Paint on a Nick Drake record? Am I nuts? Well, it is a reissue, but still! It's my one reservation about what I do, rendering records unplayable, at least on one side. Especially when it's music I love. So how do I justify it? How can I say I love vinyl so much that I ruin it?
Well, I can buy another one on eBay for $25 since it's a reissue. But, more importantly, I like what I create. I'm repurposing something mass produced into a unique piece of art directly celebrating the original art of the album. To make the record collectors out there gasp, after all it is just a record. It's not like I'm depriving the world of Nick Drake's wonderfully wispy voice. Also, there's something cool about using a physical representation of the actual music, the record, to pay hommage to the creator of said music with another physical representation, the portrait.
This past week I've been prompted to rethink the idea of reproducing my work. Sort of paying hommage to my own creation? Seems egotistical a little. I'm still not 100% sure. I'm opening up to the idea of editions of prints limited in scope and number, on something other than vinyl, by a very reputable outfit. I wouldn't want it done on records. I know that. Not on random records, blank records, or records by the subject of the painting. Maybe on wood panel or metal? How would that even look, a record with grooves printed flat?
It would open up the possibilities for more sales, more quickly. But both of those aren't really my end goal though. My goal is to make individual meaningful connections that give people a way to share their music, their culture. More more more, faster faster faster isn't my style. Hmm, in the right context maybe, so it's different sales, with rigorous quality?
I'm just not sure. What do you think? Is it selling out in the short term or smart business in the long term? I'd really appreciate help here!
SOLD - Nick Drake 01/13/09