# Let's Go Ahead And Kill Your Dream Early...

- Site: Analog Industries
- Author: Chris Randall
- Date: 2013-06-09
- URL: https://analogindustries.com/2013/06/lets-go-ahead-and-kill-your-dream-early/

![Let's Go Ahead And Kill Your Dream Early...](https://analogindustries.com/images/blog/ootzootz.png)

I typed up a fairly lengthy rant on the current state of Kickstarter that was largely triggered by [this article.](http://torontostandard.com/culture/stop-giving-your-money-to-rich-people-on-kickstarter) I think the author, while perhaps not exactly clear on how capitalism works, makes some very good points. Then I realized what I was really building up to was some rather delicious schadenfreude about [The Cabin Sisters.](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/512169314/the-cabin-sisters-zosia-and-clara-mamet?ref=live) All that by way of saying that 00tz 00tz, the band pictured above, shouldn't feel that bad. You're in the same boat as David Mamet's kids. There are worse boats to be in, mostly operated by Carnival Cruise Lines, where you'll apparently be stuck on the Promenade Deck with David Foster Wallace footnoting the experience as he tosses off another cynical rant about people from flyover states that don't buy his books.

Anyhow, I deleted that tirade. Why? Because it's so fucking obvious. Yeah, Kickstarter have demonstrated that they have malleable morals. Yeah, Amanda fucking Palmer. Yeah, Penny Arcade, whatever. Veronica Mars? There's a stretch goal for the people that give a shit. David Mamet? Sorry girls. Sins of the father, and all that jazz. Plus, it helps to be able to play an instrument before you go off making records. And seriously, music video? 1993 called. They want their marketing (and their joke) back.

Also, I don't want people to confuse me with DFW. (I generally expound parenthetically.)

Basically, it comes to this: there was a brief time from the 1970s to the mid 1990s, where being a musician didn't also mean being a panhandler. That time is gone. Which brings me to the actual subject of our conversation: [Flattr](https://flattr.com/). Go peruse that site, then come back here and we'll discuss. I'm intrigued with the idea, personally. Interested to hear the thoughts of the AI readership.

## Comments (46)

**boobs** (2013-06-09):

i signed up for flattr 2 days ago. i think the idea is good shot at something new. some new possible model for compensating "creators". not sure it'll work but it is reasonable how it's set up. totally up to you and your budget etc yada yada etc.

i hate that they try to get you to sign up w/facebook account or twitter etc.. but facebook wants to be the entry point to everything. i'm rather surprised it showed up at flattr since it's sort of comes from a pirate bay type of open internet keep the internet free yada yada type of place and that to me runs counter to facebook.

annnyyyway... i'm gonna give it a shot.. as a creator.. and see what happens. currently i'm not 100% clear on how someone will 'flattr' my content. there is no badge or whatever showing up anywhere.. i guess it'll all be kinda background but there should be a way to 'like' something on soundcloud etc w/o it being a 'flattr'. fucking quotes.

it's very early stages and has long way to go but i applaud them for trying something different. it could grow change morph into something commonly accepted or it could just disappear and be used by 30 people in sweden.

i've heard of other models that use torrent technology... you upload stuff you created.. people can donate/pay for it through the tracker and the people who download it can reseed it and earn money from reseeding it (from somewhere???) but that part wasn't fully explained to me in the kitchen of this house party where the conversation took place.

just nice to know that people who are young and smart and understand the internet are willing to try new shit are thinking about these things and how to get people paid for making stuff and make it somehow painless for people who can't not get all their media through torrents.

ps - DFW was from fly over states. i hesitate to mention it since i can de_fucking_rail anything w/a DFW conversation. but.. i found "a supposedly fun thing..." less cynical and more just.. hilarious.

**boobs** (2013-06-09):

re: kickstarter.. it's worth mentioning that Francis Ford Coppola routinely mortgaged his home and went into to debt to finish a film.

i guess now we just ask the internet

**boobs** (2013-06-09):

ugh.. cabin sisters.. just clicked on that. .isn't that the actor in HBO Girls? wtf.. can't they just get together any of the probably dozen people they know in the industry who make movies or direct things or do commercials etc and collect on a favor or pay scale or some other fucking brainstorm and get shit done??? it's pretty fucking lame that the obvious solution is kick starter.

where the punk rock is?

throws hands in air.

**darklordjames** (2013-06-09):

Flattr? A) I find it hard to give a shit about a site that names themselves by dropping the "E" before the "R" at the end. B) 2001 called. Said it wants its vision of micro-transactions back.

Web comics tried this a decade ago. It's a model that has already proven to be a failure. I think I'll stick with the model of "You put out some MP3s that I probably won't listen to, but I want to support you anyway? Sounds like a great excuse to give you $10.", or "You're offering up a bundle of indie games that I won't play, but I can dictate that 100% of my $10 goes to Child's Play? Sold!"

Kickstarter? I have zero problem with anybody asking for money on it. It's up to the supporters to decide what is worthy of their dollar, not the project creators nor the pundits. I've given my money to Wade, Penny Arcade, Veronica Mars, Doublefine, and the interesting custom dice game Dungeon Roll. In all cases, I wanted the product that they were offering. Some imaginary scale of just how "indie" they are, and therefore deserving of the funding, had nothing to do with the choice in any case.

**seancostello** (2013-06-09):

I just fast forwarded through The Cabin Sisters' Kickstarter spiel video, and saw footage of someone talking in front of a cabin. This would imply that they know someone with a camera, and probably some editing software. So, why do they need an extra $32K for a video? Why didn't they just lip sync their songs a few times while they had someone with a camera there?

EDIT: I figured out why they didn't just film a video: because VIDEOS ARE FOR CLOSERS.

**mitchell** (2013-06-09):

Here's a question... I can't tell exactly what they're trying to do, but we'll assume the band depicted in the pic is seeking ten grand to make themselves a CD (BTW, whatever band this is was already tired and cliched ten years ago when I frequented the places that kinda band hangs out. They always sound EXACTLY the same- no choruses, chunky chick in a corset with a weak voice, etc.) Why do they need ten grand to make a record? Surely mohawk guy already has a PC (this guy is NEVER a Mac user, trust me) with a cracked copies of Cubase and every plug-in ever created, and the only actual audio in this band's music is tuneless singer girl (again, trust me on this). Mixing and engineering is always done by mohawk guy, so that's a freebie. If they pulled their heads of 1992's ass, they'd know that there's no point in pressing CD's, so it would seem that with $55 burning a hole through their PVC pockets, they've got enough crowdsource funding to make like, nine records.

About five years back, I did just that, but I made CD's, so that was about a grand. And I had it mastered, so that was another $600, and I dropped a couple hundred to record a live drummer. And because I don't do trite goth/industrial, I made many times my investment back in royalties from placements. Best of all, I didn't have to beg anyone for money, like a dick.

This may sound a little harsh-like, but a substantial part of my 10,000 hours (you spent 10,000 hours on your craft, didn't you?) was learning to record, mix and generally be self-sufficient, because never in a million years did I assume I could go sniveling to the general public to prepay for my awesome musical meanderings.

Recently a friend of my girlfriend's friend actually did a Kickstarter so she could buy an apartment in NY. Are you fucking kidding me? She was totally serious about this. When I decided I wanted to own a place, 1) I chose a location that was realistic for my budget (viva depressed real estate market Vegas!), then I tried out a bleeding-edge concept called SAVING UP MY MONEY to get what I want, because I'm not ten years old, thus Non Life Threatening Things I Want That Cost Money (e.g. a house, my very own musical CD, makin' a movie, etc.) are my own responsibility to procure, not my friends, and not the public at large.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-09):

Well, while you're absolutely correct, the premise on which you built your argument is unfortunately false. To wit:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1237860123/00tz-00tz-makes-a-music-video?ref=live

Yeah, they need $10K to make a video. Apparently. Because you do.

This isn't really about picking on OOtz OOtz; that's too easy for starters, and it'll quickly devolve in to some ad hominem shit. If we want to have a conversation about how many people who do kickstarters have zero idea of the economics of what they're getting in to, this could be an interesting case study, but Sean nails that in a pretty thorough way: if you're crafty, you can make pretty much anything on pretty much nothing.

-CR

**Wade Alin** (2013-06-09):

I try to stay away from Kickstarter arguments. Try. It stirs up way too many emotions in people. The most personally offended seem to be people who have spent time waiting around to "get signed," missed their calling entirely, or spent $3-5k on a record that went absolutely nowhere and think it was a significant investment. Now these little fuckers who don't know shit about shit . .

The most successful people I know and those who have had those successes within the "traditional" label/artist relationship usually say Kickstarter is "neat." There's not an outpouring of hatred and a "kids these days" bitterness about it.

Personally, I've done 2 successful Kickstarter campaigns. One because we needed money to accomplish our goals (and I didn't _want_ a label involved,) another because I had no interest in doing the project but "fans" did. I can mix. I can do a couple other things. I've put well over 100k on credit cards to finance my music in the past. Reaching my "goal" was never really a question, it was more about how I reached that goal.

I think, ultimately, the argument over Kickstarter has nothing to do with art or music. It has the world to do with age, values, all kinds of shit that never touches on the reality of "project financing."

I have a more serious question. Has Kickstarter created a wave of horrible art, music, movies and projects? I mean, worse than what ignorant, out of touch, corporate entities have been willing to finance in the past? Is there just a higher exposure rate to people's stupid ideas?

**bongo_x** (2013-06-09):

Great article and when I heard about the film they focus on I had the same reaction. I don't really understand what people who get involved are thinking besides "OMG the Internets!". Most of those people would probably balk at paying $10 or $15 to see the finished film, but will give much more than that to people who don't need it sight unseen.

But damn, I wish those guys would finish that Chris Whitley movie, and I would have given them something.

>chunky chick in a corset <

It weird, but the way you wrote that almost made it sound like you meant a bad thing.

bb

**noisegeek** (2013-06-09):

Thank you for foregoing the Kickstarted rant. Any more it seems to me that even coming from someone whose opinions I respect, complaints about Kickstarter basically boil down to "People aren't doing things the way I think they should, and I'm very angry about it!". If you think crowdfunding should be run differently, build your own platform and run it however you want.

**afreshcupofjoe** (2013-06-09):

I'm with boobs.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-09):

Regarding Kickstarter, it's generally a case of this: people that are able to promote themselves and justify their endeavors are usually able to accomplish their goals. Whether they use Kickstarter, a traditional label/studio/publisher, self-funded, whatever, if someone has a vision, and there is a market for that vision, that someone can usually pull it off.

If, on the other hand, that person's vision is stupid, or they have zero self-promotion skills, or they are phoning it in, the market usually decides (in that adorable manner it has) that those people might be better off pursuing something more amicable to the common good, like blanching fries. Thus our friends OOtz OOtz (because of an obvious lack of talent) and the Cabin Girls (because of an obvious attempt at pulling the wool over our collective eyes) don't get to make their videos. The general public, for all its manifold failings, usually knows when you're faking it. This is why Brokencyde sells records. Everybody knows they're a joke, but it's kind of a funny joke, and besides, they're entertaining, and nothing if not earnest.

-CR

**boobs** (2013-06-09):

i think kickstarter = just another social media marketing device for a lot of artists/musicians/labels (creators) who do campaigns. for others it's essentially a pre-ordering system for a release.

and then there are the people w/delusions who i have no idea about... and as said there's the "i needz monies!" people who are probably just "why not... it's there".

i think there's a lot of cool stuff that came around via kickstarter and friends. niche products.. weird inventions etc.. all good. like anything else lot's of crap comes along w/the tide. that's life i guess.

as for flattr.. we'll see. (shrug)

**TomE** (2013-06-09):

I'm just delighted when somebody says they like something I made. That seems a small ask of the universe, low risk, whereas running a popularity contest with cash prizes seems like hubris asking for trouble.

Flattr is just beyond me. Microtransactions for likes? What about just selling shit? Here is my shit. It's 5 bucks. Now you have it. Enjoy.

There's plenty of things I like and care nothing for whoever made it.

**Zero One** (2013-06-10):

i looked at the photo timeline on facebook, either they got tricky in photoshop or SHe's not as chunky as she used to be, take a look- she really was really chunky in 2010.

**Jaysen** (2013-06-10):

Wait, was 00ntz 00ntz already taken? And whether you succeed or not really depends on your fanbase, i assume. One of my favorites, IAMX, used PledgeMusic for their campaign of a new album & tour and met their goal of 100% in just an hour of starting while finishing 817% at close. If i like a band and want to support them, i will. I do by buying their music and product for one. I'll spend even more if i get something special like an autograph or something of value to me. Is it really that much different than joining a fan club and getting the special perks by being in it?

**Jinsai** (2013-06-10):

The main problem with something like Flattr is "who are you compensating?"

If you decide to "Flattr" a band, is the cash going to the label? The management? The current members of the band or their corporation? The person who wrote the song you like who is dead and/or no longer in the band?

You just don't know. And you never will.

**nulldevice** (2013-06-10):

I actually know (in passing) the kids from 00tz 00tz - and make no mistake, it's spelled with zeros.

They're very nice folks.

And...and that's pretty much all I will say about them.

But seriously, though, Who the hell needs $10 grand to make a video? Okay, I can see it costing a lot for a professionally shot and edited video, but...what does it get you? The only place it's going to be seen is on your youtube channel, which attracts 18 visitors a month, and this isn't 1983, having a "neat video" isn't going to drive record sales unless you happen to be insanely lucky, insanely clever, or a doughy korean rapper. You're just going to be some douche who spent a lot of money on a video that nobody's going to watch.

Regardless of the long-term efficacy of Kickstarter, one thing it certainly has done is foster a culture of completely overreaching and overestimating one's own value. I find my inbox and FB feed inundated with KS requests from bands I've only vaguely heard of who expect me to pony up absurd amounts of cash to fund a "debut EP" or some crap like that. Really? Really?

**nulldevice** (2013-06-10):

Also, nobody will confuse you with DFW(1), because you are clearly(2) still alive.(4)

1. David Foster Wallace, not Dallas/Fort Worth airport, which nobody will confuse you with either.

2. Clearly.(3)

3. David Foster Wallace Really liked footnotes.

4. Man, Infinite Jest was a pretentious piece of shit.

**zerozeroisland** (2013-06-10):

Coming from the 'old school' as i guess i am, i probably should be more riled up about the whole 'kickstarter = spare changing on the street' thing, but i'm really not.

I haven't really spent any extended time digging through Kickstarter, so i can't say for sure, but it seems like on a basic level the system sort of polices itself. If the band/artist/dilettante child of a rich daddy's project has no merit, for the most part people will not give them a cent. witness the Cabin Sisters and 00ntz x2.

I'd be a lot more disgruntled if i was seeing bands like that raking in 6 figures. Music video aside, that would buy a lot of cheesy Lip Service(tm) buckle shirts and plastic biohazard goggles at Hot Topic. In my day, we went to the army navy store and bought real surplus welding goggles. now get the f off my lawn.

Don't want to spend too much time making fun of other musicians, though lord knows in this case it's pretty easy. but if you need a half a paragraph to explain your band name, you might want to come up with something better.

From their ReverbNation page: "00tz 00tz (spelled with zeros & pronounced like the sound of the beat in electronic music, namely Industrial music)"

**zerozeroisland** (2013-06-10):

On a related note, Luke O'Neil wrote a pretty good piece about the whole thing, but as it relates to music bloggers using Kickstarter to fund their pipe dreams, specifically the guy who wants you to give him thousands of $ to star 'Indie, Bikes and Beer' which really does sound more like a Portlandia sketch:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/music/2013/02/advice_for_aspiring_music_writers.php

**mitchell** (2013-06-10):

Sorry if I started a hate crusade on 00tz 00tz; I don't know them, I'm sure they're not bad people, just a little clueless. Was merely stating that I've known many people/bands of their ilk over the years, so I'm a little cranky there.

Pretty much the same thing I said about making records applies to making videos- if you're clever, you can make neat videos (that 18 people will watch) for next to nothing. I'm not shooting off my mouth either, I've done it. Search "Electrolux/Celebutante" on youtube if you're curious- made on a rooftop at my old studio in LA for with my best friend, a $120 point and shoot with 720P video, a bunch of Home Depot work lights, a little imagination and fuck of a lot of extension cords and sweat. Cost: ZERO DOLLARS. No internet groveling. Far more punk rock, AFAIC.

Look, maybe the whole idea is ok on some level for some artists, it's just hard for me to swallow. CR makes a an excellent point: enterprising folks with worthwhile projects will make things happen no matter what. On the other end of the spectrum, if idiots want to give big chunks of money to already-rich people (or in the Veronica Mars example, already-rich studios) to effectively remove financial risks, well, get down with your stupid selves. It's really just another variation of the Sunset strip pay-to-play rock club mentality, wherein the club owner gets paid no matter what, sells drinks on top of that, and the band gets fucked financially no matter what the outcome.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-10):

Dude, they're a candy-rave goth band. They're well acquainted with being hated upon. And if they aren't, they sure as hell should be. I'm sure they'll find this eventually, so my advice for them is this: suck it up. If you can't take negativity, I suggest you seek another outlet for your creative endeavors.

That said, deep genre bands are always ripe for ridicule. Especially ones joining a genre that is, by now, decades old. I'm more sad that the Cabin Sisters ostensibly start in the same neighborhood I started in (L.E.S. REPRESENT!) and I'm trying to picture them in the same context as Missing Foundation, Carbon, Cop Shoot Cop, Foetus, and Motherhead Bug. Ironically (and I definitely mean "ironically" and not "coincidentally") the 00tz 00tz characters can trace their lineage directly back to that same scene if they tried, while the Cabin Sisters, who are actually from there, can not.

Very strange, when you think about it.

-CR

**DGillespie** (2013-06-10):

Unfortunately, it's less strange if you go walk around down there recently...

Regarding Kickstarter, I really can't get upset about any of it. If your pitch is, "Hey, I've created this thing of value, but I can't get it out without extra financing." I'll decide if I agree about the value proposition and act accordingly. In fact, I think Kickstarter is a great thing if it allows creators to hold on to the rights to their creation and allows them to put it out when they otherwise wouldn't be able

Alternatively, if your pitch is, "Hey, can I have some money because I want to ...", then you're not really any different than the guy on the corner asking for change. I might decide to give it to you or not, but I'm still not going to get upset about it. I think the asker should, however, realize how it makes them look.

I am curious how the girl with the New York apartment fared. I'm not one to ask for much, but my pride does have it's limits...

Dan

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-10):

The only thing that really annoys me about Kickstarter (other than shit like the Penny Arcade "Fund My Life" adventure) is that it occasionally (often, actually) creates a situation where someone is taking advantage of the lack of knowledge a civilian might have about the situation.

For instance, there was a level on the Veronica Mars one where the backer pays $10,000. In return, he gets a walk-on speaking role in the movie. This is a nifty trick, but how it is anything but a fan tax is utterly beyond me.

I was reading an article about a particular company's customer service policies earlier today, and the CEO of the company said "when I took over this company, it had policy of determining 'who is right' in any customer interaction. I decided to change that to a '_what_ is right' policy."

Dark Lord James et al will say "well, I got what I paid for" in a situation like that. And I'll say "you shouldn't have been charged. You should have been _paid_." That's what's right.

-CR

**MikeF** (2013-06-10):

I'm with b00btz b00btz.

**bongo_x** (2013-06-10):

I can't believe 00tz 00tz as a name needs to be explained, and I thought it was kind of a funny. Didn't listen though...

**mitchell** (2013-06-10):

@CR- thanks for assuaging my guilt about lambasting 00tz 00tz or whatever they're called.

@Dan- NY apt chick was trying to raise $5K toward her down payment (turns out it was indiegogo), of which she scammed, er, raised $1075. I don't know her, but my GF assures me she's not a kid, has a real job, etc.

**nulldevice** (2013-06-11):

I was having a conversation with a friend about kickstarter, and he's run a few incredibly successful kickstarts in the past. His comment was "oh, all the clever projects will eventually rise to the top."

And that kind of struck me funny. Because "clever" != "good" in a lot of cases. Some guy with shitty projects but awesome marketing will likely do far better than somebody with an interesting output but average marketing skills. I mean, yeah, this is quite often the case, but it seems like kickstarter was founded with sort of the opposite idea in mind. Huh.

Wheels within wheels, man. Wheels within wheels. Must be the chemtrails and the government mind control rays.

@Mitchell. Don't feel guilty. They need to hear it from somebody. Unfortunately it's not their label rep.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-11):

Yeah, IndieGoGo allows that sort of "fund my adventures because I'm entitled to $THING and I don't have it and that's a damn shame" stuff, which Kickstarter (Penny Arcade's "pay us or we'll keep running advertising!!!" extortion notwithstanding) technically frowns upon.

-CR

**Wade Alin** (2013-06-11):

IndieGoGo, because you've publicly complained about people using Kickstarter, changed your mind, and want to save a bit of face. Actually, doesn't IndieGoGo also let you keep the money you've raised even if your campaign has failed miserably?

I'm not even here for this tired discussion. I'm waiting for CR to say something about the Apple Dehumidifier Pro.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-11):

I have nothing to say about the Mac Pro. It looks like what it does: move a fuckton of air. Form, for a change, follows function.

That said, Apple's laptops (which I like fine) are powerful enough for me. When I do real heavy lifting, I do it on an expandable computer I built myself that runs an operating system that doesn't require you to re-buy all your software and hardware every 5 years. I've _never_ thought Mac Pros were good purchases, and this one won't change my mind. I could give a shit what it looks like.

-CR

**Wade Alin** (2013-06-11):

Okay, I'm good now : )

**ToneHead** (2013-06-11):

That "who is right" vs "what is right" insight a few comments back was pretty Zen from a leadership standpoint. I've found that in any dysfunctional organization I've ever been in, assignment of blame begins to consume much of the energy that would otherwise go into accomplishing the mission.

**MMI** (2013-06-13):

On the subject of new funding platforms, I ran across http://www.patreon.com/ a few months ago. Certainly lot easier to understand than flattr.

OTOH, in this era of internet induced ADHD, it took me some 30 minutes to re-find that site. So it's probably doomed.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-13):

Which brings us to the elephant in the room, so to speak.

A lot of art (I include music, writing, the visual arts, anything) is kind of shitty. In order to make a living making it, two things must be true:

1. You must be good at self-promotion (what PR people call "creating a story" is an adequate substitute).

2. You can't suck.

If you're really good at #1, then #2 can maybe take a back seat. (For a good example, see professional endorser Celldweller.) If you're really, really good at #2, then people will come along to facilitate #1.

But if you're not good at #1, and #2 isn't true, then you're gonna need to brush up your fry-blanching skills, basically. No web-enabled panhandling machinery is going to change that.

-CR

**boobs** (2013-06-13):

@MMI - is http://www.patreon.com/ just for white people? ;)

that was my first impression anyways.. but thanks for the link. i'll check it out.

i do find it annoying that there are so many options to for this kind of thing. not that competition isn't good but it makes for a not fun time keeping track of it all.. especially if you run a tiny label.

that's where we're at now.. until we're all embedded w/RFI chips that auto deduct our 'credits' or whatever.

**Taxist** (2013-06-13):

That patreon site is so sickeningly web3.0 its hard to look at.

**kineticmonkey** (2013-06-14):

I'm not sure what I find more interesting - crowdfunding itself, or crowdfunding anxiety.

I mean, there are loads of options to get your music out there and tonnes of ways to "monetise" (gah! I hate that word) your art. But the really interesting thing is how artists obsess over how their business their model should work, and why this or that platform is the devil's work. I guess different platforms will work for different people.

After half a dozen self-released EPs I'm now obsessing over the next one, and how to release it, how to promote it, how to make sure (for my wife's sake)that I break even. Discussions like this help me to keep all this in perspective. In the end I know the likelihood of getting picked up by a label is minimal so I'll promote the best I can, play some shows, and a few hundred people will download the EP. If I kickstarter or patreon or bandcamp it the result will be largely the same in terms of reach.

That said, I do really like simplicity and clarity in transactions - some of these social music THINGS really complicate matters. Bandcamp (that I use) keeps it pretty simple. As does Noisetrade. But Spotify, Flattr, Kickstarter... They're such complicated transactions that they lack honesty and I feel can compromise the integrity of art. Spotify turns FANS into the product, not music. With Kickstarter you end up setting an often arbitrary target for something that will be funded from elsewhere (the artist's own credit card, often) if the target isn't reached just to be able to access the already raised funds. And Flattr takes the value/transaction decision away from the creator/listener relationship. All of these platforms will work for some artists, but I wonder how they will work in the long term.

**boobs** (2013-06-16):

"4. Man, Infinite Jest was a pretentious piece of shit." - nulldevice

well.. tried to let that go. i mean.. it's been days. i understand that people don't like DFW for stylistic reasons or can't deal w/the footnotes but i have no idea where people get some of the criticisms they come up with. I had a lot of thoughts about this and why i think your comment is just a silly and dismissive thing to say but none of them hit the mark. Then last night i read the foreword that Neal Stephenson wrote to "everything and more" and a few lines more or less said it for me. here they are:

"...many of DFW's critics fall into a common pattern of error, which consists of attempting to explain his style and approach by imputing certain stances and motives to him, then becoming nonplussed, huffy, or downright offended by same."

and regarding 'archness' or 'smartassness' in DFW's writing

"Why do people see it when it's not there? It's something to do with the fact that his conspicuous verbal talent and wordplay create a nagging sense among some readers that there's a joke here that they're not getting or that they are being made fools of by an agile knave. Which DFW was not."

the more i got to know him and his life the more i enjoyed his writing but i read most of his stuff before really knowing anything about him other than he was given the macarthur genius grant which is the only award they give to private citizens for being a genius.

so yeah.. i'm a fan.. maybe just a little butt hurt and maybe now and then i'm unable to let flippant internet remarks slide but a fan none the less.

btw - neal stephenson's foreword to "Everything and More" is a fun read and more than that really. it explains.

synths and stuff.

**beauty pill** (2013-06-16):

I'm with boobs.

**puffer** (2013-06-18):

Yeah, I'm definitely w/ boobs on this one. Wasn't going to say anything 'cause its not the forum nor probably the audience, but, that.

Dismissing something for being pretentious is meaningless.

**ToneHead** (2013-06-19):

I'm not familiar with DFW, but I'll have to check his books out at some point. Whenever he's mentioned, I see this polarized love/hate response, which is usually a sign of something interesting ...

**rexlapin** (2013-06-19):

Re DFW,

Thanks boobs!

I hadn't read him before, but just picked up a copy of "Everything and More" at the library and I'm really enjoying it. My copy doesn't have the forward by Neal Stephenson but I feel like he is able to connect to my non-math savvy brain in a way the makes things clear. Hell of a thing at almost 60 years old!

**J** (2013-06-24):

Considering the wage inequalities of today, I feel a charity based support system for the "good things in life" is especially dangerous. Art is a powerful social force and if the mega wealthy are the ones funding it, the message that they present is the one that gets heard. It's no coincidence that popular music is in praise of a conspicuous consumption based life style.

England with it's lenient welfare system produces more good music consistently than the states. How many great bands are made up of "lazy" art school drop outs, people using "chemical endurance" to manage two jobs at once and/or leeching assholes? Point being, art is a job. We pay people that make terrible food, have poor customer service, are self serving bureaucrats, bad doctors, poor teachers, people that poison the environment and advertise junk food to kids, but making art, even mediocre dross, that, you need to rely on the kindness of strangers!

When electronic mostly analog gear was mistakenly undervalued and got into the hands of more people, we got some awesome music.

If your work has populist appeal, like Thomas Kincade, you'll make money eventually. Arts councils staffed by people with taste that look for people worth fund is not a bad thing.

If you're a musician, writer, or just an artist, it's what you'll do regardless of money or popularity.

It's a nifty trick that some artists have pulled off with Kickstarter, I'm not mad at that. They get money and people get to feel good for being a personal supporter rather than a "consumer".

If you value what you do, why treat it as a charity? I donate money to volunteer organizations, but I know that's crap, they should be funded. Personally, I owe myself (and others) millions of dollars in back pay for the work I do.

**Chris Randall** (2013-06-27):

I think Jonah wins this round.

-CR