks together with the band.  He pops them onto his myspace page.  If I am linked, I get a notice the next time I login.  If I don't know Watchaclan, maybe I hear their tune Balkan Qoulou

on Eastblok Records Balkan Beats #3 which I happened upon somewhere else on the web.  So here is a tune I totally dig.  It's an old Algerian Berber song Qoulou L Ch'hilet Laâyani (it plays as the second song on the preceding link),  but redone as a Balkan brass tune as played by this very eclectic band from Marseilles.  It is a blessing to live in a time where so much cultural fecundity is possible.  

But I have to consider what happens next.  

What happens when the last Berber village gives up it's last song for repackaging. What happens when the last un-mined 60's era funk drum part is finally utilized as some pop songs break beat.  What happens, when hollywood has remade their last old sit com.  If all the new sitcoms were based on material from the old sitcoms, and all the new berber songs are based on Casio beats, or Michael Jackson melodies, how fast does the feed back loop descend into one bland piece of shit noise.

Thats all for now.

XXOO

Bobo

That dangerous step down the road to socialism

Well, there we were last night at a dance preview.  A friend of a friend, choreographer Todd Courage   lacked financial backing, but with a lot of friends, put on a preview of the work he is set to put up at the JCC later this year.  Needing cash to compleat the thing (costumes, lighting tech, publicity, and what not), he threw a preview party, and showed portions of the work in progress, made sure everyone had plenty of wine and sugar to get the checkbbooks lossened up, and hustle hustle hustled. 

I had never been to such a thing, but thought it a brilliant move on Todd's part.  Plenty of people in this town who still have the green, and if they can feel connected to what's going on, all the better.  They are just patrons, so they give support, but have no say in the shape the work takes.

Todd, like myself, has many years put in as a creative force, so his gathering really got me thinking about what it means to be an aging artist in this world. One who has not achieved a lucrative full time career in their chosen field.  The young are solidly  connected with a profusion of peers all hooked together in the rituals of mating.  Not yet firmly established, they are all too willing to dive in, in order to gain a reputation, or to build their portfolio. For the most talented, or the most aggressive, support networks coalesce into professional networks. Few continue their work into mid adulthood who are either late bloomers, or who are too far out front of what is common in the marketplace.

For the performing artist, especially for those in the director role, the choice of continuing to undertake ensemble projects requires either riches or madness. Not only must one come up with the space to create and the venue for performance. but a troop of musicians, actors, or dancers (for a musical, all three) are either expensive to hire, or a monster to organize (often both).  Our new friend Todd needs costumes for his troop, being a choreographer, not a clothing designer, he then needs to collaborate with someone to realize his sartorial vision, and while materials can break the bank by themselves, serious design talent costs.  The same is true of having a score written, lighting designed.... and the list can get very long.

Even in the microcosm of Go Van Gogh  there are many moving parts.  In a "Group" as opposed to a "Project", one can often find the skills within the team. Go Van Gogh creates all its own promotional material, does its own graphics and web design.  But who is to say that the group would not fare better in the marketplace if all these tasks we

re handed over to a full time pro.  Some one who can devote far more amassed skill than any part timer in that role. 

Those who have made that difficult step into full time professionals of their creative crafts, must marshal their time in financially lucrative ways.  While thats great for their craft, it  may in some cases, be less wonderful for their art.  A work for hire, after all is not a true collaboration.  It is an effort fully subjugated to the requirements of capital.  

This opens the door for those who are not so encumbered to jump ahead creatively, and snatch opportunities of a different sort.  I personally know dozens of very skilled and creative people who are laboring at jobs that either don't fly high enough, or have little to do with their aspirations.  They have spent years acquiring skills and experience, and now when asked for their time, wish to be payed at the same rate as full time professionals in that line.

Who can blame them.   

I can.  Through ego, or the wish not to be seen as a lesser light, they are throwing opportunity on the scrap heap. It is a marketplace after all.  To be taken seriously you must show your track record.  Rehearsing your band for 10 years may make for a tight set, but the club needs to know how many drinks they will sell.   This is demonstrated by how many drinks you sold at the last place.  The same is true in every discipline.  If you are a fine graphic artist, who has published your work.  What campaigns have you created as a marketer.  What copy have you published as a journalist.

You see how it is.  By insisting that the world bend to our ideas of the marketplace, we cut ourselves off from synergistic opportunities.  The very work that could gets you out into the publics eye.  The very affirmation that the marketplace demands.

So I call on my fellow creatives to create together.  Not selflessly, not as charity, not without objective. Look around you.  Who in your network, your community, is doing great but under appreciated work.  Who could benefit from what you do, but can't afford to pay your asking price.  Is there a possible trade off of visibility, or even the exchange of services.  The musician who writes a piece for a dance troop may end up with a paid commission down the line.  A visual artist who designs and paints a set for a play might have their other work displayed for sale in the theatre lobby.  The possibilities are huge.  And if you must be paid for your time, consider working on a sliding scale for projects that might take flight, or that allows you to more fully realize the work you prefer to do.

Or you can keep trying to claw your way in to the "dog eat dog" world that passes for art, intellectual property, and commerce.  Personally I would rather inhabit a scene where the operating principle is "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their need".

Thats all for now.

XXOO

Bobo