Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
If everyone embraced "open source" as an economic reality, maybe giving your time, ideas and efforts away would be groovy and reap rewards for everyone. But that's NOT THE CASE. Trying to apply "open source" principals to the arts is the death knell of any notion of making a living as an artist. Frankly, the Cali economy as well as the nation's is a result of people saying "whatever" when faced with challenges and details regarding money. The Arts? Better to help the public understand NOW whether it is vital, has value, and might be worthy of structured economic principles, or it's going to die just like education, healthcare etc. Artists of all walks should be compensated for their work and intellectual property—Just like inventors, writers, photographers etc. (Not that these trades aren't "art", but they seem to have more firmly established money structures). Keep saying "whatever" and someday your sustenance will disappear. And THEN you will have to come up with the same detailed "structure" so you can receive "payment" for your ideas, time and efforts. Best to just DO IT NOW. Or . . . stay high, party on and figure it out later. WHATEVER. On 10/6/09, richard sales <richard@glasswing.com> wrote: > (Some modern) musicians are the only folks I know who will FIGHT for the > right to give their work away. It is SO weird! > > always happy to run into others who have to do crass, unartistic things >like > eat, pay rent/mortgage, buy the occasional pint, use modern >transportation > etc > > R > richard sales > www.glasswing.com > www.richardsales.com > www.hayleysales.com > On Oct 6, 2009, at 8:58 AM, Warren Sirota wrote: > thanks for posting the link. people's attitudes about art and money are >so > f*kd. > > > next? > > > > > > Amanda Palmer wrote this blog about making money on the internet > > > and the attitudes of people she encounters who don't appreciate her > efforts > > > at staying financially stable as an artist.