Ageism in the Record Industry

My recent article entitled “Fall out, Sell out and Move out” which berated “Fall Out Boy” was not met with open arms from all camps; one such critic felt that bearing in mind the band were only 17 when the album “Take This To Your Grave” was released somehow absolved them from criticism and that my comments were “a little harsh”.

I make no apology for the fact that they felt the sharp edge of my keyboard in this instance for a number of reasons. Frankly just like any other band, and needless to say combined with any other label, their sole purpose of pressing discs is to snatch away the listener’s hard earned dollar from another band; so if they wish to offer themselves up alongside every other contemporary band who have the same profit focus then it only seems fair that they are compared on the same base.

If they want to play at being a band but are intimidated by the competition then frankly they have to suck it up because there aren’t any other options; I for one haven’t seen the “17 and under” category on the shelf at HMV or on I-tunes and I should very well expect them to be cheaper than other albums if the band worry they can’t sell. I am quite certain that no customer is going to buy an album out of sympathy for this group of teenagers who have tried soo hard and have really made a great effort; because making an effort simply doesn’t cut it. The only customers they can guarantee are their mums and I hope even they would think twice.

All this leads me on to pose the question: How old must you be to be considered a “real” band or artist? For example was Bob Dylan too young when he recorded some of his best music and almost single handedly revolutionised folk music? Or perhaps did the Arctic Monkey’s have to show fake ID before they were allowed to have the UK’s fastest selling album of all time? I know for a fact that the answer to both these examples is no. So how does it look from the other end of the age spectrum? Surely artists must develop and mature indefinitely? But unfortunately the evidence is to the contrary once again because frankly even big names such as Van Morisson, The Boss and Dylan have surpassed their creative peak and should be quite happy to live off the royalties that their back catalogues’ generate.

I guess the simple conclusion is two fold: firstly, unlike some people, music isn’t ageist which is a hypothesis best proven by none other than Mozart at 16. Secondly music critique can only ever address the art at hand; I can never give a band the benefit of the doubt just because they are 17 or give the Boss a favourable review for “Devils and Dust” because I know he can do better; ultimately on this site the music is up for review and not those behind it.