Powered by Bravenet Bravenet Blog

Tag Board

This tag board is currently empty.

Please type in the four characters shown in the black box.

September 26, 2008

4:39 PM

The strange bedfellows of music & politics

  • Name: Dawn!

I got word that a musician friend of mine had performed recently during a high-profile function for a certain political party.  My first reaction was shock.  In fact, some other friends of mine, for whom I had bought this guy’s first CD, told me they were now putting the CD on eBay.  I wanted to send my musician friend a “Say-it-ain’t-so-Joe” email.  Then I remembered something I’d heard somewhere years ago: “An artist can’t pick and choose their audience.”  Maybe the person who booked talent for the function is a fan.  After all, there is that idea that music is universal; it’s something that brings different people together.  People can have opposing views about many issues yet still enjoy the same music.  And besides, maybe the money was too good to turn down.

But then I thought, you know what?  This is an election year.  And this election season has been a pretty ugly one.  And, at times like these, you have to either choose sides or be totally neutral.  I’ve never had a political discussion with my musician friend.  But I had to wonder where he stands on the issues in this season if he’s willing to play for “them.”  I thought about the artists like Van Halen, Heart, John Mellencamp who have expressed anger about their recordings being used in a certain candidate’s campaign and during the above mentioned high-profile function.  Reports are that the candidate’s campaign purchased the rights to use those songs, so the artists have no recourse.  But that brings up the issue of artists’ rights and ownership of their masters and that would be another aria.

 

I have a running debate with another paly of mine over what makes an event political.  We agree that an event that raises money for a campaign or a party is political.  But she thinks, for instance, that inaugural ceremonies are national because it’s the official taking of the Oath of Office.  I think that while inaugural ceremonies should be national, they tend to be political because the person taking that Oath still represents the views and vision they expressed during the campaign.  That debate started when a mutual friend sang for an inaugural ceremony and I was livid about it.  That mutual friend later told me she had received several “nasty grams” from some of her fans.

 

And then, there’s gospel legend Richard Smallwood who was invited to the White House to participate in a celebration of gospel music this month.  I was not mad at Smallwood for accepting that gig.  He had previously turned down White House invitations because he disagreed with the policies of the current Administration.  However, a celebration of gospel music, despite taking place at the White House, is not a political event.  And, truth be told, to have a celebration of gospel music and not include Richard Smallwood is pointless, but that too is another aria. Then, came reports this week that Smallwood was “dis-invited” by the White House because of his participation in the retirement celebration of Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright last March.  Okay, now it’s political and it’s petty and it’s just one of the reasons why I think that when my first friend above got the call to perform at the high-profile political function, he should have just said “No.”

1 Comment(s).

Posted by Johnny:

Speak,my sister! It shows just how tacky and ignorant this administration is, to invite a Gospel icon, living in the Nation's capital, and then dis-inviting him because he sang at the retirement celebration of a man of God, who as far as I'm concerned, made much of America think during those brief few months. The truth will set you free, but it will piss you off in the process, someone once said. I rest.
September 26, 2008 @ 5:40 PM

Post New Comment

 BraveJournal Member Non-Member
No Smilies More Smilies »
Please type the letters you see