Last Saturday night, while out in Brooklyn, we met a PA who worked a T-Mobile video shoot with of Montreal, also mentioning that Art Brut shot a commercial for the same campaign earlier in the day. oM’s went down at Waldorf, while Art Brut filmed at Irving Plaza. Curious, and jumping into reporter mode, we heard from another source that oM’s spot would feature two lines of Kevin Barnes dialogue and the band in full Monty attire. Hello, America. We were curious about the logistics and the band’s decision-making process, especially considering some of the flak they received for their Outback campaign, so we reached out to see what was what. Kevin Barnes, master lobster handler, kindly stepped to the plate. Of course we weren’t asking the man to defend himself (we certainly prefer oM to Mellencamp during Office breaks); nevertheless, Kevin’s presupposed a “Band Of Whorses”-style backlash and titled his essay to ‘Gum readers “Selling Out Isn’t Possible”…
Selling Out Isn’t Possible
by Kevin Barnes
Are you a sell out? Yes. Don’t let it bother you though, cause apparently I am also a sell out, and so are your parents and everyone you’ve ever known. The only way to avoid selling out is to live like a savage all alone in the wilderness. The moment you attempt to live within the confines of a social order, you become a sell out. Once you attempt to coexist you sell out. If that’s true, then selling out is a good thing. It is an important thing. If we didn’t do it, we’d be fucked, quite literally, by everyone bigger than us physically who found us fuckable.The pseudo-nihilistic punk rockers of the 70′s created an impossible code in which no one can actually live by. It’s such garbage. The idea that anyone who attempts to do anything commercial is a sell out is completely out of touch with reality. The punk rock manifesto is one of anarchy and intolerance. The punk rockers polluted our minds. They offered a solution that had no future. Of course, if the world would have ended before Sandinista! was released then everything would have been alright. It didn’t. Now we have all of these half-conceived ideas and idiot philosophies floating around to confuse and alienate us. I think it is important to face reality. It is important to decide whether you are going to completely rail against the system or find a way to make it work for you. You cannot do both — and if you attempt to do both you will only become even more bitter and confused.
When I was younger, and supported my parents, I chose to float between the two. A lot of people choose to do this. There are so many confused young people running around now polluted by this alloyed version of the tenets of the punk rock manifesto. Of course they’re confused. It isn’t possible to be in chorus with capitalism and anarchy. You must pick one or the other. Very few people are willing to do it, though. The worst kind of person is the one who sucks the dick of the man during the daytime and then draws pictures of themselves slitting his throat at night. Jesus Christ, make up your mind! The thing is, there is a lack of balance. When capitalism is working on a healthy level, everyone gets their dick sucked from time to time and no one gets their throat slit. It’s impossible to be a sell out in a capitalist society. You’re only a winner or a loser. Either you’ve found a way to crack the code or you are struggling to do so. To sell out in capitalism is basically to be too accommodating, to not get what you think you deserve. In capitalism, you don’t get what you think you deserve though. You get what someone else thinks you deserve. So the trick is to make them think you are worth what you feel you deserve. You deserve a lot, but you’ll only get it when you figure out how to manipulate the system.
Why commercialize yourself? In the art industry, it’s extremely difficult to be successful without turning yourself into a cartoon. Even Hunter S. Thompson knew this. God knows Duchamp and Warhol knew it. Some artists are turned into cartoons and others do it themselves. I prefer to do it myself. at least then I can control how my cock is photographed. Why should it be considered such an onerous thing to view the production of art as a job? To me, the luckiest people are the ones who figure out a way to earn a living doing what they love and gain fulfillment from. Like all things in this life, you have to make certain sacrifices to get what you want. At least most of us do. If you’re not some trust-fund kid or lotto winner, you’ve got to slave it out everyday. People who wanna be artists have the hardest time of it ’cause we are held up to these impossible standards. We’re expected to die penniless and insane so that the people we have moved and entertained over the years can keep us to themselves. So that they can feel a personal and untarnished connection with our art. The second we try to earn a living wage or, god forbid, promote our art in the mainstream, we are placed under the knives of the sanctimonious indie fascists. Unfortunately, there isn’t some grand umbrella grant that supports indie rockers financially and enables us to exist outside of the trappings of capitalism.
The thing is, I like capitalism. I think it’s an interesting challenge. It’s a system that rewards the imaginative and ambitious adults and punishes the lazy adults. Our generation is insanely lazy. We’re just as smart as our parents but we are overwhelmed by contradicting ideas that confuse us into paralysis. Maybe the punk rock ethos made sense for the “no future” generation but it doesn’t make sense for me. I like producing and purchasing things. I’d much rather go to IKEA than to stand in some bread line. That’s because I don’t have to stand in a bread line. Most people who throw around terms like “sellout” don’t have to stand in one either. They don’t have to stand in one because they are gainfully employed. The term “sellout” only exists in the lexicon of the over-privileged. Almost every non-homeless person in America is over-privileged, at least in a global sense.
Obviously, I’ve struggled with the concept. I’ve struggled because of the backlash following my songs placement in TV commercials. That is, until I realized that the negative energy that was being directed towards me really began to inspire my creativity. It has given me a sense of, “well, I’ll show them who is a sellout, I’m going to make the freakiest, most interesting, record ever!!!” … “I’m going to prove to them that my shit is wild and unpolluted by the reach of some absurd connection to mainstream corporate America.”
I realized then that, for me, selling out is not possible. Selling out, in an artistic sense, is to change one’s creative output to fit in with the commercial world. To create phony and insincere art in the hopes of becoming commercially successful. I’ve never done this and I can’t imagine I ever will. I spent seven years not even existing at all in the mainstream world. Now I am being supported and endorsed by it. I know this won’t last forever. No one’s going to want to use one of my songs in a commercial five years from now, so I’ve got to take the money while I can. It’s the same with pro athletes. You only get it while you’re hot and no one stays commercially viable for long. It’s not like Michael Vick is going to be receiving any big endorsement deals anytime soon. As sad as it may seem, one of the few ways most indie bands can make any money whatsoever is by selling a song to a commercial. Very very few bands make enough money from album sales or tour revenue to enable themselves to quit their day job.
Next time you see a commercial with one of your favorite bands songs in it, just tell yourself, “cool, a band I really like made some money and now I can probably look forward to a few more records from them.” It’s as simple as that. We all have to do certain things, from time to time, that we might not be completely psyched about, in order to pay the bills. To me, the TV is the world’s asshole boss and if anyone can earn some extra bucks from it and they’re not Bill O’Reilly, it’s a good thing.
He raises a number of interesting and important issues and questions. What do you think? What’s selling out? Does it depend on who you’re shilling for? Band Of Horses recently backed out of that Wal-Mart campaign, so they were obviously conflicted. This is all super important life and death shit, obviously, but the real question is: Who’s in Kevin’s Fave Five?
The commercial airs sometime on Sunday, so perhaps will find out then. Clip to come…
UPDATE: Should have guessed that “sometime on Sunday” meant during the American Music Awards (the T-Mobile Text-In Award suspense is practically unbearable, no?). We’re ushered into a faux Montreal band meeting, in a Waldorf-Astoria hotel room, with a smarmy agent guy trying to orchestrate an oM reunion tour on his most excellent Sidekick. (Says Kevin: “Reunion tour? We haven’t broken up!”). Aside for a big band cheer for Düsseldorf, pretty uneventful. On the way out we get “Gronlandic Edit” for a few seconds: “I guess it would be nice / to give my heart to a” [CUT TO BLACK]. Guess T-Mobile’s got no love for god. Watch:
You Might Also Like
 The 25 69 Most Anticipated Albums Of 2010 |  Pitchfork Music Festival 2006 Photos |  Watch Band Of Horses Cover Jason Molina On Kimmel |  Coachella 2013 Weekend 2: Friday’s 5 Best Things |
 |
 |
Leave a Reply
Sign in Sign in with FacebookYou must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.
really good for him. someone needed to say that.
Kevin an incredibly talented songwriter and deserves to make a living at it, which is especially difficult now that so many folks believe recorded music should be available at no cost.
[Most importantly, i]t’s not like Michael Vick is going to be receiving any big endorsement deals anytime soon.
I agree with James on this one. Just about any way that Kevin Barnes and Co. need to go about making more records and touring more I’m all for it. What speaks more for of Montreal is that Barnes is open to speak to the community openly about so-called “selling-out” (In essay form, no less). I love this band, I love their music, and things like this make me enjoy them and music today in general that much more.
I hear you KB!
You make a similar argument to that of my pimp. He says to me, “You’ve only got a few good years left in you before your tits sag and your teeth fall out, so you might as well let ‘em fuck you in the ass!”
Who needs integrity anyway?
LET’S GO OUTBACK TONIGHT!!!
Kevin,
Don’t let the haters get you down. I love commercial jingles and I’m not alone. You should be proud of your work in this field. Outback has outdone the P.C. Richards whistle or even the Sleepy’s anthem with its classic didgeridoo groove.
This is snapshot neo-art for the 21st century. Face it, hipsters! Times have changed. This isn’t the ’90s when people cared about what the “cool kids” at the “coffee haus” thought! Get with the program.
By Mennen…
I used to criticize sell-outs too. As I finished my last year of law school, I was presented with my first opportunity to sell out, and I took it. Anyone who talks shit about selling out doesn’t have anything anyone wants to buy.
“Outback has outdone the P.C. Richards whistle”
Let’s not get crazy now.
Kevin Barnes is such an economic badass.
I just saw the outback commercial the other day and was super excited and cranked up the volume on the tv, I’m actually glad the music’s getting more into the mainstream and I really don’t know why all these people are calling them sell-outs. It’s a shame really.
I think the bottom line is not to support something you think is evil. For instance if you sold your song to Google or some similar corporation no one would bat an eye, where as Band of Horses sells one to Walmart and people wig out. Why? Because they are letting someone use your catchy art to sell a product or idea of which people have opinions. Because we’re making a judgment about them selling a song to that corporation specifically, not a corporation in general.
Some people think corporations are universally evil. These people are usually foolish and/or (usually and) hypocrites. They are also the same people who prattle on about selling out. Anyone who pays their cellphone bill has sold out to telecommunications as much as Kevin Barnes ever will.
I love Of Montreal, T-Mobile, AND The Bloomin’ Onion, so naturally I am okay with this decision. I feel that what Kevin is doing is okay beacuse, as far as I can tell, neither of those two companies have questionable buisness methods unlike some other recent Indie-rock enlisters. Luckily Band Of Horses came to their senses and pulled from Wal-Mart.
Every time some dipshit complains that the only way they can continue to make music and provide for themselves is to sell their music to some taco commercial, I think Fugazi. You don’t need to sign onto some giant conglomerate record label, you don’t need a fucking video, and you don’t need to take a check from Nike just to continue to record music. Don’t give me a fucking recitation of some dipshit capitalistic theory to justify yourself. All I hear is an admission your music is fucking weak, no one buys your shitty albums, and this is the only way you can make a buck. No one’s going to want to use your songs in a commercial in five years: exactly.
there is nothing wrong with making money off your music, and in the current industry, licensing is where the money is at. go kevin.
on the other hand, artists can still choose who they “sell out” to, and should do so carefully. the associations made by advertising are indelible.
Ok, that’s a whole bunch of reasons you don’t HAVE to sell a song to a commercial, can you give me a good reason NOT to, assuming the company isn’t inherently immoral?
“Kevin an incredibly talented songwriter…”
Kevin is just an incredibly talented person and got insanely fucked on the Outback deal. I feel bad for the guy. If this means he can keep making records for me to enjoy while protecting his creative rights, then more power to him.
atta boy… wanna open for KISS?
nothing wrong with getting paid. still… I used to love oM and the Outback spot ruined Wraith and the band in my mind if not forever then for a good long time.
My friend and I went to see oM perform in SF on tuesday. Before their set began, she and I stood, somewhat in awe, right in front of the stage, staring at the giant three-tiered light-up set, the projection screen showing real time footage from the cameras attached to the mike stands, and the roadies’ trippy and fantastic costumes.
“this must be where all the Outback money went,” she said to me.
of Montreal sold their soul to the steakhouse devil, and the result is one of the best live shows I’ve ever seen.
Plus, that commercial is really catchy.
I think there’s a distinct difference between allowing your song or part of your song to be played during a commercial and re-recording/changing the lyrics of a song to promote whatever product the commercial is selling. In the first instance, you’re briefly lending your art to commerciality; in the second, you’re letting commercial-interests impose upon and reshape your art. I think the second scenario is problematic. After all, all art exists within a larger cultural context. And it’s naive to think that a song won’t adopt new connotations depending on its public usage. Hence, “Wraith Pined to the Mist” is now “That Outback Song”
?It is kind of hard for kids to be upset
about this kind of thing, they have never had a child or had to pay bills or do anything, which
is basically what it came down to you know. Kevin wrote the song, so it is actually his money,
but, it wasn?t even that much money, but at the time he had a wife and a kid, and it takes a lot
of money to support a family. He kind of felt weirdly pressured I think. So that?s how it worked
out. But the kids who are upset about it, you know, if I was sixteen, I?d be upset too,? Poole says
and adds: ?But we don?t even play that song in America anymore. It is just ruined. We are very
sad about it. But the worst thing was that Outback Steakhouse didn?t even use the original song.
They made their own version of the song, and it ended becoming this kind of mockery of the art
that of Montreal created.?
Mostly agree with Barnes on the selling out, but forcing a choice between anarchism and pure acceptance of capitalism is bullshit. Capitalism is exploitative. It has its benefits, and there isn’t a better system, but that doesn’t mean we have to pretend it’s all flowers and lollipops. Some artists stand up for principles or change without falling back on mindless support for anarchy. Some find ways to live within capitalism that resist participating in and being victim to its most exploitative elements. It’s not an either/or situtaiton.
Not that music always has to be that place. Not that Of Montreal has to be that band (really, how would they ever be that band and make the particular kind of awesome music they make?) or shouldn’t make money. And I DO like when I hear a song I like in a commercial, actually. I’m much happier to be hearing songs I like in commericals than songs I hate. But the subtext here is that artists with principles are hypocrites, and that’s bullshit. Barnes, you don’t have to take every other artistic stance down with you just to ease your conscience for being in a commercial. And when you start talking about social Darwinist bullshit like “You’re only a winner or a loser,” I lose a bit of respect.
I suppose “I fell in love with the first cute girl that I saw that could appreciate George Bataille” was always supposed to be ironic. But I thought maybe only half ironic, have nostalgic. Maybe I was wrong.
Oops. I left out the other part of that quote.
The last few months have seen of Montreal fans have become actively critical of the band,
after one of their songs appeared on a TV commercial for the Outback Steakhouse restaurant
chain. ?Yeah, that was a learning experience,? Poole says. ?Kevin didn?t read the contract properly,
and didn?t have a lawyer look at it, so he thought it was one thing, and it turns out he was
signing something else,? he explains. ?Once he realised what it was, maybe an hour later, they
wouldn?t let him go back.?
I’m just kind of amazed that, given his points, he’s concerned enough about it for write 1000+ words.
Wal-Mart is awesome– what’s wrong with supporting it? Some say it’s evil, I think they do more good in this world than any of the posters who say its evil will ever be capable of.
Thats all fine and well but just don’t ever go around waving your penis again where I can see it. I fucking mean that, Kevin Barnes.
I really like this guy! I’m gonna hafta give his music a listen…
Kevin Barnes is a whiny little prick and I wanna beat his ass. He has no fucking idea what punk-rock ethos is b/c he doesn’t have a clue what The Ramones, Sex Pistols, The Clash, Joy Division contributed to mankind! Without the punk-rock movement, there would BE no Kevin-freaking-Barnes! Ya dig?!
I’m all FOR artists who are able to find a bigger audience (even if through commercial means), if they keep their musical integrity. Kevin says he would “never” change his music to fit commercial needs, but that’s EXACTLY what he did when he RE-RECORDED his own freaking song to FIT THE ADVERTISER’S NEEDS! He inserted “Outback Steakhouse” into his own song! What’s wrong with you, twerp?
Newsflash to Kevin: There ARE indie-rock bands (like AUDIOCRASH from FL) that only play music because it’s their PASSION, and NOT to make a buck. There ARE pop/hip-hop artists like the hot new kid, J. MELLO (aka JUSTIN SMITH) from NJ, who are extremely TALENTED lyricists and would never DREAM of, say, rappin’ about Starbuck’s Coffee. (Unless of course, he MEANT to rap about Starbuck’s Coffee when he recorded the track!)
With ELECTRONIC/DANCE music DJs/producers — like PAUL VAN DYK, PAUL OAKENFOLD, BT, MOBY, FATBOY SLIM — it’s a GREAT thing when their music gets LICENSED for commercial use in TV spots, film, video games, etc. because it means the artists are getting paid and exposing their music to a wider audience. The difference is, Paul Van Dyk LICENSED his track titled “Connected” to Motorola. He did NOT re-record “Connected” using only DIAL-TONES from a fucking MOTOROLA PHONE in place of the original SYNTHESIZERS in the track! Am I getting through to you, Kevin, you dipshit?
Get over your fucking self, Barnes. You’re certainly NOT the only artist having his/her music used commercially. But you ARE the most annoyingly sanctimonious prick whose rants I’ve read today. Now, go get your dick sucked.
“Selling out, in an artistic sense, is to change one’s creative output to fit in with the commercial world. To create phony and insincere art in the hopes of becoming commercially successful. I’ve never done this and I can’t imagine I ever will.”
…..you changed your song’s lyrics into a company jingle. Help me out here.
desree- outback bought the song, used the melody and they set their own words to it. he didn’t rewrite it.
^^^ troll
after reading your post, Des’ree, all i see is AUDIOCRASH! and J. MELLO!*!&@ barf
Yo, way to spit some Ayn Rand shit, fucko. You think people getting fucked by capitalism are just lazy? You think 12 year olds in a third world country making shirts that you shill are just lazy? Go to hell, boy.
You can justify a lot of what you’re saying, but dont applaud the system while you’re at it. I will gladly steal your next record as you so willingly separate the music from the business.
God, I’m so tired of ppl bitchin about sweat shops. No, it may not be easy living, but every time ‘do-gooder’ fuckos force them to close those laid-off children end up looking for other ways to make money… like prostitution and criminal activity.
A lot of people need to calm the fuck down and realize that Kevin did not rewrite the words to his own song. He did not realize what Outback was asking for when they asked him for the song, he has explained that if they had used the song as is he would be ok with it but it angers him that they changed the words but there’s nothing he can do about it now. Yes, he probably should have understood what they were asking for clearly before signing the contract but he didn’t and now it is too late. Please shut the fuck up and understand the situation before you go on your RARARRARA HYPOCRITE tirades.
selling a song for a commercial is a one time handjob. bring back the major label cultivation.
WHO. FUCKING. CARES???
when will everyone finally learn that of Montreal are among the (if not the) most overrated bands to come out of… anywhere. ever.
honestly, unless im higher than the current pound/dollar ratio i cant enjoy a single one of their overly hyped, boorish excuses for pop music.
i wouldnt listen to them if someone payed me. and i AM a sellout.
“It’s a system that rewards the imaginative and ambitious adults and punishes the lazy adults.”
I really have no problem if artists when to sell their work to a commercial interest. Its their music, they can do what they want. I’m in no position to judge their motivations. But I really wish people would drop the completely false assertion that capitalism has built this perfect meritocracy where the “hard-working” succeed and the “lazy” fail. As others have pointed out, capitalism, or more accurately corporate-powered capitalism in America, has messed up the lives of millions of people.
When an industry is outsourced to a different country leaving hundreds of thousands of people out of a job (and with sparse replacements of equal value) is it because those workers were too “lazy”? Or is it because the attainment of ever-better profit margins have become truly mercenary. If it were all about “hard work” why are so many hard workers doing so badly?
“Almost every non-homeless person in America is over-privileged, at least in a global sense.”
Compared to starving children in the third world, or political dissidents in China, sure. But is that a fair comparison to make when critiquing the level of “privilege” in America, by comparing it to the very worst cases in the world? Why not compare it to the very best cases in the world? With all our affluence why are so many millions without health care? Why is our infant mortality rate plummeting to third-world levels? Why are corporations almost completely unchecked and given legal status equal to a living being? This line of argument seems very close to “you don’t know how good you got it, so shut up”. A defense of American capitalism that the ever-growing ranks of working poor are most likely fed up with. But then, perhaps they are too lazy and uncreative to deserve success.
From my experience, the best defense against cries of “sell out” is to make transcendent art that renders such criticisms meaningless. If you can’t manage that, perhaps you aren’t working hard enough.
Music comes with persistent associations: the place you first heard it, who you were with, how you were feeling. I’d rather not have companies buying into those memories.
it’s pretty clear that kevin barnes doesn’t have a very good understanding of what anarchism is.
for someone who doesn’t think he did anything wrong, he sure spent a lot of time defending himself.
“…discussing ‘Story of the Eye’”
I like this guy even more now. Go Kevin, you’re awesome :)
Exactly, Chase. This essay reads like he’s desparately trying to convince himself of something.
some terrible points and some incredible points. the incredible points remind me of this dave eggers essay:
http://www.geocities.com/temptations_page/eggers.html
Dear Kevin,
Hey, remember me? We used to have it pretty good together, I thought things were all right. I hope you like the money Kevin, I miss you.
Sincerely,
Your Soul
you guys really watch too much tv. secondly, if you’re ranting about using discretion before you sell you art, i hope that you are also using that same discretion in researching every store you ever walk into. hipster-crites.
@a: thanks for that link. i thoroughly enjoyed it.
What a slut….
Of Montreal – keep making the cheese!
We interviewed these cats last month and they mentioned the Outback deal helped buy and build the massive tour setup and production, so sounds like everyone wins.
For your next stunt please make the entire state of NY smell maple syrup at the same time.
http://www.butterteam.com/2007/10/bt-interview-of-montreal-interview-talk.html
While Kevin (and his Adam-Ant-by-way-of-Rufus-Wainright outfit in the photo above) makes some good points in defining selling out as compromising your art in order gain marketplace advantage, he sidesteps the issue of artistic intent.
If your overall goal is to be a famous rockstar (hello, Ryan Adam), it’s not possible “sell out” or compromise in pursuit of fame or economic/material success. When your creative efforts are in pursuit of gaining the approval of the largest number of people possible, that’s not an artistic pursuit — that’s marketing. Is it possible for a marketing executive to sell out? I think not.
In contrast, being an artist, I believe, is a matter of intent. If your goal isn’t rockstar glory (to show up all those kids in third period who laughed at you — show them good!), or merely getting laid on Saturday night, but to express a point of view, to get a message out to people (to wake them the fuck up, perhaps), then it is indeed possible to sell out, and sell out hard.
Michael Jackson’s Pepsi commercial may have opened the floodgates on musicians licensing their current hits (as opposed to oldies and dusties) to commercials, but a Black musician actually collecting millions of dollars for his music was a semi-revolutionary cultural statement 20 years ago. A bunch of white boys doing so today is not (although I sympathize with how hard it is to make a living in ANY artistic pursuit these days. It DID used to be easier in the recent past, and it could be again, if we want it to be.).
I should wrap this up here before I digress too far:
If your goal as a musician is to be among the lucky 0.0001% who become rich and famous, you can’t possibly sell out in pursuit of this goal. But if your goal as a musician is to make an artistic statement or express a point of view, well then yes, it is possible to sell out.
Whether selling a song for use in a commercial (or allowing the Corporate Death Machine to, in some other way, wrap it’s arm around your shoulder for the photo op and pass as your cool amigo, while still performing heinous acts in private that undermine artist’s interests) constitutes selling out, well that’s up to you — and no need to get defensive about it because that’s your business, not mine.
Interesting Eggers piece, although I feel it’s really talking about a different context of selling out than the one we are here. While he chooses to discuss “selling out” in the context of simply doing a job and getting paid for it (akin to, let’s say, getting paid by the local supermarket for gathering shopping carts, or in his case writing an article for Time magazine), what we are actually discussing is taking a pre-existing piece of art and re-contextualizing it as a sales pitch. So while it’s one thing to be a paid-by-the-word freelance writer and create an article from scratch, it would be quite another if, I dunno, Exxon Mobil took a paragraph from “Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius” and used it in print ads to talk about what a great, hip corporation they are because gosh, we’ve read Dave Eggers too! Co-optation and work for hire are not the same thing. Ask him about selling out in that context and you’d probably get a different answer.
my wife disagrees, but I fuckin’ agree. plus, Hissing Fauna: hands down the best record of the year, so who cares– let’s dance to the weirdnesses!!!
I think having control over where your music goes after you made it is a bad idea. It’s the reason sampling’s gone through a huge legal fiasco, and now many have to be cleared, and aren’t. If I were a musician I would let anyone who wanted use my music, it’s not anyone but the persons choice on how to use it. Once it’s made it should be able to be played anywhere if someone feels it’s fit.
I only selling out as making music just to make money, or having that be your primary goal. If a band sold out it would require them changing their sound or making a record or songs just for the sake of selling them. As long as you’re still making music for the pleasure of making music I think that’s the only thing that should matter.
On the Flaming Lips point that Eggers brings up: does a band that agrees to allow a song to appear in a film/TV constitute selling out? I’d say no. I’d classify that as artistic collaboration/collage, unless we’re talking about any song in any Michael Bay film.
criticism of licensing songs to commercials by “sanctiminous indie fascists” is something that really gets my back up, especially if it’s a band like of montreal who are sort of in the shaky area between day job and full-time musician. this applies to the outback commercial (which i thought was quite funny) and band of horses. but if this really is as described, a sort of alan partridge-style “hi, i’m kevin from of montreal!” endorsement spot, then it goes past boundaries of dignity and integrity that nobody in their position has broken before. nah brah
Thanks, KB. I love listening to “Hissing Fauna” on the ol’ iPod when I’m out hunting bucks.
Outback steakhouse and its founders are major contributors, via the Outback Steakhouse PAC, to the Republican Party, contributing $303,015 and $334,197 for the 2000 and 2004 election cycles, respectively.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.asp?strID=C00253153&cycle=2004
Tell this douchebag with my love and a kiss that if he had half the integrity or genius of Bruce Springsteen or Neil Young– artists who do, in fact, refuse to license their work for commercials and do think that it matters– he would have reason for pride. He wants to sell his song as a UPS jingle? More power to him. But don’t come with your anti-snobbery snobbery (which is the worst kind) and sanctimonious garbage against artists who don’t feel the same way you do. He mocks this idea of sanctimonious indy kids, but of course, he’s just picking a different kind of sanctimony. He’s also making a purity statement. He’s just making it from another side. Garbage.
freddie, i think comparing of montreal with bruce springsteen and neil young is a bit unfair. both those artists made so much cash from the old music business model that they never needed to sell their material. for example, both bruce and neil broke out when radio was a viable marketing tool. that’s no longer the case, so bands have to look for alternatives to promote (i.e., make money) themselves.
one last thing…don’t be so naive. bruce isn’t working shift work in jersey these days.
Kevin Barnes is like the Unabomber. That was a fucking a manifesto he wrote there on selling out. LOL. That thing was long.
spliting hairs aside….i think any reasonable realistic intelligent person would agree with what kevin said
I wouldn’t do it. I’m worse off than they’ve been for years. How much do you need?
Even though I don’t think Kevin has ever clearly stated that he made a mistake with the Outback thing (perhaps it would violate the contract or whatever), it was a mistake, but lesson learned. They still got paid, and last time I checked, they’ve been nonstop touring for the last 3 years pretty much, their music has blown up but a ticket to see them is what, $10-20 at the most, and their live shows are visually and of course musically among the best I have ever seen.
Outback steakhouse was a mistake, it’s fucking obvious Barnes and everyone else in the band know it, but you learn from it and move on. we all could have made the same mistake, especially with 1 million dollars in front of us, so lets not crucify them for learning a lesson.
I guess the beatles sold out when they did their songs in German..
Selling out is kewl!
Do you like their music?
Great, shut up!
“Even though I don’t think Kevin has ever clearly stated that he made a mistake with the Outback thing (perhaps it would violate the contract or whatever)”
He has.
…. GO KEVIN!
Hey great blog!
I?d love it if you checked mine out, just started it a few days ago. I will be posting Mon-Thu every week, hopefully!
http://nmsles.blogspot.com
I write mostly blurbs and ramblings about music every day, and I want to start doing some more album/song reviews when the time comes. I would really appreciate a comment or some feedback! :) thanks!
i think if your band is good enough, you don’t need to sell the songs. you don’t see arctic monkeys hawking tmobile, and he seems to be trying to convince himself with his little article
When you think about it, the internet represents the sum total of all human/corporate organization. Now imagine that economic-organization as a wave of gathering-momentum. The technology and resources required to fuel the internet is at the very crest of that wave.
I guess I’m just suggesting that if you are wasting time and energy bitching about others “selling-out” — via the internet — maybe you should reconsider your medium for bitching.
one last thing…don’t be so naive. bruce isn’t working shift work in jersey these days.
I know he’s not. And, as I said, if someone wants to sell their songs for advertising, that’s their right. But I don’t like the fact that he attacks by implication artists who don’t, and what’s worse, he makes his piece a referendum on musical sanctimony when he is, in fact, taking part in the same.
Geez…all anyone can do is bitch about how they can’t make a living. Indie bands didn’t use to have this sense of entitlement: you toured, maybe sold a few albums, and then maybe you could pay your phone bill with what you brought home from the tour and your next paycheck from 7-11. Even the Replacements had day jobs.
Yeah, the old business model is dead, replaced with something much more efficient: with the internet, bands now have the widest distribution platform any artist has ever had, with near instantaneous delivery to any customer in the world and the opportunity to cut out the distributor entirely and make five times as much cash than being signed to any record label, but no one except Radiohead seems to have worked it out.
Even if Barnes feels like he got screwed by Outback when they changed the song, he still knew who he was selling it to.
And now it is time to use Google:
Hutch Harris/Thermals: “It was a really easy decision. How could we go on after soundtracking Hummer? It’s just so evil.”
Tom Waits: “If Michael Jackson wants to work for Pepsi, why doesn’t he just get himself a suit and an office in their headquarters and be done with it?”
Ian Mackaye: yeah just pick one
Three artists that have been able to make music a full time job without ever selling out.
I’ve tried to justify selling songs to ads, but in the end, I just can’t get behind it. Since Kevin is so fond of either/or statements, let’s throw one out: It’s either art or a jingle, Kev. Make your choice.
what ever.
Well, yes, I think Kevin Barnes just wrestled away “Indie Douchebag of the Month” honors away from that naked guy at the Girl Talk show.
I really don’t see why it matters whose songs are in what commercials. You like the music on the cd or you don’t. That’s all anyone should care about. As long as Kevin is making music I love he can be in any commercial his pretty little heart desires. Why should I be mad if he wants to license a song to feed his daughter or to provide for a kick ass stage show?
I can’t believe Mr Barnes would use his music in an advert and then write a big long piece like this trying to justify himself. I’m all for ‘selling out’ to corporations, it’s brilliant! But Barnes has really sold with this ‘selling out’ statement. What a pussy!
Also, to take issue with this :
“It’s a system that rewards the imaginative and ambitious adults and punishes the lazy adults.”
and…
“i think any reasonable realistic intelligent person would agree with what kevin said”
Reeeaallly? Hmm….
Kevin was rigth when he said that selling out is “changing your creative output to fit in with the commercial world.” Maybe Jenny Lewis is reading this…
I’ve never had a problem with bands selling their music to big companies. I love hearing The Shins and Rogue Wave on the new Zune commercials, I love hearing Dntel on car commercials, and Mates of State on AT&T commercials. It’s better than mainstream music any day!
Granted, this may mean an onslaught of 15-year-old girls skank-dancing at the next Of Montreal show, but I’m glad that the band is making money.
art is suffering. art is sacrifice. this guy forgot that.
“wahhhh”
I think a lot of valid points were raised here.
Someone mentioned that as long as you enjoy the music a band makes, why should you care who they sell a song to? I absolutely agree. I think its been a while since people focused merely on the music bands make and not on style, business deals, and other things that simply shouldn’t matter and are besides the point. Intentions? Who cares? Are you enjoying their music, do you get something out of it, does it make you happy? Good then. That’s more than enough.
While I disagree with some points brought up by Barnes (primarily the whole idea that capitalism is a perfect system in which only the lazy get screwed over, because with outsourcing of labor to other countries this isn’t quite true anymore), I still think he’s made a good point overall. There’s nothing wrong with selling a song to a corporation for a commercial because they need to make a living too. We all do what we have to (as long as it’s not immoral) to stay afloat, don’t we?
hey look, heres another quote:
“people can bitch about my principles and ethics while they’re spending their parents money or washing dishes for some asshole.” – isaac brock
i like to think after saying this, isaac yelled “SO LONG SUCKERS” and drove off into the sunset, the tires of his truck creating great plumes of dust that rose and fell in the glow of the evening. but he probably didnt
whats wrong with jingles anyway? i read an interview with corrine bailey rae (stay with me) where she said “someone once asked if i could write and sing a jingle selling cheese in israel. i could never do something like that.” you dumb bitch, i would fucking LOVE to write a jingle hawking israeli cheese
Punk is garbage? ”The pseudo-nihilistic punk rockers of the 70′s created an impossible code in which no one can actually live by. It’s such garbage.”
I don’t think so. It’s reactionary cr@p like this essay that’s garbage. Why don’t you just whore yourself to the Bush administration and the US Army and do the soundtrack for the next military recruitment campaign. You can even play an Iraqi insurgent in the next Army-sponsored videogame and get your head blown off by gamers. That would advance your career in commerce, right?
I’m guessing the real problem here is, music fans usually associate the identity of the music along with the music itself. So, if the music is associated with Outback Steakhouse, then it’s as if they are directly supporting that place when they really are supporting the band.
As a conflicted and confused youth, I suppose I can agree with him. If I ever make it big, I promise I’ll be choose-y with the corporations I make deals with.
The bottom line is that I love of Montreal and that I couldn’t care less what they do as long as they don’t kill and/or rape any babies and continue to make good music.
Dave Eggers’ piece resonated with me. Yes to saying yes. But if this were a live conversation, I’d want to put the following to him: what about the implicit contract an artist or entrepreneur (when still early and small) makes with his or her viewer, reader, listener, user? I think Dave doesn’t acknowledge that there is an intimacy to the relationship between an emerging artist and audience/fan, more imagined than real, and full of unrequited passion and adolescent fantasy perhaps, but that is no less visceral to the early fan or the early adopter of a new technology for that matter. When the artist or entrepreneur gets big, this notion of monogamy, albeit illusory, is shattered. So the young person, early adopter, explorer/discoverer, president of a fan club of 3 feels an inexplicable sense of betrayal and moves on to support the next underdog. Remember “you were working as a waitress in a cocktail bar, when I met you. Now 5 years later, you’ve got the world at your feet. Success has been so easy for you. But don’t forget it’s me who put you where you are now and I can put you back down too. Don’t you want me baby?” Creepy, yes, but kind of a hard-to-ignore part of the psyche of fan-hood. And this goes beyond the arts. Mike Arrington, tech guru, writer, investor wrote a sad post about the state of silicon valley now vs. a number of years ago. http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/05/22/silicon-valley-could-use-a-downturn-right-about-now/
Small is beautiful, big can be devastatingly gorgeous and infinitely renewing, but the journey between the two is by definition a relationship between creator and experiencer and therefore inherently fraught with negotiation.
He probably spent 3/4′s of the money on the shirt he is wearing in that picture.
I like OM for the most part but Kevin Barnes is so lame. I hate shit like this. He is such an attention whore.
if kevin barnes wants to fabricate a bunch of flimsy logic to excuse his tasteless business decisions, fine, but his essay also manages to insult the scores of bands that DO have ideals and DO manage do function outside of the despicable capitalist machine. for that, he can go fuck himself.
I really don’t get why anyone thinks Of Montreal is any good, and the dude needs to lay the heck off the clown attire… but he is essentially right. Get over it, indiedom.
But what’s with the parting jab at Poppa Bear?
when he’s on the cover of NME I might say he’s a sell out, but until that day they remain my 2nd favourite band
Thank you Kevin Barnes for your Capitalist Manifesto. Your rational of either/or-ness is the same sort that our nations leaders have used to justify their atrocities. The longer your spewing got, the more pathetic you sounded. I know that it can not be easy to dream up all those rationals to why compromising your integrity is good for art. As already stated by many comments above, there are artists that have NOT sold out and managed to live through their music. But I understand, money has a powerful pull. I guess one of the differences between you and them(the non-sellouts) is a matter of vertebrae……
“Selling out, in an artistic sense, is to change one’s creative output to fit in with the commercial world.” – Kevin Barnes
Ummm…by allowing Outback to change the lyrics to his song, didn’t Barnes essentially do the preceding?
someone earlier had it right. art is suffering, art is sacrifice. If you want to sell your art to whoever to make a living that is great. There is much to consider about the integrity of the artist, and the function of art. Is Kevin Barnes a sell-out? Who really cares. There is a bigger question and problem at stake. I think a bigger problem is people adjusting to the change of “undeground” or “indie” music becoming so popular. I’d like to think everyone would agree that using “indie” to describe music is pointless. I don’t really think indie was a term ever invented to describe the way music sounds at all. But it’s become associated with elitism, fashion, underground, less popular music that is “cool” and that is an issue.
“Art” can be a vehicle for socializing, but how are we to decide that the socializing has become the sole function of the “art” or music? I’m not sure myself.
This may seem like an aside, I don’t know who will really read this or connect with it, but I feel this is an underlying issue with the topic at hand.
I believe there is very little honest art being created today. Art wasn’t always trendy and cool. That didn’t really start take it’s roots until maybe in the 1920′s, but mostly during the 40′s, 50′s, and 60′s when art took drastic turns in abstract expressionism and pop-art.
To me this is the question. I’m tired of the term art being tossed around. Bukowski sums up my ideas nicely with his poem “So You Want To Be a Writer.”
http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/16549
heres my essay:
kevin barnes is a dick
by me
Hey kevin barnes, youre a dick. I honestly dont care that you sell out. thats fine, everyone needs to make a living. but youre “to sell out is to live” argument is a cop-out. you dont have to have your music used for commercials. you dont. not all bands do this, and some do. you do, and that is fine. its that you dont understand the distinction, and try to make the argument that youre not doing anything different than anyone else. but you are (you do it to the point where you let a company change the lyrics to one of your songs to better fit their slogan – that personally i think is shit, but as for generally selling your music to be used in commercials, thats fine). let me tell you kevin barnes, you are not above it all, and that is fine. just dont try to act like you are and be a dick. to respond with this essay is a defense tone shows your colors on the issue.
i like you music (honestly your band has crafted one of the best albums of the year). and i take no offense when you use your songs in commercials. but to take this stance on the issue seems ridiculous and you seem like a dick. thats all
no matter how ironic and cool it may seem to support the commercialization of music over those who suffer to avoid it, it isn’t. this guy has crafted one of lamest, awful, mis-informed essays i’ve ever read and its great that so many people are openly supporting it as if he is helping things. kevin barnes is not an artist. nobody is expecting you to die penniless and insane kevin. you are just scared of that fate, so you’ve lost touch with the art you would like to make. the reason many artists die penniless is not because they did not know how to succeed in a capitalistic society but because they were more dedicated to what they wanted to do than someone else telling them how to live. thats dedication. thats integrity. you know neither of these things kevin. i would not have to say these things if you would accept your own way of thinking, retire from music, and get another profession instead of depreciating the importance of the field in which you work, one which people look to for comfort from outback commercials and people who tell them that the homeless artist has lost the game of capitalism and the man shopping in ikea has won. fuck kevin barnes and the blind followers who agreed with this essay. its okay to accept your position as a corporate slave. most of us have. but its not cool. we are sell-outs.
“Here’s the deal, folks. You do a commercial – you’re off the artistic roll call, forever. End of story. Okay? You’re another whore at the captialist gang bang and if you do a commercial, there’s a price on your head. Everything you say is suspect and every word that comes out of your mouth is now like a turd falling into my drink.”
who the fuck is Of Montreal anyway?
seriously?
is this the guy previously seen with his cock out onstage?
“I realized then that, for me, selling out is not possible. Selling out, in an artistic sense, is to change one’s creative output to fit in with the commercial world”
you changed your creative output to fit with the commercial world when you chaqnged your lyrics to “make it outback tonight” so by your own definition you are a sellout. and swearing doesn’t make you not a republican.
Totally agree with Kev on this one. I grew up only listening to punk rock and hardcore….then I “grew up”. Seriously, punk rock gives you an ideal and identity as a youth but what 30 year old is still exclusively rocking out to the same 3-chord juvenile mess they were listening to when they were 15 years old. I will still listen to punk on occasion, but now I really care for of Montreal over the Business….Broken Social Scene over NoFX, etc, etc. It’s called evolution! Do I still read the same books I read as a teenager? Do I still only eat what I ate at 17 years old? NO! Selling out is not a concern if mine anymore….listening to good, creative music is! If you can make a buck while still producing great music, go for it!
Yeah, well I’m 33 and I ain’t buying it. The guy had one of his songs transformed into a bloody jingle for a steakhouse. Let’s call a spade a spade.
I think the Eggars says its best, when it comes to artistry: “What matters is that you do good work. What matters is that you produce things that are true and will stand.” Artistic integrity is being true to yourself, is not dictated to by the the push and pull of the marketplace.
I also think that commercials can sometimes be artistic. The use of Jose Gonzalez Heartbeats to illustrated color in the Sony TV ad is a good example – nobody even knew who Jose Gonzales was at the time, so how could that he be characterized as a sell-out?