In fact, give me your definition of a sell-out?

I had this discussion with a friend of mine earlier about so-called "sell-out" artists(now mind you, I said artists).

The concept is simple to me,,,,but I'm intrested in ya'll's inputs on this subject.

So?

Harlepolis said:

In regards to soul music, it's a parallel similar to real life in the Afro-American community. It's an artist who musically and/or personally makes a deliberate attempt to cater to white fans, often at the expense of the soul fans who helped define his or her career.

Here is the Big Kahuna of music sellouts:

Najee said:

Intersting input,,,,though, I've always thought of MJ as a mainstream darling from the jump street.

Even Papa Joe, didn't want them to mingle with the chitlin circus or the small venues' atmosphere since they signed with motown.

Speaking of catering to whites, I heard about Ray Charles being called a "sell-out" many times, since he recorded that "America The Beautiful" song.

Harlepolis said:

Being a sell-out doesn't mean just musically -- though a case can be made that Michael Jackson has done that since "Bad," since he's been creatively dead for the past 20-odd years. Despite having fans outside of soul music, The Jackson 5/Jackson music was fairly funky in the mode of Sly and The Family Stone during the Motown days and acts like The Brothers Johnson in the "Destiny" and "Triumph" period.

Being a musical sell-out also means distancing yourself from the core fans (The Jackson 5/Jacksons/pre-"Thriller" MJ fan base was more of a black audience than a white audience), and no one has done that on the level MJ has physically. He literally has destroyed his body to resemble some androgynous-looking white man or some weird-looking white woman.

If MJ is not a musical sell-out, then who is?
[Edited 4/8/07 15:32pm]

A Sell-Out is any person that turns his/her back on their roots, principles, self-esteem, self-respect, and/or spiritual beliefs in exchange for higher success (educational, financial, political, social, spiritual, sexual, racial, logical, professional, and/or personal) within the mainstream society.

By this definition, a lot of artists are very gulity for this (Prince included). Sometimes, it worth it if you're trying to pervent from being poor and homeless, or especially if you're providing for your family. But sometimes, too often, it's not worth losing the respect of your peers, fans, or your higher power.





BTW, this thread can co-exist with music:non-prince AND P & R.

Najee said:

Musically speaking, sometimes.....

To compromise an artistic vision to increase sales.

I think it is possible for a real artist to churn out a comercial jingle or some such to make some change. It is when they start screwing around with what they do best that makes them sell outs. This includes catering to a core audience when they are being pulled musically in another direction.

TonyVanDam said:

True, but my intentions for this thread are for a musical sense, not social.
[Edited 4/8/07 15:42pm]

A sell-out is a person who gives up their morals and principals for the money.

Women who use sex to sell records is a sell-out. Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Monica, Christina Aguilera and most of today's R&B singers are guilty of this.

Krytonite said:

Not arguing that they are guilty, but what if the theme of the album, and/or the morals of the person have to do with the represntation of sexuality?

Krytonite said:

exactly. prime example is Hammer. he was good at first, got successful, then went bankrupt and decided to do the "thug image" for the "funky headhunter" album.

ThirdandFinal said:

In the beginning of the careers of Janet Jackson, Britney Spears, Monica, Christina Aguilera, etc were all covered up but then decided to use sex to make money.

Krytonite said:

I agree with regards to them, just not as a blanket statement.

skywalker said:

Name some artists that sold out.

Krytonite said:

F***ing For Tracks = Selling Out?!?

There are no artists that sell-out. From the start, they desire to be successful. Many regular people think becoming mainstream is selling-out when in fact no artist gets in the business to be unknown and poor
[Edited 4/8/07 17:24pm]

Krytonite said:

Not quite true in Britney's case. Her own mother encourage her to use a Lolita-like gimmick for her debut cover on Rolling Stone. At age 16, Britney was showing a little too much for social conservatives to handle.

skywalker said:

If the artist is going to do it under his/her own terms, yes.

If the artist is force to do it because the record label execs are telling them they have to make their stockbrokers happy or else (READ: Nelly Furtudo, Black Eyed Peas...Fergie-era), no.

Janfriend said:

I don't think reaching the mainstream is considered to be "selling out" either. But some do it for the expense of forgetting where they come from.

Janfriend said:

That's true. But the Grateful Dead are very well known (and I think they're in the R&R HOF), and most of the time, they weren't making much money. And most of the time, their earlier albums were giving away free.

Harlepolis said:

How do you know they didn't decide to go in another direction? I don't think it's fair to say "You're this type of artist, stay that way." I think many of them have different influences and should be able to change things up a bit regardless of their resistant fanbase. I don't like it when artists stay in one box

TonyVanDam said:

The Grateful Dead formed in 1965 and didn't they have a hippie following? I think they are a minority and don't really count when discussing the music business today or as a whole

Janfriend said:

Thats not what I ment.

Pfff,,,I'm too damn sleepy @ the moment, I can't type any more forget it.

Krytonite said:

Britney was never covered up

In the world of POP music, I don't think there is such a thing.
The objective is to Sell-Period.

On a more theoretical level, performers that have established themselves as purveyors of music as art would probably be the most susceptible to this term.

Jazz musicians would be one of the easiest examples to cite.
Let's say that John Coltrane was still alive and released a snooze-jazz album or after the success of Saturday Night Fever Sun Ra/Cecil Taylor/Anthony Braxton suddenly released disco albums.

Miles Davis may have been the biggest unjustifiable recipient of this term from the Jazz critics.
One could make an argument that George Benson, an artist that had a firm reputation as a Jazz guitarist, might qualify.
(Don't forget that he's had some face work also)

And this is not isolated to the Jazz world.
Anyone remember the uproar when Dylan went electric?


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431

Janfriend said:

Was Britney half-naked when her first album came out?

lilgish said:

Janfriend said:

I agree with you. The concept of "selling out" just makes no sense to me.