The other day, I saw a blog posted on Facebook which largely condemned not only contemporary popular music, but this culture that permits and encourages such music and spectacle to take place for us and our children to see. I really appreciated how passionate the writer was and enjoyed many of the points he made.

That is, until I got to the part where he referred to the individuals such as Miley Cyrus who dispense their wares under the umbrella of the “the art industries”.

Having seen a lot of art and been present for the creation of even more, I can say with great certainty that there is nothing resembling so-called “art industries” (or art) anywhere in the vicinity of these people the writer of this article has identified with said art industries. The fact is, none of these individuals are artists, much as they might want to be in their wildest fantasies.

There is an entertainment industry. There is even a music industry. But there is no art industry.

Additionally, there is no art being created or emanating from the entertainment industry. None. If you require proof of this, speak to any random executive who works at any level of the entertainment industry. Ask him what his prime directives are and those of the corporation he works for. Within a scant few minutes, you should have a good indication of how utterly irrelevant art is to the entertainment industry and everyone in it.

The words “art” or “artist” are terms with a certain cache which are dragged out of mothballs when this cache needs to be applied to a specific entertainer- usually to give his lack of commercial success some degree of credence or to make the more gratuitous amongst the larger community of entertainers appear to the public as being more “serious” than they cause themselves to appear. Relative to this, there was a recent article full of industry apologists explaining why Kanye West’s latest offering is, depending on who you choose to believe, a commercial disaster or a resounding artistic success. Proof once again that reality is the most flexible commodity we possess.

I am someone who feels that art is an indispensible aspect of human endeavor and human existence (and who also likes to believe that he has- to whatever minimal extent- contributed to its advancement). I am equally appalled and angered that anyone, no matter how valid or strong their primary point, would equate and confuse the self-obsessed spectacle of entertainers with the expression of artists.

The fact is, there never could be an “art industry”. The very personal nature of expression prohibits this from ever happening. There may exist industries which have subsidized artists, but never co-opted art. The absolute and only thing co-opted has been people’s perception of what art and an artist actually are.

An artist works to refine and follow a series of inner directives- not appeal to everyone so he’ll amass fame (and presumably, fortune). Any time you get that familiar aroma of seeking approval while trawling for attention by doing something seemingly outrageous, you know you’ve ceased dealing with art.

Art is the product of an individual’s expression for the sole purpose of doing expressing himself, while entertainment has become a means to gain the attention of others, usually by means of a spectacle. These days, that spectacle has no actual point or necessity beyond getting attention. This is why reality TV stars are entertainers, the same as Miley Cyrus.

Artists can, by their own recognizance, be entertainers. Every great performer who ever became an entertainer was, at their core, an artist first and foremost. Entertainers, however- those individuals who crave attention because they never got enough from their parents and don’t actually have anything to say- cannot be artists.


  1. I can relate to your thoughts, somewhat. Being a youth, I try to keep up to date with the more “popular” songs of now; but that’s just the problem. It’s just a “now”; something deliberately fabricated to appease the masses, for a time. Notably, Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, Taylor Swift; the list may go on and on. However, it is for this same reason I am glad that my dad exposed me to music; not my friends, social media, or anything else.

    In a previous article I just read, you mentioned The Girl From Ipanema, and my mind instantly thought “Oooh. Amy Winehouse.” Then I thought about “A Song for You”, “Rehab”, etc. Only to find out you mentioned a different artist. Amy Winehouse is one of those that will always stick with me; I’m still ashamed that she died so young. He (my dad) also introduced me to other amazing artists, such as Beres Hammond, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Depeche Mode (love that band)… and Pearl Jam. It is indeed a pity that he died early of disease, I would have enjoyed introducing him to my personal favourites including Linkin Park, Imagine Dragons, Breaking Benjamin, Radiohead, and Stromae.

    As you rightfully said, there is a clearly defined line between (most) music of today, and the music of “yesterday”. My personal goal is to revive the old rap that youth can enjoy and “turn up” to, without having to oblige words like “bitch”, “nigga”, “whore”.. the list goes on.

    As it is both helpful to me as writer, and a music enthusiast, I look forward to reading more of your articles when I have spare time, so please keep writing.

  2. Thanks- recently, I’ve been “otherwise occupied” but will try to add to the pile! You’re very fortunate to have this perspective on things- I’m sure it is serving you well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *