4 ms·

Institutions - especially those driven by profit - do not regret. If they did, an internet archival project would not trigger it when the likes of Kurt Cobain a

Institutions - especially those driven by profit - do not regret. If they did, an internet archival project would not trigger it when the likes of Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse could not.

dylan604 2y ago
What does Cobain or Winehouse have to do with this? These individuals had issues well before record labels were involved in their life. Prince turning himself into a symbol is much more emblematic of record labels controlling the lives of artists.
- racl101 2y ago
  Agreed. Cobain, for example, just struggled with fame, drug issues, stomach pain, regardless of his dealings with the record labels. Seems rather immaterial. Unless, of course, I'm missing something. Admittedly, I don't know much about him even though I'm a millennial. Seems like I should but I was more into post grunge music.
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    > Agreed. Cobain, for example, just struggled with fame, drug issues, stomach pain, regardless of his dealings with the record labels. Steve Albini remarked that during the In Utero sessions, he ignored everyone but the band and that everyone associated with Nirvana were "the biggest pieces of shit I ever met." [0] There was absolutely massive pressure on Cobain to produce for his contract, and that greatly exacerbated a number of the issues you listed. Seems like a guy who should have been given some time off from his contract. Same with Winehouse; ultimately both were a commodity for their labels to package and sell and the problems that they were showing in their behavior were ultimately their own to deal with. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Utero#cite_ref-26 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Utero#cite_ref-26
nonrandomstring 2y ago
On the other hand, institutions from science and technology, wireless communications, radio and phonograph, made all of these recordings possible. Just sayin. So nil-nil at half-time for the argument against "bare" institutions? Or are you saying all "institutions" are inherently monstrous?
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  I didn't say they were monstrous. I said they don't regret. Now you can argue that's psychopathic, which is often synonymous with monstrous, but I wouldn't call them psychopathic, either, because a person is psychopathic. A group of people, an institution, cannot be. Now, the systems that these institutions exist within are often heavily influenced by psychopaths looking to leverage situations for their own maximum benefit, often at the expense of other humans, but the institutions themselves, they're amoral.
  - nonrandomstring 2y ago
    I agree with much of that. Corporate "identity" and "ethics" is a nonsense - mostly conjured up by types who like to hide their malfeasance in a crowd. But there is such a thing as group psychology [0]. And many fascinating ways in which groups exhibit memory and latent intent. My objection is to vague attacks on all and any "institutions". Yes, most of them are corrupt and broken now. But that doesn't preclude the belief we can build good institutions, and should keep trying. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_dynamics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_dynamics
qoez 2y ago
Bothers me generally that journalists anthropomorphize companies ("company X worried by...", "will regret..."). Companies are totally emotionless entities only living to maximize profit.
- psychoslave 2y ago
  And so is internet archive. And laws. And juristic institutions. There is no emotion or individual human interest in our fully rational processes, move along, you mere mortal.
  - bunderbunder 2y ago
    I doubt that's what parent was getting at. Probably something more along the lines of the central thesis of the book Essence of Decision by Graham T. Allison. The gist of the book is that organizational behavior never makes sense if you anthropomorphize it as if it were a single entity with its own goals and motivations. Nor does it make sense if you think of it as a corporate machine that behaves mechanistically. It really is a bunch of individual humans with their own goals and motives interacting within a bureaucratic structure. It's a pretty interesting book because its ideas actually got a pretty decent test. He used the Cuban missle crisis to evaluate these three theories of organizational behavior, and showed how publicly knowable facts didn't make sense under the first two models. He then showed that the third model fit them better, and went on to make some hypotheses about what really happened that couldn't be verified at the time. Decades later the relevant information was declassified and it turned out that, while many of his guesses were incorrect, an impressive number of them were spot on.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
  >that journalists anthropomorphize companies Because companies are composed of individual tapeworms working towards a common goal? >Companies are totally emotionless entities You speak as if they're evil spirits. They're made up of people. They're very emotional, you just get to see all the worst emotions manifesting at the most inappropriate times.
quickthrowman 2y ago
Geffen didn’t shoot heroin into Kurt Cobain’s arm and Island Records didn’t pour a 1.75L of whiskey down Amy Winehouse’s throat every day. Kurt and Amy did that to themselves. FWIW, I am a former heroin addict and alcoholic. If you want an actual honest take on what’s fucked up about the music industry, Steve Albini covers it well in this essay: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-problem-with-music https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-problem-with-music
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  They didn't, but at a certain point, one should realize that it's better for the artists (and thus, arguably, the long-term investment the label has made into their careers) to not have their problems made worse by commoditization.
  - aerostable_slug 2y ago
    Her management notoriously tried to get Winehouse to stay alive and keep making music. She made a song about it [0]. I think simply getting a paycheck was quite a contribution to these artists' demise. Though he managed to not die directly as a result of the heroin that consumed his existence, the late Matt Dike autobiographically remarked (paraphrasing here) that the worst thing in the world for a junkie was unlimited resources. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehab_(Amy_Winehouse_song) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehab_(Amy_Winehouse_song)
  - quickthrowman 2y ago
    You can’t force someone to stop shooting heroin or drinking excessively. They were addicts before show business, the money just made it easier to maintain an addiction. I would’ve never quit heroin or alcohol if I had virtually unlimited resources to acquire more drugs.

Institutions - especially those driven by profit - do not regret. If they did, an internet archival project would not trigger it when the likes of Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse could not.

dylan604 2y ago

What does Cobain or Winehouse have to do with this? These individuals had issues well before record labels were involved in their life. Prince turning himself into a symbol is much more emblematic of record labels controlling the lives of artists.

racl101 2y ago
Agreed. Cobain, for example, just struggled with fame, drug issues, stomach pain, regardless of his dealings with the record labels. Seems rather immaterial. Unless, of course, I'm missing something. Admittedly, I don't know much about him even though I'm a millennial. Seems like I should but I was more into post grunge music.
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  > Agreed. Cobain, for example, just struggled with fame, drug issues, stomach pain, regardless of his dealings with the record labels. Steve Albini remarked that during the In Utero sessions, he ignored everyone but the band and that everyone associated with Nirvana were "the biggest pieces of shit I ever met." [0] There was absolutely massive pressure on Cobain to produce for his contract, and that greatly exacerbated a number of the issues you listed. Seems like a guy who should have been given some time off from his contract. Same with Winehouse; ultimately both were a commodity for their labels to package and sell and the problems that they were showing in their behavior were ultimately their own to deal with. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Utero#cite_ref-26 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Utero#cite_ref-26

nonrandomstring 2y ago

On the other hand, institutions from science and technology, wireless communications, radio and phonograph, made all of these recordings possible. Just sayin. So nil-nil at half-time for the argument against "bare" institutions? Or are you saying all "institutions" are inherently monstrous?

lenerdenator 2y ago
I didn't say they were monstrous. I said they don't regret. Now you can argue that's psychopathic, which is often synonymous with monstrous, but I wouldn't call them psychopathic, either, because a person is psychopathic. A group of people, an institution, cannot be. Now, the systems that these institutions exist within are often heavily influenced by psychopaths looking to leverage situations for their own maximum benefit, often at the expense of other humans, but the institutions themselves, they're amoral.
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  I agree with much of that. Corporate "identity" and "ethics" is a nonsense - mostly conjured up by types who like to hide their malfeasance in a crowd. But there is such a thing as group psychology [0]. And many fascinating ways in which groups exhibit memory and latent intent. My objection is to vague attacks on all and any "institutions". Yes, most of them are corrupt and broken now. But that doesn't preclude the belief we can build good institutions, and should keep trying. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_dynamics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_dynamics

qoez 2y ago

Bothers me generally that journalists anthropomorphize companies ("company X worried by...", "will regret..."). Companies are totally emotionless entities only living to maximize profit.

psychoslave 2y ago
And so is internet archive. And laws. And juristic institutions. There is no emotion or individual human interest in our fully rational processes, move along, you mere mortal.
- bunderbunder 2y ago
  I doubt that's what parent was getting at. Probably something more along the lines of the central thesis of the book Essence of Decision by Graham T. Allison. The gist of the book is that organizational behavior never makes sense if you anthropomorphize it as if it were a single entity with its own goals and motivations. Nor does it make sense if you think of it as a corporate machine that behaves mechanistically. It really is a bunch of individual humans with their own goals and motives interacting within a bureaucratic structure. It's a pretty interesting book because its ideas actually got a pretty decent test. He used the Cuban missle crisis to evaluate these three theories of organizational behavior, and showed how publicly knowable facts didn't make sense under the first two models. He then showed that the third model fit them better, and went on to make some hypotheses about what really happened that couldn't be verified at the time. Decades later the relevant information was declassified and it turned out that, while many of his guesses were incorrect, an impressive number of them were spot on.
NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
>that journalists anthropomorphize companies Because companies are composed of individual tapeworms working towards a common goal? >Companies are totally emotionless entities You speak as if they're evil spirits. They're made up of people. They're very emotional, you just get to see all the worst emotions manifesting at the most inappropriate times.

quickthrowman 2y ago

Geffen didn’t shoot heroin into Kurt Cobain’s arm and Island Records didn’t pour a 1.75L of whiskey down Amy Winehouse’s throat every day. Kurt and Amy did that to themselves. FWIW, I am a former heroin addict and alcoholic. If you want an actual honest take on what’s fucked up about the music industry, Steve Albini covers it well in this essay: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-problem-with-music https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-problem-with-music

lenerdenator 2y ago
They didn't, but at a certain point, one should realize that it's better for the artists (and thus, arguably, the long-term investment the label has made into their careers) to not have their problems made worse by commoditization.
- aerostable_slug 2y ago
  Her management notoriously tried to get Winehouse to stay alive and keep making music. She made a song about it [0]. I think simply getting a paycheck was quite a contribution to these artists' demise. Though he managed to not die directly as a result of the heroin that consumed his existence, the late Matt Dike autobiographically remarked (paraphrasing here) that the worst thing in the world for a junkie was unlimited resources. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehab_(Amy_Winehouse_song) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehab_(Amy_Winehouse_song)
- quickthrowman 2y ago
  You can’t force someone to stop shooting heroin or drinking excessively. They were addicts before show business, the money just made it easier to maintain an addiction. I would’ve never quit heroin or alcohol if I had virtually unlimited resources to acquire more drugs.