This is a post about the Beatles 'selling out' and licensing a videogame.
I remember when I was young, my parents were the people who taught me about good music. Unlike most people, my parents 'actually listened to good music.' That's why I still like good independent music today, because it sounds like old stuff that has timeless pop sensibilities. I feel excited to reconnect with this iconic band+my parents. Think it will bring us closer 2gether somehow. Might even make them a mix CD of 'stuff I listen 2.' Might make them listen to Panda Bear since they liked the Beach Boys.
I recently discovered the game ROCK BAND when I was walking down the hallway of my dormitory floor. I saw a group of bros with the door open 'having a great time' playing original music. But then I realized they weren't actually creating the music themselves, it was actually a 'sweet ass game' where u pressed buttons along with a kewl guitar rock song. I tried to play it, but I wasn't very good because I had never heard the Nickelbacks/RageAgainstheMachines b4.
Hopefully I can 'practice more' with this game since if I buy it, it will mean that I 'care about music' and 'history' and that I like to have fun and listen to kewl music from any generation. Definitely going to buy THE BEATLES: ROCK BAND video game.
Maybe this is why our parents loved the Beatles so much. Maybe they knew that their songs would last 4ever, eventually ending up in some 'sweet ass' video game that 'doesn't promote musicianship', 'the spirit of music', but primarily highlights the fact that bands are 'brands' which 'create art' that can be protected and licensed out whenever u need some more money.
Feel jealous of bands with megabrands. Feel like they just need 1.5 memorable albums, then can just 'cash it in' 4ever or something. Feel like it's hard for young people to 'authentically enjoy music' because we enjoy aligning ourselves' with brands and criticism more than any of the 'more organic' elements of music. I don't think that is 'a bad thing' but feel like it turns good artists into a 'hokey experience' when 'too many ppl start 2 suck their dicks.' Like a concert will become a high priced show where people 'act the way that they think they are supposed to act.'
I feel sad that John Lennon isn't alive to 'greenlight this shit.' Feel like he had a lot of brand integrity, and would have said 'fuck no.'
Can't believe this is the band that our parents loved. They seem 'really video gamey' to me. Like a crappy band from the popular internet sensation SECOND LIFE/the Sims/World of Warcraft. Not even sure if I like the Beatles after hearing them for the first time [via this video game].
Does n e 1 know the difference between 'Guitar Hero' and 'Rock Band'? They both seem 2 be branded '4 fucking losers.'
Do yall think that Sir Paul McCartney is 'rolling around in his grave'?
Do u think that they will have songs from when the Beatles 'did a lot of drugs'?
Will u get to fingerbang Yoko Ono with a drumstick/guitar fret, or something?
Will u get 2 divorce Heather Mills?
Will u get 2 fire Ringo Starr?
Is WINGS better than The Beatles?
Do u think they will ever have a bloghouse guitar hero/rockband? I feel like there is most likely to be an 'indie' one with a bunch of Arcade Fire / Interpol /Of Montreal type of stuff.
Do u think that these music games are 'fucking ghey'?
Are video games the only way for musicians to make money nowadays now that no1 buys music/cds/mp3s?
Would u rather 'jerk off' for 3 hours than 'get good at playing fake instruments'?
Do u wish u could have been in a good band back when memes weren't distributed on the internet, therefore making every band-related-meme seem 'larger than life'?
Sort of think that the sports Guitar Hero ad was better, since it featured 4 athletes who 'I can relate 2'. All 4 bros trying to 'seem normal', but it is 'very impossible' for them to do since they aren't humans--they are megabrands.
Kobe Bryant - a guy with a contrived personality, and a hollow interior.
Michael Phelps - a bro who loves to smoke and fuck bitches with huge titties
Alex Rodriguez - a bro who wanted to 'move to NYC' and then took steroids to be the greatest of all time.
Tony Hawk - a cool dad who just wants to chill and extend his xtreme skateboarding brand
Just want 2 be great enough to have a brand that lasts for 20-50 years, and then have some sort of 'blasphemous' tribute that signifies that my brand is still identifiable/marketable even though new technologies have changed the world and the way that people consume my brand.
I want to 'sell out' in modern ways.
Paul McCartney is widely known as the Panda Bear of the popular band The Beatles. While he is widely respected, many question some of his business and life decisions. He 'pissed away' the rights to the Beatles master tracks, gives away his samples like candy, and even made ill-advised personal life decisions, such as going vegan + marrying a 'one legged gold digger.' Because he is a Beatles, most of these massive mistakes are 'forgiven', since the Beatles have produced some of the best mp3s of all time.
Recently, he 'gave away a sample' from a Wings song to Erykah Bady, the ex-lover of Andre 3000 who has made 'critically acclaimed' albums in recent years.
Here is the quickest summary of this marketable ordeal:
Pitchfork reports on an exchange initiated by Erykah Badu on TwitterTwitterTwitter, seeking last-minute clearance for a sample from the Wings song “Arrow Through Me.” Looking to connect with Paul McCartney, she appealed to anyone who might help connect her to him or a closer contact in the chain.
Following the stream of tweets, it looks like Badu got a hookup to Lenny Kravitz, who knows McCartney’s daughter Stella, who then connected her to Paul. He approved the sample clearance and she thanked her “Twitter fam” for making the clearance come together.
This seems like an uplifting story, justifying the utilization of social networks + technology for 'something good.' The lost story is the fact that Paul McCartney should have 'shafted' this request, protecting the music that he made. Many young artists are capitalizing off the work of legends, so many think it is time for the 'old guard' to stand up for themselves' instead of continuing to be taken advantage of.
Many feel like McCartney gave up tons of emotional and financial capital when he married his one-legged wife Heather Mills.
Even though this seems like a 'good story' to make him seem 'cool' to young people, we have to assume that young people would have appreciated his song more in the original context.
Would it have been 'more alt' to use the sample without clearing it? [via the chillwave movement]
Is Erykah Badu 'alt'/'indie', or should she only be covered on 'black websites/magazines'?
Has Paul McCartney 'pissed away' billions of dollars by not protecting his the rights of his music?
Will there be a 'backlash' against the Beatles? [via Beatles Rock Band]
Is twitter a legitimate social tool that is changing the world 4 the better?
