Originally posted by torontophenom: Well as an artist wouldn't you strive to accomplish both the options your giving? I would.
I think I addressed this with the last sentence in my post.
Most people would strive to be successful. But in any regard, those same people would probably rather have people respect their craft, first...and have success second.
I'm just speculating, though.
Again, the question is...which would be more important to you?
Originally posted by torontophenom: Well as an artist wouldn't you strive to accomplish both the options your giving? I would.
I think I addressed this with the last sentence in my post.
Most people would strive to be successful. But in any regard, those same people would probably rather have people respect their craft, first...and have success second.
I'm just speculating, though.
Again, the question is...which would be more important to you?
Both would be of equal importance for me.
I wouldn't want to release shiit for the sake of an existing fad. Remember that "Laffy Taffy" shiit? lol
Like, a lot of times I'd hear someone say "I don't care about the glitz and the glamour and the awards...I just wanna sing (or act)." Or whatever the case may be.
It seems like a lot of people value having some artistic credibility over commercial success. If the latter comes, fine. But it's not mandatory.
I think this is one of the problems that Mariah Carey has had her entire career...highly successful with very little critical acclaim.
Originally posted by Be: Like, a lot of times I'd hear someone say "I don't care about the glitz and the glamour and the awards...I just wanna sing (or act)." Or whatever the case may be.
It seems like a lot of people value having some artistic credibility over commercial success. If the latter comes, fine. But it's not mandatory.
I think this is one of the problems that Mariah Carey has had her entire career...highly successful with very little critical acclaim.
Mariah has had critical acclaim. I'm not sure how "little" you mean.
Well you never know what will be critically aclaimed, you can try your best to fit the mold, but then again you wouldn't really be getting respect for something that is completely art, it would be for something manifactured to what the standard of "critically aclaimed". Sometimes it can be both, sometimes not.
Posts: 5525 | Location: Denver, CO | Registered: October 29, 2007
Originally posted by Be: Like, a lot of times I'd hear someone say "I don't care about the glitz and the glamour and the awards...I just wanna sing (or act)." Or whatever the case may be.
It seems like a lot of people value having some artistic credibility over commercial success. If the latter comes, fine. But it's not mandatory.
I think this is one of the problems that Mariah Carey has had her entire career...highly successful with very little critical acclaim.
Mariah has had critical acclaim. I'm not sure how "little" you mean.
Most of the time people say that she doesn't since her sales are so high, and the assumption of her work being "trash" is thrown in. It would be better to say that her critical aclaim is not up to bar with her sales/sucess.
Posts: 5525 | Location: Denver, CO | Registered: October 29, 2007
Originally posted by torontophenom: And Be, what would you choose? I forgot to ask you earlier.
Well, I'm shallow, so I don't really care if people respect me or not.
I'd probably just want a platinum plaque.
But another example that I thought of is Amerie. For lack of a better term, she's a flop. But if you look at the reviews for her albums, they are incredibly laudable across the board.
And it has me thinking...is being successful as important as having credibility as an artist?
Why should someone like Amerie be concerned about having a platinum plaque, when she has such high critical acclaim as an artist?
Originally posted by A_Mb88: Well don't you need to have sucess first so people can notice you then say that you're critically aclaimed?
No.
You can be critically acclaimed and not be commercially successful. And vice versa.
You have to be somewhat known to get aclaim, if not you're just another indie artist that no one knows about. (And this is why we get the annoying assumption that less know artists are oh so good, and vice versa)
This message has been edited. Last edited by: A_Mb88,
Posts: 5525 | Location: Denver, CO | Registered: October 29, 2007
At the start, I would worry about commercial success. Even if that means safe, mainstream, music that critics dislike. After about 2 or 3 successful mainstream albums, I would strive for the respect and trying to cement some kind of legacy. At that point I would have label support, money, connections in the industry, so it would be a lot easier to take artistic risks.
