COLLAPSE BOARD

55 Responses to “Playing for love instead of money: On Amanda Palmer, Punk Rock, and Compensating Musicians Fairly”

1. Princess Stomper says:

   September 16, 2012 at 10:46 pm

   I think we are, at last, seeing a backlash against the No Value culture. The culture that says that musicians, uniquely, don’t deserve to be paid for their work. The fans would never dream of working without pay, and the transporters – train drivers and bus drivers and taxi drivers – who take the fans and bands to the gig expect to get paid. Hell, we even pay them extra in the form of tipping! We pay for the sandwich we buy at the station and we pay for the beer we drink at the venue.

   It’s sick and completely fucked up that we don’t want to pay for music. Years of illegal downloading have instilled into us the idea that music is not something that we have to pay for, and that artists – unlike absolutely everybody else, even the graphic designer that created the t-shirt – don’t deserve to be paid.

   “You can make your money off touring,” they say.

   So bands are desperate to get onto bills, where again they are exploited. The pay-to-play culture is back and bands get stiffed in a thousand different ways at the venues, where those oh-so-loyal fans that have promised them (while illegally downloading their songs) that they can make their money off touring then don’t bother to turn up because it’s just too inconvenient.

   Small venues are closing.

   When it’s gone, it’s gone, and slowly it’s dawning on people that if they don’t turn up to the gigs then the venues will close and if they don’t turn up to the stores then the shops will close. When they don’t buy records then the labels will close and if they don’t close then they will only sign the ones that are absolutely guaranteed to make money. Coldplay are your fault, consumer!

   So we push people towards Kickstarter – and people are happy to contribute once, or maybe twice, to invest in some record, but what then? Is every act expected to cower before you, cap in hand, to plead their case against a thousand others that their hard graft is worth your $5? Before it’s even begun? Or won’t you just pony up and buy the damn record from the record company that made the decision for you that the thing was worth investing in? Thus keeping jobs going and providing for families and supporting the economy?

   The record company provides the band with funds to support them on their tour (or the band do that themselves if they’re DIY). That is their job. The promoter advertises the gig and makes sure everything runs smoothly on the day – including paying the sound guy, the venue and the bands. That is their job. The fan turns up at the gig, pays at the door, and buys the damn record. That is your job.

   You have one job, as a fan, and that is to invest in your favourite act – not just for one Kickstarter, but for a lifetime, because if you don’t, then there won’t be another record. I think finally – finally – people are starting to understand that. This recession has been a pretty brutal lesson in teaching people how economies work.

   And – yes! – there is also a barter economy in music. Bands remix each other for free and appear on each other’s records for free, and that’s great, but you can only expect musicians to play for free on your tour if you agree in return to perform some equivalent service for them. You have to give back or it’s not a fair trade. It’s like a well: if you keep taking out without topping up, then sooner or later it’s going to run dry. That’s not “punk rock”, that’s basic economics, and every musician and fan needs to understand that.
2. Darragh says:

   September 17, 2012 at 8:05 am

   Interesting you didn’t mention Steve Albini’s response … I’ll quote it:

   I have no fundamental problem with either asking your fans to pay you to make your record or go on tour or play for free in your band or gather at a mud pit downstate and sell meth and blowjobs to each other. I wouldn’t stoop to doing any of them myself, but horses for courses. The reason I don’t appeal to other people in this manner is that all those things can easily pay for themselves, and I value self-sufficiency and independence, even (or especially) from an audience.

   If your position is that you aren’t able to figure out how to do that, that you are forced by your ignorance into pleading for donations and charity work, you are then publicly admitting you are an idiot, and demonstrably not as good at your profession as Jandek, Moondog, GG Allin, every band ever to go on tour without a slush fund or the kids who play on buckets downtown.

   Pretty much everybody on earth has a threshold for how much to indulge an idiot who doesn’t know how to conduct herself, and I think Ms Palmer has found her audience’s threshold.

   (Albini has since retracted, and apologised for, calling Amanda an idiot)
3. Erika says:

   September 17, 2012 at 10:29 am

   Darragh, my first draft had a link in the first paragraph to the apology portion of the Albini rant since, as you pointed out, he retracted. Still, even with the “idiot” portion removed, I don’t really agree with Mr. Albini’s summation: “If your position is that you aren’t able to figure out how to do that, that you are forced by your ignorance into pleading for donations and charity work, you are then publicly admitting you are an idiot, and demonstrably not as good at your profession as Jandek, Moondog, GG Allin, every band ever to go on tour without a slush fund or the kids who play on buckets downtown.”

   Does Steve Albini really think that Jandek’s recording career paid for itself??? Artists have needed, and received, help and support at varying levels from fans and patrons since time immemorial. It’s silly and even unfair to demand “self-sufficiency” of all artists.

   I have no problem with Kickstarter or crowd-funding; I think for artists who genuinely need funding help for a project, it’s fantastic. Many great things have come of it. The sad thing to me is that the musicians who seem to need Kickstarter the least (because they already have successful careers often built with label support) tend to earn the most. Even that would not be a terrible thing – but not to pay support musicians? That is unacceptable.
4. Golightly says:

   September 17, 2012 at 1:22 pm

   My cousin who is a teenager and a bit of a natural at business organized a gig, booked the venue, sorted the bar, printed the tickets, promoted it, sold the tickets… think he charged £8 a ticket for 8 bands. I was informed of this and also of his success and how he’d made £500 for himself after paying everyone. That’s my 17 year old cousin earning £500 in one night. By ripping off musicians. Apparently all the bands were happy to be able to play “for the experience”… I totally recognized that I was partly jealous because he had achieved something clever financially which I never had… but I also knew my anger at everyone’s pride in him about how everyone was happy and he’d made money, was also coming from a totally legitimate place. I explained that even musicians playing the Olympics were playing for free “for the experience” so what does all that experience lead to? It’s not like musicians book gigs by going to job interviews with their cv’s (resumes) in hand using ‘work experience’ and ‘unpaid internships’ to prove their worth and get higher paid gigs. So the whole thing is null and void really. It’s a con. To be clear, the people had attended the gig to see 8 bands. That was why they were there. The venue was paid for, the staff, the printers, the usual… everyone except for the bands. And that is the same thing as the kids in sweatshops on the other side of the world working for basically nothing so Nike can sell trainers at high prices to consumers.
   I guess it’s up to musicians to work out how to get better at business, because while the free resource is there to exploit, every businessman (or woman) worth their salt will be using this instead of the costly resource.
   We can thank such promoters in one way for using free bands to fill their line ups because with zero overhead for the ‘product’ they can afford to take chances on bands… but even then most places insist on bands proving they can draw an audience.
   This is reminding me of that book Welcome To The Music Business. You’re F**ked.
   Maybe the only thing to do is to put on your own shows, be the promoter, hire the venue, sell the tickets yourself and then get another 7 bands to join you on the bill for free. Then take it in turns, so then the other bands who played for you for free, well you can play a gig for them for free. Alone, a band isn’t necessarily gonna make a lot in one night, but if it’s £1 or $1 per band on your ticket price then it’s pretty easy to sell that gig to people. And if you have 8 bands, that’s 8 sets of friendship circles who will naturally be talking about it and if you’re lucky, bringing their paying friends to the party.
   Screw the musicians union. Start your own local musicians union instead. Just unite with the other bands yourself on a personal level and offer them a free gig in exchange for a free gig and you make your £500 in one night to share with your band. This system is basically what the promoters are already doing to you. But at least this way you get to screw each other one at a time, so the money is in the right pockets eventually… and it could be a load of fun. And you could make a load of friends.
5. Princess Stomper says:

   September 17, 2012 at 4:36 pm

   @ Golightly – or you could stick to the system which has worked for thousands of years in which if you want people to work for you, you pay them money or an equivalent service in kind. If you’re a promoter, sure, set a minimum door count before payment kicks in, but do pay the bands or you are a rip-off merchant. If you are a band and want to hire session musicians, you have to compensate those people for their time, effort and expenses.

   When JG Thirlwell couldn’t afford an orchestra to perform his early albums, on which he played every instrument himself (or sampled it), he just stood alone on a stage with a reel-to-reel tape providing the music. To turn it into a “show”, he put pig’s heads from a butcher’s shop on spikes and covered the stage in dry ice. He turned it into a unique concert experience – I’d heard of the concerts before I’d even heard the music. Later, with more money, he rearranged the songs into a more traditional “rock” format and played the rest through a backing tape. Everybody present got paid. He adapted his show to what he had rather than ripping anyone off. I’ve seen Neil Hannon perform (chamber pop act) The Divine Comedy’s set on just a piano, and guessed that he couldn’t afford the other musicians, and didn’t fault him for it, since session musicians are expensive. He made the best of what he had. When My Life Story played in Brighton, there were about a billion people on stage and Jake Shillingford changed costume three times, and it was gloriously excessive – but I guessed each person in the band earnt about 50p each. It didn’t even cross my mind that they didn’t get paid.

   The Trichordist sums it up best:

   http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/occupy-amanda-palmer/
6. Derek Robertson says:

   September 17, 2012 at 7:02 pm

   Darragh, Erica – Albini apologised for the “idiot part”, but he also made it pretty clear that he still thought she was doing a pretty shitty thing. Quote:

   I have no problem with bands using participant financing schemes like Kickstarter and such. I’ve said many times that I think they’re part of the new way bands and their audience interact and they can be a fantastic resource, enabling bands to do things essentially in cooperation with their audience. It’s pretty amazing actually.

   It should be obvious also that having gotten over a million dollars from such an effort that it is just plain rude to ask for further indulgences from your audience, like playing in your backing band for free.

   Fuck’s sake a million dollars is a shitload of money. How can you possibly not have a bunch laying around after people just gave you a million dollars? I saw a breakdown about where the money went a while ago, and most everything in it was absurdly inefficient, including paying people to take care of spending the money itself, which seems like a crazy moebius strip of waste.

   I’m pretty much 110% with Stomper and that Trichordist piece – she’s not being slammed because she’s being too transparent, or has simply ended up as a scapegoat, or, as Golightly said on Facebook, “Are people offended because it’s dog-eat-dog and this woman knows how to eat dog?” People are offended because she’s using unfairly exploiting the goodwill of her by now pretty sizeable fanbase and cheapening her “art” at the same time. That’s a pretty impressive double whammy. Sure, she’s not the first, and she won’t be the last to do so, and I dare say there are a million other targets equally deserving of our ire, but by being so brazen, and digging her heels in, she’s made herself a pretty justifiable target. If she’s unwilling to pay her backing musicians, if that has no value to her, could she possible criticise me if i downloaded her album for free? What would be the difference?

   Just because people are happy to be exploited doesn’t make it OK. It would be different is she was organising glorified jam sessions, or was playing for charity or something, but she’s not. She’s on a proper tour where the tickets don’t come cheap – she’s making money, make no mistake, and so to not share it with the people helping her create the spectacle is downright insidious. Also, doesn’t it bother her fans that they are paying good money to watch a show backed by amateurs? $20 is a lot of green to see “professional-ish” musicians play. BUT the real kick in the teeth is the fact that for the big shows, New York etc, she IS paying pros. Why the fuck is that? Scared of bad reviews? A calculated decision based on which are her most lucrative markets/audiences? How dare she show such utter contempt and disregard for the people who put her in the position she currently occupies.

   The reason i think this is a big deal is she’s a musician/artist herself, one who knows how hard it is to struggle to make ends meet, to tour, to get recognition and exposure. For her to turn round and so openly, happily, and stubbornly accept the role as oppressor/exploiter, and so brazenly devalue an art that she’s spent so long fighting for, is depressing in the extreme, and sends completely the wrong message. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em! She’s saying it’s ok for those on the inside to turn gamekeeper and get your snout in the trough while you still can. If someone like Amanda Palmer is so happy to fuck people over for $, what hope does that leave the rest of us trying to survive and make ends meet in an industry that continues to career downhill?
7. Everett True says:

   September 17, 2012 at 7:43 pm

   Fair points all, Derek, but y’see I really don’t think that’s a) what Amanda Palmer thinks she’s doing and b) what Amanda Palmer IS doing. Hopefully, Lucy Cage will come on board and explain it better than me. (Uh, assuming that’s how she feels of course.)
8. Lucy Cage says:

   September 17, 2012 at 7:53 pm

   She is not “fucking people over”, she’s asking if anyone wants to join her onstage for one number! She is not “not paying her backing musicians”; the tour musicians are all paid, these are different people each night who chose to come and join in the fun.
   There’s quite a difference.

   As for the millions dollars: if the tour budget had allowed for extras, I imagine, on past form, that she would’ve paid for them. I think she’s being vilified because she’s an uppity bitch who made shedloads on Kickstarter; people are imagining that she has pocketed it all and is parsimoniously choosing not to share it out whereas it is all accounted for in the making and marketing of the new record.
9. Derek Robertson says:

   September 17, 2012 at 8:12 pm

   Lucy – She’s not looking for people to join her onstage for “one number”. She’s looing for people to send her audition tapes, turn up for a rehersal in the afternoon, learn the part, turn up for the show, and play for the duration. She’s also asking that the string players play with Jherek Bischoff to form the support act – thereby playing twice. In terms of numbers, she’s asking for six volunteers a night; six to compliment the guitarist, drummer, bassist, and 2/3 horn players (as far as i can tell) that permanently make up the Grand Theft Orchestra. That’s 50% of her band. Playing for the whole show, for free. Every. Single. Night. (except in important places like NYC. There she calls in the pros).

   I don’t imagine for one second she has pocketed it all, and i don;t for one second care whether she is rich, poor, and uppity bitch, or whatever. That has no bearing on my argument. Read the piece in the Trichordist – if those numbers are correct, that by playing to 1200 or so she’s grossing $30-60k, it does seem to me more than a little cheap and suspicious that she can’t afford to pay for ALL the backing musicians. Furthermore, if she spent all the money on her record and then suddenly realised she didn’t have enough left to fund a tour as she imagined it, that’s her own fault. I know she broke it down on her blog, and i’m not accusing her of being greedy, i just find it hard to believe, with the sums we’re talking about, she couldn’t find $35k to pay for this.

   Everett – I also genuinely believe that she didn’t see the controversy this would generate, and perhaps she just didn’t think it through properly. But digging her heels in is making it worse, not better, and she hasn’t done herself any favour with her recent pronouncements.
10. Lucy Cage says:

    September 17, 2012 at 8:39 pm

    “Lucy – She’s not looking for people to join her onstage for “one number”. She’s looing for people to send her audition tapes, turn up for a rehersal in the afternoon, learn the part, turn up for the show, and play for the duration. She’s also asking that the string players play with Jherek Bischoff to form the support act – thereby playing twice. In terms of numbers, she’s asking for six volunteers a night; six to compliment the guitarist, drummer, bassist, and 2/3 horn players (as far as i can tell) that permanently make up the Grand Theft Orchestra. That’s 50% of her band. Playing for the whole show, for free. Every. Single. Night. (except in important places like NYC. There she calls in the pros).”

    Even that is not “fucking people over” if those people are made aware of the facts in advance and are freely choosing to do participate. To me, fucking over implies deception, coercion and exploitation. If the extras are an integral part of the show and the GTO cannot continue without their input (which doesn’t seem to be the case given that the band has performed without them) then she’s got more of a job to explain herself but still I don’t think conscious decisions made by consenting adults should be dismissed so breezily.
11. Derek Robertson says:

    September 17, 2012 at 8:48 pm

    I think these “extras” are pretty much an integral part of the show – I know she has played without them in the past, but she bends over backwards to find people, even if the can only play to “high school level” (her words), so that kinda implies their presence is important.

    And I think it’s pretty much the definition of exploitation – I agree totally with the Albini quote I posted over on the 10 Questions piece. Of course, I wouldn’t blame the fans or those happy to volunteer, but no-one is criticising them (at least I’m not). At the same time, just because a consenting adult makes a free, conscious decision about participation in something, doesn’t preclude it from being exploitative.
12. Darragh says:

    September 17, 2012 at 10:18 pm

    I don’t know, I feel there is a form of exploitation in this one. Whether Palmer likes it or not, she is implying ‘I’m famous, people will come watch me and they can watch you too, playing on stage with me – that’s how I’m going to pay you’ – there is a power relationship here that Amanda can exploit.

    The whole thing stinks to me. So half the band are worth paying, but the other half are not? It’s like those horror internships people complain about which seem increasingly more popular, where these things are euphemisms for slave labour.
13. Daniel says:

    September 18, 2012 at 12:48 am

    Erica, thank you so much for this piece. As a musician, I’ve always had qualms about having to swap services instead of being capable of paying outright for musicians to play on records. The problem with a barter model is that I can’t offer much to the woman playing violin on a record, because she doesn’t have a record or show where my help will be required. She does it for the opportunity to be part of the record. I appreciate it, but I WANT TO PAY HER. She has a terrible job (like many), but when she gets home from work instead of watching reality tv, binge drinking or zoning out in front of an xbox, she’ll practice violin. Does that deserve monetary reward? If you want to use that to your benefit, I think it does.

    It’s saddening to see artists (often on labels or capable of being signed) crowd kickstarter and reap the benefit of a resource that should be for artists without any alternative. I can’t imagine how one squanders a million dollars making a record, because I’ve made my last four combined for under $10,000 USD (which is quite a lot of money in my opinion).
14. D says:

    September 18, 2012 at 1:07 am

    “I’m pretty much 110% with Stomper and that Trichordist piece – she’s not being slammed because she’s being too transparent, or has simply ended up as a scapegoat, or, as Golightly said on Facebook, “Are people offended because it’s dog-eat-dog and this woman knows how to eat dog?” ”

    Actually, I’m offended for that very reason. What she is doing is not gaming the system or doing an end run around the system, but perpetuating the system.

    I never thought I could use a biblical parable in a situation like this, but I find this fitting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_unforgiving_servant
15. Lucy Cage says:

    September 18, 2012 at 6:11 am

    Daniel, one of the ways she “squandered” a million dollars is by paying her staff generously.
    Here’s the breakdown for where it went:
    http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/amandapalmer/amanda-palmer-the-new-record-art-book-and-tour/posts/232020

    As for the fact Palmer is “capable of being signed”: well, she was signed and she was fucked over by her label. She wanted out. She didn’t want middlemen and corporations in the picture so now she sells directly to the fans: why is that “sad”? It seems something worth celebrating to me!
16. Darragh says:

    September 18, 2012 at 7:05 am

    I hate to disagree with you again Lucy, but she isn’t paying her staff generously. The fact is some staff and being paid and others are getting $0.

    All that budget proves is that Amanda didn’t budget appropriately, or didn’t get enough money in to cover the costs. Fans are getting expensively made cd case booklets while part of touring show don’t get anything for their time.
17. Everett True says:

    September 18, 2012 at 7:17 am

    The fact is some staff and being paid and others are getting $0.

    Pretty much the same way every organisation I’ve ever encountered works, especially within the media. My reservation remains: no one would give a fuck is this wasn’t Amanda fucking Palmer and she wasn’t so transparent (open) about the way she operates.
18. Everett True says:

    September 18, 2012 at 7:30 am

    Anyone ever go on about the disparity between Bono’s wage (say), and the army of unpaid volunteers that populate each U2 gig? Or all the unpaid stewards at festivals the world over? Is it better somehow because no one gives a fuck about these people whereas Amanda Palmer clearly does?
19. Lucy Cage says:

    September 18, 2012 at 7:47 am

    “Fans are getting expensively made cd case booklets”
    - which were promised them when they ordered and paid for their Kickstarter packages.

    “part of touring show don’t get anything for their time”
    Not true; they also get what was promised: fun, merch, beer and a enjoyable evening. It is entirely up to the people involved whether they think their time and talent is worth that or whether they want it compensated only in cash. I’d have every sympathy with a full-time working musician who chose not to take up the offer but when I read her call-out my reaction was: “Ooh, exciting! Wish I played those instruments, I’d have been there.” I’m an amateur musician, my time is my own to give away, I’d have given it away to play with a band I love. Scab behaviour or life-enriching experience? Might just have to disagree on which.
20. Derek Robertson says:

    September 18, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Oh shit, i just mentioned U2 over on another thread! They have an army of unpaid volunteers at their gigs? I’d like to know more…and yes, that’s just as bad.

    Festivals are a different example, as they’ve long been held up as over-sponsored, corporate cashcows, and the fact that they employ volunteers is hardly surprising. It’s true she’s getting a lot of flak cos she’s being upfront about it – that still doesn’t make it right IMHO.

    I think in may ways it;s like a perfect storm of controversies she finds herself in the middle of. For example, looking at her own breakdown of figures, she set aside $80-100k for three or four videos. I’d argue it’s wrong of her to spunk that kind of cash on a 4 minute promotional tool and then cry poor over $35k to pay for her backing musicians. Sounds like bad planning and prioritisation to me.

    Of course there’s A WHOLE SHITLOAD of issues and wrongs going on in the ,usic world, and this is but one. Still, for me, that’s no reason to let someone off for what is, pure and simple exploitation.

    Anyway, I’ve said (more than) enough, guess we’ll all have to agree to disagree. T’was fun having the discussion, keep it clean kids.
21. Darragh says:

    September 18, 2012 at 8:57 am

    Pretty much the same way every organisation I’ve ever encountered works, especially within the media. My reservation remains: no one would give a fuck is this wasn’t Amanda fucking Palmer and she wasn’t so transparent (open) about the way she operates.

    That might happen, but it doesn’t make it right though.

    But I take your point – Palmer is getting dragged across hot coals for being transparent about the budgeting process. But the figures and the costings look extremely flimsy. You look at the figures and one can’t help thinking why she couldn’t budget to pay all the musicians in her entourage (there is a beautiful irony in the fact that she links to Albini’s post on what’s wrong with the industry, and then Albini absolutely taking her to town on her costings).

    What I’d be interested to know, and this might be explained elsewhere, why are some musicians, including Palmer presumably, entitled to get paid and others not? Is it fame, stature, power? To me, Amanda is preaching hypocrisy here, whether she likes it or not, marketing herself as outside the traditional structures of the music industry, but simply replicating them in the end.
22. D says:

    September 18, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    It’s scab behavior.

    Heres something that’s missing frm a lot of these discussions. With a few exceptions, string quartets and horn players are not pop musicians, and not singer songwriters. Even if they had recordings, they wouldn’t necessarily sell. They are artists, but more like guild craftspeople than pop musicians. In other words, their passion is playing in jazz bands or orchestras, and pop gigs are what pay the bills. So the idea that people are willing to do it for shits and giggles is deeply offensive to them. It suggests that what they do is worth only hugs and beer, and that is shoddy business practice.

    If I knew how to fly a jet, I’d loveto do that, but my guess is real pilots would be rather bemused to say the least.

    Just… Not paying your people and framing it as being “For tha fanz” not just leaves a bad taste, it sets a bad precedent. Find a way to pay people, even if It means not getting paid yourself. Thats what being the boss of a startup means.
23. D says:

    September 18, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    Also, heres the thing about both punk rock and anarchism (the real kind); at their best, they both realize that personal freedom is about accepting responsibility. The volunteer request may seem DIY, but it’s really almost the opposite: it’s a little like asking for a bailout.
24. D says:

    September 18, 2012 at 1:57 pm

    “We play for each other for free all the time. That’s the way we roll, and any rock musician who says, “I will not walk on stage without getting paid,” you’ll just get a look of extreme mystification from the other rock musicians in the room. It’s just not the way we do business.”

    I promise that this is the only time I’ll bring up Mr. Palmer…

    One of Gaiman’s biggest idols is the writer Harlan Ellison. Here’s what he has to say about not working for pay.

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

    I wonder if Gaiman has introduced the missus?
25. Daniel says:

    September 19, 2012 at 1:34 am

    Lucy, I don’t feel like I’m off base. $250k was spent on select staff to offset 8 months of not touring. What does that have to do with the record? If that’s integral to the making of the album, what would have happened had the kickstarter only reached its goal of $100k? Pressing 1500 vinyl LP’s should NEVER EVER EVER cost $20/unit. Pressing high quality cds and records per unit price drops significantly the more you press, and even with eco-friendly/recycled products those per unit figures are really high (and no, I’m not pushing crappy jewel cases and Eastern European vinyl). $150k was for managing the other $850k. Also, with Kickstarter’s 5% and Amazon’s fee (5%) there’s another $80k not on the breakdown. Maybe not much in the scheme of what was raised, but it is 80% of the original goal. I think a higher-profile musician that uses kickstarter in a manner calls its credibility into question does a huge disservice to other musicians. That IS sad.
26. Daniel says:

    September 19, 2012 at 1:34 am

    We should have gotten Vic Chesnutt a kickstarter, then he might still be alive (and before you ask, no, I’m not charging Ms. Palmer with his murder).
27. Lucy Cage says:

    September 19, 2012 at 2:01 am

    “They are artists, but more like guild craftspeople than pop musicians. In other words, their passion is playing in jazz bands or orchestras, and pop gigs are what pay the bills. So the idea that people are willing to do it for shits and giggles is deeply offensive to them. It suggests that what they do is worth only hugs and beer, and that is shoddy business practice.”

    So what about all the classical musicians who are not only willing but extremely happy to play with Amanda Palmer? Are you going to tell them how wrong they are? Put up picket lines so that no-one gets up on stage at a paying gig without being paid? Does it not matter that your suggestion that musical activity should always be commensurate with business practice might be “deeply offensive” to them?

    I’ve played classical and rock gigs and I know that sometimes performances get paid for in cash and sometimes they get paid for in fun, beer, whatever. The same applies to writing for free sites/commercial sites; people make their choices by weighing up all sorts of personal, artistic and financial factors because monetarising art is incredibly complex. It *is* the way things work at the moment however much you might disapprove. How are you going to convince people never to cross that line?
28. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 3:37 am

    “I’ve played classical and rock gigs and I know that sometimes performances get paid for in cash and sometimes they get paid for in fun, beer, whatever. The same applies to writing for free sites/commercial sites; people make their choices by weighing up all sorts of personal, artistic and financial factors because monetarising art is incredibly complex. It *is* the way things work at the moment however much you might disapprove. How are you going to convince people never to cross that line?”

    That’s nto up to me, that’s up to their unions.

    The fact is that what started this whole shitstorm is her reply to a woman who actually is a fan and would love to do it but is drawing a line in the sand.

    If that’s the way things work, it’s a shitty way to work if you have the money to remedy it. She threw out the figure $35,000 as what she needed and didn’t have. However, in her blog about where the money’s going she said that they had enough money to up the video budget to $20,000 because videos are “fun to make.” I’m sorry, but paying people fairly comes before fun.

    It’s not good enough to say that this is the way things have always been done. She wants to change the way music is done, she needs to change it for the better.

    Again: she’s no longer an employee of a record company, she’s the boss. If she can’t make the payroll, that’s her tough luck.

    To paraphrase what has been said a lot lately, the musicians who deserve to be paid are not responsible for her failed business model.
29. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 3:40 am

    Oh, and as for “monetizing art” being “incredibly complex,” in this case it’s actually pretty simple.

    People want to get into the gig. They pay money for tickets.

    Some of that money should go to ALL the people they’re coming to see.
30. Derek Robertson says:

    September 19, 2012 at 4:49 am

    That’s a good point D. Aside from the ethical questions all this raises, look at this situation from the point of a regular, gig-going fan. Her tickets aren’t that cheap – around $20 in the US, £17 in the UK. Doesn’t it bother anyone that for that money, you’re not getting to see a fully professional show? That part of it is a glorified Amanda Palmer fanclub jam session of high-fives and shits & giggles?
    Even if one accepts that some of her followers are happy to play with her for nothing, isn’t she doing a disservice to her paying public?

    It looks to me like she’s happy to take money from fans for a show backed by “professional-ish” people who perhaps can “barely play at high school level” (words from her blog) because she’s too cheap to pay for professionals. Sounds like a great gig.
31. Everett True says:

    September 19, 2012 at 7:35 am

    Doesn’t it bother anyone that for that money, you’re not getting to see a fully professional show?

    WTF?! Jesus. Let’s start a campaign for a Return to Real Rock while we’re at it.

    (Incidentally, it’s not a good ‘point’ at all. It’s two people who don’t like Amanda Palmer sounding off to each other in the corner of a virtual pub over their pints of virtual Real Ale about the virtues of ‘real’ music and ‘real’ ethics regarding ‘real’ money (while of course not actually paying for any of their virtual pints themselves) and convincing themselves as the night grows longer and longer that their virtual opinions are fact.)
32. Everett True says:

    September 19, 2012 at 7:52 am

    As Derek and D are so concerned that professional people get paid for practicing their craft, I will of course be expecting cheques from both of them any day now in return for their presence here. Or do ethics only apply to other people?
33. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 8:12 am

    Everett True: um, it’s your blog, shouldn’t you be paying us? Are we making money off of this? I don’t recall charging admission to, well, your blog.

    Here’s the thing: it has nothing to do with artistic expresion. It’s business, and she shouldn’t be excusing bad business practises as freedom of expression. if it was about a creative choice, she wouldn’t use pros at the gigs that “mattered.”

    I would love to see a white-collar criminal (and before you even think it, no I am not calling Palmer anything resembling that) plead the First Amendment. The judges would have embolisms.

    Don’t try to excuse cheapness as an artistic choice or helping out the fans. As the Trichordist pointed out, “This is a collective bargaining/workers rights issue. Nothing more. Please don’t try to make musicians feel that questioning the ethics of a rock star employer is somehow violating the rock star’s human rights. That’s disingenuous.”

    Economic justice is not a fucking creative decision.
34. Everett True says:

    September 19, 2012 at 8:48 am

    I repeat: do ethics only apply to others? Where’s the joined-up writing in this sentence… fuck you, I’m entitled to everything for free these days because of the Internet AND ‘professional’ people should always be paid. Where’s the joined-up writing? The AND does not supply it.

    D, the reason your opinions are only opinions and not facts or arguments or anything like that, is because you’ve provided no parameters, no context. Where is your taxonomy? Where are your counter-examples? What is the field?

    I repeat: Amanda Palmer is being made a scapegoat because of a) her transparency, and b) the fact folk fucking LOVE being sanctimonious on the ‘web about celebrities. Really, really obviously, festivals, the Olympics and ANY big gig that involves an army of volunteers (‘stewards’) are far worthier targets but that ain’t going to happen because AP is way more fun to take potshots at.
35. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 9:20 am

    Um, I’ll buy your book,okay? Or I’ll boycott Huffingtonpost, whatever. But if you’re not getting paid, that’s not my fault, because I don’t recall paying anything for this site, period. If they’re making money off the advertising and you’re not getting it, that’s terrible, and I will say so. Want me to write you something about it? I’ll do it for hugs.

    BTW, I pay for all my music, unless explicitly offered for free by the artist.

    Here’s the thing about your example of festivals, though… do you require to audition to be a volunteer at a festival? Does it require years of training to take tickets at a festival? Are any of the ticket takers being paid while others are not? Are the volunteers doing work that would otherwise gainfully employ other people? Are volunteers profiting the organizers at all? Maybe, I guess you could make a case for it.

    (Oh, and the Olympics and my local folk festival are non-profits, regulated by law)

    That doesn’t change the fact that a high profile musician who is using a model that is being touted as the future of music is doing it in a pretty shoddy way.
36. Darragh says:

    September 19, 2012 at 9:35 am

    But Everett, Amanda may be a scapegoat, but does that make it _right_ that she’s doing this? Regardless of sanctimony and all that – does that excuse her for not paying staff or volunteers, despite having ample funds to do so?

    (I don’t buy that budgeting for a second – if that’s what’s she spending her money on, she’s got to get a better accountant).

    If U2 or Radiohead or any other high profile act did this exact same thing, wouldn’t we all be railing against them in a similar fashion? I daresay we would.
37. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 9:51 am

    Darragh: indeed, I don’t think they could get away with it. I’ve been to a single U2 concert and the setup took up the whole stadium. It was clearly done with union labor, and if U2 pissed off the musician’s union, they would have pissed off Teamsters to deal with in no time.
38. Golightly says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:01 am

    ” people are imagining that she has pocketed it all and is parsimoniously choosing not to share it out whereas it is all accounted for in the making and marketing of the new record.” Interesting point… so it’s really quite likely that thing where people circle like vultures when someone ‘wins’ a million. That sounds likely. Whenever anyone wins something or gets something for free (even if that means working hard for it behind the scenes) people start to feel justified in trying to get some of it. This sounds like human nature at it’s least appealing really… like the lottery winners who end up shunned by their neighbours and end up lonely. Like the time I won a business competition – money to spend on carrying out my business plan… and my landlord and flatmates started asking me for money. It’s typical. People covering it with righteousness when it’s pure jealousy that their own personal kickstarter accounts are still on £0… or better yet, they haven’t even been enterprising enough to actually carry out their kickstarter plans. They feel she has an unfair advantage… as if she got her fame and career handed to her on a plate or something. A bit like how everyone hated Paul McCartney’s daughter for being a successful fashion designer, even though coming from her background, she had no real obligation to work as hard as something like that takes. And it took her 10 years to break even with her business. People can get so stupid over money.
39. Darragh says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:12 am

    Golightly, I’m not sure that example works. Did you win a bunch of money, but then ask people to work on your business plan for no financial recompense? Amanda Palmer is asking for people to play with her for nothing other than good times, beer and hugs.

    It’s not like musicians are lining up demanding to be paid to play for Amanda because she’s got a bunch of cash from kickstarter. The problem is, some musicians get paid to tour with Amanda, and some don’t and there is a piss poor explanation for why that inequality exists.
40. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:15 am

    “People can get so stupid over money.”

    This reminds me of the movie The Magic Christian, in which Peter Sellers plays the richest man in the world who likes to show what ridiculous lengths people will go to for money. In the 60s this was a popular notion.

    Pauline Kael, would have none of that. She noted that there’s something very cruel about people with money using it to manipulate people without. So, yeah… I don’t feel that anybody has the right to criticize musicians who are annoyed with this.

    In any case, she made the documents public, and she notes that she decided to raise the amount of her video budget $20,000 just because videos are “fun to make” (although, of course, they are also cheap advertising).

    So why is the budget mutable enough to add that money and yet when it comes to the budget for musicians, that’s locked in? (I’m not taking into account the $100,000 just for herself, because I hadn’t heard about that)

    Again, she can do what she wants. But we can criticize her for that, and to suggest as some have (including Palmer) that we are stifling her freedom is ridiculous.

    it’s not about disliking her personally. It’s about her choices, and her choices as a boss appear to be misguided at best and unethical at worst.
41. Everett True says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:58 am

    If U2 or Radiohead or any other high profile act did this exact same thing, wouldn’t we all be railing against them in a similar fashion? I daresay we would.

    You wouldn’t because the information wouldn’t be freely available.
42. Darragh says:

    September 19, 2012 at 11:05 am

    > You wouldn’t because the information wouldn’t be freely available.

    But assuming it was, wouldn’t those defending Palmer on this be forced to defend U2 or anyone like that, for the argument to be consistent?

    In the spirit of debate here, I’m not so sure such support be forthcoming.

    As I’ve said before, Amanda Palmer must be kicking herself for being so transparent.
43. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 11:29 am

    Yeah it would be readily available, because, again, like I said, the musician’s union would know, and theyd tell the Teamsters or whoever and suddenly the stage would stop getting built.

    I am not a member of a union, and I used o distrust them , but I dig them now. why? Because I like weekends. And safety conditions. And no child labor.
44. Everett True says:

    September 19, 2012 at 2:48 pm

    OK, D.

    Find that information for me. We can have a chat about it.
45. Derek Robertson says:

    September 19, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    Everett – It’s not that I “don’t like” AFP. Truth be told, I haven’t heard a note of her music, and i don’t know her personally, so i can’t make that call. I’m simply criticising her decision, in this instance, to not pay her backing musicians.

    That criticism has got nothing to do with a value judgement on what I consider to be “real” – it’s simply the ethics behind the way she is choosing to handle the business and monetary side of her affairs.

    As for your “Return to Real Rock” comment – I’ll say again, if i had paid $20 to watch a glorified jam session populated by amateurs, I’d be very disappointed. Other’s might find that a hoot. Bully for them. The point was actually phrased as a question for a reason (perhaps it doesn’t bother anyone – I dunno).

    As for the part about professional people being paid – yeah, they should, and it sucks that they don’t. It sucks that you don’t. I, personally, do try and support and pay for artistic endeavours, including writing. If Plan B or Careless Talk Cost Lives were around today, I’d subscribe. If CB had a good iPad app version, I’d buy it. I never read HuffPro because I thought it was scandalous what they did. I wouldn’t complain if CB suddenly had banner ads, pop ups or whatever, because I understand that people need to eat. I don’t consider myself entitled to anything for free because of the internet – BUT if someone chooses to publish a website/blog/whatever for free, and they don’t try to monetize it, that’s up to them. The difference between such endeavours and what AFP has done is that you are not sitting on a shitpile of cash and REFUSING to pay the hired help. Ethics DO APPLY to everyone, and if you wanna test me, make CB subscription only. I’d pay in a heartbeat.
46. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:22 pm

    Everett- huh? There’s no “information,” just hypotheticals based on over 100 years of labor relations. Unions stick together, and U2 wouldn’t get a second of union labor if they were screwing another union.

    But again, so what? Yes,mpeople know about it because Palmer was public about it. Doesn’t make it any better.

    Again, she’s the boss. When you’re the boss, you make payroll before you even think about paying yourself. Or you wait for the profit at the end, which of course is all yours. Thats the cost of being free of a company. Nothing to do with technology or new economies.
47. D says:

    September 19, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    Derek: pretty much. Although personally I don’t care if the concerts in the small venues have poor quality musicians. For me, the problem is that she’s trying to fob off a bad business decision as an artistic choice, and that somehow by making her perform up to ethical standards we’re threatening her artistic freedom.
48. Erika says:

    September 20, 2012 at 3:10 am

    I *do* like Amanda Palmer’s music, and I respect her innovative and courageous approach. It sounds like her live performances are amazing. She’s creative, hard-working, and courageous. A friend who’s musical opinions I really respect, says this new album is the best album EVER.

    That said, (don’t I know that) outrageousness can be a double-edged sword. Maybe the same part of her personality that allowed her to do all these great things has taken her to this ill-advised place which she staunchly refuses to leave.
49. D says:

    September 20, 2012 at 6:07 am

    Erika: I’ve talked with some people and they all agree that they are really scared about how things are going. This is not just about Palmer, this is about how Kickstarter works in general (I would not be surprised if there’s legal scrutiny of Kickstarter after this.) Because she’s The Future Of Music people *want* her to succeed but they want to do it ethically.

    I think there’s a certain breed of capitalist who likes to consider themselves “rebellious” and “not playing by the rules,” even when those rules are actually beneficial to some people.
50. Erika says:

    September 20, 2012 at 7:46 am

    Well, Kickstarter says specifically it’s supposed to help artists raise money for individual projects, not “fund my life.” http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines

    However they don’t really tell you what to do with the overflow if you exceed your goal – but everyone is trying to exceed their goal, you know? Because the goal has to be set as the minimum you need to complete that specific project. Is PR, tours, videos etc, for an album part of a single project? Amanda Palmer wasn’t afraid to throw it all in, and I can see the argument for that. Obviously, most artists trying to put out an album with Kickstarter ask for, expect, and receive, far less.
51. D says:

    September 20, 2012 at 8:10 am

    I have to admit I haven’t followed kickstarter too closely before this. However, i think you’d agree that this is a big deal not just for her but for them.
52. Everett True says:

    September 20, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    So, of course, there’s this.

    what we’re doing about the crowdsourced musicians. also: we charted at motherfucking #10.
53. Derek Robertson says:

    September 20, 2012 at 6:29 pm

    Glad she’s finally seen the light and mended the error of her ways. Kicking up a fuss about stuff like this can be a force for good after all.
54. Erika says:

    September 21, 2012 at 4:38 am

    Yay! Amanda Palmer! Thank you for being bold trying new things, and thank you for listening and for bringing this important issue to everyone’s attention (even if it was inadvertently). Also, Yay, Musicians! We love our work, but no one loves struggling and starving in the face of wealth and excess.
55. D says:

    September 21, 2012 at 7:43 am

    Erika: I guess is this waht you call a “teachable moment.”