Well done! Money is necessary and indeed very nice,
...but completely changing your sound and ditching your back catalogue in an attempt to be popular makes you a cunt.

You really are trying to claim that there have never been bands who just did it for the love of it all - they've ALL been commercially-driven cynics just like Bowie - aren't you?

For every Bowie there's a Pink Fairies. If you're really that staggeringly ignorant of this subject you really would do well to minimise the humiliation and stop digging yourself in deeper.
( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:00, 1 reply)

Well I would have thought anyone employed as a professional musician is doing as their
profession.

So yes.

I don't really see what the problem is with trying to be popular as a musician.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:16, closed)

People are in the music industry for one of two reasons..
1. To help them create their 'art'.
2. To make money.

I have no problem with those in either camp but the real hypocrisy belongs to those who claim to be of the former but are patently obvious in their quest to achieve the latter.

Bowie is a fine example, as are U2.
(Tugnut Ex of this parish, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:42, closed)

... and anyone who points to one band doing it and not the other.

All "artists" want to create their art, and to make money.

Just as one doesn't say to someone one fancies "I find you physically attractive, and am not interested in your mind", you say "You have beautiful eyes", a musician says "I'm all about the music" not "Give me your money."

All artists. To what degree you buy into this is up to you, but to slate one over the other is simply ridiculous.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:12, closed)