How Much Does Character Matter?

Taking a poll of hands.

How much does a musician's character affect your perception of them and their music? Would you still listen to a musician's music if their character were less than savoury?

Personally, it doesn't matter a jot. What about you?

[GRUNTERSDAD]

If their character is somewhat shady or suspect or rude, it may turn me off a bit.
I would just as soon listen to the music and not know too much about any of them.

[MikeM]

It matters to me. I have left bands in the past because I didn't like the shadiness of this or that character in the band. Also, there ain't no way I would ever buy a Ted Nugent record because I hate his guts and everything he is.

Seems to me that the music is sort of reflection of the person creating it. Granted, I can't always tell by listening to the music who the character is creating it, but once I know who that character is, it can forever taint my view of that artist.

How about Classical composers? Stravinsky was an enormous Monarchist, but that doesn't affect the power of his music. The same can be said for Beethoven's attitude later in his life (which is understandable). If we take it on purely musical terms, it shouldn't affect what you're hearing - unless you are hearing commentary that you don't agree with.

[DrumEatDrum]

Character matters.

But it does depend on what you mean by "character were less than savoury."

Plenty of musicians have engaged in less than great behavior (drugs, alcohol, sex) but that's not enough of an issue to turn most people off of anyone's music.

Now, if lets say it were true Ozzy killed puppies before every show, you know that would probably turn off most people from listening to his music. I don't go listening to pro-Nazi music, or such.

Originally Posted by MikeM

It matters to me. I have left bands in the past because I didn't like the shadiness of this or that character in the band. Also, there ain't no way I would ever buy a Ted Nugent record because I hate his guts and everything he is.

Seems to me that the music is sort of reflection of the person creating it. Granted, I can't always tell by listening to the music who the character is creating it, but once I know who that character is, it can forever taint my view of that artist.

Well said Mike. I see Musicians, Athletes, and Actors, as role models, whether they want to be or not. Especially when they are very popular, and have a huge influence on younger people. If I go to a concert, and the guys on stage are acting like complete a## holes, then I am probably not going to be too interested in their music. Why support bad people, if you have a choice.

[Red Menace]

Originally Posted by MikeM

...Also, there ain't no way I would ever buy a Ted Nugent record because I hate his guts and everything he is.

Nugent aside. He's a right wing nutjob and he makes the world a worse place by living in it.

I really don't give two hoots about a musicians character if I'm not in a band with them. To be honest though I really do think less of a musician if they don't drink. Recovering alcoholics and old timers aside it just strikes me as self absorbed ass-patting... Kind of like Peart's drumming...

I kid... I kid...

[Thaard]

The only time I've judged a musicians character, was when Ginger Baker released his outrageous book "Best drummer in the World". I still think he played good in Cream though.

[MikeM]

Originally Posted by mediocrefunkybeat

How about Classical composers?

That's an excellent point - who will give a rats ass what an a-hole Ted Nugent was 200 years from now (assuming his music survives that long)? The larger point being that the music ultimately gets judged, not the composer, given enough time to pass and ignorance to build.

I don't want to know what an unsavory dude Stravinsky was! Like a lot of people who (wisely, IMO) don't want to meet their heroes for fear of being greatly disappointed. I can totally relate to that phenom.

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

I see Musicians, Athletes, and Actors, as role models, whether they want to be or not. Especially when they are very popular, and have a huge influence on younger people.

I think you're right that ultimately they are role models, but that shouldn't hold them to a higher standard in my view. If Mr/Ms. Celeb wants to booze it up, take piles of drugs, chase men/women, and otherwise become tabloid fodder, that's entirely up to them - I don't use words like should or shouldn't do this or that when it come to stuff like that. There should be no requirement to sanitize one's behavior for the youngin's sake for those that achieve fame.

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

If I go to a concert, and the guys on stage are acting like complete a## holes, then I am probably not going to be too interested in their music. Why support bad people, if you have a choice.

True that!

[Pollyanna]

Some magnificent musicians have been abysmal human beings. Some musicians are wonderful, decent people and can't groove to save their lives.

When I am consuming music character is a non-issue. When I'd dealing with a person, their music is a non-issue.It's an interesting thing, how much fabulous music has been made by bastards, morons, loons and perverts, though.

It seems that some flaws fatally affect musical ability and some don't. Also, some people develop skills while they have their heads screwed on ... and then later on the bolts holding the head on start loosening ...

[SergiuM]

I think character matters (a lot, if you're talking about band members). But if I'm listening to a record, it really doesn't matter that much, good music is good music.

Unless the composer is a complete weirdo/freak, in which case i probably wouldn't support him by buying his music. I guess you've got to draw the line somewhere.

[Pollyanna]

Originally Posted by SergiuM

I guess you've got to draw the line somewhere.

The only time I've drawn a line was with Gary Glitter. I was a big fan as a child and sometimes I enjoy checking out my old childhood stars on the Tube. It wasn't a conscious decision to boycott, just that now I have a bit of an icky feeling about him after the child sex stuff in the news.

Usually, though, I couldn't care less as a listener. The scene has been so full f maniacs and ratbags that, if I was picky, I'd have to forget about music and take up religion ... and find one without dodginess at the top (which narrows the field down to, like, pretty well nothing :)

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by Pollyanna

When I am consuming music character is a non-issue. When I'd dealing with a person, their music is a non-issue.

Nicely put, Pol. Sums up my feelings in a nutshell.

The "role model" debate is an interesting one though and it seems to raise it's head in this country every football season. I see merits on both sides of the argument, but I think personally speaking I'd lean towards the idea that just because one can kick a ball around a paddock, deliver an Oscar winning performance, write a song or strum a guitar, it doesn't automatically elevate them to role model status. These guys and girls are very good at what they do....end of story. Attaching the role model tag purely because their abilities recieve mass exposure just doesn't seem enough for mine. Kids may like to believe their heroes are beyond reproach, but it just ain't so. Kids like to believe in Santa Claus too.

Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold

Nicely put, Pol. Sums up my feelings in a nutshell.

The "role model" debate is an interesting one though and it seems to raise it's head in this country every football season. I see merits on both sides of the argument, but I think personally speaking I'd lean towards the idea that just because one can kick a ball around a paddock, deliver an Oscar winning performance, write a song or strum a guitar, it doesn't automatically elevate them to role model status. These guys and girls are very good at what they do....end of story. Attaching the role model tag purely because their abilities recieve mass exposure just doesn't seem enough for mine. Kids may like to believe their heroes are beyond reproach, but it just ain't so. Kids like to believe in Santa Claus too.

But believe they do. Don't fool yourself.

[Coldhardsteel]

Originally Posted by Pollyanna

Some magnificent musicians have been abysmal human beings. Some musicians are wonderful, decent people and can't groove to save their lives.

When I am consuming music character is a non-issue. When I'd dealing with a person, their music is a non-issue.

I agree with this.

I don't listen to Motley Crüe, but that's because I don't like their music, not because the group was notorious for their substance abuse.

I think that if I knew someone in a group and had a beef with them, I might have that little voice in the back of my mind saying 'listening to their music is supporting the behavior I don't like'. At the that point though, I think I'd really have to hate the guy to not listen to music that's of a certain level of quality.

[mxo721]

mmmmm. good post, and a paradox fer sure, because character counts alot to me, but sometimes, I really love some song, and find out years later it's some rotten person...luckily I never liked ted nugent ever, so if a grizzy bear eats him really slowly tomorrow, I'll laugh.

Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold

Nicely put, Pol. Sums up my feelings in a nutshell.

The "role model" debate is an interesting one though and it seems to raise it's head in this country every football season. I see merits on both sides of the argument, but I think personally speaking I'd lean towards the idea that just because one can kick a ball around a paddock, deliver an Oscar winning performance, write a song or strum a guitar, it doesn't automatically elevate them to role model status. These guys and girls are very good at what they do....end of story. Attaching the role model tag purely because their abilities recieve mass exposure just doesn't seem enough for mine. Kids may like to believe their heroes are beyond reproach, but it just ain't so. Kids like to believe in Santa Claus too.

The 'role model' clause is interesting. There is obviously this debate the second somebody mentions the rich and famous and often the talents have nothing to do with the achievement. Many of those that we look up to have Public Relations staff that want to push an image and depending on the character of that person it can be a very simple or a very difficult job. I believe that Deathmetalconga works in that field, so I'd like to hear what he has to say on that issue.

I find that the best role models are those that are up-front and honest about their own personal issues. One in the news recently is the Cricketer Marcus Trescothick. He was a World-class batsman and played for England for years until he had to retire from touring due to severe depression that had a major impact on his life, family and performance. He recently took part in a Radio programme about depression in sport and (as a severe depressive myself) he spoke honestly and candidly about his struggle with the condition.

That kind of honesty and sincerity is what I look for in a positive role model. Often, if they're a musician then their music can be judged on its sincerity. If I see that, then generally I will have more time for it and it just so happens that sincere music is usually the best music. Sincerity can also apply to negative character traits as well - but the same is true there too.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

But believe they do. Don't fool yourself.

What they believe is not our responsibility though. They have parents to look towards for a role model. An annonymous sportsman, musician, actor or whatever has no obligation towards ensuring that someone elses 10 year old stays on the straight and narrow. I'm not talking about deliberately setting out to corrupt here, but I just don't see why they should be accountable because their actions may shatter the misguided illusions of someone else's kids.

[Pollyanna]

Originally Posted by mediocrefunkybeat

I find that the best role models are those that are up-front and honest about their own personal issues.

... That kind of honesty and sincerity is what I look for in a positive role model. Often, if they're a musician then their music can be judged on its sincerity. If I see that, then generally I will have more time for it and it just so happens that sincere music is usually the best music. Sincerity can also apply to negative character traits as well - but the same is true there too.

+1

Young people often deal with major personal issues because they're trying to find their place in a complex world. It's not easy when there's BS going on at home / school / in the 'hood! I was an emotional disaster zone when I was young but, if you take time to think hard about things and you're honest about your strengths and weaknesses and are keen to learn and grow as a human being, then middle age becomes very pleasant. If you wallpaper over the cracks then ... hello mid-life crisis!

In that context, successful people who admit their difficulties help to blow away the fog of fame and help younger people get a glimpse of reality. Goody-two-shoes Mr/Ms Perfect types are inspiring for those not dealing with BS at home/school/the hood (as I mentioned earlier) but no use at all for many kids. The honest, flawed diamonds are the ones who will help there.

In the end, what famous people do is less important than how they are reported. The media turns them into role models - the famous people are just wanting to enjoy their (blessed) lives. Almost magically, the media manages to avoid the scrutiny they apply to famous people, yet their responsibility and role in shaping people's attitudes is far, far greater.

Also, bear in mind that what is reported about famous people is almost never the whole story, just one that editors think will attract readers - and we all know how people stop to see a car crash.

I see a red sports car in twenty years. Oh lordy...

Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold

What they believe is not our responsibility though. They have parents to look towards for a role model. An annonymous sportsman, musician, actor or whatever has no obligation towards ensuring that someone elses 10 year old stays on the straight and narrow. I'm not talking about deliberately setting out to corrupt here, but I just don't see why they should be accountable because their actions may shatter the misguided illusions of someone else's kids.

We make them millionaire's. They may not want to be role models, but unfortunately it comes with the territory. The least they could do is help out with our kids. Do you guys really think that most kids today listen to their parents over there idols. Especially with all the broken homes now. I don't care if they are not perfect. Who is. I would just like them to be honestly working on being a better person. I think that is all of our responsibility. Maybe I am aiming too high here.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by mediocrefunkybeat

I find that the best role models are those that are up-front and honest about their own personal issues..........

That kind of honesty and sincerity is what I look for in a positive role model. Often, if they're a musician then their music can be judged on its sincerity. If I see that, then generally I will have more time for it and it just so happens that sincere music is usually the best music. Sincerity can also apply to negative character traits as well - but the same is true there too.

Agreed. There are many that are happy to take on the role of "role model" and I applaud that. I just don't agree with the thinking that just because a person puts a facet of their life "out there" due to a talent in a given feild, we have the right to heap the term role model onto them. Not everyone is and not everyone wants to be.

That we admire the talent they show in one area doesn't give us automatic inclusion to the rest of their lives. We have an expectation that because they excell in one area, every other part of their lives will be just as flawless. They're not....... they never are.

Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold

Agreed. There are many that are happy to take on the role of "role model" and I applaud that. I just don't agree with the thinking that just because a person puts a facet of their life "out there" due to a talent in a given feild, we have the right to heap the term role model onto them. Not everyone is and not everyone wants to be.

That we admire the talent they show in one area doesn't give us automatic inclusion to the rest of their lives. We have an expectation that because they excell in one area, every other part of their lives will be just as flawless. They're not....... they never are.

Agreed, but many wouldn't. A lot of this has to do with hero-worship, fanboyism and media pressure. Unrealistic expectations thrust upon people can have totally the opposite effect and sadly, we see it all the time.

[theindian]

Musicians personal lives do not matter to me at all. I am in it for the tunes & nothing else.

Sure there are exceptions which have already been mentioned (pedophiles, racists, etc.) but for the most part I don't worry about it.

As for the role model thing, what a celebrity does with their personal life is there choice. It would be a different matter if they openly promoted bad behavior "Hey kids shooting heroin and having unprotected sex is the thing to do."

Thats not the case though. One could argue that their actions promote bad behavior but that is where parental guidance should come in.

There are those who do contribute to charities and try to make the world a better place, and that is great. I like that from a moral standpoint.

However, like I said earlier I'm in it for the tunes and that is it.

Come back after a couple of you young guys have had kids and answer this question. You might not see it so selfishly.

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

Come back after a couple of you young guys have had kids and answer this question. You might not see it so selfishly.

I don't think it's at all selfish for people to believe that those in the public domain have a right to live how they choose within the laws of their land - irrespective of the morality of those laws. Perhaps it's selfish to expect them all to live a certain way because of your beliefs.

[theindian]

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

Come back after a couple of you young guys have had kids and answer this question. You might not see it so selfishly.

Its is the parents job to teach children good behavior and at what age they should be exposed to provocative influence.

You can't legislate morality and it is not societies job to be G-rated all the time. You can change the channel, limit and filter computer access and not allow kids to hang around with people they should not.

Regardless, there will always be someone who is offensive to someone. It is a personal decision to decide who that is.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

We make them millionaire's. They may not want to be role models, but unfortunately it comes with the territory.

See, this is my point. No. It doesn't....not in the least. You pay your money down because you dig their talent. Not because you're entitled to their entire lives. As I said, they're good at their given talent, doesn't mean they're good at everything. Buying a CD, paying for a film or season tickets doesn't entitle you to what they do in their down time. It entitles you to share in the talent that they have, nothing more.

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

Come back after a couple of you young guys have had kids and answer this question. You might not see it so selfishly.

Selfish? Then I'm gonna flip that.

You're damned right it's selfish to expect 24 hour access because you shelled out for tickets for "game time". You listened to the music, you saw the flick, you cheered on your team....great, now it's time to go home. Not follow them around waiting for them to slip up so you can say- HA...gotcha. Bad role model. - It ridiculous. The whole idea of forcing a title onto someone who is uncomfortable with it is absurd, no matter how many CD's you buy.

And I'm already a proud father mate. :-)

[aydee]

Originally Posted by mediocrefunkybeat

Taking a poll of hands.

How much does a musician's character affect your perception of them and their music? Would you still listen to a musician's music if their character were less than savoury?

Personally, it doesn't matter a jot. What about you?

Great poser, MFB. My view is that it shouldnt. But it does.

Art should be for art's sake, but often the persona & value systems inevitably play a part. All the recent finger wagging on hip-hopper lyrics, to the persecution of people like Jim Morrison back in the 60s, history is littered with lots of examples. I dont think the large majority of people can separate the two.

To answers your question, yes, I believe music to be an entity by itself. Totally complete, no add- ons please, love it or leave it.

But then again, I'm the pre MTV gen.

...

Well as usual PFOG, we agree to disagree. Man I love these forums. :)

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by sticks4drums

Well as usual PFOG, we agree to disagree. Man I love these forums. :)

All good fun mate. No harm, no foul. If you were standing next to me, I'd get you a beer and get onto something I know we agree on........Small kits are totally superior to monster kits!! :-)

[aydee]

...

I remember a place where everyone agreed on everything. I think it was called CCCP.

...

[Pollyanna]

Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold

Small kits are totally superior to monster kits!! :-)

And I love Keith Moon's playing and don't care about the explosives in the toilets and his other excesses.

And Neil Peart doesn't have the feel of Bonzo and Ringo.

And jazz is the most deeply satisfying genre.

And double pedals too often just clutter up the bottom end ...

:)

[aydee]

Originally Posted by Pollyanna

And I love Keith Moon's playing and don't care about the explosives in the toilets and his other excesses.

And Neil Peart doesn't have the feel of Bonzo and Ringo.

And jazz is the most deeply satisfying genre.

And double pedals too often just clutter up the bottom end ...

:)

..

I love Keith Moon's playing and don't care about the explosives in the toilets and his other excesses.

And Neil Peart doesn't have the feel of Bonzo and Ringo.

And jazz is the most deeply satisfying genre.

And double pedals too often just clutter up the bottom en

:)

..

[Pollyanna]

Originally Posted by aydee

..

I love Keith Moon's playing and don't care about the explosives in the toilets and his other excesses.

And Neil Peart doesn't have the feel of Bonzo and Ringo.

And jazz is the most deeply satisfying genre.

And double pedals too often just clutter up the bottom en

:)

..

Well said, comrade ... but don't forget to say that small kits are more fun than big kits ... or you will be sentenced to a three-hour session of intensive self criticism!

[get_rad]

In my opinion, character is important. As long as the musician isnt trying to hard to keep there image and are jerks in the process, im fine with it. But when it gets to the point where their attitudes start sinking through to the surface, thats where i draw the line. a perfect example as far as a drummer for me is Travis Barker. I used to actually not mind his drumming until i saw the interview he did with a Canadian legend, Nardwaur. In this interview Barker continuously complains about "stupid questions" and "microphone positioning" which eventually to a early ending. Ever since i first saw this interview, I have lost ALL respect for Travis and any music he's associated with.

here's the link to the interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WMnXg6GEmU

[Pollyanna]

Originally Posted by get_rad

In my opinion, character is important. As long as the musician isnt trying to hard to keep there image and are jerks in the process, im fine with it. But when it gets to the point where their attitudes start sinking through to the surface, thats where i draw the line. a perfect example as far as a drummer for me is Travis Barker. I used to actually not mind his drumming until i saw the interview he did with a Canadian legend, Nardwaur. In this interview Barker continuously complains about "stupid questions" and "microphone positioning" which eventually to a early ending. Ever since i first saw this interview, I have lost ALL respect for Travis and any music he's associated with.

here's the link to the interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WMnXg6GEmU

Just because someone enjoys playing music doesn't mean they enjoy interviews. Travis at no point looked like he wanted to be there. Still, he at least turned up. Who knows? Maybe he was in a bad mood, depressed or just plain irritated by the interviewer's grating screen persona? Maybe they didn't get along when organising things before the interview?

That's exactly the point I made before. You never get the full story in the media, even with live broadcast without manipulation or editing.

Whatever, even if he is isn't a nice person he's still a very good drummer, even though what he does is not my style and too young for my tastes.

The more I've read of Bill Bruford, including his autobiography where he comes across as incredibly grouchy, the more I feel he's a difficult and prickly man. However, I don't have dealings with him and my enjoyment of his skill, ideas, sounds and approach is totally unaffected.

I only expect musicians to please me musically - the rest is their business IMO

[DrumEatDrum]

Originally Posted by Pollyanna

The only time I've drawn a line was with Gary Glitter.

I think that is a very good example. Not that I was into him before, but I certainly wouldn't be buying his records these days.

Keith Moon, yes he was a danger to hotel rooms, cars and swimming pools, but he didn't attack kids or anything that would make me give up my love of The Who.

A musician having an alternative political views, or being grumpy in interviews just doesn't come into play into if I like or dislike their music.

[Bo Eder]

Originally Posted by mediocrefunkybeat

Taking a poll of hands.

How much does a musician's character affect your perception of them and their music? Would you still listen to a musician's music if their character were less than savoury?

Personally, it doesn't matter a jot. What about you?

I think if you're in a position of interacting with said musician, then certainly I think character is important. If someone is just a big turn-off in terms of personality and I haven't heard anything he's done, then chances are I won't go out of my way to hear any of his music. But if I don't interact with them and it's music only, then would I necessarily know the guy is a sleaze personally? Probably not.

I'm a fan of other musicians just like anybody else and sometimes you meet your heroes and they aren't anything like what you expected, sometimes you do and they're the nicest people. If I was 12 or something it might affect me, but not anymore. Everybody has issues and it's not my job to judge them, especially if I don't have to interact with them. I've learned how to be professional about it and when it's time to part ways, you part ways.

[Pocket-full-of-gold]

Originally Posted by Pollyanna

Just because someone enjoys playing music doesn't mean they enjoy interviews. Travis at no point looked like he wanted to be there.

Can't say I blame him to be honest. That guy was totally forced and tried way too hard to be OTT. He annoyed me to listen to, he indeed did ask stupid questions and was an all around PITA.