2 Jul
2010
2 Jul
'10
11:31 a.m.
I tend to agree with Charles Eisenstein (cf. his thesis "The Ascent of
Humanity"):
we are transforming all "natural capitals" into "financial capitals"
and by doing so, we are going way too far towards a "society of experts" where
each of us as individuals relies on an anonymous "specialist" for a given job,
implying a unnatural and impersonal interaction between both parties. This interaction is
usually reduced to an exchange of money for an expert service. Musicians nowadays are
falling into this category as well, they become experts that want their share of the
financial capital, they are willingly transforming their artistic capital into money. I
don't blame them, that's the current state of the world.
I remember the time when as a student, I had a tough time making both ends meet. I used my
skills at playing the guitar and singing to make some extra money in long evenings spent
in bars or other places where I could earn enough to cover for my daily expenses. I had to
learn tons of popular songs that the audience wanted to hear. I kept a good memory of this
time but when I think of it, it was also a time when I did not compose or create anything,
and that really depressed and frustrated me because I had to prioritize bills and such.
And I agree here with Patrick Shirkey: it did not mean one second that I agreed with the
system as it was/is.
J.
PS: I decided about 2 years ago that I would not commercialize my music at all, in spite
of the crazy number of hours I had put into my project. I do not want to participate into
this transformation-of-everything-into-financial-capital. That's enough. I got myself
a job that pays my bills, and that's the biggest compromise I can do: sacrifice some
of my time into an activity that has nothing to do with my natural inclinations because I
simply refuse to link my music project with money. To each his own.