An Excellent New Read: "A Brief History Of Why Artists Are No Longer Making A Living..."

@orpheus10  and @whart 

Much thanks for the kind words.

@whoopycat

"...he treats WWII as the beginning of time." I think that's just because that marks for him the beginning of his point of involvement with the industry and he was perhaps reluctant to try to account for any of the period prior to that since it would plainly involve speculation. I think I can sympathize with that. But, your point about touring remains well taken. Thanks for your post.

@bdp24 

Thanks for your post. Very interesting anecdotes!

'three easy payments' offered...

and Elvis didn't place an emphasis on looks and theatrics and sexuality instead of quality music? Did he not rip off black people's music for the most part and monetize their craft at a level they could never have dreamed of? I think we are being a bit too simplistic here. It's never been easy separating form from function. Things are no different today than they ever have been. You think it's ever been easy making money from music????

The poster has no problem regurgitating a half-baked 1980's music rag notion that cannot be supported by fact surrounding Elvis Presley and this ridiculous buzz word, 'culture theft'.
Elvis Presley was the conduit and crossroads of American music before an industry grew large enough to manufacture such a thing. Because he also happened to be genetically 'beautiful', half-wits throughout the years tended to discount his mind boggling talents and allure, which are still, arguably, unmatched.
If what the best selling artist of all time did was able to be replicated as a formula, or for that matter, equaled, it would have been done over sixty years ago.
He had no equals, black or white and could only be eclipsed by The Beatles, a worthy and equally unmatchable phenomenon.
To mention very few off the top of my head- Robert Plant, Jackie Wilson, Springsteen, James Brown and Lennon himself would agree, so if self-hating post 1970's white kids with lowered testosterone levels, no war to protest, a dismal array of genuine generational rock & roll heroes and their little word processors, think so, they're in shallow waters. There was no equal. Not in his time or since.

I agree that "cultural appropriation" or "cultural theft" are ridiculous concepts.  

I’ll agree with that sentiment. The author of the article put it this way:

"Yes, there have been a handful of futurists – H.G Wells, Aldous Huxley, and given the state of many current governments I would grudgingly include Ayn Rand. Probably the most successful futurists in our lifetime may have been Marshall McLuhan and Stanley Kubrick, but even so, all of these writers and film makers have been only partially successful gazing into the crystal ball. Given that the past is no more fixed than the future I begin this conversation with you."

It’s that last sentence that to me is the operative one here. You could envision it coming to include all kinds of attempts that people often make to ’rewrite’ historical events...including this kind.

While it seems the author only meant to be washing his hands of it, he also seems to be acknowledging that such attempts can be expected.

@jburidan, imo the one exception to your otherwise fine contention is that of Paul Simon’s Graceland album. Not because he merely pasted his voice onto the music of the South African musicians he recorded and called it his (though that is a valid criticism), but because the "songs" he wrote for that album suck!