Billy Corgan on the implosion of the pumpkins and the record industry

Rotten_pumpkins.jpg


I intend on listening later. Though I don't really want to hear Corgan blame his mid-life struggles on MTV.
 
That was interesting. Seems like he has a few regrets about how he handled the band. It's a shame folks like him don't go into the business side of music. I think an up and coming band may take someone like Billy's advice before they would listen to some guy in a suit who has never been in a band and he may have been able to steer some folks down a better path.
 
Rogan has really come into his own as an interviewer...

I have never been a Pumpkins fan, or a Corgan fan, but this was a really insightful look at his experiences in the industry...I didn't see him assigning blame at all, just recounting the events as he saw them...

His take on Napster and MTV and the industry's short sighted reaction to them was especially eye opening to me...
 
Chad said:
That was interesting. Seems like he has a few regrets about how he handled the band. It's a shame folks like him don't go into the business side of music. I think an up and coming band may take someone like Billy's advice before they would listen to some guy in a suit who has never been in a band and he may have been able to steer some folks down a better path.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was what I took away from it; he fucked it up even though initially he was warned about taking sole songwriting credit and later accepting the exclusive spotlight as it was offered; suffocating the public personas of the rest of the band.

The part about how he believes the industry is especially manipulative was interesting and I had to wonder if some of his own insecurities really influenced that perspective.
 
Lerxst said:
The part about how he believes the industry is especially manipulative was interesting and I had to wonder if some of his own insecurities really influenced that perspective.
Click to expand...

He's hardly the first person to say that about the record industry.
 
Lerxst said:
The part about how he believes the industry is especially manipulative was interesting and I had to wonder if some of his own insecurities really influenced that perspective.
Click to expand...

I don’t doubt the manipulative nature of the business. His isn’t the first story I’ve heard about his shitty the music business is.
 
The music business isn't very romantic, but when you think about it, neither are most industries. My personal observation was that there were two huge problems: the fantasies of those who became involved; and how bad the business model was.

The first led to a lot of outright duplicity, to where duplicity became almost accepted. Secondary issues were immaturity (e.g., almost every artist, ever) and instability (very rapid product cycle, that industry). People who got to work before 10:embarrassed:0 were seen as 'go getters,' and yeah, they were out 'working' (going to shows) the night before, but c'mon.

Perhaps non-coincidentally, the most successful people I knew were unusual personalities, but they were very reliable.

The business model was vastly more fucked. To correct Mr. Corgan with my most-recent knowledge (admittedly from the late 90's but I think that's the era we're discussing anyhow), 96% of releases did not recoup. Did the other 4% make up the difference? Nah, catalog sales did. My father's very non-musical take on what I explained to him was "their overhead has spiralled out of control." Yup. And having seen all the various ways artists 'went into debt' to their label (let's have the A&R guy's wife cater your release party with a $20k catering bill!), it was just a distribution scheme for catalog sales. So many Doors CDs to sell; so many limo rides to be taken.

Billy Corgan has always fascinated me because he is willing to say the things out loud that most don't -- that a great many bands are one person's vehicle, and the others are along for the ride. He's utterly right - those are his songs. It was his band. Still, you really don't have to be a dick about it, and if you communicate in a decent way with people, you can set expectations ahead of time. Not setting expectations is really shitty in the context of a band signed to a major. So he gets honesty points, which are then immediately deducted for "dick penalty."

My .02.
 
FWIW, there is so much fucking ignorant and immature presumption on the part of the interviewer that I would be glad to dissect, but I think it'd really only be interesting to those who are contemplating major label/major-indie label life, and perhaps not at all interesting.

For example, dumbass presumption implied #1: If signed, an artist is supposed to be rich and comfortable. (In the video, this comes from his "you signed me" part). Really? What fucking medieval fantasy world are people living in where they think that signing with a major label is supposed to be like winning a lottery - hey, comfort-for-life!
Just like other people, professional artists are supposed to work for a living. And trust me, if you're playing a 26 date tour to 10,000+ people a night - you're quite comfortable, bad business model or not.
This notion that artists are somehow exalted creatures for whom we should suspend the regular rules of life (that you need to keep working to keep earning) is ludicrous.

Here's another: his remark that "they're just trying to figure out how to make money off of you." Well, yes, they are, because it's called the fucking music BUSINESS, you dumb ass. The artist is trying to make money, too. But somehow that's okay for the artist, and not the label? Absurd. So many artists seem to think record labels should have existed to gratify their rock star fantasies. But like all other companies, lo and behold, they exist for a single purpose: to make money. The idea that they should have a different agenda - serving the emotional/ego needs of artists - is ridiculous.

I could go on, but already have.
 
Danhedonia said:
FWIW, there is so much fucking ignorant and immature presumption on the part of the interviewer that I would be glad to dissect, but I think it'd really only be interesting to those who are contemplating major label/major-indie label life, and perhaps not at all interesting.

For example, dumbass presumption implied #1: If signed, an artist is supposed to be rich and comfortable. (In the video, this comes from his "you signed me" part). Really? What fucking medieval fantasy world are people living in where they think that signing with a major label is supposed to be like winning a lottery - hey, comfort-for-life!
Just like other people, professional artists are supposed to work for a living. And trust me, if you're playing a 26 date tour to 10,000+ people a night - you're quite comfortable, bad business model or not.
This notion that artists are somehow exalted creatures for whom we should suspend the regular rules of life (that you need to keep working to keep earning) is ludicrous.

Here's another: his remark that "they're just trying to figure out how to make money off of you." Well, yes, they are, because it's called the fucking music BUSINESS, you dumb ass. The artist is trying to make money, too. But somehow that's okay for the artist, and not the label? Absurd. So many artists seem to think record labels should have existed to gratify their rock star fantasies. But like all other companies, lo and behold, they exist for a single purpose: to make money. The idea that they should have a different agenda - serving the emotional/ego needs of artists - is ridiculous.

I could go on, but already have.
Click to expand...

I didn't see his comments as ignorant. I saw them as playing up what most people think about the music business. You play the clubs, get signed to a major and then you get mansions, hot chicks and fast cars. The whole "Money for Nothing" thing. I think he was also playing up the idea that a label takes the artist under their wing to help them reach their artist goals, when in reality, they are just trying to make a buck.

You worked in the business and saw how the sausage was made, most people don't. They don't see the hundreds of bands that get signed and fail, they only see the 1 who succeeds and to them, the 1 is the norm.
 
I suspect it doesn’t help that the entertainment business is not attracting the best and brightest business hyenas—vs finance or global commodities or blue chip multinationals. These are the business weenies that slept through most of their classes.

And pop musicians are mostly dumb and often coming from weird sheltered worldviews. So it’s little wonder that second-rate business monkeys are screwing over the moody, kinda pretty dreamy kids who were cooler than they were smart to build a business model that is constantly teetering on the edge of failure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top