Dear Wu Tang Clan:
Firstly, I would like to say that I am given to understand
that you are, in fact, nothing to fuck with, and as such, fucking with you is far
from my intentions here. Neither is it
my intention to oppose your release of Once
Upon A Time In Shaolin in anyway, either the music itself or the method with which you have decided to release this particular double album—as a single copy to be
toured itself as an artistic exhibit before being sold to a single individual. To the contrary, I find the idea to be
rather clever. That said, though, I do wish to
discuss the nature of the release.
As to whether or not this will bring attention to issues in
the modern music industry, I have no doubt that it will and even has already
begun to. As to whether or not this new
model will be revolutionary as you seem to hope, I refuse to speculate. What I will wager, though, is that, as it is
presented, this is not the revolution we need.
What we have been presented in this model is not simply
exclusivity, but the ultimate in artificial scarcity. Typically, I oppose artificial scarcity on principle,
as it inflates prices despite increased efficiency of production and therefore
decreased man-hour requirement. Yet, the
increased profits from artificial scarcities are not passed along to the
workers who are now have less work to perform, but instead they have less money
to use on the inflated costs of the goods they need, which itself creates
increased competition for jobs and deflates wages.
Although this is a matter that I believe needs to be
addressed in society, in regards to the particular instance of artificial
scarcity created by the exclusivity of your upcoming release, I find it
difficult to imagine that much of the money is not finding its way to those making
the product. Yet the point that this new
method for releasing an album is apparently in favor of artificial scarcity is
nevertheless noteworthy, especially in the field of art.
As an amateur musician myself, I cannot foresee the small-time
band I play with getting the necessary interest that would be required for the sustainable
pursuit of privately released music.
Granted, I see no reason why a band could not continue to release music using
established methods, but if things continue as they are in parallel to private
music, we could barely call that a revolution.
Instead, this seems to be a model of exclusivity that also excludes
fellow artists—namely, those artists who have yet to achieve the notability or
influence required to obtain backing for a private release—perhaps those more skilled
in music than publicity—and, as such, this model has the potential to work
against the preservation of the art form on a whole by offering the illusion of
progress.
Now, as I already said, I do not oppose the method of release
for Once Upon A Time In Shaolin. Questions about whether art should be
concealed from the world aside, I do not believe that a single instance of this
particular form of exclusivity will be detrimental to either the industry or
the art. The fact that it has, at least
from my immediate perspective, achieved its goal of prompting dialogue about
and consideration of current trends in art instead lends me to support the endeavor,
and I certainly wish you the best of luck in more direct success with the
project.
Yet, if we truly want to change the music industry, I fear
that we have more to address than the nature of music distribution. The same widespread artificial scarcity
throughout other industries—the same thing that leaves so many working so much
for so little pay to mass produce lowest common denominator goods while
funneling money to those who already have the most—also feeds into a culture
where the young artist, who devotes himself or herself to contributing to what
beauty is left in the world, is more often than not seen as less valuable than
those who make a living working against the well-being of others. Instead, if we were to work to undo this
artificial scarcity, allowing prices or wages to adjust to where they should
naturally be, we would also free up both disposable income and free time to—hopefully—invest
in the arts. At the very least, it would
be a much needed step in the right direction when the most we tend to see otherwise
is slowing the steps in the wrong direction.
Thank you for lending me an opportunity to add my voice to
the discussion.
—Carter Edge
No comments:
Post a Comment