@Aqua-Letifer said in The end of culture and art:
@Larry said in The end of culture and art:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The end of culture and art:
@Catseye3 said in The end of culture and art:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The end of culture and art:
You could not possibly be more wrong about that. Movies take hundreds of people to make. They're all essential, all several hundred of them. Albums take a team as well.
I specifically used the word 'creator'. I didn't say 'make'. Of course those projects take hundreds of people, but those hundreds are, to one degree or another, gofers. The concept, the idea, comes from one or a very few.
Still, it's better to have their backing than not... nothing works like a fat marketing campaign....
I think even that is going to get a little fuzzy: big names going off on their own (if they can get out of contracts), and indie people finding other means. The institutional model will never go away I don't think. Just that some folks will find alternatives (which for many will include a day job).
You are correct. It's still a little risky for a "big name" to go off on their own, though. I have seen some who tried it and their careers just died. But other than that minor point, I agree with your assessment.
As for cat's "gopher" remark...... There are no "gophers" getting any of the money. None that is except the occasional situation where the artist who get the credit wasn't even involved.... I've been involved in quite a few projects where "big name" artists known for their playing skills got credit for playing something, but wasn't even there because they weren't good enough musically to pull it off, so some bald headed middle aged guy played his part for him...,