Iron Maiden's integrity

MrKnickerbocker said:
How exactly can integrity be a fad?
Click to expand...

I didn't say integrity is a fad. I said integrity in music industry is a fad. No band is absolutely free in this business. Record companies own them, they're free as long as they don't meddle with certain things. There are countless occasions where a band's intentions are limited by record companies. Countless occasions where they're censored. Robert Fripp once said "If you have a passion of playing music, don't become a professional musician.". Some bands try to pass themselves off as a band that values integrity, one that sticks to their guns etc, when in reality pretty much all bands would do anything possible to sell more records and get more recognition. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, because that's essentially what it's all about: Reaching out to as many people as possible.

In Maiden's case, I think you have to be pretty naive if you think Bruce's return to the band had nothing to do with financial issues.
 
The Flash said:
I didn't say integrity is a fad. I said integrity in music industry is a fad. No band is absolutely free in this business. Record companies own them, they're free as long as they don't meddle with certain things. There are countless occasions where a band's intentions are limited by record companies. Countless occasions where they're censored. Robert Fripp once said "If you have a passion of playing music, don't become a professional musician.". Some bands try to pass themselves off as a band that values integrity, one that sticks to their guns etc, when in reality pretty much all bands would do anything possible to sell more records and get more recognition. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, because that's essentially what it's all about: Reaching out to as many people as possible.

In Maiden's case, I think you have to be pretty naive if you think Bruce's return to the band had nothing to do with financial issues.
Click to expand...

So you don't think it's possible to have integrity and try to sell records? Or that those who claim, or seem to, have integrity are lying for the sake of selling more records?

Either way, I disagree, but I can see your argument. I'm sure it happens, but I think there's a big difference between listening to the demands of your record label and kowtowing to their every whim. Just because someone is not 100% free to record any sound they want and put it out on a major label does not mean that person lacks integrity.

As for Maiden, I have no illusion that Bruce rejoining had a lot to do with money, but you don't hear that in the music.
 
MrKnickerbocker said:
So you don't think it's possible to have integrity and try to sell records? Or that those who claim, or seem to, have integrity are lying for the sake of selling more records?

Either way, I disagree, but I can see your argument. I'm sure it happens, but I think there's a big difference between listening to the demands of your record label and kowtowing to their every whim. Just because someone is not 100% free to record any sound they want and put it out on a major label does not mean that person lacks integrity.

As for Maiden, I have no illusion that his rejoining had a lot to do with money, but you don't hear that in the music.
Click to expand...

There's no "having it" or "not having it". I'm saying there's no integrity in music industry to begin with. I think it's a myth. So yes, those who claim to have integrity do it for the sake of selling more records.

The thing is, I'm not attacking bands. I don't hold the view that integrity is a must have for artists.
 
Maybe Flash is right, but that's a deep philosophical discussion for another time.
 
At least where music is concerned, i don't think this band has EVER done it only for the money.

Even image wise, they would have gotten a record contract (and therefore money) sooner had they cut their hairs in a punky style. Even back when it was virtually all or nothing, they remained pure.
 
I think it's a bit more nuanced than whether or not a band has artistic integrity or not. It depends on a lot of factors really and not every artist is the same. To keep this from going off the rails in a deep philosophical discussion though, I'll just talk about Maiden: I think they do have artistic integrity. They haven't released a single album that made me think they were phoning it in and trying to do something to make money. I think the music always comes first for the band. And yes bringing back Bruce was largely a financial decision, but you can't listen to Brave New World or look at videos from their reunion tour and not tell they were having a great time. I think the reunion was a case of "Lets put our differences aside to do something that will be both very enjoyable and very lucrative".

Which brings me to my point: Maiden is still a business, whether you like it or not. Whether they like it or not. Their decisions have to be made with the thought in mind that they need to make money to support their families and give paychecks to all the cogs in the Might Maiden Touring Machine. It might be a pain in the ass for them sometimes but that's just how it works. Does that compromise their artistic integrity? I don't think so. I'd say money is a factor but at the end of the day they've been lucky enough to do what they love and do things their way while still making money.
 
I never said anything about bands considering Money > Music. Easy to win an argument when you shift the paradigm as it suits you. Way to disregard any input I've put into my point of view. This is a philosophical debate, doesn't concern me if you want to dive into it or not. In a world of show and entertainment, in a world where people have other personalities than the normal lives they lead, I don't buy the idea of integrity. Take it as you may.
 
Last edited:
Does that mean that you call Steve Harris or any other musician who happens to make money a liar?
I mean, if you'd not believe them when they say they have (an) artistic value(s)? Then you say they lie.
 
Last edited:
Although the debate can get philosophical, i think it all comes down to this: Has the band ever compromise their music, written songs in a certain way or change their image because of commercial appeal?

I think not. And that's pretty much what i always meant with this topic: Does Maiden have integrity in what they do? The rest is just a bonus, like merchanfise, etc. Everybody does that. But being musically pure, that is much more rare...
 
Last edited:
Forostar said:
Does that mean that you call Steve Harris or any other musician who happens to make money a liar?
I mean, if you'd not believe them when they say they have (an) artistic value(s)? Then you say they lie.
Click to expand...

Lie is a harsh term. But when an artist makes statements where he says he takes pride in his artistic values and his way of sticking to them, I do think it's a financially motivated move, yes.

nuno_c said:
Although the debate can get philosophical, i think it all comes down to this: Has the band ever compromise their music, written songs in a certain way or change their image because of commercial appeal?
Click to expand...

No it does not come down to that. My argument is about the music industry in general. Integrity in music industry does not exist, because people in music industry all have different personas in the entertainment business. No matter how "down to earth" they might be, everything they say effects their brand's market value.
 
The Flash said:
I never said anything about bands considering Money > Music. Easy to win an argument when you shift the paradigm as it suits you. Way to disregard any input I've put into my point of view. This is a philosophical debate, doesn't concern me if you want to dive into it or not. In a world of show and entertainment, in a world where people have other personalities than the normal lives they lead, I don't buy the idea of integrity. Take it as you may.
Click to expand...
I kinda thought that's what your thinking was, Flash; and at a philosophical level, in some respects, I probably agree. I think for the purposes of this discussion though, the question (for you certainly) will just have to be: at what end of a sliding scale of integrity (as much integrity as one can feasibly have in this world vs. zero integrity) do you feel Maiden sit at?
Forostar said:
Does that mean that you call Steve Harris or any other musician who happens to make money a liar?
I mean, if you'd not believe them when they say they have (an) artistic value(s)? Then you say they lie.
Click to expand...
Yeh, that is a little harsh. The explanation , surely, is that artists are prone to spouting an enormous pile of crap when asked about these things?! :p
nuno_c said:
Although the debate can get philosophical, i think it all comes down to this: Has the band ever compromise their music, written songs in a certain way or change their image because of commercial appeal?
Click to expand...
Probably.
 
Last edited:
CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
I kinda thought that's what you thought, Flash; and at a philosophical level, in some respects, I probably agree. I think for the purposes of this discussion though, the question (for you certainly) will just have to be: at what end of sliding scale of integrity (as much integrity as one can feasibly have in this world vs. zero integrity) do you feel Maiden sit at?

Probably.
Click to expand...
Do you have any example or are you just guessing? I honestly don't see any...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top