Mangum.

Kevin Barnes is riding the Ayn Rand horse, and hard!

I view Barnes as a sellout not because he's sold his music that he created with (theoretically) no commercial intent. . .I understand the usefullness of licensing in the fight to feed and clothe musicians. The reason Barnes and Of Montreal are sellouts is because they re-create their art to suit the purposes of the people who want to pay for it. I can't believe he doesn't understand the difference.

@1, Fixed. I fucking always do that. It's like a Carissa's Wierd thing for me...

Jim Noir (Barsuk) just did the same thing with one of his songs for a Target commercial. I guess the lyrics needed to be more shopping-friendly.

I consider the number anti-christ of sellouts to be Metallica, for suing their own fans to please their bosses.

Somehow, I see Of Montreal to be a *long* ways to get there. Non-musician music fans seem to struggle so hard with grasping what selling out means...

Let the people who put out one of the best albums of 07 make a little money for godsakes...

I can't see how a T-mobile take on a "Hard Days Nite" redux is the gateway to selling out.

It's more the Outback Steakhouse commercials than the T-Mobile business.

I would say that Barnes' attitude towards selling out ("It's awesome, everyone should do it!") is more indicative of his sold-out status than anything else. When you've crossed over to the dark side, the dark becomes the light.

i don't believe musicians should get paid. for anything, ever. they shouldn't have health insurance either. i didn't pay a dime for the new radiohead record, and it makes the music sound that much better.

#7: Of Montreal make tens of thousands of dollars every time they play. Literally. Plus, they now sell tons of records, and they license their music to tv shows and things without re-writing their songs. They have a considerable amount of income without bothering to change their songs around to suit the needs of corporate advertising. It's been a long time coming, for sure, but they are in no way starving artists.

The line between legitimacy and selling out is not a fine as people think--you sell out when you compromise your art for the needs of others because the others are going to pay you X amount of money. I think it's pretty clear that this is exactly what Of Montreal did, and the fact that they are proud of it just makes it even clearer that money is more important to them at this juncture than art.

oh come on. the outback commercial sucks. this ad was silly. but, you know what, the music is good. and the shows are amazing. he has to pay for the sets and lights somehow. plus, he has a kid to think about. let the guy make some money.

But that's my point! He is making money! Without selling out! So why even bother to go on this heavy fiscal republican trip?

I agree with Ari mostly. I don't know how much they're making and how much is enough that they don't need to change the lyrics for Outback (a pretty subjective determination).

I absolutely understand selling the music in the new paradigm, but the Outback ad is revolting. I can't understand why Outback can't just hire somebody to write a jingle. What is the extra value of having someone prostitute themselves and betray their fans? They'll pay more if someone is willing to burn their credibility and destroy their career? Why didn't they just hire someone to write "let's go to the Outback"? What are Men at Work doing these days?

Working?

what if the band really likes the bloomin onion or whatever? its possible. maybe an outback commercial is a dream come true, like if the hot dog guy outside the comet paid me to write a jingle for him.

Well, sure. I mean, we're all familiar with the old Of Montreal b-side "Georgie Fruit and the Coterie of Efeblums Share an Awesome Blossom," right? That song pretty much lays it all out right there...

Ari, big deal! It's an accepted notion that fame and big bucks in music is fleeting in normal conditions. No one, especially the musician himself, knows how long that gravy train will last. He's getting his paper saved up for the possible occurrence that he might not be making tens of thousands of dollars per show.

(Which btw, has to be split between all the band members, agents, promoters, label, venues, taxes, etc.) I doubt the piece of the pie they're getting is a big enough motivational force to not accept any and all givers of cash. He's not changing his music style. He didn't change his style of dress. He even snuck in a shot at the "industry". What more do you want out of them?

It's like you think you caught Of Montreal red-handed with their paws in the cookie jar.

Of Montreal is telling you "Yes. These are my hands in the cookie jar. Because we want a cookie. And this is a good place for cookies. In the future, there might not be these cookies. And if anybody had to pull these cookies out of the cookie jar, shouldn't it be us because we have clean hands? And aren't cookie jars used to dispense cookies?"

How can you not see Of Montreal's point, Ari? :)

if you change all the references of 'cookie' to 'blooming onion', it's much better.

the outback steakhouse commercial thing wasn't exactly kevin's doing -- in a recent interview (which i would link if i could remember where i saw it...) he said there was some fine print he missed that allowed outback to rewrite the lyrics, and if he had caught that then he wouldn't have signed on. irresponsible? maybe a little. but not a sellout.