Legacy - A Noose Around Every Artist's Neck
Opinion

Legacy - A Noose Around Every Artist's Neck

Producer and label owner, Simon Huxtable, examines the role legacy plays in the creative process
By Simon Huxtable
Fri, 15th December 2017

I’ve been hesitant to write this article for a long time now. Essentially, it’s a personal battle of mindset vs reality and I, for one, have struggled to reason out a cohesive argument. Thing is, legacy is something I used to assume other artists had. Your Bob Dylan’s and Michael Jackson’s say… but in reality, it’s anyone with a creative streak that has the balls to put themselves out there. Indeed, many would say their children are their legacy, their businesses… anything their proud of really. But what good, in terms of music, is a body of work you’re proud of if it a) makes you little or no money (as is the case for a great many who rely on that income to survive) and b) the aggregates hosting it appear to be getting rich off your hard work and years of dedication?

 

Case in point - Spotify’s CEO and board have, under Swedish law, recently had their tax records made public showing they earn massive million dollar salaries and yet the business itself is making a huge year-on-year loss. How is that fair to the artists on the platform who have put blood, sweat and tears into their art and receive as recompense a measly 1000th of a cent per stream?  Taylor Swift, for one, has taken umbrage with them on more than one occasion, but that’s OK for her to alienate the company, she’s a multimillionaire herself, so what if they ‘ban’ her, right? It all plays into her narrative via clever PR announcements; beefing against ’The Man’ as it were. Not so easy for the likes of you or I to take such a stance and likely to end up being reported something like “Snowflake artist has Spotify meltdown” because the music media are a fickle bunch.

 

Talking recently with Omid 16B about legacy, he quipped “What good is legacy when you’re dead?” He has a point. In this materialistic world of have and have nots, legacy is prescribed as a thing to aim for, to be proud to achieve. But other than your parents and a few close mates, who else will even remember you after you pass? So, shouldn’t we just enjoy the process, the making of the music rather than agonize over Facebook likes and Beatport Top 10s, giving our ego an occasional tap on the back? The establishment would argue no, it’s about making sellable units - they don’t even humanize it as ‘music’ - it’s about making them (and you) money. James Yorkston poignantly wrote about life as an artist in his song ‘Woozy with Cider’:

 

“In their cocaine-fueled electronic cabarets, I’ll be the man at the bar drinking overpriced whiskey from a barmaid who’s too good to catch my eye. She only works here two nights a week, the rest of the time she’s a singer in a rock and roll band. I bet she’d change her tune if I told her my album had peaked at number 172 and that I also had friends who worked in bars and that didn’t define who they are, though it certainly helps their capacity to drink!”   

 

On the other side of this particular coin, legacy can be used as something to spur you on. I remember reading a quote about legacy from Nick Warren a long time ago promoting about a Way Out West album. In it he talked about how he wanted to make music his kids were proud of, but I think that sentiment, while well meaning, can become a barrier to a great many of us with creative tendencies: “will people like my music/art/words?” Ultimately, you need to be selfish in the creative process: make it for you and everyone be damned. Problem with that is, art is a social thing. We go to concerts, gigs, clubs, museums not as individuals, but for an inclusive feeling; a sense of belonging through mutual appreciation. We are, after all, a tribal species by nature. So, the question becomes at what point does financial reward outweigh the need for legacy?

 

Certainly, in the last 10 years, even five, the music world has been turned on his head by the changes that have occurred. The majors have, to my mind, fought against them or opted to try and control them inadvertently forcing grass roots artists to really consider whether a life in music is for them. Most give up or look for alternative ‘safe’ employment options, King Unique (Matt Thomas) has retrained as an archaeologist for example, but I’m sure you can all name others. The result is many truly gifted artists have been forced to change career to more secure jobs because they have families, debts and real word shit to deal with: ain’t nobody getting by on ‘exposure’ that’s for sure. But this isn’t a simple problem, far from it.

 

Looking deeper at the bigger picture reveals a battlefield of competing groups; agents upping their prices for touring artists because not enough is being made from record sales, which in turn forces promoters to up ticket prices to make break-even; making club owners rethink their prices and on and on, each one trying to eat as much cake as they did in the 90s. But it isn’t the 90s anymore. Those changes: digital DJing, streaming etc. happen as a result of human evolution, of development of club culture and we haven’t really taken that on board fully. So, what we’re left with is a broken underbelly with the more commercial end of things looking the most profitable.

 

The kids with their cracked software (allegedly) and desire to become famous (not good) see this; are socialized into this way of thinking, and the idea of legacy for them is mutated into Instagram shares and snapchats rather than making great art. Fame becomes its own reward to them and life won’t be worth living unless they are living this imagined champagne lifestyle, just look at any reality TV competition or Hip-Hop video. A victim of this mindset for me is Avicii. ...let me explain!  I remember when his music first hit the blog sites: Blog House it was called and it was a breath of fresh air. He was obviously super talented, but after years of touring and homogenization of his sound he burned out and was tossed aside, like a million failed pop stars. Next… Ad infinitum. In tandem came EDM which blew up and died in a matter of years, same with Dubstep so what of those artists legacy? “Oh, they were famous years ago… didn’t even know they were still going.

 

I think we need to reevaluate our idea of legacy. Be happy with making art and stop worrying if it sells, because ultimately, as streaming continues to grow in strength (with or without freemium models) we will continue to see a cheapening of music. My hope is that we reach a critical mass and everything is reset: our whole societal structure realigns and we begin to see the beauty and majesty in all artist endeavors and of the people brave enough to put their souls on display.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADVERTISE WITH VMAG

Your brand here.
[and other locations]
Never miss an eyeball.
ENQUIRE
RECENT ARTICLES
Meeting Claptone - One Vibrant Ray of Soul
By Kate Stephenson
Thu, 31st May 2018
Madeleine Wood Releases First Solo Track - Phantom Boy
By Katarina Smythe
Mon, 7th May 2018
Spotlight: Maria Z
By Katarina Smythe
Tue, 17th April 2018
Spotlight: Mat Imagin
By Katarina Smythe
Tue, 13th March 2018
Spotlight: Ina Bravo
By Katarina Smythe
Thu, 22nd February 2018

SUBSCRIBE