Raise Your Choice

OK, I apologize in advance for reviewing this insipid flick, Raise Your Voice, that shouldn't have to be seen by anyone without a tween (ages 9-12). One reason I do is that, by and large, despite its obvious mass appeal, predictable nature, it's part of a positive trend in empowerment films for girls.

I saw another one, Saved, with Mandy Moore, that offered some good messages about religious tolerance, without being preachy. And yes, back to the Britney thing I just questioned her "art", but as I recall, her film basically showed her asserting her own vision even when it was at odds with the parents'.

If you haven't figured it out by the title, in this vehicle for the utterly cross-branded Hillary Duff, we see the beautiful, talented young protagonist overcoming fear and big Daddy to, literally, raise her voice. I can certainly relate to this because my voice has been a focus and passion of mine for the past 3 1/2 years. And if you think Hillary has obstacles... So, Mike, here we go... my voice.

When I was my daughter's age, unlike her, I was quite the little performer. I loved the attention, I was good at it. I got all the lead roles in the school plays, sang at the big parties for the relatives. As a tween, I staged the first of many rebellions. Like Cleopatra's companion of the earlier post, I was not about to let anyone's unfinished dreams be mine, so I quit.

Big mistake, by the time you get to your teen years, or maybe because of them, you can lose your nerve. I remember when I was successfully attempting to bring some drama teachers into my kids' elementary school, they felt that a fourth grade play was "too late" because, by that time, the kids were too socially aware of each other to make the most out of the experience of acting together. There would be too much attention to the size of the role, more shyness, etc.

I guess going out there and singing in public, especially rock, takes more confidence than I had to offer when I was younger and it was only when I chanced into it again, much later, that I was able to pursue it. The irony is that while the internet and life experience made it easier, the life, the years themselves, put it out of reach in terms of making a viable living at it... though who knows... hope springs eternal. I've had the opportunity to perform with several great bands, including my own, and feel grateful for the experiences. I don't really understand why it should be so difficult, but I think it will continue to get easier to put together local bands & find places to play and cultivate an audience. It's easier to promote your band and produce your music without the horrid middleman. I've heard some great stuff on Magnatune recently.

Anyway, not to be deterred, I felt that there was, and should be, some avenue for a middle aged woman to sing in public, particularly if she was really willing to work at it. Well, after the first blush, it became pretty daunting, especially when the band I had supported turned its back on me in a dishonest, not to mention disheartening, way. Somehow, despite the odds, I am slowly but surely learning a craft and perfecting my art... and, they are not the same thing. There is a voice... the vocals... and then there's the artistic voice, the message. With singing, it all comes together within your own body and soul. Being able to express yourself in a song, particularly your own song, with friends, musicians... it's the most beautiful feeling and it's so sad that, while most people would love to do it, and would benefit so much from doing it, it is viewed as fairly unreachable, at least for women. Out of the hundreds of musicians I've played with, not one has been female.

You should see the veiled jealousy I encounter from others, particularly women, particularly those lost in their own unmet, unknown needs. It's not just me, I have a very mild-mannered neighbor who happens to like belly dance, she gets the comments too. I know a housewife who sang with the same group I did, and she was scared off by a jealous, "well-meaning friend". I tried to support both these women, but the latter is probably shut down for good (well, not her good), telling herself over and over how much she enjoys cooking, probably the closest she comes to creative expression of her voice.

Cooking... socially approved. Singing rock music in tight jeans with a bunch of men... not approved. She was married to one of the band members and so was not as easy to dislodge. Someone, whose MO I've observed numerous times, made her feel that heavy weight of the claw and cackle club. And she buckled like a house of cards, even though I perceived her as being quite beloved by the women. And, I do believe she genuinely loves cooking, I've heard her wax rapturously about it... but what about her own unique identity and point of view?

The same person who I believe spooked this woman has made a number of comments both to me and in front of me, to the effect of, fit in, assume the role, or you will suffer. It's not just overprotective parents who kill the dreams and creative opportunities of others, it's meek women and men who learned to get their way through subtle coercion and manipulation, advising us always to stay in the lines...or else social nightmares will follow. I got a dose of this from my own in-house social approbation society... until it, thank god, left... finally unable to deal with a free, perceptive and, worst of all, honest human being.

There will always be those who try to lower others. I always find it so inspiring to see others think for themselves, or create something, or make some connection. Why do so many people seem threatened by this? Because they choose to stay in fear, and they resent those who went out and found happiness?

So, hopefully films like these will inspire young girls to raise their voices and follow their dreams, at a time in their lives when they are at risk of losing the ability to do so. Now if only the real world would fire Larry Summers (1/20/05 post) and send some real-life messages... we'll be in business. Unfortunately, it now looks like only the faculty there, is registering any real internal objection. For now, let's stay in our little teen dream scene and hope for something better for our daughters... all of us.

It's not just teenage girls who get shut down, at least they're allowed to stay in touch with their feelings. We all get boxed in, especially if you have kids. However, I like to see creative opportunities available for adults because fulfilled people are less likely to squelch others.

Freedom of Expression

I read this book online, you can just download it off Kembrew's website, it's under a CC license. It's almost as easy as reading a regular book, except you have to scroll each page if you want it big enough to read on your laptop.

Like Bollier, who founded Public Knowledge, and whose book, Brand Name Bullies, I recently posted about (link at right), and almost all the writers on this subject, McLeod spends lots of time discussing lawsuits. It's gonna be a long time before we can get out from under the legacy of having so many copyrights in the hands of so few. It's to the point now where I feel the only solution is to shorten the length of copyright to some 20 years and put some retroactive features in there to expedite the process, otherwise we're gonna be bogged down by a body of intellectual property law that's gonna make traditional property law, including the Rule Against Perpetuities (which is exactly what we're getting here), look like a walk in the park.

McLeod discusses how these problems play out in the biotech sector and hip hop community. I learned as a DJ that knowing your music and being able to piece it together to make the sum greater than the whole and put a creative message out there is an art form unto itself. As a radio DJ you're essentially being paid to do that, if you take the challenge even higher and become even more creative, and do it as mashup, then you get prosecuted for it. Kembrew goes through the whole culture of it, how long of a sample you can take ( under 4 sec.), how much money you can make ($15K) before the labels will come after you and put you out. What haunts the hip hop community plagues all artists who build on previous works, from collage to documentaries.

Some of these numbers, man, Kanye was paying some $150K for samples he used in College Dropout. We have a huge economy here which has absolutely no fucking benefit to society whatsoever, only detriment. This is not a bunch of disparate events, this is a organized abuse of the legal system. This is every bit as big an issue as campaign reform and the change needs to happen at the legislative level. The current climate is going to make that extremely difficult and if SC buckles this spring, we're going to start going backwards, not only in terms of our culture, which is already happening, but tech. If we slow down the tech engine, we're really in trouble, because China is out there & they don't give a fuck about our copyrights.

Kembrew points out the irony that the labels hastened their own demise by trying to convert the public from vinyl to CD, in order to make money. People were naturally reluctant to buy their whole music library over again, but, they had to. The labels stopped accepting returns for records. What had been a typical practice of sampling music by buying a record and then returning it, came to a close, so people had to move to digital. The way Kembrew put it was like hey, go out there without a condom, don't come crying to me. Those boys, through their greed, and stupidity, opened the Pandora's box themselves.

The book also explores this idea of the gift economy, the free sample, and gives many examples showing what art and music is supposed to be about. How it's about expression and sharing your message in a creative, warm, communal way. To me, the apotheosis of this concept is the Grateful Dead community. I wouldn't even know where to begin, trying to express what that has meant to me in my life. I never labeled myself a Deadhead, I never made following them a way of life, but I knew many who did. It was a true community of the most loving, amazing people you could ever meet.

When I would be at a Dead show... the feeling was completely different from any other environment. I knew I could ask anyone around me for any type of help and they would give it, they would welcome me warmly, not knowing me... and not in the way of being at some Billy Graham crusade or something. I would often wear, purposely, very un-Dead looking garb, it didn't matter, there was absolutely no sense of evangelism, just sharing. We always hated the labels, even then, but, we had to live with them for some things, get some disks pressed. But, that was a small function, it wasn't about the records, we had all the tapes we ever needed. It was about the community and this book expresses some of what it means to be an artist and what it means to be a fan and love your artist, feel connected to them and their message. The give and take, and trust, of that experience. When that relationship exists, you don't have this sense from these pampered millionaire/"artists" that they feel exploited, you don't have fans feeling like thieves.

By inserting this useless, parasitic layer, between our artists and their fans, we are depriving ourselves of a wonderful experience that nurtured me personally and artistically for a lifetime. Most bands do not show the kind of example of generosity of spirit the Dead did, they gave free concerts, allowed unlimited taping at concerts, just out of love for their fans. Jerry deeply loved his fans, they all did, and they showed that in every way. When I showed up at their suite with a friend, they welcomed me warmly, invited me to party, even sleep over.

Of course, they were probably the biggest earner of all time. They were #1 on Fortune's biggest earners in entertainment (including movies etc.) year after year. This is no coincidence. They earned more money off their hippie fans than Britney will ever be able to skim off Daddy's wallets. The Dead never felt any less than Grateful. They felt blessed by the adoration of their fans and their deep appreciation of the music. I danced in front of Jerry many times and felt a sense of connection and mutual appreciation. There was no phoniness, there are no bad Jerry stories out there... no little boys on Jesus juice.

What the Dead did, many bands have done, very successfully, and the internet will make it possible for many bands to grow the same way. Grow your business the Mom & Pop way, through pleasing your customers, not this pseudo VC model.

Anyway, I think it's important to show the positive example here, not just list one horrid abuse of the legal system after another. We could have so much more. I think about all these Britney dominions. What kind of community is that? What's her message? When we have groups like U2 who posture themselves as socially aware yet who let their labels intimidate artists without even making a stink about it. I mean, supposedly, the Edge made some lame comment about trying to talk to their label...what the fuck is that? "Yeah, I know you're right, I'm an artist too, but the label is what's in control here"... when you're a band with the fan-given stature of a U2??? Come on.

Speaking of Negativland, (link at right), the book also highlights some of the artists who are trying to bring these issues to light in creative, provocative, aesthetic ways. I found this very inspiring and I'm sure to be blogging further on the subject, starting with the following:

The kicker of the book is that McLeod was actually able to trademark the phrase "Freedom of Expression", at least for certain uses. It's cute how he actually uses the mark throughout the book. However, if you need to use the phrase... I doubt Kembrew will prosecute. He did sue his best friend, who posed as an infringer. He hired a lawyer, who drafted a cease & desist & the story was covered by a local paper, who later refused him permission to use the story as part of the artistic statement he made. His activity was listed as a piece of illegal art on the site of the same name (see link at right).

Cleopatra

Talk about your road flicks... this one was sort of like The Motorcycle Diaries, which I just reviewed, but, instead of two Argentinean doctors on a bike in '52, this was two Argentinean women in a car, who were as different from each other as, yes, I gotta say it, Wife Swap.

One was a young, beautiful actress, on the verge of stardom who felt stifled by her Tommy Mottola-like manager/hubby. The other was this vapid old woman who seemed to have absolutely nothing in her life except some decrepit husband and her kids, who she lived for, but, who were living their own lives. She had a pretty lively imagination, but, that was it.

So, off they go, the girl to get out from under Svengali and the lady I guess for her last shot at something more exciting than watching hubby lay in bed. This was the lady's big break, to see this star as just a regular girl, and get to be brought along for an adventure. At the same time, the girl got nurtured, more for herself, like a mother-daughter thing.... very symbiotic.

You know, not many people have the balls to go out and adventure. Most won't even ride shotgun. But, those who do... they do have a little wild side... you've got to give 'em that.

RS Top 50 Moneymakers

IPac beat me to the punch about the RS list with a nice post about the label's "Woe is me" campaign. It seems like often the response from, I don't know what we're calling ourselves these days...communists, commonists, reasonable human beings who like music, whatever... is this sort of denial mode, oh, you're not really losing money. Maybe that's for legal reasons...damages? What damages? If we ever get to that one, I should go back to practicing law for sure, cause it'll take plenty of lawyers to make sense of those books.

My response is a bit different. I don't give a flying fuck if they're losing money. I think they are. I hope they are. They don't deserve to have much money unless they deliver something the public wants or needs. I'm sick of subsidizing people who watered down our culture with, yes, as IPac reminded me....boy bands. Anyway, (watch this smooth segue) at least we don't see any on RS's top 50 earners of '04.

They say they've done lots of in-depth interviews to get all these numbers. So, even though their sources can't identify a good song to save their lives, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt cause, it's exactly what I would expect. I can't remember how much depth I've gone into before about how to make money playing music, probably 100 times, but it usually goes something like this..."play for your fans, they will come, they will pay, they will buy T-shirts, they will love you, they will support you, they will show you the money"

Evanescence was the only band in the top 50 to earn more from recording than touring. Now, I'll grant you that most top earners are established acts that did build up audience largely through the label system. Now they're more powerful than RIAA & Clear Channel (again, recently subpoenaed by Spitzer!) combined because they are the name that brings people in the door, spending $100. - $500/person for the evening, there's parking, ticket fees, food, souvenirs... it's all overpriced and it adds up. I'm much happier to pay roadies, back-up singers, ticket-takers etc. than some slick sell-out label shill, whose new job is seeding music blogs with praise from supposedly legit fans.

Top artists are commanding $1. per album and pennies per recorded song sold. Prince gets $2. Most get far, far less. In fact, some 98% never see a cent past their advance and end up owing the label money for lots of high priced, useless service that bands can and should be performing for themselves or contracting out at reasonable prices. Even Madonna couldn't make back her advance from the last album. Recorded music should continue to be marketed as it always has been, to some extent, promotion for bands who you will then pay to see live.

When it comes to dollars, the American public is smarter than it looks. Aside from Green having its Day at the Grammy's, green is having it's way with our RIAAdicoulous friends. While CD sales continue to shrink, more and more folks download their music, most freely, but are increasingly looking for ways to pay something reasonable to the artist. See all the links to the right; Magnatune, Dmusic etc., which let listeners pay artists fairly directly for the download.

But, as film buffs are going increasingly from theaters to the better experience of DVD flexibility and bonus features, the big money and trend in music is in performance, and for similar reasons, people are looking for a better and different entertainment experience. Madonna (#2) took the philosophy, put on a great show, charge for it, it worked. $300. is more than B'way, but, she put on a great show & she's Madonna. She lost money on her recorded music and deserved to after her little fuck-you's to her P2P fans. I don't care how much she dances or what she did for female artists, you don't give your fans the finger, like fucking Metallica, who came in right behind her. The reason, as RS points out, is that Metallica renegotiated its contract with Elecktra in the mid-90's and now commands a highly unusual $3./CD.

We're willing to buy music on DVD's, sales of which now outpace box office receipts by some 40%, and music DVD sales doubled last year. The new DualDisc's are popping up all over (CD on one side, DVD on the other). This is the first sensible response from the recording industry, trying to provide some sort of value to its customers, instead of marketing through intimidation. They're one of the few bright spots the labels have now so expect to see more concert footage, hopefully with good commentary. With most now coming in Surround Sound, those with nice home theaters can hear five speakers, making it sound just like the concert. Or, as they put it, now it sounds like the guy shouting Freebird is behind you, not on stage.

In Silicon Valley, where money is made largely through innovation, we sometimes forget how the big economic engines move. It's based on the repetitive, day to day activities of life. What's the biggest company today? Exxon. We have to drive every day. The other big engines have to do with soap, food, clothes, entertainment, drugs. What big business looks for is to get the consumer on their IV drip. We have to eat, wash, drive every day. That's why they love food, soap & gas. Now cars they could make to last forever, drugs, they could be looking for cures, but, they're not, they want you on a drug you have to take every day.

This is the explanation for the Napster-to-Go model they keep trying. From Pressplay, Rhapsody on the industry wants us on this ever-dependant model of pay every month, get used to it, if you want music. Blockbuster has me where they want me, a direct monthly feed through my Visa. Now that they can't sell CDs, they want us to forget this concept of owning music. I thought this debate between Barry Ritholtz and Cody Willard was very interesting. At a certain point, Cody, was left with only one argument that he had to keep reiterating, the music isn't yours, it's stealing, it's wrong. It kind of reminded me of trying to argue with my kids when they were toddlers, "honey, just because you're holding the toy doesn't mean it's yours". It's like the first bank robber on the scene complaining that the next one is taking some of their loot.

Remember how Marx talked about the lynchpin of Capitalism being ownership of the means of production? In the record biz, that's the distribution networks which they built up through the mob, and the recording studios. Well, the internet and ProTools changed all that. Turns out their product was capable of being digitized. Their basic position is, we have it, it's ours, if you want it, you deal with us.

I saw this same attitude when I was involved in fundraising for Palo Alto schools. The Board of Education, responding to whining about unfairness, told the district's schools they could not use PTA funds for staff. A central fundraising organization was formed, I helped, or tried to, it wasn't easy. There were some on there who took the position that since we now held the monopoly on staff, all we had to do was simply ask for money. It was actually put out there like, "If they want staff, they pay us".

In their arrogance, they sometimes forget that even with monopolies, there are always other options. Some people will go to private schools, or give their kids private lessons, or just buy lots of playground equipment... or download music or buy DVD's or go to concerts, or use open source etc. etc. Organizations, public or private, with that attitude forget what Steve Forbes reminds us is the first rule of business; the customer comes first, and, monopoly or no, they'll pay a price for that.

The recording industry came into being as a result of a technological breakthrough (funny, they always forget that part) and will leave the same way... most industries do. I saw some of Network again yesterday, it's astounding how accurately it predicts reality television and discusses larger issues having to do with the media and societal trends. The climax of the film is when the President of the big conglomerate seats the seemingly discerning dupe at the end of the runway/Board table and exhumes Oz-like pronouncements about how the world doesn't care about nations, the lingua franca is green, that is the ebb and flow (or, as I would put it yin/yang) and Beal has "meddled with the inexorable forces of nature".

Well, technology is the Tsunami. You can try to hold it back, but, not for long, the only constant is change, Einstein proved that. The money may measure the change, but it is not the engine. The engine is the inexorable nature of humans, created in God's image, to strive and change and make things better.

OK, I'm rambling, and I usually try to keep these pretty tight, so, let me tie it all up here. When it comes to earning money in music, it's all about the playing. And, if you want to make money off music in an ancillary way, do it by legitimately helping people find music they will like, or by perfecting a medium by which to enjoy it, not by stripping and ripping artists and then trying to profit off the multiples as you search for commodities and rely on government granted help to do it.

If music be the food of love, play on.
Twelfth Night 1:1

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Diaries

A motorcycle, thousands of miles of open road through amazing landscape, adventure... not to mention Che Guevara... gee, nothing for me to like or relate to there....

OK, let's take them one by one... bikes, love 'em, recently buzzed through the foothills on the back of my friend Stan's bike... too fun. As to the road trip, I've taken many. Most were longer than the five thousand miles covered by the young (28 yr. old) Ernesto Guevara and his friend Alberto Granada, who is still alive today. And yes, as Ernesto points out, they are open ended, improvisational adventures. You never know what's around the next bend, that's what makes them such great learning experiences.

The point of the film is to show how this experience shaped Che Guevara into one of the most influential, important revolutionaries of our age. I love and admire all revolutionaries, from Jesus to Shawn Fanning. But Che is up there at the top because of his awareness, his ability to communicate the message, his effectiveness and influence, but most of all, his heart.

Like Gandhi, Mother Theresa & Michael Moore, his compassion shined through above the anger and made him that much more inspirational. It's a fine line for revolutionaries, because that anger has to show too. I also love those that can use humor and theatrics like Ken Kesey, Jerry Rubin & Abbie Hoffman, or music, like Jerry Garcia. It's easy for revolutionaries to become negative and talk all about problems and fighting. The problem is that most people are small and selfish and think about their own lives, not global change and abstract issues.

Revolution for the masses must be phrased in positive, concrete ways. Otherwise you end up like the shmuck I referred to in my last post, who couldn't make the connection between societal trends and their own little world. I mean, if a professional writer can't handle it, what hope is there for Mr. & Mrs. Bridge listening to Barry Manilow in Oshkosh? They might care if you took away their VCR or told them our freedom and flag are jeopardized, or maybe they'll only care if you try to take their gun, that, they enjoy.

The title of this post is taken from the classic 1974 book, by Robert Pirsig, which accompanied all my road trips, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. It shows, well, the zen of motorcycle maintenance (and Ernesto and Alberto could have used some knowledge of that out there) and being on the road and living your life. Zen, the road, life... it's all the same. I mean, artists, including myself, have always used lots of road imagery to express the long and winding nature of life. I could come up with 10 Dead songs right now, from Truckin to the Golden Road, and another 10 Beatles songs.

Seems like lots of the movie road trips these days are outlaws on the run, like Thelma & Louise, or freaky, like Wild Thing. This film showed the road trip for what it really is for most who take them, a journey into the unknown. You trust yourself, your vehicle, and maybe a companion if you have one. Everything else changes from day to day, new landscape, new people, new perspectives and ideas. The constant is you, so you really get to know yourself, and your capabilities and perspective, well. That's the big beauty and benefit, it's difficult to show that on film.

This film did a great job of that though. By showing the trip of someone we are familiar with at a later point in his life, we can look at this trip and keep in mind the man that Ernesto becomes... he becomes Che on the road. And though we never really see Che in the film, we see Ernesto growing from man to legend. We see his heart and mind expand with each new vista and town full of people.

Those people Che fought for were people he met, and ate with and touched. I've not only seen the physical landscape of this country, I've spoken to people all over it, Europe too. I can easily understand how that type of experience could bring out the revolutionary impulse of a person, particularly when the people one encounters are in need. We see Che's awareness rise as he encounters the migrants and the way they are treated. It's still the same today, check out A Day Without A Mexican (2/11/05 post).

Being among people, having to, essentially, live off them, as is shown here, is true travel. Not this vacation/leisure stuff, though I've done that up too, bigtime. Real travel is like what I did in Europe in '81. Just a small pack and a few thousand dollars I'd worked long and hard in a deli to earn. I wish I'd known I wouldn't need it. I stayed in one hotel, the first night, in London. Some old matron barged in my room at the crack of dawn "to clean". For the next three months I spent about $20. on lodging (total), most of that on a hotel roof in Athens with every other kid from around the globe.

Now, I had none of the cache these young doctors did. I was continually blamed for Reagan, who scared the living shit out of these people, whose parents had been bombed out twice before "by US", and for Chapman, who had just killed John. But, my point is, it's only when you depend on the kindness of strangers that you really learn about them. I was just friendly and people invited me to stay, usually for days. Living with them, I really got to know them. It was a great experience. Yes, there are crackpots out there, you need to have great awareness while on the road. But people should not be afraid to go out there and encounter life. Life entails risk. Without risk and openness, there is no learning, no revolution.

BTW, the diaries are real. Che's daughter found the motorcycle diaries and didn't know they belonged to her father until she read them and discovered his wonderful adventure...I recommend the film, and diaries, and adventures.

An Abstract Problem

This review (link) illustrates, to me, the problem when it comes to artistic expression and free speech in a supposedly democratic society. Amit Asaravala reviews Brand Name Bullies, by David Bollier, a book illustrating example after example of large corporations intimidating private citizens exercising free speech into submission or bankruptcy and ends up saying, basically, that he still doesn't understand what the fucking problem is here. Now, this guy WRITES for a living, for Wired News, a high tech, progressive publication.

Does anyone see a problem here?

We've got boys and girls dying every day in Iraq, fighting for our freedom. What freedom? Freedom of expression was the first and most important freedom this country was based on. Why is is so hard to get through to the public at large that these copyright bullies are chipping away at what we can say and do...what the law calls "a chilling effect"?

This affects all of us, every day. We all have voices. We all have a right to hear the voices of others. We all want to be able to build a business, express ourselves or create a piece of art in peace, or at least be able to enjoy that produced by others We have a right to share ideas, art, music, build on it, use it to create our own expression. Can't people see how much less we will be without those things? Why are we willing to sell ourselves out this way?

A society without a strong artistic voice is a powerless, superficial society, just like the one Green Day sang about. We are crippling our artists and ourselves with these burdens and restrictions. We end up with a diligent but deadened populace and an artistic community reduced to the .1% of those brave enough to deal with an organized and armed enemy.

It's about time someone with a voice expresses this in a way the public will understand and stop hiding behind case law, and legalese. We need someone to advocate for the artistic voice and what it means to our culture. We need someone to point out that having our government infringing our Constitutional rights is unacceptable, and doing it while standing in the shadow of big business is not fooling anyone.

BTW, a much better book on this subject, that avoids the pitfalls described by Asaravala, is Freedom of Expression by Kembrew McLeod. It's available online, under a CC, and is written very clearly.