Good Old Neon

I respect those who have offered valid criticism regarding my opinion, and if I have offended you in any way, I apologize (I

"Well, as I watch Elvis Costello hawk Lexuses (Lexi?) on TV, I wave goodbye to one of the last holdouts from the pre-80's era. Its now assumed that if you were a rock star with any integrity from this era, you now have no problem using your song about "social revolution" to sell jeans, trucks and Carnival cruises. The Who, Dylan, The Clash, Iggy Pop, Mellancamp, Sting...the list is long and depressing. The only holdouts remain Neil Young and Bruuuce, who turned down $12 million to use Born in the USA for Chevy.

And then there's the wave of new bands that are ready and willing to have their art help in the sale of widgets. The Shins shill for McDonald's, Modest Mouse for minivans, White Stripes for Coke, Iron & Wine for M&M's, Postal Service for UPS, The Go! Team for Honda, Of Montreal for Outback Fucking Steakhouse, and Moby for....well, everything.

What's odd is that the great bands of the mid-80's to mid-90's avoided such tactics like the plague, and they continue to today. In the 80's, bands like Fugazi, Sonic Youth, the Pixies and R.E.M. set a clear precedent that such behavior was taboo and cheapened the value of your music. R.E.M. continued this into the 90's, turning down millions to use 'Its the End of the World as We Know It' for Windows 95, saying "our music is not for sale". - Blue Grass Roots

Songs carry emotional information and some transport us back to a poignant time, place or event in our lives. It's no wonder a corporation would want to hitch a ride on the spell these songs cast and encourage you to buy soft drinks, underwear or automobiles while you're in the trance. Artists who take money for ads poison and pervert their songs. It reduces them to the level of a jingle, a word that describes the sound of change in your pocket, which is what your songs become. Remember, when you sell your songs for commercials, you are selling your audience as well. - Tom Waits

A DAY OR SO?!?1 You're the same person who, why, two pages ago, said TIME WAS MONEY!!! If you don't hurry up with that I'm gonna own a VW and be fucking confused, man!

Really - I did - care to quote me on that???

Oh, Jesus Ass-Fucking Christ on a Skateboard, is this bullshit still carrying on? I can't leave you kids for two minutes, swear to cod.

 

jnickerson (et al), you need to get down off your fucking high horse. This "I am the arbiter of all that is right and true in the world of Art" just makes you look like the biggest knob on the planet. The world hasn't changed because a Wilco song is being played in a commercial. No one's being hurt by it. Their music doesn't suddenly suck because of it. And, contrary to what you obviously think, their ability to carry on as artists has not been compromised.

 

At the end of the day, artists gotta eat. Right? You do realize that, don't you? Sure you do, because you're a "gifted artist" (your words) who hasn't sold his soul to the commercial mainstream. Well, goody goody two-shoes for you. I'm sure your lofty principles help you sleep better at night. But don't imagine for a minute that they entitle you to sit in judgment over others, especially a group of guys who sweat to put out great music and play great shows for the likes of you.

 

I just get so disgusted when people like you decide to take up the mantle of True Art. Who elected you? Who appointed you? More importantly, why the fuck should we care what you think? Art is what it is. Sometimes it's private, sometimes it's public, sometimes it's transcendent, sometimes it's utilitarian, sometimes it's commercial. Why do you get to draw the lines that decide what it is and what it isn't? ...how it can be used, and how it can't? ...who should profit from it, and how much?

 

The act of selling a painting is an act of commerce. If you sell it to a museum or corporation for a large sum of money, isn't that "selling out," by your definition? If not, why is it different from selling a 30-second snippet to Volkswagen?

 

I seriously think you need to take a look around and reconsider your worldview, if this kind of thing gets you this upset. Take a step back. Ask yourself if it really bothers you, or if you just let it bother you because it seems somehow cooler or more artistically principled to do so.

 

That's all I got. I didn't even bother to read the last couple of pages of this shite, so hopefully I haven't rehashed any previous posts.

Give me a day or so, and I

I choose to acknowledge that I don't know what Tweedy's thought process was and choose to assume that, as always, he put out the exact record that reflected his true artistic ambitions. To me, it appears more likely that the band pulled the song from SBS because it didn't fit the album, or perhaps because they wanted to save it as a freebie thank-you for those of us who supported the band--which is pretty much the opposite of selling out. Point is, it seems a stretch to automatically assume that a devious masterplan was in the works from the get-go. There are a multitude of alternative explanations.

The songs were already finished. Licensing them neither serves nor damages the songs.

How, exactly, were the songs compromised during their creation? There might be a slight shift in marketing tactics, but that's all.

Quick question

Hey jnick,I guess not knowing that this thread would blow up is not your fault,but threads like this do,and that I hope you can understand that.It's just kind of trollish to start such a thread before even posting or looking at what might upset this community.Not saying you are not a part of it,put not knowing you at all makes really easy to give you hell.You are to have your own opinions,thats great,and I hope you can look past a few adds.There are many things around Wilco that I dislike and I have to deal with them,Why?,cause I love the music like you have.

I certainly agree that, at times, I allow my love for music and art to cloud my judgment. I came of age at a time and within a scene where it was us against them

But for me, if history serves, they won't. In fact, I can't think of a single song or artist whose context changed merely because I once heard a snippet in an ad. The ad eventually faded away and was forgotten, while the song lives on in the state that I prefer to hear it--as art.

I realize that you are trying to ascribe larger significance to Wilco's decision--trying to place it into a wider cultural context--and I'm sympathetic to that effort. I completely agree that those kinds of conversations need to take place, and I largely share your contempt for the overcommercialization of our culture. In this case, though, your generalizations seem rooted in kneejerk fears that I do not share. As I said earlier, I'm unconvinced that every time a band licenses a song that it automatically constitutes "selling out"; in fact, I pretty much feel that's usually an artificial distinction that overlooks the long history of art commingling with commerce ever since, I dunno, the invention of art.

 

But I do believe there is such a thing as selling out. Where do we draw the line? For me, I have no problem with bands treating their music as both art and product; I believe those functions can peacefully co-exist. As long as the music was made with the purest of intentions--a true reflection of the band's artistic ambitions--then what happens next is largely irrelevant to me. For me, "selling out" happens only when a band ignores their true artistic impulses in order to produce something they don't actually believe in for the sole purpose of making money. That's where I draw the line; you obviously choose to draw it somewhere else.

Do you not find it somewhat odd that a song slated to find a home on SBS

have read a number of these interviews and fail to see this "commercial development" you seem to refer to.

 

Also, I have listened to Sky Blue Sky roughly 100 times by now and nowhere in there did I hear anything that screamed at me "Car Ad." Also, "Is That The Thanks I Get?" was a song Jeff wrote for another singer to sing, if I remember the story right.

 

None of these songs were written specifically for a TV commercial, but you seem to think they were; that this is an album filled with car jingles. I think you're wrong.

 

Your bitching and moaning that they've "sold out" is completely outdated. So what? They have a few fucking songs in commercials. Why does that get your panties in a bunch?

 

And, most importantly, how exactly does Wilco's music being in a commercial effect your life in such a negative manner? Don't like it? Ignore it and go on your merry way.

 

And if it makes you hate the band so much you refuse to buy the albums or go to the shows...good. One less person I have to battle with for tickets.

 

AMEN TO THAT IF YOU DONT LIKE IT DONT BUY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sigh

I also don't understand the original poster's condeming of somone he doesn't know. like I said before, do you know anyone in the band as a friend? then don't lose respect for him because of your assbackwards perspective on how the decision could have happened. No one here knows how exactly the decision was made and what the line of thinking was, so I don't think it's a very valid argument to say they've sold out and I don't think you're being fair to yourself to have music ruined because you have paranoia against commercials.

It

I drive an Echo - no, literally - I drive an Echo.

fixed it

Thank you

 

Wilco makes music for themselves,were just lucky to be apart of it.Jeff would of wrote that song if he was a janitor at my daughter's preschool,got to make a living,take care of them babies.

 

If Wilco is such a sell out,why are you here?

 

Get lost!

No offense, but does mom know you

As a VW driver,I couldn't be more happier!

Your an A-Hole if you can't see past this.For one I wish I could make music as well these boys do,and if I could I would quit my day job.They have to make an fn' living,get over yourselves.

 

Six pages of crap.

 

Why are you still here?

 

Trying to sell your opinion?

 

Go home.

I couldn

Look, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone around here more sympathetic to your claims for the sanctity of art than me, but if one thing has been lost here, it's some perspective.

 

How do I know the licensing of "The Thanks I Get" and "You Are My Face" hasn't debased the art? Because when I listen to both songs today, they still mean the exact same thing to me as they did last month. Their presence in a commercial interferes with their artistic value only if you choose to let hysterical, doomsday overreactions get the best of you. These ads will soon pass, the art will endure, and the songs will continue to exist as pure expressions of Wilco's artistic ambition.

Perhaps you

When the devil came, he was not red, he was chrome and he said:

cruise control

electric power steering

tilt and telescopic steering wheel

front and rear cupholders

remote trunk release

front and rear door pockets

front seatback storage

12V front, 12V rear and 12V cargo area power outlet(s)

front console with storage

retained accessory power

so precise.....

If you had a new Motorolla phone, you could browse the internet and learn about how the music industry functioned before capitalism from the palm of your hand.

Too funny - you are, no sarcam intended or implied - cracking me up.

Hip, ironic detachment - I get it.

when? before capitalism was invented?

That's a start.

I believe you are vain.

 

And blind.

 

I hate people when they're not polite!

I guess it was polite for you to call me a liar? Hmmm

sure buddy.

It

jesus...you people are taking this way too seriously. it's just a car ad and you're making moral judgement on people who you think you know because of the music they play. just because they are in car ads doesn't negate the fact that they give out their music for free on a regular basis, have had their album bought by the same company twice, and have made music that we all agree rivals even the messianic Beatles or Dylan. that's like saying to shill for your own car you're contributing to the problem so therefore you're just as bad as the company that employs tactics to get you to buy them. get over this "holier than thou" attitude. yes, the commercial industry is an egregious attack on our consciouses, but that doesn't negate the fact of who the band is: a bunch of guys who made some of the best, freshest music in a long time. that should be all that matters in the long run to anyone, because despite our best wishes, we're not Jeff Tweedy's pal and the most we can get out of his exsistence on Earth is his music, not our shallow judgement based off a silly commercial.

and marketing is very much an artform, but that requires a bit of specific education in that regard.

You

Dead on. Wilco sold out. There is no way to justify it. Money is not an issue with Wilco, they've grossed MILLIONS over the years. And if they weren't making enough, well they could go into some other line of work, because you don't pursue a career in music expecting to make a lot of money. Plus, to shill for a car comapny, who are directly responsible for a large number of the problems we are facing in this day and age...shameless.

 

And marketing is not an art, it is a shallow and souless endeavor.

I have to agree here

Oh my god, that made me giggle a lot.

me too - that was funny - not true, but very funny ; )

Don't forget selling a double album (Being There) for the price of a single disc at their own expense AND getting dropped from their label for refusing to change thier art (Yankee Hotel Foxtrot) just to suit Reprise records' ideas of what would sell.

 

This doesn't sound like a band who would sell out.

Yet they sold themselves to an advertiser - no?

I think, to accuse a band that gives albums away before they're released, permits gigs to be recorded, webcasts for free shows on a regular basis, of selling out, is one of the most 'selfish', narrow minded things I've heard in a while....

Good point

Yes, but art only matters if it has access to an audience. Wilco is a brilliant artist that nobody gets to hear on the radio. How can it not be a good thing to give people access to even just 30 seconds of a great artist, whom they wouldn't have access to otherwise? That's 30 seconds of extra joy they're bringing into the world, what artist wouldn't want to do that?

 

"Selling out" is when a mega-star sells a mega-hit to a sponsor, which is greedy and unnecessary from the exposure perspective, and the song gets gets spoiled by being driven down people's throats. When a little, relatively unknown band like Wilco does it, it's not selling out, it's buying into a platform that will get them heard.

 

Did the Fratelli's sell out when they sold "Flathead" to i-tunes? No, they brought a great piece of music to my attention, and my life has been that teeny bit better ever since.

I might agree with you if Sky Blue Sky did not debut near the top of Billboards list

Do you REALLY think that because "Is That The Thanks I Get?" is in a car commercial, it will "drive the kids mad" and send them running to the concert for that song?

 

I highly doubt it. It's not on an album and, from glancing at set lists on this tour, they're not even playing the damn song! Also, I notice that nowhere in the commercial does it even say "Wilco," at least, not in the version I saw on the computer.

 

If they're selling that song out there specifically to drive people to the shows, this strategy ain't gonna work.

 

Frankly, you come across as a cynic of the worst kind. As Greg pointed out in his post, bands like The Clash, Dylan, and the Stooges have all (in your words) sold out as have Zeppelin and other bands. I sincerely hope your record collection has none of those artists or any others who have songs in commercials.

 

I wouldn't want you coming across as a hypocrite.

I DO really think that