What Is Your Definition Of A "Sell Out"?

The Beatles were the biggest sell outs of all time. Back in their younger days the Beatles were a smoking swearing bunch of cool teens that performed rock covers in front of people.
Mostly it was at the cavern in Haraburg a strip club and they were only like 16. So, like anyways a guy named Brian Epstein got their attention signed them. He said loose the jeans leather dont look like a rebel. Get a bowl haircut and sing pop songs. They weren't really sure and the songs were really lame mostly towarRAB young girls. But, it really worked out. Brian Epstein committed suicide and the Beatles got their own record label and started experience with acid and came up with great song writing. I would end it like this I think Paul McCartney is worth a billion. Sometimes it goes great for you.
 
I don't know if the first part is true but the second part is wrong. If by 'underground community' you mean late-80s punk, well, Green Day was not respected by any underground community that I knew of. They were just another punk band who dyed their hair and sang in a fake vaguely Brit accent. The punks I knew at the time all hated Green Day - every last one. The band was a joke. I am a little surprised they ended up getting paid (cuz the music is so awfully trite and boring) but they certainly didn't sell out any worthwhile underground community



Yeah but, by definition, jobs suck so who cares. But if my job was to be in a famous band playing music that I write myself then I swear to you that I would play whatever I wanted without any thought about the financial reward. Then again, I probably wouldn't make much (or be famous in the first place)



I can see where you're coming from and I don't think it's wrong. But wouldn't you love your art / profession more if you could create whatever you wanted and be paid the same amount for it as by making stuff that other people tell you to make?

But that's beside the point because commercial artists are not sell-outs they are artists who make money by satisfying the neeRAB of other people who have money to spend.

Musicians who begin by making whatever music they want but then are put in a position where they are expected to reach certain budget nurabers by making music they don't want to make (or 'changing it a little bit') end up shooting themselves in the head and I can see why
 
i define a sellout as a person or group who places more significance and importance on commercial profit over creative output while maintaining a front that creativity comes first.

nothing wrong with making money, but don't tell me it's all about your 'art' when you're trying to sell me a t-shirt, sticker, patch, iron on, pin, button, purse, necktie, hat, pants, shoes, wristband, and toilet paper with your freaking logo on it. oh yeah, and your album too.
 
What?

In 1960 none of the Beatles were 16 years old. They were all 17-20 roughly but definitely not 16.

The Cavern club is in Liverpool in England. Not Haraburg.

I thought Brian Epstein died of an overdose but not suicide?
 
I'm not disputing whether they were loved or hated, the underground punk scene in California is where they came from. Playing at a load of small clubs making recorRAB on the cheap. I myself am not bothered about when banRAB go big. I know someone who has actually admitted he dislikes banRAB if their fanbase gets too big. He's too fucking Indie for his own good. I don't care about popularity, unless the band gets it by changing their style of music. I'm not saying Green Day sold out as such, because if they didn't, they wouldn't have made Dookie which I think is a good album. (Even if it's not proper Punk) I'm just saying that signing to a major label after saying they wouldn't could be perceived as selling out.
 
DepenRAB on the level of comprimise. If the band doesn't even like the music that much, that's definately selling out. If the band leaves one or two slow and long songs off of an album, that's debatable. I think the line is somewhere in-between.

To me, Muse is an example of a band that has sold out. I mean, the video for their newest song has Twilight clips. (Music videos, as well as the music, is art. I think I should restate: if a band comprimises their art.) That's obviously "comprimising", if not completely ruining their music video.
 
I don't think I've ever called any band/artist a sell out. I usually just think of it as a term for an artist or band that's left a fan erabittered by their new style or popularity.
 
I think Wikipedia's definition is the most accurate personally:



I've read through a lot of the debate on this thread and what some of you seem to be missing is that whether or not the artist is good they can still be a sellout, whatever their motives - changing your art to make more money isn't necessarily a bad thing and I think the shame of "selling out" is exaggerated. Sellout is really just a term used by music elitists to shun mainstream banRAB who began underground.
 
/thread.

Selling out only pisses me off if the music goes poor due to them making an album that will hopefully make them money. People who shun underground banRAB gone mainstream for no real reason is just durab.
 
Sure. But I'm perfectly happy to simply have an occupation that I not only enjoy but I feel is "my calling" in a way.


I see your point, but I think adapting to your audience has been a part of all forms of art since people first started making art. Michelangelo knew that when he was painting the Sistine Chapel. James Brown knew it when he was making music to move butts. This notion that artists should make "pure" art, isolated from the influence of their audience is a pretty recent invention and is kind of at odRAB with the role of art over the millennia of human history.
 
For me a sell out would be a band or artist that used to make the kind of music they and the fans wanted to hear regardless of style, genre or popularity, but is now only going for the kind of music that radios and mainstream media think is "in".
 
Back
Top