Grimes/Claire Boucher thread

Like I said, I'm not a fan of Grimes. I do think a Canadian music industry is worth supporting at multiple levels but the issues of equity and nepotism do concern me so the story interests me - and so far, I'm not sure this story is evidence of a systemic problem. It sounds like you would want to revamp FACTOR and the granting system altogether to make it focused on promoting those who are actually in need, which is a valid position but is, I think, more extreme than mine.

xp

But if people are being defensive about Grimes, it's probably bc MtlBlog and National Post are making this explicitly about Grimes herself and her partner.

It was late last night and I posted the wrong link

https://factorportalprod.blob.core.windows.net/portal/Documents/FACTOR_Recipients_List.pdf

Here it is

A complete list of all the recipients of FACTOR funding 2019-2020. You will scroll, and scroll, and scroll, and scroll some more-- 2k CAD seems to be the base minimum for a grant. You will see very few artists you recognize; as somebody who is "in the loop", even I see very few artists I recognize, although the few that I see constitute pretty-much EVERYBODY I know who lives in Canada and works as a musician.

My conclusion is: FACTOR ~is~ funding those who deserve funding-- both those who we know create worthy work, and those who we don't know (and need the assistance). Speaking personally, too: when you get a video grant, that money goes to the video artist. When you get a publicity grant, that money goes to the publicist. "Is FACTOR saving you money?" kind of? but not actually? it's paying for things that I (personally) would not be able to afford without funding.

I myself am NOT defensive of Grimes. If she is, or organizations she's affiliated with are, going to apply for arts funding, it would be helpful/wise to be accountable by publicly acknowledging this application, and stating what the intention is for any funds received.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to what Niko has to write about all of this

Hey friends, I found a home for my voice on the Grimes thing. Thanks for everyone having my back on that, I really, really appreciate it.

— Niko Stratis (@nikostratis) November 25, 2020

But if people are being defensive about Grimes, it's probably bc MtlBlog and National Post are making this explicitly about Grimes herself and her partner.

Never read either of these two publications imo!

Like, FACTOR, a federal $25m granting system has been going for years, and is so well-funded, because it's been found to work; subsidizing a music industry is good for other industries, as well.

And as I mentioned yesterday-- there are other granting institutions (specifically Starmaker) that DO give money to the money-est of the monied, to Celine, to Shania, to Bryan, to Drake, to Bieber. (Note: I do not know if Starmaker actually grants money to the aforementioned artists, but they are certainly eligible.) To be eligible, you have to meet a certain (very high) sales/streaming requirement. I am much more interested in this being investigated, personally-- although I intuit that it's still a highly positive thing, as this is not about "helping out needy artists", this is about stimulating an industry

It's worth noting maybe that on the Spotify thread, a few weeks back, when I was catching hands for saying "Spotify is a wonderful product and an excellent way for music to be transmitted"-- because it is-- even if the pay-out is crap and broken and Daniel Ek should be killed, smoked, and eaten-- that one of the primary solutions I felt would solve the problem is "more government funding for musicians". We can (and should) eat Daniel Ek, but it won't change the fact that recorded music and its usage has irreversibly been devalued, and if it's going to continue being created, it's going to require some other method of sustaining it. Considering how the music industry has (compared to other industries) such a low operating cost, it makes sense (to me) that creating a system where it subsists on government funding is a no-brainer

Like I said, I'm not a fan of Grimes. I do think a Canadian music industry is worth supporting at multiple levels but the issues of equity and nepotism do concern me so the story interests me - and so far, I'm not sure this story is evidence of a systemic problem. It sounds like you would want to revamp FACTOR and the granting system altogether to make it focused on promoting those who are actually in need, which is a valid position but is, I think, more extreme than mine.

Funding labels with their costs for promotions and other expenses that do not have tangible financial gains is a good thing, and of course it will somehow end up helping the likes of Emily Haines or Tegan and Sara, and if Grimes is a part owner of one of these labels then so be it, I have no problems with that.

I come from a place/industry where some artists keep getting financed over and over and over at the expense of others despite no commercial success and I probably over stepped and saw nepotism where they might be none at all.

at the expense of others

I don't think it works like this, personally, but that said, if I have any ire, it's less "Grimes got $90k" and more "Beverly Glenn-Copeland only got $10k"

And again, "Tegan & Sara getting government money" is! ultimately! a! good! thing! Bands that big are effectively cottage industries, that money is going to the thousands of people who work for them, it's not going into "buying Sara a pony". And again: I think it'd be great if bands that big, if they decided to apply, show their work, or don't apply. Arcade Fire do not apply for government money. Destroyer has only started to do so recently-- he has a large band to feed, I'm glad he's getting funded-- but for years he and that whole crew of musicians (including their Victoria-originating sisters and brothers, Wolf Parade i.e.) did not apply out of principle.

It's nice to log on to the FACTOR website and see Rollie staring intensely at you, gotta say

It's worth noting maybe that on the Spotify thread, a few weeks back, when I was catching hands for saying "Spotify is a wonderful product and an excellent way for music to be transmitted"-- because it is-- even if the pay-out is crap and broken and Daniel Ek should be killed, smoked, and eaten-- that one of the primary solutions I felt would solve the problem is "more government funding for musicians". We can (and should) eat Daniel Ek, but it won't change the fact that recorded music and its usage has irreversibly been devalued, and if it's going to continue being created, it's going to require some other method of sustaining it. Considering how the music industry has (compared to other industries) such a low operating cost, it makes sense (to me) that creating a system where it subsists on government funding is a no-brainer

Like paying taxes.

And here's some of my economic problem we have in Canada, in that tax payer money is made to fund artists who then allow Spotify to rake in a lot of money without paying taxes in Canada or genuinely funding artists in return. The structural problem, highlighted by Grimes receiving such a sum (if it isn't as the owner of a label), is that the return for it is basically zero, except maybe patriotic pride to see one of us do very well? It doesn't help the ecosystem that will help less established artists down the road (or artists in domains that are less commercialisable).

"patriotic pride"

for better or worse I do think there's a lot of "soft power" at work behind these granting institutions. It's less about making Canadians feel good and more about setting up Canadian artists to punch above their weight internationally, thus making Canada seem cultured, successful, etc.

otm

Oh, absolutely. And it seems to be working pretty well-- but in Canada, "export" seems to be a priority. In Europe, certain countries spend lots of money on arts funding, but we (as outsiders) don't really seem to see it, as such efforts in France/Germany/Benelux seem to be focused more on stimulating culture for local benefit. Compare this with Iceland, where "export" is also a priority-- I could name 20 contemporary Icelandic bands compared to 5 contemporary French bands, i.e.

I think the soft power thing is true and otm, but I don't see how it helps artists in the long run.

Oh, absolutely. And it seems to be working pretty well-- but in Canada, "export" seems to be a priority. In Europe, certain countries spend lots of money on arts funding, but we (as outsiders) don't really seem to see it, as such efforts in France/Germany/Benelux seem to be focused more on stimulating culture for local benefit. Compare this with Iceland, where "export" is also a priority-- I could name 20 contemporary Icelandic bands compared to 5 contemporary French bands, i.e.

That's because outside of hip-hop contemporary french band are mostly terrible.

I like Feu ! Chatterton, and that's about it.

There's a lot of shitty French hip-hop too tbf (see: Jul).

The sum up what was confused and confusing posts, here's my take: Can and Prov. governements should fund artists that are in need of financial help in order to advance their careers/pay the bills, and fund corporations and institutions that will allow the canadian cultural ecosystem to further blossom from an economic point of view. I see Grimes has being in neither category, as an artist, maybe in the second if she is indeed a co-owner of Crystal Meth.

or Crystal Math.

which is a dumb name imo.

The government spent HOW MUCH on crystal meth??!

Looks like Crystal Math was founded in 2006 by the manager of the band Metric, “in an effort to assist (...) Metric self-release their next album 'Fantasies' without the backing of a traditional label.”

I really can’t find more on the company’s officers or a link to Grimes, beyond the obvious fact that she’s on the label.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu6YgBon-Rc

new track for the cyberpunk 2077 soundtrack (lizzy wizzy is the character she voices in game)

it's fine?

revisited miss anthropocene last night, confident it's her best

what a great company to partner with!

CD Projekt? Do they have a bad rep?

yeah anti-trans humor on social media and problematic stuff in the game

gamergate "pc culture is out of control" vibes all over

forced crunch/excessive working hours for workers

tried to fuck their employees out of bonuses because of bad review scores

game is super buggy and they have to offer refunds to ps4 and xbox one owners

Tbf much of it wasn't immediately apparent. And speaking of collaborators, see also:

https://cyberpunk2077.bandcamp.com/album/cyberpunk-2077-radio-vol-1-original-soundtrack

pissed jeans have a song on it too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfrIrTzdJKY

lol she announces she has Covid and she's "weirdly enjoying" it and it barely makes my social media feeds, what a time

It’s not as popular right now
But Bitcoins also a cash cow
And even though she’s fallen some
I still grew my initial sum

I’m told that I’m on the spectrum
I catch crypto like ash ketchum

Crypto king, like Kim dot com
Get me some etherium!

— 𝑪𝒍𝒂𝒊𝒓𝒆 𝒅𝒆 𝑳𝒖𝒏𝒆࿎ (@Grimezsz) January 28, 2021

new grimes jam dropped

every line of that is calculated to make my brain leak out my ears

not as popular as elon right now but

lmaoooo
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/grimes-nft-digital-artwork-1134516/

jesus christ
https://niftygateway.com/collections/warnymphvolume1

omg this shit is terrible, it's like if wyland stopped painting humpback whales and started making 3d renderings of space babies, this is what we would get
https://res.cloudinary.com/nifty-gateway/image/upload/q_auto:good,w_800/v1614181985/Max/Grimes/Newborn_3_f8zgk5.jpg

it's like angela from the office entered into a goth phase and redid the jazz babies poster in maya 3d, lmaoooooo

http://theofficecom106.weebly.com/uploads/6/0/4/4/60449985/3753068.jpg

Musician makes mediocre artwork shocker

alright wiseass, u can dismiss the art itself but are u not impressed by grimes's revolutionary incorporation of blockchain technology into the commercialization of her work? does nothing impress you?

and really tho, u think this is merely mediocre? not, say, catastrophically tasteless?

Since you asked - I don't personally care about this shit, and don't get why ppl come here to clown on her every time she does something mildly cringy (or is accused of something by association).

i understand. i love a lot of grimes' music. she's very often brilliant. i think people have been unduly harsh towards her, too. i wouldn't be in here to diss some shit i thought was just mildly cringy.

everything about this stunt grosses me out: the vaguely specified charitable committment, the lazy deviantart quality of the work, the blockchain gimmick. i don't get worked up about the politics of the art world very often, but this shit strikes me as deeply cynical and it disgusts me and i wonder if it's not almost a little evil.

NFTs are extremely embarrassing and every other musician who expresses interest in them should be clowned on just as much

Half of my twitter timeline is either musicians clowning on NFTs or Mat Dryhurst defending them

new all purpose headline to be used going forward for anything grimes-related:

GRIMES DOES VERY STUPID THING THAT SOME MAY SAY ISN'T STUPID

"How can she possibly need more money", said one fan when asked about the development.

this feels like first dave matthews band album's magic eye cover

if people bought magic eyes for $250,000. maybe they did?

davey otm that this work would be most appropriately installed on the side of an office tower or two on the way out to the airport

my take is that NFTs are dumb in many ways, not the least of which is the giant energy suck that is crypto mining that underpins the transactions

on the other hand, the “art” aspect pretty much cut out the middleman when it comes to artistic works as money laundering instrument and if anyone wants to get that money, have at it

Art’s ugly, but the real joke is people paying for that shit.

A percentage of the proceeds from the WarNymph NFT sales will be donated to Carbon180, an NGO dedicated to reducing carbon emissions.

Pretty horrendous if true.