Age old arguments!

Happy New Year all! I hope you had a safe and thoroughly good one! I know I did :0)

OK, it has not been very long since I last wrote, but an email I got from someone who had been reading my blog, and it inspired a response from me, and a public one at that.

My post that initiated the email: “Oh, and I have to mention The Editors, what a band! Sound a bit like The Killers, but not in a "let's rip them off and jump on the whole 80's revival bandwagon" sort of way. Anyway, their album The Back Room is magic!”

Here is the email I got in response: “The Editors ripping off the Killers??? It's Interpol they sound like, and it's Interpol, Hot Hot Heat, French Kicks and others that preceeded the Killers' not-so-original sound.”

So in response…I said they sound a bit like The Killers, not that they are ripping them off. I think The Editors are amazing (and I wish they had more support in Australia). I have never tried to pretend that The Killers have a particularly original sound, however, I must note that there is a very big difference in merely mimicking a particular sound or band that you admire; and taking inspiration from the style and making it your own. I firmly believe that The Killers are a band that have worn their influences clearly on their sleeve, but have contributed their own elements to their influence to advance the music to a new place.

I have to be honest and say that I have never heard French Kicks, however I have seen Interpol and Hot Hot Heat live; and they are brilliant. I am not denying that in any way. Though given the choice I would prefer to watch The Killers or listen to their CD, but that is just a personal taste thing.

Anyway, all of this got me thinking about all the drunken arguments I have had over the years about which bands rip off which other bands; who was the “original” band that started a particular trend; and of course which bands do and do not have “cred”.

This argument is one I hold very close to my heart, and one that gets me very fired up…I am sure a lot of people feel the same. My biggest point is that ALL bands (and I mean ALL) have drawn influences from other artists. Why is this a bad thing, and something that is looked down on? After all, it is the biggest form of flattery is it not? I guess at the end of the day, it boils down to the point I made above. There is nothing wrong with an influence, as long as you have added your own flavour to it.

Music is no different to fashion, film or any other form of pop culture, it goes in circles. It ebbs and flows. Very rarely does something truly “new” or “original” come along, and when it does, it is a mutation or merging of other styles.

I hope I have explained myself more clearly with the above. I would love to know what others think, do you agree???

Oh, and another pet hate of mine. I loath it when someone loves a band, but once they get commercial airplay, or some sort of major success they have “sold out”. Can someone explain this concept to me, as I seem to have missed something? Is it not the very ambition of a band or artist to get their songs heard by as many people as possible? Is it not the point to be the best at what you do? Why is this selling out? I honestly do not see the difference between a band progressing and growing their audience, and someone in an office going for a promotion at a major company.

The Black Eyed Peas are a band that gets a lot of grief on this topic. They are more successful than they have ever been since including Fergie in the band, and yes, their albums have taken on much more of a pop feel. Why is this “selling out”? They have kept their Hip Hop roots, and taken their music to a whole new audience. Their songs (other than ‘My Humps’) often have strong messages contained in them and their music is making hundreds of thousands of people happy. To some fans, this is a crime.

Can anyone explain to my why success is “selling out”? I really want to understand…

Pop Princess xo