This month I�m turning things over our newest writer Scott Slapp. No that�s not his real name; Scott is Keavin's roommate and he actually writes for another well-known music publication that isn't as free thinking as anti, he wanted a freer forum where he could express what he really thinks about the current state of music and some of the bands that populate the scene. You may have seen one of his reviews posted here at anti over that past month or so. (Read his artist of the month article on Loundermilk. It's a classic!)

We were hanging out one night a couple weeks ago and as usual our conversation turned to music, the music industry and finally the topic he is writing about here today. He asked me if it would be cool to let him write an editorial on this subject and I readily agreed to turn my column over to him for that purpose. We discussed giving him his own column and calling it �Bitch Slapp� but most people would misunderstand the name, which is a play on his pen name and him bitching about something. Plus he didn't know if he'd be able to find anything to rant about each month. Maybe someday down the line, that will happen but until then enjoy his rant posted here today. Now with my longwinded introduction complete, I give Scott Slapp and his rant �Popularity Sucks!� - aG

I can�t think of a worst job in the world than being a rock star. It�s such a double-edged sword that I don�t think I could handle it and I�d end up going postal and mowing down fans or my bandmates with a tour bus. Most people don�t think of being a professional musician as a real job like we have. They think it�s one long party, one long tour with women, drugs, and rock �n� roll! But to a professional musician it�s a job, and unlike us civilians who can stoop to a lesser job to help make ends meet, if a musician compromises or is thought to have compromised his integrity to succeed than he has committed the cardinal sin of rock. He�s sold-out! 

I know aG, Greenmuse and Dr Fever ranted about similar subjects before but I don�t think anyone has really addressed this issue head on and that is the fact that as soon as a band has some success, their one time fans automatically start calling them sellouts. In some cases I can understand this if a band that�s been underground suddenly changes their sound to appeal to a mass audience, then yeah, they are sellouts. But over the past couple years while browsing antiMUSIC I�ve seen more and more readers labeling any band that suddenly hits it big a sellout, regardless if they changed or not. I know I�ve been guilty of this myself but I recently began to really think about it and see how wrong this attitude is. How would that Lithium dude say it? I�ve been a tool! 

Here is what usually happens and it�s a real paradox. A band comes out, they gain a following in the underground. The fans that are into them have an attitude like �dude, this band is cool, everyone should check them out!� Everyone roots for the underdog, we want these underrated bands to succeed and replace the crap that�s popular. Here is where the paradox comes in. Say that same band that we were pulling for, comes out with a new CD and by chance their record company does something right and the band gets a hit single or a string of them. The same people who were pulling for them a year ago, now start to bash them, calling them �trendy� or �sellouts,� even if the music hasn�t changed at all. I don�t get it? What�s different, the fact that trendy people are now wearing t-shirts for the band? So what was once cool is now �uncool�? That�s a f***ing lame bulls*** attitude if you ask me. 

If the music hasn�t really changed, then why should anyone�s attitude towards it change? If that is your attitude, then what are you saying about yourself? That you were a trendy loser a year ago when you loved this band but saw the light all of a sudden? Isn�t it cooler that you knew about them before they hit it big? I�m not talking about Metallica either, who did change their sound. But I can�t take a side on the Metallica thing because I never knew about them �back in the day.� My first exposure to Metallica was back in 1991 or so when my sister played the �Black� album into the ground. Yeah, they were soon displaced by Nirvana and then The Smashing Pumpkins, and then by whatever was the big band at the time. I was a little too young to get into any music back then, but I did see my sister following the trends. But just because a band becomes popular or is the big thing at the moment doesn�t mean they suck! Today, I love the �Black Album�, Nirvana and Smashing Pumpkins, even though I was a little too young to get in on them when they were the biggest things in music. I love them because the music is cool and that�s all that really matters. Who cares what the lemmings in the mainstream or the underground think, they need to be bitchslapped anyways. 

During the past couple of years, I�ve been able to meet a few musicians and see a little bit into their mindset. Because of that, I understand why a musician would have to compromise a little so they can make a living. The record business is so damn trendy it�s not even funny. Very few �different� bands get the chance at a big record deal and forget about radio or cable music video plays. It�s ain�t gonna happen. Some bands use a carrot and stick trick, they will have a couple of songs that might be trendy so they can suck people in to hear the real stuff. I can�t dis a band for having to do that, that� the lame game that has to be played and they are trying to earn a living and succeed in one of the most cutthroat businesses in the world. The sad thing about this is because the music business is so damn trendy, these bands automatically limit their shelf-life by being forced to associate with a trend to get a deal and maybe have a couple hits but in the long run they are screwed because once that trend dies, they die along with it. 

You see that happening with nu-metal right now. Korn�s new CD hasn�t sold nearly as well as their last one. But from what I�ve read about Korn, they used to be a popular underground band that their fans deserted once they became popular in the mainstream. I can�t stand nu-metal in a big sense but there are a couple of nu-metal bands that I like. But I�ve seen a few nu-metal bands that were cool one day when they were underground and then suddenly sucked the minute they had a hit. I just don�t get it. I guess what I�m driving at is, isn�t it just as trendy to suddenly hate a band because they become popular and your friends start calling them sellouts? Who gives a s*** if your buddies don�t like a band? If you like it, play the damn CD�s! It�s that simple. Because if you have to follow what everyone else you hang out with thinks, then it�s you that is the sellout. I know I�m just as guilty of this as the next guy but I�m not jumping on that bandwagon again. It�s something to think about. So ask yourself the next time your friends turn on a band, do you want to be a sellout to them? 

Before you get to rant and bitchslap me on the board I want to end with this thought. I know this isn�t the usual rant you guys like to read but I needed to talk about this because it�s been bugging me for a while. I�d like to see a frank and open dialog on this issue here, that�s why I wrote about it. Now that you�ve been bitch slapped, please tell me what you think about this on the board below. I don�t know if this will be a regular thing for me but I want to thank aG for stepping aside and letting me vent about this topic this month.