When things like Mariah Carey happen to EMI - I love it.

I think its quite telling that Mariah Carey is considered a failure by EMI - selling only 2 million copies of her last record . The vast majority of the various artists represented in my cd collection will not even dent that figure. I appreciate that they gave her a huge advance and mismanaged the deal - but lets face it that's the way they work - big investment big return. They are not interested in investing in work that will only sell small (by their standards) amounts even if its pushed hard. This trend can only continue...... mark

"john schuller" <superbadassmofo@hotmail.com> wrote in response to my own statement:

Uh, this really doesn't answer Joseph's question.

Composers & performers releasing their own recordings doesn't address the same functions as major record companies do.

You may not like some or all of the functions these companies serve (I know I don't), but independent labels do not and can not serve the same functions. And these functions are so intrinsic to mass culture in the world as it is, that "self released music" alone won't change much of anything.

...

I think it would. Mass culture will always have something to pacify themselves with...McDonalds, James Bond, Star Wars Episode III, Romanace Novels, SUV's...I just like to see them struggling right now. When things like Mariah Carey happen to EMI - I love it.

The major entertainment industry have shot themselves in the foot. The introduction of DVD's and CD's (digital information) is great for bootleggers.

Okay, so you're amused by fluctuations in the primacy of various aspects of mass culture. But you still haven't answered Joseph's question about how independent releases can fill the need for MASS entertainment. You don't have to like this need, or its various agencies, but realistically, no increase in independently produced music will have an appreciable effect on mass culture as a whole. It's hard for me to imagine what it would take for the overall mechanisms of mass culture to dissolve. But the availability of more product by artists who don't take part in mass marketing approaches is NOT going to be how it ends. If you have any more concrete suggestions I'd love to hear them, but you aren't even close to the point of the question here. As you say "Mass culture will always have something to pacify themselves with..." The emphasis here should be on the word "always" cause it's that deeply ingrained in the culture. Sure, from time to time, there may be more emphasis on TV or movies and less on music, or whatever, but mass culture as a whole simply ain't going away any time soon. Even if every pop diva like Mariah Carey disappeared tomorrow and they somehow (fat chance) dragged all of the major labels down with them, this wouldn't result in more listeners for chanteuses like, say, Shelley Hirsch or Sainkho Namtchylak, let alone for other kinds of musicians like say Derek Bailey or Pauline Oliveros. We may not like that music as a category (though I'm sure there are folks on the list who could make a more spirited case for some divas over the rest), but lots of people do & it's not just because they haven't heard the music of Tim Berne or Annie Gosfield. One or two esoteric artists in a given field may get treated like poster children, someone who can get written up in People magazine, so when you say "performance artist" or "minimalist composer" to someone at work they have a handle for the idea, sort of. But, as anyone who's tried to explain to a co-worker, relative or other civilian that there's more to these categories than Laurie Anderson or Phil Glass knows, this is only a bit of spice for the uber-culture, a placeholder rather than an opening of the door. And for the artist who happens to become this kind of placeholder, turning this marginalizing "publicity" into some kind of lasting increase in audience is a lot more work than most independent artists can or will pull off. Independent releases by composers, performers, and sympathetic small business people, fill a very important niche in how some music gets to some people. That should be obvious to anyone choosing to read the Zorn list. Some musicians can make a living doing this, and they and other listeners can find music they like that's outside of the mainstream. But there's literally no way that these kinds of CD labels can successfully serve the very real, however unfortunate, need for what mass culture has become. Wanting it to be otherwise is Romantic and all, but it's not going to happen without some kind of extremely drastic natural disaster or major war that knocks out much of the infra-structure of the developed world. Capital must expand & mass culture is a big big part of all that. As usual this discussion has wavered between the morality and legality of the economic realities of small labels & independent musicians. But there's another aspect of the issue that's only been touched on which I think is of equal importance to the financial side. That's how much control an artist has over how their work is presented and perceived. This is already longer than it should be, so I'll wait til tomorrow to send out some thoughts on that. And, as an aside here, please, please, PLEASE DON'T send me a separate copy of any responses to this. This isn't usenet; I'm already going to get any e-mail you send to the Zorn list; that's how e-mail lists work. It REALLY makes no sense to send me an extra one. It's not "courteous" to send an additional copy, it's just redundant & silly. Bests, Herb -- Herb Levy P O Box 9369 Fort Worth, TX 76147 herb@eskimo.com