The purpose of Chapter 10 in Marketing the Arts (Addis & Holbrook) is to discover the answer to the author’s question: whether or not you can fulfill both artistic excellence, and common popularity (including financial success). To do so, we explore the movie industry, which provides ample studies of both audiences and consumers through awards, financial success, and articles/reviews. In addition to the expert and average consumer, other artistic peers play an important role of “evaluating a film’s excellence” (143). I think many people use the financial earnings and box office standings as the main indicator for a movie’s success. For example, those who take pride in their artistic vision and want to remain “authentic” in their career might have a harder time earning insane revenue but might have also have a better chance at receiving an academy award, which is turn can help inflate box office receipts. Despite the ample amount of academic and statistical jargon (including a 9-line citation to prove a sentence-long point), we are able to envision how to translate these results in film studies, over to the musical industry. In many ways, musicians can find themselves forgetting to follow their authentic selves in the search for commercial and financial success. On the other hand, in sticking to one’s vision without adaptations to the popular audience, they can find themselves fighting to get a following. I believe it takes an incredibly thought-out balance between staying authentic in your artistry and adapting your vision for financial success.
Chapter 12 focuses heavily on the authenticity of bluegrass music in the Appalachia region (and feeling, apparently). Hirschman makes an interesting comparison between hip-hop community and bluegrass community “pickin’, grinnin’, and cloggin’” (188). There is a sense of authenticity in both types of music. Hip-hop music aims to “scare, shock, (and) disturb the surrounding white culture,” talking about jail time and other taboo subjects. Meanwhile, the “Hillbilly” bluegrass artists have a sense of equality with their local audience. The musicians are often locals using handmade instruments talking about “alcoholism, unemployment, and emotional loss…” (179). The book details a trip to Carter Fold in Hiltons, VA, which is supposed to be the “Holy Grail of country music/old time music/bluegrass music…” (183). They talk about an area so difficult to find, that even upon calling the place, they still receive incorrect directions (whether on purpose or accident is to be interpreted). However, upon their arrival, they find a gold mind of authentic music and unusual country characters. There were never any crowds over 200+ people, and the even was a casual affair, with people of all ages covering a wooden dance floor. It’s a local affair, nearly inaccessible to tourists for a reason. The locals most likely would rather be comfortable with their peers and equals, rather than being gazed at with wonder by outsiders who don’t understand them. Overall, while I did think chapter came with some nice stereotypes wrapped in a pretty bow, I can definitely understand the point the author is making about the authenticity of the two music types.
Questions to think about:
What is the best example that you can come up with a movie that was a "sell-out:" only aiming for financial gain, perhaps star-studded?
Can truly authentic Bluegrass music come from outside of the Appalachia area?
Do you believe it's possible to be truly proud of your work if you are only striving for financial/commercial success?
Comments