Needs: Audience vs. Artist
At the #CGMF concert Monday, I chuckled at Ed Robertson’s introductions for the newest, Barenaked Ladies songs. “Since you guys can’t stop screaming for them, we are going to play a new song!” he said.
It was a light-hearted way of acknowledging that he knew the audience was there to hear hits, but the band wanted to share a new song or two. (After a new song, a hit followed.)
Which makes me wonder, whose needs matter more? The artist’s, or the audience’s?
Clearly, an audience is necessary for the artist; but without the needs of the artist being met, there would be no art in the first place.
A scale’s balance of the “audience vs. artist’s needs” tips quickly: Bob Dylan’s current live shows might be an example of the artist’s needs being more weighted than the audience’s.
However, it’s easy for an audience to be initially annoyed about an artist sharing something new that is wonderfully special, utterly phenomenal! (Ironically, Dylan’s historic electric performances; Chris Thile’s Punch Brothers’ first live show; The Decemberists performing their The Hazards of Love in its entirety.)
As performing musicians, there is nothing wrong with performing for our audiences; but there is also nothing wrong with performing for ourselves. When making a set list, it’s important to recognize the scale, and consider which way it’s tipping; and how far.
Comments are closed.