Shut up and sing!

**USN_Squid** · 08-04-2004, 12:24 PM

This political crap from actors and singers just rubs me the wrong way. Am I the only one that doesn't give a toss what Sean Penn or Pearl Jam think about politics? They have an amplified platform to speak their views, and yet are not especially qualified or in demand to express them. They get rich and famous and somehow think that they must be right (or left in this case) and we're all a bunch of idiots that need high school dropouts and music majors to educate us politically. I think there must be a psychosis that develops when you are rich and insignificant.

Shut up and sing!

edit:
If people are willing to pay a buck, why not I guess? In the article it says this:
The idea was hatched by several of the acts' managers, and quickly expanded. "Once we started talking to each other, ideas started percolating and other artists started reaching out to us," said Jon Landau, Springsteen's manager. An idea hatched by the Managers.....hmmm $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

**Pokerface** · 08-04-2004, 12:50 PM

I give a toss.

Of course, it's the least I can can do, considering the toss I give all you for YOUR political views.

**H-Hour** · 08-04-2004, 01:03 PM

I don't begrudge them for wanting to be socially active, wanting to do what they can to espouse their views. They're people too, and you don't have to have a PHD to have the same rights to activism that we all have. I'd rather see artists standing up for what they believe in then standing up for shakin' that ass. Do you get mad at them for other fund-raising concerts like farm aid? What about the artists who will perform at the DNC and RNC?

If someone has a platform, I don't blame them for using it.

I should add, though, that I don't really care what they think either. It seems you do, since you're the one upset with their plans.

**Wolfie** · 08-04-2004, 06:23 PM

If I was to pay for a concert and they ended up expressing their political views on stage, I would demand my money back. I paid to hear them sing, not sprout off why they think Bush should be re-elected or Kerry replacing Bush.

**NewsWrthy** · 08-07-2004, 01:18 AM

I have a Major Issue with John Melloncamp and his never ending need to voice his leftist views, but I still like his music alot. Hmmm not sure what to think of myself now( looking in mirror and scowling at self)

**H-Hour** · 08-07-2004, 02:44 AM

Yeah, how dare these people use art as a means of political expression! Who needs songs like Imagine, Strange Fruit, or Black Brown and Beige. If a song has lyrics, they should never be more then grocery lists, and don't even get me started on the satire of Schostakovich! I want my instrumentals straight up.

**NewsWrthy** · 08-07-2004, 10:51 AM

It's not that I begrudge them the right to self expression. I just will not support an artist who uses his music as a forum to promote views contrary to mine. It would be like voting for the candidate that you don't want. nothing personal thay have the right to say those things and I have the right to with hold my money.

**USN_Squid** · 08-09-2004, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by H-Hour

Yeah, how dare these people use art as a means of political expression! Who needs songs like Imagine, Strange Fruit, or Black Brown and Beige. If a song has lyrics, they should never be more then grocery lists, and don't even get me started on the satire of Schostakovich! I want my instrumentals straight up.

They can write the songs that make the whole world sing for all I care but does that mean Ted Koppel should interview them for their political ideas?

**Pokerface** · 08-09-2004, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

They can write the songs that make the whole world sing for all I care but does that mean Ted Koppel should interview them for their political ideas?

I'd be more interested to hear their views than those of most politicians.

**leejo** · 08-09-2004, 04:40 PM

I'd rather hear some politicians sing that some of these singers. We already know that politicians can act.

**H-Hour** · 08-09-2004, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

They can write the songs that make the whole world sing for all I care but does that mean Ted Koppel should interview them for their political ideas?

Hehe, well, I mostly agree with you there, but that's the fault of Ted Koppel and other news media (although it could be said they're just giving the audience what it wants). I don't expect a famous musician, or anyone really, to turn down the opportunity to share their views with the world if they want to and are asked.

Also, for many artists, such as Ani Difranco, political and social ideology are central to their work.

All forms of art, but particularly music and literature, have always been rife with political and social themes. This content connects with and influences it's audience. In that regard, artists often act as leaders of social groups. A prime example of that is P-Diddy's new "Vote or Die" campaign. Artists can, and often do, act as social stewards for mass opinion. I don't mind this, though I tend to think the bar has been set quite low by mass opinion.

**IceCold** · 08-09-2004, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by USN_Squid

They can write the songs that make the whole world sing for all I care but does that mean Ted Koppel should interview them for their political ideas?

Why not? What makes their opinion any less important than yours, mine or Michael Moore's?

**USN_Squid** · 08-09-2004, 06:23 PM

Here's a quote from Springsteen in the link I posted above. He's basically saying, alright I'm at the point where I'm famous enough, rich enough, etc. that I can afford to piss some people off by saying what I think and I don't care if they don't listen anymore.

You build up credibility, and you build it up for a reason, you know, over a long period of time, and hopefully we've built up that credibility with our audience. And I have an audience that's Democrats, Republicans and everything else, you know. And I think there comes a time when you feel, all right, I've built this up, and it's time to spend some of this.

This is what bothers me. Certainly he has the right to do what he wants, and say what he wants at his own expense finanacially or otherwise. But now, every time I hear the Boss sing I will immediately think this guy is no longer just a singer to me. He opposes my views of where our Country should be headed politically, and he is using his celebrity status to influence others that may not take the time to form their opinions otherwise. The list of people that I react to this way grows everyday. I was watching a movie with Woody Harrelson (sp?) this weekend and my first thought when I saw him was not that I enjoy his movies, but that he is a freakin crackpot lefty (pun intended). I can't watch a movie wit Alec Baldwin without thinking that he uses his celebrity status to push issues I disagree with.

It's just changed the way I view my "entertainment" I guess. And yes, this is nothing new, but you have to admit that it's much more prominent than anytime in recent history. We are literally in danger of being attacked in our own neighborhoods and I feel they have a disproportionate amount of influence in the mass media.

And the kind of things they're doing are just looney. Danny Glover thinks Fidel Castro is a hero to his people, I mean come on!

**leejo** · 08-09-2004, 06:27 PM

Eh what the hell. Picasso was an adulterous *******. But the boy could paint. The Boss can write a song. Alec Baldwin can....hmmm. Uh... Well I guess Danny Glover can....damn. Uh. Ok well the Dixie Chicks are really good at...

Ok OK Bon Jovi. He's got great hair and . Jeeze this is hard. Uh.

**H-Hour** · 08-09-2004, 06:51 PM

Then don't watch, listen, read or support anything they do if you don't want them to have celebrity status. That is your "vote".

This really seems like its more of a pop-culture issue for you guys. I really hate to admit it (I really do), but these people are a significant portion of our cultural leaders. If you want different people to assume that role, then support different people. If you want that role to be abolished, then good luck, cause I don't think you've got a chance.

He's basically saying, alright I'm at the point where I'm famous enough, rich enough, etc. that I can afford to piss some people off by saying what I think and I don't care if they don't listen anymore.

I read his statement more as, "Look, you know I'm not a radical, but I believe in this very strongly, so I'm going to voice my views. I hope I've built up enough credibility with you that you won't hate me just because your views differ from mine." Granted, "spending" was a bad term for him to use, because it implies he's losing it, as opposed to just risking it.