Monitor Mix

by Carrie Brownstein

 
 

BRANDED

Kanye West has inexplicably launched his own travel website; it's like Orbitz or Travelocity except that it's Kanye. Ostensibly, the point is that West is selling more than hotels and plane tickets; he is selling a lifestyle, namely, his.

On its own, the news of Kanye's online travel agency is benign, novel in its quirkiness, maybe even admirable as seen as part of a long line of West's creative and unique endeavors; but within the broader context of artists or people-turned-brands, West's new venture is not so much troubling as it is tiring. Maybe it's that it comes at a time when Madonna is once again ubiquitous, gracing the cover of half a dozen magazines. And Madonna is always extolling something--oxygen facials, peeing in the shower (kills fungus!), Pilates, adoption, Kaballah, children's literature, Britain. Madonna is so branded that it's hard to distinguish between her and, say, Proctor & Gamble; she's just some other company that shape shifts with the times, transforming her outward appearance and message to attract new buyers, all the while selling us on a new way to exist in the world. And the concept of artist as a brand is also overwhelming within the context of an election year--one in which we as consumers (I mean, voters) are already inundated with sales pitches of how we can best make America (that brand we live in) safer, cleaner, and stronger.

When bands become brands, the dynamic creates a very cynical way of viewing music; the inherent value shifts from an aesthetic or sonic one to a monetary one. If I am choosing between a U2 iPod or a regular one, a White Stripes camera or the non-White Stripes camera, my role as a fan has been commodified as well. Basically, I feel like a tool.

I'm not fooling myself--bands and fans and the music industry as a whole are a business, and a struggling one at that. And there has always been a bottom line. But when everything is branded it gives me the feeling like I'm doing all of my shopping at the mall; there is the illusion of choices, but mostly they are being made for me. And by being at the mall in the first place, I've already forfeited most of my options.

Much of music has always been about buying into an idea, a movement, a sphere of influence, an aesthetic, and a voice. As music fans, we're sometimes willing to let the collective voice of the audience speak for us, or for the music to represent a bit of who we are. But I'd be less willing to do that for a brand. Imagine putting brand stickers on your car, following brands around the country, asking for a brand's autograph, or trying to sleep with members of the brand. Frankly, it wouldn't be as fun. So, before Bright Eyes puts their name on a hybrid car or Feist comes out with a line of handbags, they should remember that their fans would likely be embarrassed to utter the words, "I'm with the brand."

11:51 AM ET | 04- 3-2008 | permalink

 

Comments (Send a comment)

I'm with the brand!

That could (and should) be the title of a college thesis paper on music commerce. How funny!

Sent by Chad Bly | 1:58 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Best post ever, thanks!

Sent by Andy | 2:24 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I would like to see more of the reverse: brands as artists!

I'll bet Nintendo could make a solid album.

This is a great idea. Seriously. I mean, what if Ford or Toyota made a better album than Interpol? -CB

Sent by Tim | 2:39 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Who was your copy editor? Robin? "On it's own [sic]." Robin? (2nd para.)

Fixed, thanks! -CB

Sent by nsf | 2:40 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I guess this is one of the main reasons most of us are first attracted to more "independent" or "underground" music. Of course that arena is being encroached upon by corporate brands too. I see all those brands plastered over everything from NPR's coverage of SXSW and I feel a little uncomfortable. But I like to think that the bands I really hold dear (Yo La Tengo, The Evens, Built to Spill, etc.) have always resisted this trend. I hope....

Sent by Stuart | 2:43 PM ET | 04-03-2008

amen

Sent by j | 2:46 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Excellent post Carrie! Interesting, and intelligent, view on it all. I agree it can become tiring...like all these blummin' celebrity fragrances...how ridiculous! x

Sent by Divinyl | 2:49 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Mention of putting brands on cars makes me think of the sense I'd had at seeing Colorado and midwestern (at least) car dealers slap a logo on the car, for you to drive around as their little mobile billboard. And how indignant I'd be at the notion. A deal-breaker on the buy.

Sent by saucet | 2:54 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Kanye's awesome travel website lists Cafe Azul as a recommended restaurant in Portland. It closed several years ago, right around the time his "brand" was at its peak.

Sent by td | 3:12 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Good stuff. I get this feeling every time I see someone with an Apple bumper sticker on their ironymobile.

Sent by Brian A. | 3:34 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I think everybody has a price. Hell, I'd sell out... if only anyone was buying.

Sent by Joe | 4:06 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Sleeping with the brand, that sounds awkward.

I have a set of Spice Girls handkerchiefs, and have happily blown my nose into the images of Posh, Sporty, et al for years. Perhaps a more appropriate version of branding? (They lasted longer than the reunion!)

Sent by Zoe | 4:13 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Great post.

Sent by Ryan | 4:26 PM ET | 04-03-2008

You knocked this one out of the park.

Sent by Brian from NH | 5:12 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Please tell me there isn't a U2 ipod.

On branding redundancy: my favorite is when people have Chevy stickers on their Chevy, etc. Kind of like wearing the band's t-shirt to the show.

Sent by Elizabeth | 5:14 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Don't be that guy!

Sent by Brian | 5:25 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Great post. Although hip-hop is diametrically opposed to punk/indie/alternative music in one crucial sense: selling out or linking yourself to a brand is a sign of "making it big" instead of "selling out" So in that sense, why shouldn't Kanye West have his own travel website? Is it any worse than all these "branded" clothing labels, fragrances, magazines, caskets, etc?

I agree. Also, at this point, the idea of "selling out" is sort of a non-issue and one I don't care too much about. But this whole branding thing takes it to a whole different level. It's not just lending your song or face to a product, it's about turning the band/artist into a product. I think hip-hop artists are savvier about this, there has never been the pretense that they are "above" being commodities, as long as they are in control of those decisions. Rock/indie musicians seem to just be realizing that branding is a way for them to go beyond the world of music, and for the brand to maybe make a bigger impact than the music itself, at least temporarily. -CB

Sent by Rick | 5:33 PM ET | 04-03-2008

This is one of my favourite posts. I admire bands that don't endorse anything other than music.

Sent by Kirie | 5:34 PM ET | 04-03-2008

So we can't look forward to a line of Carrie Brownstein-branded, comfy-yet-stylish shoes for rocking onstage? Damn.

Seriously though, fantastic post. Hearing a song you love in a commercial can be disheartening. Seeing cheesy stuff branded by a beloved band is downright miserable.

Look for Monitor Mix to make its own line of....um....I don't know how to brand a blog. I need a marketing firm to help me. I agree that songs in commercials are different than branding. -CB

Sent by chriso | 5:48 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I totally agree. Great post.

As a rabid White Stripes fan, however, I tend to feel that they issue fan merchandise (which I do not own) in the form of collectibles or memorabilia, which strikes me as different than, say, a White Stripes power mower or iPod.

Sent by Rachel | 6:10 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Feist did peddle iPods for a while.

I'd say a lot of us already buy into certain brands of music. Some of us buy the "indie" brand. Some buy the "hip-hop" brand. Others buy the "classic rock" brand. Some people cross boundaries and dip into each brand, liking what they like and not afraid to have varied tastes. Most people take their brand of music to rooftop and yell, "I'm with the brand," brandishing their indie or hip-hop or what have you like a coat of arms.

Sent by Nick L. | 7:21 PM ET | 04-03-2008

"I don't know how to brand a blog. I need a marketing firm to help me."

May I suggest CarrieWood, an indie rock takeoff on Dollywood, set in beautiful downtown Portland, Oregon. I'd totally go to it.

Sent by Nicole | 8:21 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I think the branding issue tends to be focused more around the "artists" whose music has never seemed like anything more than a way to promote their own brand. However, to use Wilco as an example, I really can't judge them for trying to find other ways to make a living other than touring 360 days a year.

I think they said it best when they said that a few of them even drive VWs.

Just playing devil's advocate, but is the level of difference that great from Kanye to the old Priceline.com ads?

This post is not a critique of the artists who give their songs or images to products. That's not something I feel strongly about. I guess with the example you gave it would be like if Wilco had their own brand of car, if they themselves became a product -CB

Sent by Erik | 8:55 PM ET | 04-03-2008

Professional athletes have been branding themselves for longer and much more unabashedly than musicians. I think that musicians, at least those more invested in being artists than business people, have held out because they don't want music to be about buying into an idea or a movement. That's my guess, at least.

I hope you read the Mudede article in the Stranger last week about Vampire Weekend because it was centered around class in hip hop versus indie rock and how hip hop aims to glamorize wealth (thus, so many rappers are also entrepreneurs) and VW takes their aesthetic and inspiration from a struggling Africa of the 80's. It was a good read.

Sent by JJ Hellgate | 9:04 PM ET | 04-03-2008

"...one in which we as consumers (I mean, voters) are already inundated with sales pitches of how we can best make America (that brand we live in) safer, cleaner, and stronger."


Would i be a tool for making this my new myspace headline? Did i just reference myspace?!


Best blog yet.

Sent by kristina | 11:38 PM ET | 04-03-2008

I remember reading an interview with Gwen Stefani where she said that she knew she probably wouldn't be making music forever and that this gave her another creative outlet... which really does make sense.

I've always looked at band merch as being a logo and brand in itself, not that it stops me from wearing it.

then again, there is the whole KISS franchise...

Sent by beth | 8:30 AM ET | 04-04-2008

The title made me hope for a post related to The Big Lebowski ("Ever hear of a little show called Branded?"), but this was great nonetheless.

Sent by diakron | 11:13 AM ET | 04-04-2008

excellent post. your point of view is always original and so clearly and eloquently stated. i can't add anything to what's already been said except for thanking you for making your links pop-up in a new window. it really annoys me when blogs do not do that.

Sent by brett | 12:31 PM ET | 04-04-2008

Sent by alison | 1:21 PM ET | 04-04-2008

Incredible post Carrie.

Sent by pranay reddy | 5:38 PM ET | 04-04-2008

The way I see it, we shouldn't try to draw clear moral guidelines of what makes musicians sell-outs and what doesn't. It's hard to generalize and a lot of people confuse this issue with the idea that bands lose value when they go mainstream. I think it's more important how the artist behaves once he/she has coherently lent work to a brand and doesn't let that influence the quality and spirit of future output.
I know I'm looking at a best-case scenario here, but when good art is used by brands it can operate as a joint-venture, in the sense that you are popularizing both the product and the medium. People find themselves listening to music and trying to understand lyrics they never would have gotten to any other way, valuing cultures they didn't use to pay attention to.
Moreover, media industries can no longer stand alone. They are required to go for massive interconnectivity between markets to cut costs, increase profits and make themselves harder to sink - I believe that the music industry is in it's third or fourth consecutive year of negative growth. In the future it will probably have to be fueled solely by love it seems, because those who are only in it for high margins will switch over to, who knows, puppy-based ethanol or something.
I just think we have to remember why we love the music (or any form of art for that matter) and maintain the intimacy between us (between the work and yourself,that is... haven't met any of you).
Really interesting topic, I guess one could go on about it for hours.

Sent by margot | 8:40 PM ET | 04-04-2008

But all rock has become everything it started out opposing. You need to go beyond rock - to the very scary new music that's replacing bands, the first new music of this century, the first music to oppose what rock has become - Post-Bands music. It's the music that everyone in the old guard trembles in their boots over - while those who hear it tap their feet!
While rock has become clonish, bland, and is so puffed up the only thing it is rebelling against is change and rehab, Post-bands music is back to basics - rebellion, fun,passion, and unpampered music playing. And hopefully it is upsetting everyone stuck in the music rut by opposing bands and rock and electric instruments, and the same venues, and musicians that don't know how to write music but still do, and conglomeration of the industry into 4 dinosaurs, etc.
And this new music is only the tip of the much much bigger art revolution.
Sadly no one talks about it because the revolution is against the old media too. No one yet. Ah but look ahead - scary music is on the horizon! And it's not on that 'band'wagon!
Hopefully it'll bring the world out of last century!

Sent by Tom Hendricks | 11:46 PM ET | 04-04-2008

shut up

Sent by helpcomputa | 1:21 AM ET | 04-05-2008

it is easy to brand a blog carrie, you can become like perez hilton and hang out with z-grade celebrities all day. how about monitor mix t-shirts? something like "i sold my soul for money and i all i got was this stupid shirt... and a lot of money".

Sent by killabot | 5:36 AM ET | 04-05-2008

This is my favourite post yet. How poignant can you get?

Sent by Kevin McCallister | 1:03 PM ET | 04-05-2008

Wait... what's post bands? robots with computers "singing" in midi?

I think this is more about the act of commodifing oneself then branding. Branding is used even by the most indie, hardcore, straightedge, anarchy punk rock bands. Through music, decisions to play at certain venues, clothing choices, recording style, chosen media format they are making choices about how to present themselves to the world. This is the core of what branding is. It has been usurped by corporate culture to represent something dangerously homogenized. But if you boil branding down to its core principles, it means consistent visual representation. That could be moved a step to the left and be interpreted as consistent musical form. I think the White Stripes are an amazing example of this. Maybe I don't agree with their decision to commodify themselves via cameras but as far as creating an interesting and consistent visual style I think they're pretty subversive. Branding IS a dirty word but I think if try to get to the core of what it represents you can apply the principles losing to things that have true substance. Such as, say, dischord records.

And. Who buys this stuff anyway? It seems like it's made for kids. Which is gross but I don't think we are the "target audience."

Sent by KM | 7:25 PM ET | 04-06-2008

One of the many reasons I don't, and won't, work for an advertising agency. Including the one in Portland.

Sent by Aunty Consumer | 7:53 PM ET | 04-07-2008

Post-Bands is against ALL bands (and as a sidenote - all ads too) because they, bands, are too dull, derivative, clonish, boring, safe and sanitized.
Post-Bands is anything that is not a band. Six Billion people can't even imagine music without electric guitars. But Post-Bands can. Post-Bands is back to basics. Take a standard guitar and a singer - that's it, that's Post-Bands. You can't hide behind loudness, or over production, or echo, or dancers, or hype, or auto tune. You have to be pretty good - or pretty bold. You have to be saying something because people can hear what you say.
Bands are everything rock started out rebelling against. Time for fun. Time to upset people like you that can't even envision a music that isn't in the band rut.
When rock began it was the best of both melody and beat. Now beat has become psychotic rock - heavy metal, hardcore, rap, etc. and melody has become mush pop - boy bands, divas, etc. Post-bands is back to both! Melody with beat, passion, fun, rebellion, emotion, upseted-ness - all the things music hasn't done in this century.
And Post-Bands, unlike rock, is also about the new art, literature, and the total art revolution in all the arts and media. Scared yet?
The new is here. And bands can only gaze at it from the last century. And the media is stuck in '?' gear.

Sent by Tom Hendricks | 11:19 PM ET | 04-07-2008

You may feel like a tool but others may feel part of a group and want to connect with others of that group. Or some have a desire to feel part of a like-minded community. And what better way to do that than having, say, Grateful Dead golf gloves?

"This is not a Fugazi t-shirt" anyone?

Sent by Bryan | 11:38 PM ET | 04-07-2008

Primus sucks

Sent by zach | 10:15 PM ET | 04-08-2008

Post bands. I still don't get it. So you mean folk? Bluegrass? Isn't that kind of Pre-Bands? I think you are making this whole post-bands thing up friend. The new is here? Cool, can you point me to a specific instance of that newness? Or would that destroy it? To know is to erase.

Sent by KM | 8:29 PM ET | 04-09-2008

"people used to make records
as in a record of an event
the event of people playing music in a room
now everything is cross-marketing
its about sunglasses and shoes
or guns and drugs
you choose" ani difranco Fuel 1998
10 years ago!
One wonders if it has always been this way since making music became a lucrative career choice and not just an outlet of talent

Sent by b | 6:32 PM ET | 04-12-2008

*standing ovation*

Sent by Mitch | 7:42 PM ET | 04-14-2008

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.







 (privacy policy)

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.




   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
Carrie Brownstein

Carrie Brownstein

Carrie Brownstein is a writer and musician. She was a member of the critically acclaimed rock band Sleater-Kinney. Her writing has appeared in 'The New York Times,' 'The Believer,' 'Pitchfork,' and various book anthologies on music and culture. Read Carrie's F.A.Q.

 

 


All Songs Considered Blog

 
 
 

Related News Feeds

 
 

Search 'Monitor Mix'

Search for the word(s):
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs