I used to frequently get into debates with a good friend of mine, on whether or not musicians could remain true to their art and be a commercial entity at the same time. Of particular concern was that when an artist become interested in making money, that the unconscious desire to make profit changes the art itself, thus rendering it 'un-pure' or at the very least not 'authentic'.
At the time of these debates, we were both coming at it from the perspective of musicians trying to stay true to our roots and find "our" sound as individuals and as a band. Now that I'm trying to actively make a living with original music, this debate has taken a more personal turn.
I was writing a song the other day and while trying to come up with a chorus there was a little voice in the back of my head telling me that it wasn't "commercial enough", it wouldn't help sell records, etc. It was at this point that I realized that in the writing of this song, or the chorus at least, I had stopped being true to myself and was changing my art to reflect my desire to be commercially viable. Needless to say, I have since tossed that chorus out the window and today will be attempting to bring it back to something more honest in terms of what I think it should sound like, not what I think some record exec might want it to sound like.
This whole episode has made me revisit some of my thinking on art and authenticity. What do you guys think? Can an artist be authentic and be commercial at the same time?
Comments