Quote:
Originally posted by David
Can't you look at this equally validly from the public's perspective? If 18 million fans didn't purchase "Rumours," who would've cried & whined the most? The band.
But you didn't finish the rest of your sentence. "Just as we work hard to please our bosses in order to continue earning a living, entertainers work hard to please their fans" ... in order to continue earning a living!
Some other people in this thread said that Fleetwood Mac makes music & CDs for me. That puts a loony, simplistic spin on what is really a very complex interrelationship between the published musician & the consumer. When I buy the new CD by Fleetwood Mac, am I doing it for them? It's a business transaction, a marketplace event. Both sides happen to benefit: Fleetwood Mac makes a good living & enjoys the emotional benefits of adulation & connection; the consumers get to pop a CD in the car CD player or have a great time at a live show. It's Fleetwood Mac's living; it's our recreation, our hobby, even in some cases our emotional healing. It's symbiotic. But it ain't one literally giving something to the other. If John McVie paid this month's bills for me, that's giving me something. If he washed & waxed my kitchen floor, that's giving me something. But he & his bandmates don't give me their music. I buy it.
|
I agree with this almost completely, but I'd like to point out that many fans DO purchase the albums for the benefit of the band. We can download the songs off the net if all we want is the music. We want to give this band the royalties & the platinum certification. I imagine that at least a couple posters on this board have bought more than one copy of SYW to help boost sales.
And since you brought it up, John McVie is scrubbing my toilet right now as I surf the Ledge. That's why he doesn't talk onstage: He's too pooped, not to mention loaded on Clorox fumes.
- Jake