Does Success Kill Creativity?

[bogey_j]

I believe success kills ambition and creative art. An artist is at his best when he/she is young and hungry. Once you get to that point where you're making millions of dollars and have a lot to lose, creating becomes formula.Obviously there are exceptions, but that's what i think

 

what do you think?

[sventvkg]

 

I believe success kills ambition and creative art. An artist is at his best when he/she is young and hungry. Once you get to that point where you're making millions of dollars and have a lot to lose, creating becomes formula.Obviously there are exceptions, but that's what i think what do you think?

 

 

No I don't think success does. I think when that drive inside of you to progress artistically stops burning, that's when creativity wanes. Whether or not an artist is commercially successful shouldn't have anything to do with that.

[Matximus]

I don't think success kills creativity. What it seems to often do is take away that tension, or that challenge, that good artists need to thrive. It can also expose the true depth of an acts' talent, their skill.

 

People that are a tad undercooked as writers or performers at the time of their lucky break tend to flame out superfast. Anybody can get lucky writing a couple good songs. It's damn near impossible to turn them out on a dime without tons and tons of practice.

 

Solo acts with a massive amount of true, brutal experience have a better shot at great, long, runs. Think Michael Jackson; Bruce Springsteen. Sam Cooke. David Bowie. Those kinds of people. Elvis is an interesting exception. But some of the missteps he made make more sense when you realize how he was almost totally green when he was discovered.

 

And in band situations, a group that has a couple of ambitious, core guys, has a good shot of making interesting work well after they've made it as big money all-stars. Trying to outdo a peer provides that tension, and drive you might otherwise lose after you're living lovely in a big mansion.

[Khem1cal]

I'm not sure if it's success or the labels......

 

I listen to metal mostly(I do enjoy softer music as well, but really enjoy the fast & heavy stuff) and I've noticed this in local bands that get signed too.

 

They come out with an EP, It's awsome, unique, very creative.

 

Get signed: It's generic, nothing sounds unique(sounds like every other metal act), and i'm left scratching my head.

 

I've noticed this in rock bands as well, although it's most apparent(to me) in metal. I've got quite a collection of EP's, but less full-lengths because the full-lengths sound so cliche & contrived, it makes want to puke!

[pdiddy]

It might be something like insanity (doin the same thing and expecting a different result). Success may lead to do the same thing and expecting the SAME result.

[Hoppy Shimko]

 

Depends on the person. No matter how much money or fame comes their way they still get up every single morning and work hard to write a great song or put on a great show. They're in it for true and undying love of music and that's a joy to be around.

 

 

Joy thy name is Hoppy !

[BlueStrat]

I'd turn it around and say that i don't know very many successful people who aren't creative.

 

What often happens to artists who become successful, though, is their time to create disappears. They find themselves touring, doing press interviews, radio shows, TV appearances, and when they do get free time they want to ge as far away from anything t do with the whole scene as possible.

 

For a lot of artists, though, once they get past that initial success flurry of activity, they can be quite creative while enjoying success. The Police, Tom Petty, Bruce Springsteen, and dozens of others put out great albums after they became successful.

[daddymack]

I'm not sure if it's success or the labels...... I listen to metal mostly(I do enjoy softer music as well, but really enjoy the fast & heavy stuff) and I've noticed this in local bands that get signed too. They come out with an EP, It's awsome, unique, very creative. Get signed: It's generic, nothing sounds unique(sounds like every other metal act), and i'm left scratching my head. I've noticed this in rock bands as well, although it's most apparent(to me) in metal. I've got quite a collection of EP's, but less full-lengths because the full-lengths sound so cliche & contrived, it makes want to puke!

 

Some of that, though, may be more the fault of the producer(s) than the band itself. Most self-produced materials have the stamp of the band/songwriter's creative skills. When they get signed, they rarely are allowed to pick their own producer, or produce themselves. Thus, their 'touch' is filtered on subsequent releases until they find a producer who they click with....if they do.

Also, it is possible, that rather than write new maretial amid all the running around, they may opt to do older material they already rejected for their original release, which may indeed be inferior, hence not having been on their freshman effort.

[Kramerguy]

some bands get better as they go (pink floyd, AIC, Led Zep IMO)

Some get worse - how many bands do you know where their first album is undeniably their best?

 

success seems to have little to do with it.

[Inazone]

 

some bands get better as they go (pink floyd, AIC, Led Zep IMO) Some get worse - how many bands do you know where their first album is undeniably their best? success seems to have little to do with it.

 

 

I agree with Khem1cal as it pertains to metal bands. A lot of them start out strong, but once they are presented with an opportunity to reach a wider audience, there is pressure to continually expand that audience, namely through more accessible songs. A veteran producer might be able to squeeze those songs out of the band, compromising some of the creative drive that got the band off the ground to begin with. Those first one or two releases often are the best, after which point the band starts sounding closer to other bands on the same label, or who worked with the same producer.

 

I like Alice in Chains. Every release has been good, but Facelift was their best in my opinion. It's my favorite album, ever, regardless of genre. With each album/EP that followed, they lost a little bit of that fire. I feel the same about Soundgarden, or Metallica, or even U2 to leave the metal genre for a moment.

 

One of my favorite (metal) albums is Testament's Low. Their label, Atlantic, asked for a grunge/alternative album. Instead, Testament gave them a thrash album that had some death metal vocals, which was a first for Testament. The playing and songwriting had far more urgency and drive than their previous couple of releases, and was the most creative thing they'd done in years, but the label want accessible radio songs and dropped them.

 

I don't blame success, but some of the factors that combine to bring a band into the spotlight can contribute greatly to lack of creativity.

[ac30guy]

 

I believe success kills ambition and creative art. An artist is at his best when he/she is young and hungry. Once you get to that point where you're making millions of dollars and have a lot to lose, creating becomes formula.Obviously there are exceptions, but that's what i think what do you think?

 

 

I disagree. Check out Disciple's last 3 albums. They are nothing alike, all within their style, and all are incredible. All 3 were written after becoming mainstream.

[mmmiddle]

 

I believe success kills ambition and creative art. An artist is at his best when he/she is young and hungry. Once you get to that point where you're making millions of dollars and have a lot to lose, creating becomes formula.Obviously there are exceptions, but that's what i think what do you think?

 

 

I think for those "artists" who are in it for anything but the artistry and creativity, then you are right. But for those who love music and being creative, the success will not affect their innate hunger for progressing.

[Poker99]

I think for those "artists" who are in it for anything but the artistry and creativity, then you are right. But for those who love music and being creative, the success will not affect their innate hunger for progressing.

 

AC/DC comes to mind...

[gtrjones]

Could it be that bands that are 'successful' are just much busier? There's a lot more time to work together and write and re-write and edit songs when you're only playing 3 gigs a month 'cause nobody knows who you are, then when you're on a bus everyday trying to get to the next gig. And several months of that can lead to people wanting nothing whatsoever to do with that damn guitar for a while...

 

It's not the 'money' part of the success - it's the demands made by all those people giving up the money...

[meandher]

Absolutely...look at Led Zeppelin!

[Next Direct]

 

success seems to have little to do with it.

 

 

Exactly.

 

You'll find all kinds of examples of both cases; band getting better with each new album - band never topping their debut album.

 

You can't make theories out of a few examples. Look at the big picture and you'll notice there's evidence that both confirms and contradicts the notion that 'success kills creativity'.

 

Hence, why it probably comes down to the people involved, not whether they were successful or not.

[Happy_Thom]

Weezer - flopped it after their first 2 albums

 

System of a down - flopped after first album

 

QOTSA - complete flop after first 2 albums

 

 

 

 

clutch - get better (almost) with every release

 

motorpsycho - pony at the start, had a golden period and now they've shifted in another direction but I dunno if it's worse, I spose it could be considered more creative as it's quite different etc...

[Johnny-Boy]

"I believe success kills ambition and creative art" - Bogey

 

Nah...

 

John:bor:

[JohnMCA72]

How many people have just 1 good, hit-worthy song in them? How many don't even have that? How many have 5 or more?

 

It's a pretty big deal to create just 1 "Hot 100" song, & my hat's off to anybody who can do it just once! There are only so many Jacksons, Springsteens, McCartneys, etc. in the world. There are a whole lot of good, creative people that none of us will ever know about.

 

I'm sure there may be cases where success killed somebody's creativity for some reason or another. More common & more likely, though, is that I think that most people only have so much gas in the tank, so to speak. It's like setting a world record for running a mile. Once you've done it, should you expect to do it over & over again? Or is once all you get, & most people don't even get that? How many people never get to play in a World Series or Superbowl, let alone win them multiple times? If you manage to get there, that one time may very well be the high point of your career & life, so I suggest that everybody try to enjoy whatever success they may have, because it can be very fleeting.

[meandher]

How many people have just 1 good, hit-worthy song in them? How many don't even have that? How many have 5 or more? It's a pretty big deal to create just 1 "Hot 100" song, & my hat's off to anybody who can do it just once! There are only so many Jacksons, Springsteens, McCartneys, etc. in the world. There are a whole lot of good, creative people that none of us will ever know about. I'm sure there may be cases where success killed somebody's creativity for some reason or another. More common & more likely, though, is that I think that most people only have so much gas in the tank, so to speak. It's like setting a world record for running a mile. Once you've done it, should you expect to do it over & over again? Or is once all you get, & most people don't even get that? How many people never get to play in a World Series or Superbowl, let alone win them multiple times? If you manage to get there, that one time may very well be the high point of your career & life, so I suggest that everybody try to enjoy whatever success they may have, because it can be very fleeting.

 

Like Norah Jones. Wasn't her first album awesome, then her last one was pretty good, but won't compare to the first. Then again Led Zeppelin had 'Houses of the Holy'...Led Zeppelin 4, Physical Graffiti...

[elsongs]

If you become extremely successful, OF COURSE IT DOES!

 

If most of your time is spent touring, performing, doing interviews, filming music videos, doing promotional appearances, signing autographs, dodging the paparazzi, dealing with rumors that may or may not be true...do you even have any time to create?

[ermghoti II]

My suspicions is there are two major factors.

 

1. A lot of art comes from pain. A songwriter will be in a different place with a steady income stream and a legion of screaming fans than living in a rehearsal space with three or four other drug addled idiots. They may not be able to write effectively from this place.

 

2. There are a finite number of ways to string words and notes together. If the monkey behind the keyboard stumbles onto a few winning combinations over five to ten years while mucking around the local scene, there is no guarantee they can spit out another 3-5 gems in the next 8-16 months, hence, sophomore jinx.

 

Oh, and drugs. An addict with sudden access to unlimited money is headed for a disaster.

[Scafeets]

Success allows some artists the freedom and resources to be more creative.

 

For others, success is someting they can't handle, and they go off the deep end, thanks to booze, drugs or ego (or a combination thereof).

 

Finally, and this applies to a good number of one-hit wonders, sophomore-jinx bands and should-couldas.... There are some who achieve their level of success with their one and only manifestation of talent, then sink to their approriate level of mediocrity after the pop buzz wears off.

[dali]

Absolutely - time and time again, this happens...but it happens more in the music industry than any other industry. For whatever reason, actors (well, not a great example..), sculptors, painters, dancers, etc.. keep the drive. So, what makes the music industry different? Well, in my opinion it's that the music industry invites more 'showmanship' performers only interested in fame. What I can't put my finger on is the Billy Joel and Elton John types, but perhaps they were at their best when they were "tortured" souls.

[Jimmy Chaos]

There are so many bands/artists where I think to myself 'Their early work was the best'

 

R.E.M.

Rod Stewart

Elton John

David Bowie

 

just off the top of my head.

 

I think when you 'make it' you are comfortable, and that can be very hard for creativity, in my opinion creativity is the lovechild of hardship.