Who decides how much one can push their art’s boundaries? Are artists here to entertain or innovate? Or both? If you’re hoping to push the envelope but just end up in a gray area that doesn’t revolutionize but does entertain, is there a point when you should resign yourself to be satisfied with what you’ve accomplished as an artist?
Radiohead Vs. Nickelback: The Classic Debate
I recently watched a live Radiohead performance on the Music HD channel. They're one of the best bands I’ve had the pleasure of seeing live, and this particular show proved they’ve only gotten tighter as a musical unit since I last saw them. The difference in musical contribution to the world between them and, say, a band like Good Charlotte or Nickelback, is like night and day. But the latter two bands entertain large audiences. Some might call it mindless, others call it greatness. When it comes down to it, they’re both equally valid for different reasons. But if the members of Nickelback are in the business to innovate, should they accept their current place in the music world (which, for the record, is in a spot pretty goddamn far from the world of innovation), or should they keep pushing themselves to be something they are most likely never going to be? And by most likely, I mean most abso-fucking-definitely-lutely.