DrAwkward wrote:Minotaur029 wrote:I wasn't going to comment on this thread anymore, but while SY has made some really ugly choices over the years, are they actually destructive in some way? I don't think you're implying that they are indeed somehow destructive (I assume you were strictly talking about some figurative forest), but over the years, the "ugly" choices of some of your friends have really upset you...I can sympathize...certain choices that people make that I would consider to be unethical (musical and otherwise) definitely offend me and I occasionally take it kinda hard. Can an artistically valid band like Sonic Youth's alignment with a major label be harmful or destructive in some way for other people/other bands...or only to themselves? (of course, in this rare case, a major certainly seemed to work for them).
This is an incredibly huge stretch, but one i must confess has crossed my mind before:
1) Sonic Youth sign to Geffen. Geffen gives them pretty much complete artistic control in exchange for having Sonic Youth as a "cred booster" on their label, making them attractive to indie bands they are interested in co-opting.
2) Nirvana, when deciding to go major, sign with Geffen because their pals SY are on the label and recommended them as a decent label to do business with.
3) Nirvana explodes, Kurt Cobain is unable to deal with the fame, becomes depressed and kills himself.
So, ya know, if you were a batshit nutty Nirvana fan who doesn't understand the concept of personal responsibility for your own actions, you could make the tenuous argument that Sonic Youth enabled Kurt Cobain's suicide. I AM NOT SAYING I WOULD MAKE THAT ARGUMENT THOUGH, just to be clear.
Here's a penny for your thoughts:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/692f7/692f7cbb37430b3ef8dfbe1d6b2bbd68149568ab" alt="Image"
But regarding your response in particular, Dr., I was talking more about the "business" model...can Sonic Youth selling out hurt the culture and hurt other bands?