This topic came out thru a question that the DD TV crew was submitted this past weekend: it said “After a tragic fact that touched everyone in the masses, would you rather musicians to write a brand new lyric for a brand new song or musicians to re-arrange an old hit and re-use it for the occasion?”
I guess the examples of tragic facts, just recently, are enough and the music industry has, more or less loud, responded.
We music fans watch the news on TV; we share our regrets and our thoughts on the social media: sharing is the natural reaction, to this day. And reversing our feelings on making (new) music is light years away from our real intentions, partially because we are not “professional” musicians.
On the other side, music makers do react as well, they more often share their feelings and thoughts on their social media than we usually do, in an attempt to first interact with their fans – interaction with people on line, you know, is a modern affair (and every fan’s wish) – and because they are aware their voice is louder, it is “out of the masses”. It is likely they go to studio to write a lyric, because maybe they think their thoughts correspond to what the masses think and for, they are aware they can sort of represent us.
The “hint” off tragic facts is generally never one thing that pushes record companies to react by forcing their musicians to make new music: performers are just their human and very sensitive: record companies only have to acknowledge it and to let it go. I can’t remember a global event that was “created” by the record industry: things like Live Aid, was kicked off by a group of musicians.
To go more specifically to the core of the question above, I think that whatever music comes out, I’d love to hear whatever musicians decide to record. It would be wise to hear brand new songs: this way, I guess, because musicians usually write poignant or impressive lyrics, as soon as they are “emotionally touched” and the newly written words have the power to really move people. Secondly, audience would appreciate the performers’ effort of saying something strong. As opposite, whenever artists decide to re-arrange, to re-use an old hit, they have to pick up one with enough good lyric; the old hit can be a more dicey choice, because apart from the original lyric, fans would just rate their hero from the old song picked up.
Speaking of costs, fees and recording bills the performers have to bear to for brand new songs and rearranging the old hit, I guess the more session men are involved in for help in the studio, the more expensive bill gets and both the “brand new song” or “the cover” I think have the same costs. The financial factor I think can rarely influence on the decision to move on: I’ve realized thru the years that the big events (built up on a simple song, see Live Aid, see “Amiche per l ’Abruzzo”, in Italy in 2009 ) took place no matter what it cost; the prevailing motivation for the artists to “react” is an emotional factor. The proceeds would go to the families of the victims or to the people affected, that’s the major target and the artists get their royalties paid for writing the new songs. The pay-off is everybody’s temporary healing
I don’t think there is an industry behind – the “tragic facts music industry”: as I mentioned above, the encouragement to “react” is of the musicians alone. Unfortunately, in the recent times the tragic facts are growing frequent, but I don’t think – and I hope it’s not so – there is any form of speculation behind. Within the victims and the suffering ones there could be managers, A&R men of the recording industry themselves, that’s why I reject to think they find financial advantage from these events, over anyone’s death.
These are my final thoughts: I’d rather my music heroes to record new lyrics and new songs on whatever negative moves them. Overall, I pray for a better world, too much blood is covering the ground!
DD TV xx