Something Corporate: <i>NY Times</i> on SXSW

This year all the talk seemed to be around mega artists like Kanye, Metallica, Devo, etc. versus up and coming acts. That was a little disappointing.

With record sales down so much it looks like the major labels/artists are diving into the "indie" scene. The line is being blurred, unfortunately mostly with the majors setting their sights lower as opposed to the indies setting their sights higer.

Well, I'm proud to have contributed some distinctly non-corporate, zero-big-name photographic coverage of SXSW for Prefix, then.

Prefix is corporate, too. It has to sell advertising, yes?

I wouldn't say that selling ads makes you corporate.

The corporate presence was clearly oppressive, but I got quite a bit out of SXSW. The big names this year might be a sign of the times, but a big name in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Sure, maybe Jane's Addiction or Metallica will never really fall out of the spotlight, but Devo, the Sonics? I like that there was a sense of reverence for some of these older groups that have fallen to the wayside but clearly influenced so many of these no-name guys. Devo has a lot to say about societal conformity and mass marketing – quite timely stuff these days. Style wise, Datarock could be the son of Devo. And the Sonics had a huge impact on garage rock coming out of the Pacific Northwest.

Or, maybe SXSW is getting so big it's becoming a celebration of itself.

more corporate sponsorship = more free parties, more free booze, more free food, more bands. in the past the only way to enjoy sxsw was to buy a badge/wristband. now you can have the time of your life on a limited budget. and remember since metallica and devo were official showcasing bands they only got paid $200 (from sxsw at least). i don't think any of the fans that got to see them in those small venues would complain one bit about them being there. as long as SXSW brings artists that I want to see to my backyard (and this year there were tons) i'm all for this festival getting as big as it can.

the problem w/ big names like metallica playing sxsw is that it takes away prospective listeners from other acts which could use them. i mean really, what the hell does metallica need to play sxsw for, other than some sort of weird ego stroke?

I don't think it takes away listeners from other bands. only 2,000 people got in to metallica. if you didn't want to see them or couldn't get in, there were a hundred other bands playing at the same time. i just really don't see any problem with them playing. i don't care one bit for metallica but i thought it was cool that they would do something like that. it added excitement to the week. REM did it last year, Metallica this year.