[Dixielandjazz] Big Business & Art

[Steve Barbone]

Rob Wright  rwright at siatucson.com wrote (polite snips and excerpts)

>I think this is an interesting question about art in general.  Having a
>liberal arts education along with many years as a professional musician and
>being a successful business man after all that. . . In summary, most artists
>are just not very good.  Yet so many poor artists have the arrogance to believe
>that they are the ones who see the truth and that the people who won't pay them
>are ignorant. I think it is usually the other way around!

>Second, most successful artists I have met , ie those who are able to make a
>living at it, are resourcefull, imaginitive, and innovative business people
>themselves.  I cannot for the life of me understand the attitude that
>artists who make it commercially have somehow sold out.  That's nothing more
>than sour grapes in my opinion. . . snipped for brevity.

Well said IMO Rob. A myth put to rest perhaps. Not too different from the
myth of the greedy, grasping corporate heads who ruin art, kill the music
business and or the business world in general because they don't innovate,
don't take chances, don't move their product or art into the future, etc.

Myths that persists even though we share these views on PC's, blackberries,
or Ipods invented and marketed by YOUNG innovators who took a chance, and
saw the future. Who among us gray bearded keepers of the status quo would
have bought their stock when they first started out? Remember that first
picture of the "hippies" who founded Microsoft? Or a young wise guy named
Steve Jobs? Or a young New Orleans trumpet player named Wynton Marsalis?

Funny thing about innovators, whether they be in the arts or the business
world. They are for the most part, members of that younger generation we so
love to disparage. Sour grapes indeed.

Cheers,
Steve Barbone