dee
|
Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 13:33
|
|
Again mate, a great article on the evils of advertising......if you do an advert , you're off th artistic roll-call forever (Bill Hicks), too right!
|
Cleira
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 13:37
|
|
Where do you find these articles - I never know where to look?
|
Vybik Jon
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 13:39
|
On the opening page of H2H (where the Drudion is listed), there's a bunch of articles at the bottom.
Maybe with you being so tall, it's harder to see the bits at the bottom.
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
|
|
http://www.headheritage.co.uk/uknow/features/
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 14:17
|
Yeah, pretty good. Got me all riled up about the Dead Kennedys debacle again, made me scoff at Mogwai for their "it got the James Yorkston album released" excuse and ha me cheer Atari Teenage Riot for suing Sony for using one of their tracks.
Didn't know that about Cope and the ads, good on him. However, you were perhaps a little sucky-uppy. Surely, following your argument, there would be no need for him to worry about ending up stacking shelves if he's got a "perennial global radio classic" like - say - Reward under his belt ;-)
|
Cleira
|
Re: Or
Nov 02, 2005, 14:19
|
Thank you, gentlemen, seems there is more to this place than I at first realised.
xx
In reply to:
Or (anthonyqkiernan) | |
Replies:
Re: Or (Chris)
|
|
Merrick
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 16:26
|
This is a forum declared to be for 'direct action and righteous talk'. The only real difference between 'righteous' and 'self-righteous' is whether you agree with the point being made.
The BBC have used Cope's music for their preview clips and whatnot - they don't need the artist's permission to do so.
The use of music in a commercial does, however, require the permission of the artist (or whoever holds the rights).
|
Merrick
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 16:28
|
Reward wasn't a global hit, Heroes was. The sums of money will be hugely different.
I'm sure he makes a few bob off it as it turns up on a gazillion compilation albums, but I don't think it was clear that would be the case in 1991.
|
Merrick
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 17:26
|
The articles make it abundantly clear what I'm for. It's only a twist of language to say 'they're all against something' and imply it's all negativity.
An anti-war article is negative in the sense of being against something, but not in terms of the overtones that come with saying it's just negative; it's not negativity.
The articles that oppose things are all clearly for the things that would come in the place of the things they oppose. They all make clear what the alternatives are.
Off the top of my head and as is surely clear from my writing, I am for people living within their ecological limits, I am for people respecting the right of future generations to be able to have the basics of life, I am for people being encouraged to question the things they're told, being encourage to think critically and share their opinions, I am for people having the right to directly affect the things that directly affect them, i am for maintaining biodiversity, I am for people taking responsibility for the consequences of their actions, realising the provenence and consequence of their deeds and acting as if the effects on others mattered, I am for people being able to do whatever they want with themsleves if it doesn't harm anyone else, I am for treating the planet like it's the only one we've got, like it can provide us with all we need if we treat it right, and trusting that people are smart enough to get that and compassionate enough to act on it.
Amongst other things.
|
Merrick
|
Re: Merrick....
Nov 02, 2005, 17:31
|
All musicians sell their music to a degree, sure. No problem with that.
But there is a difference in selling your music as music, and having your music used to sell something else.
One is you selling your art, the other is your artistry being used as a sales tool for something you're not interested in (well, except being interested in the money it brings).
|
