It would seem recording artists at some point during their careers will stand before a crossroad and they will be confronted with a choice: Sacrifice artistry for commercialism or Sacrifice commercialism for artistry. Of course, both choices each have their own respective pros and cons.
Artistry Over Commercialism
If an artist chooses artistry then even if the artist doesn't make an exuberant amount of money, or has wide mass appeal, they are staying true to their art and self by placing their art over commercial gain. They are not going to water down their sound or censor their artistic vision. In the end, as long as they're able to make a comfortable living even if their art or appeal is considered niche, at least they'll still be able to make a living off of their passion. However, there are some recording artists who are able to still have mass commercial success without sacrificing their artistry.
Commercialism Over Artistry
If an artist chooses commercialism then they could find themself getting lost in the sauce of the big corporate PR machine. They'll more than likely make more money and be presented with business opportunities that they may otherwise not have gotten. However, would the art or music they're putting out truly be an authentic representation of their artistry? Furthermore, their creative freedom could also potentially be greatly reduced.
If you were a recording artist, which choice would you choose?
Comments
Post a Comment