"Selling out" used to be a 4-letter word. In the early 90s, it was one of the worst things you could call someone (or a band). Looking back on it, it all seems so silly! Like, what a weird lens we viewed everything through. But I think a lot of that was driven by the idea that college radio/alternative music was an antidote to everything else--and everyone else--around us. It was for us, by us. And the idea that the same person shoving you into a locker could suddenly like Green Day, Nirvana, or (gasp!) Jawbreaker? Well, F that.
I loved Jawbreaker; why /wouldn't/ I want them to be successful and keep making music that I loved? But their signing to a major felt offensive, like a betrayal. It took years for me to come around to their 'Dear You' record (which, btw, while still not my favorite is a solid release). Again, with the benefit of hindsight, it seems so inane, but here we are...
I fall on the side of “selling out” is only when you compromise your values for money. Unless you are independently wealthy, you need to make money. Musicians need to make money if they want to eat and make more music. George Benson took a lot of flack when his album Breezin’ came out. Jazz purists called him a sellout for having a crossover album with a vocal hit on it. He correctly responded by saying something along the lines of “Why should my family suffer for your opinion of what good music is?”
Music fans can be demanding and ridiculous in their expectations. It is extremely hard to make a living in any creative field. Be true to yourself and you are not a sellout.
Are writers selling out by having paid subscribers on Substack? 😉
very interesting article. Now, I think that the idea of selling out depends on the musical genre in which the artist and the fans operate. In that sense, I think that no one who listens to pop music, like Beyoncé, will be worried about she selling out, since it is assumed that it is part of the genre to sell a lot of music. On the other hand, in the world of rock (taking into account the blurred boundaries between both genres), selling out is a sin. In the underground metal genre, for example, selling out remains an important issue among musicians and listeners.
I think the concept of "selling out" is more complicated than just getting a lot of money for your art (for once).
When you're in a subculture, like metal or punk or goth or skate, the top-down world of mainstream culture is a threat. In its constant search for novelty, it's predatory; and the effect of it latching on your subculture and exploiting it then cheapens your subculture down to a few shorthand marks of style and gesture and rubs away any context behind those.
It reduces your culture from a chosen, intentional way of life and expression of values to merely one among many prefab "consumer identities" on offer in the big Marketing Bazaar to anyone who has the money to buy one.
If you, as a member of that subculture, "sell out" you are selling your credibility within and among that culture as a "way in" for peddlers of cars or toothpaste or corn chips or whatever to fad-ify, exploit, cheapen, and eventually de-contextualize your subculture, rendering it meaningless. That's what you've sold; and that's why you got paid so much, and that's why your peers are really mad at you.
Capitalism cannot abide any value system that is not subject to its supremacy; and will seek to subvert and undermine any system which would arise to compete with it, even if it's not in direct opposition to capitalism. By selling out, you are handing capitalism a key to undermining yours, and thus subordinating and suffocating it.
That's why the term hasn't been used much since the dawn of this century; because "mainstream culture" has become a blob so ubiquitous, so massive and dominating, that it senses and moves to eat its potential opponents right out of the cradle, before they become enough of a threat to have to consider buying.
I loved The Flaming Lips chaotic, sloppy, acid-punk music during the late 80s and early 90s. When they migrated to their more highly orchestrated sound of ‘Soft Bulletin’ and ‘Yoshimi,’ I bowed out. It just didn’t work for me. However, having seen Wayne, Michael, Ronald, and the earlier versions of the band numerous times over many years, playing pool with them after they eviscerated a bar with just 10 people in attendance, I was, and am, proud of their success. They thoroughly deserve it.
That said, I still prefer the sound of those earlier Lips albums. But I will always wish them well.
I’ve asked multiple Gen Z’s if they feel [insert artist name with a song in a commercial] is a sellout. Their response: “What’s a sellout?”
Given the diminished income from recorded music, it’s a damn good thing new artists don’t have to fret of commercial or major label decisions in order to keep performing.
Thanks to Kevin Alexander for the heads up on your interesting post. I love that you used the Del Fuegos' Miller commercial as I was confused by that at the time. I was 19 and had just discovered the Del Fuegos via a great college rock station -- the legendary (in some circles) WOXY/97X in Oxford, OH -- and loved them. I was putting together my first serious band and learning the politics of college/alternative rock. I was happy for the band to get some exposure, but was unsure of this constituted selling out.
And I guess I'm still unsure where I draw the line mainly because it's a moot point for me: I've always played in bands that were successful at the local/regional level and have always had a day job. No one has offered me a bunch of money to use my song in a commercial. In these unequal economic times, I don't begrudge any artist from trying to make a living. But I'll also always respect the fierce independence of Fugazi.
There will always be a true artist elite of musicians who have zero interest in popularity or money, and who are in it for the art only. Currently I think the locus of that attitude is in classical crossover, experimental drone, and ambient music.
Interesting epilogue to your piece is that I saw a commercial last night that included the Velvet's 'I'll Be Your Mirror.'
"Selling out" used to be a 4-letter word. In the early 90s, it was one of the worst things you could call someone (or a band). Looking back on it, it all seems so silly! Like, what a weird lens we viewed everything through. But I think a lot of that was driven by the idea that college radio/alternative music was an antidote to everything else--and everyone else--around us. It was for us, by us. And the idea that the same person shoving you into a locker could suddenly like Green Day, Nirvana, or (gasp!) Jawbreaker? Well, F that.
I loved Jawbreaker; why /wouldn't/ I want them to be successful and keep making music that I loved? But their signing to a major felt offensive, like a betrayal. It took years for me to come around to their 'Dear You' record (which, btw, while still not my favorite is a solid release). Again, with the benefit of hindsight, it seems so inane, but here we are...
I fall on the side of “selling out” is only when you compromise your values for money. Unless you are independently wealthy, you need to make money. Musicians need to make money if they want to eat and make more music. George Benson took a lot of flack when his album Breezin’ came out. Jazz purists called him a sellout for having a crossover album with a vocal hit on it. He correctly responded by saying something along the lines of “Why should my family suffer for your opinion of what good music is?”
Music fans can be demanding and ridiculous in their expectations. It is extremely hard to make a living in any creative field. Be true to yourself and you are not a sellout.
Are writers selling out by having paid subscribers on Substack? 😉
very interesting article. Now, I think that the idea of selling out depends on the musical genre in which the artist and the fans operate. In that sense, I think that no one who listens to pop music, like Beyoncé, will be worried about she selling out, since it is assumed that it is part of the genre to sell a lot of music. On the other hand, in the world of rock (taking into account the blurred boundaries between both genres), selling out is a sin. In the underground metal genre, for example, selling out remains an important issue among musicians and listeners.
I think the concept of "selling out" is more complicated than just getting a lot of money for your art (for once).
When you're in a subculture, like metal or punk or goth or skate, the top-down world of mainstream culture is a threat. In its constant search for novelty, it's predatory; and the effect of it latching on your subculture and exploiting it then cheapens your subculture down to a few shorthand marks of style and gesture and rubs away any context behind those.
It reduces your culture from a chosen, intentional way of life and expression of values to merely one among many prefab "consumer identities" on offer in the big Marketing Bazaar to anyone who has the money to buy one.
If you, as a member of that subculture, "sell out" you are selling your credibility within and among that culture as a "way in" for peddlers of cars or toothpaste or corn chips or whatever to fad-ify, exploit, cheapen, and eventually de-contextualize your subculture, rendering it meaningless. That's what you've sold; and that's why you got paid so much, and that's why your peers are really mad at you.
Capitalism cannot abide any value system that is not subject to its supremacy; and will seek to subvert and undermine any system which would arise to compete with it, even if it's not in direct opposition to capitalism. By selling out, you are handing capitalism a key to undermining yours, and thus subordinating and suffocating it.
That's why the term hasn't been used much since the dawn of this century; because "mainstream culture" has become a blob so ubiquitous, so massive and dominating, that it senses and moves to eat its potential opponents right out of the cradle, before they become enough of a threat to have to consider buying.
That's my perspective on it, anyway.
I loved The Flaming Lips chaotic, sloppy, acid-punk music during the late 80s and early 90s. When they migrated to their more highly orchestrated sound of ‘Soft Bulletin’ and ‘Yoshimi,’ I bowed out. It just didn’t work for me. However, having seen Wayne, Michael, Ronald, and the earlier versions of the band numerous times over many years, playing pool with them after they eviscerated a bar with just 10 people in attendance, I was, and am, proud of their success. They thoroughly deserve it.
That said, I still prefer the sound of those earlier Lips albums. But I will always wish them well.
I’ve asked multiple Gen Z’s if they feel [insert artist name with a song in a commercial] is a sellout. Their response: “What’s a sellout?”
Given the diminished income from recorded music, it’s a damn good thing new artists don’t have to fret of commercial or major label decisions in order to keep performing.
Thanks to Kevin Alexander for the heads up on your interesting post. I love that you used the Del Fuegos' Miller commercial as I was confused by that at the time. I was 19 and had just discovered the Del Fuegos via a great college rock station -- the legendary (in some circles) WOXY/97X in Oxford, OH -- and loved them. I was putting together my first serious band and learning the politics of college/alternative rock. I was happy for the band to get some exposure, but was unsure of this constituted selling out.
And I guess I'm still unsure where I draw the line mainly because it's a moot point for me: I've always played in bands that were successful at the local/regional level and have always had a day job. No one has offered me a bunch of money to use my song in a commercial. In these unequal economic times, I don't begrudge any artist from trying to make a living. But I'll also always respect the fierce independence of Fugazi.
There will always be a true artist elite of musicians who have zero interest in popularity or money, and who are in it for the art only. Currently I think the locus of that attitude is in classical crossover, experimental drone, and ambient music.