Biography
Mark Thorley works at the intersection of industry, consulting, and research. His work brings togther creative professionals in music-related fields to explore the intersection of music and technology.
Collaboration in Crouwdsourcing
In examining crowdfunding wihtin the context of music projects, Thorley considers the collaborative relationship between musicians and audiences in realizing music performances. In the realization of musical projects, therefore, Thorely suggests that we imagine the “producer as a collective”: an amalgamation of traditional rolls—composer, singer, arranger, manager, and fan—that become both condensed for the project initiator and shared with funding agents (fans).
This collaborative relationship between musicians and audience members points to one of the most significant aspects of crowdfunding: the close relatiponship that develops between artist and audience. Crowdfunding platforms, then, highlight the complex ways in which a sense of immediacy develops through the use of mediating technologies. In essence, crowdfunding sites are platforms for computer-generated communication (CMC, see Watson 1997) that enable an enhanced sense of immediacy—circumventing traditional barriers between artists and their audiences
The presence of cultural intermediaries or gatekeepers has always been somewhat problematic for those who wish to take their music to a paying audience, often being seen as a barrier between the audience’s money and the creative practitioner. As Hirsch (1972, 128) notes, for a cultural good to reach an audience, it must “first succeed in (a) competition against others for selection and promotion by an entrepreneurial organization, and then, in (b) receiving mass media coverage in such forms as book review, radio station airplay and film criticism.” Crowdfunding alters this situation… (p. 3)
Because of the collaborative nature of crowdfunded projects, Thorley argues that artists and audiences can develop stronger social, musical, and economic bonds.
Freedom from the Culture Industry
Earlier this semester we discussed
Adorno and Horkheimer’s examination of the Culture Industry. Acknowledging the standaradization within which traditional models of music industry operate (and I think we can include Classical music as an industry in this conversation), Adorno and Horkheimer critique the resulting sameness in musical expression. Drawing upon
The Musical Product?
One of the key issues that Thorley addresses in this chapter is the way in which crowd funding processes have pushed back against traditional notions of the musical product. In pre-Internet contexts, or what sorely refers to as the “era of recorded music,” music consumers conceptualized their patronage of musicians around the exchange of recorded music objects—CDs, LPs, even MP3s. The emergence and growing popular position of crowd funding sites, therefore, opens up a space for re-examining core ideas about the objectification of musical performance, harkening back to our earlier readings regarding the fundamental nature of music as processual rather than object oriented (see Attali 1985, Taylor 2001, and Sterne 2012).
Crowdfunding Platforms
PledgeMusic
ArtistShare
Indiegogo
Patreon
Kickstarter
Airbnb Experiences
GoFundMe
Questions
- Have you ever participated in a crowdsourced project (musical or not, as an artist or funder)? What was your experience? In what ways did the crowdsourced process empower the artist? The audience?
- How is intellectual property impacted by crowdsourced projects? What sort of ownership does/should the funder (audience) have over the project?
- How does crowdsourcing raise critical questions regarding the nature of music and musical experience?
- Look over the various crowdfunding sites listed above (add to the list!). How do these various platforms enable artist-audience collaboration?
Question 2: Crowdfunded items are owned by the ARTIST. NOT the funders. This is the same with any establishment from donors at an art museum to the patrons and courts of Classical Era composers (ex. Haydn and the Esterhazy Court) They simply provide the means which is necessary but it's hard to claim ownership of the material.
Question 4: I am most familiar with Patreon, and mostly from an visual artist perspective. Often times if you donate a certain amount, you can have personalized portraits, offer new ideas for material, or be featured in product (ex: book of works, mention all donors by name at different levels) It is facilitated and mostly controlled by the artist but the artist can choose to what degree the audience interacts and influences the work.
I agree with Megan on her response to #2. There wouldn't be anything to fund if it wasn't for the artist and what they put out for their admirer's to enjoy.
I was actually wondering if this could be elaborated on in regards to patrons and donors for professional orchestras? They don't own the orchestra, but some donors would like a say in what is being programmed since they are the ones who are providing the funding for rehearsal spaces, performance spaces, music rentals, and any other necessities for the ensemble. In the few orchestra gigs I have played in, I always hear members of the ensemble saying "can't wait to play yet ANOTHER Beethoven celebration concert!" I would then ask them why they sound annoyed and they always tell me it is because donors want to have a Beethoven concert every season and they wish they could celebrate any other composer.
I guess that would also go into Megan's #4 response because concert halls have patron and donor seats named after them for donating a certain amount. This would also include scholarships for youth orchestras/concerto competitions named after them and being in the programs under certain titles for how much they donate.
I'd like to believe that artists should retain their intellectual property when the creation of their project requires crowdfunding. Questioning whether the funder should be able to claim ownership raises questions about the difference between donating and investing, however. Crowdfunding websites typically take relatively small donations from a wide variety of people so that the financial liability of a failed project doesn't ruin the creator and/or somebody who supported their vision. Investments are large cash injections from an individual or business who are willing to put a significant amount of money into a project because they believe they can gain something from it. At this point differentiating between an investor and record label doesn't seem that different!
In regards to question 2, I agree with the responses above and believe that crowdfunding is a way for the creator to support themselves to be able to create their art.
Like Megan, I am most familiar with Patreon, but I am most familiar with it because of multiple YouTubers I watch. They often use this platform to make extra content for those who donate or subscribe monthly, give early access to videos and tickets/events, and even get shoutouts in videos or special access to brainstorming and chat rooms if you pay enough. I think that this site allows for collaboration between the creators and audience in these ways and allows creators to see what people are interested and watching and what ideas would be successful or not. Even though I have not personally subscribed to any creators on Patreon, I've seen these collaborative benefits just while watching videos, as many of them give credit to whatever Patron gave them the idea.