do we actually get to see the artwork, or is that just reserved for the guy who buys it?Originally Posted by Cilvaringz
do we actually get to see the artwork, or is that just reserved for the guy who buys it?
is wu tang for the children or for the richs?
should i shave my balls or let them 'fro up?
The art work will go to the buyer. The snippet will be part of a little documentary Forbes filmed on the album here in Marrakech. It will be heard in the documentary, but no longer than 25 seconds. Small taster.
As for U-God, sounds like Uyi on Wu-Tang Forever to me.
The reason we haven't spoken about the record as much since the exclusive Forbes article is because we knew the structure of the actual sale was going to be a difficult and complicated one. We have been in talks with major auction houses as well as smaller ones. Some who have been in existence for close to three centuries, selling works of art when the great masters walked the earth or were even born. You can imagine how incredibly challenging it was to define what was actually being sold. Is it an album? a piece of art? a moment in music history? A statement? A beautiful box with exclusive music in it? There was no precedent for this thing. Even the oldest auction houses, in their centuries of business, they had never come across something like this and it didn't fit in any of their departments, ranging from fine art to contemporary art to porcelain from the Ming dynasty to music memorabilia. It didn't fit anywhere.
Hadn't RZA had press lined up for Brick Mansions, you probably wouldn't have heard anything at all until we had figured it out. This idea is so unique and new, that it is pretty much impossible to predict and map out what will happen to it. Once it meets the public arena and meets debate, it sort of takes a life of its own and all you can do is follow it.
So that in itself has been extremely exciting for us. As there are no written laws for a sale like this, it raised so many interesting questions and different perspectives. So the question "is Wu-Tang for the children or the rich" means you still think of this as a publicity stunt or a marketing ploy.
Despite originally making this for commercial release (and I understand the deception people feel over that), the idea is an actual concept stemming from an actual belief that music in itself must be saved from complete devaluation by doing something as drastic as this, in the hope that fellow artists revalue themselves and their works, instead of letting the market put that value on them.
Whether it works or not, who knows. Whether it was clever or dumb, who cares. What matters is that in the end, when I decided to tell RZA that this record should take on another purpose, it came from a genuine place and a pure thought, and not to punish our fans or be an asshole for the sake of becoming a millionaire.
Sure, we'd all like to become successful and if great money comes with it, fine. But that's simply not the motivation behind this concept. If it was, that 5 mil offer would've long been accepted. We have a long list of offers from labels as well as brands seeking association, but accepting those would actually make this about money and make this a publicity stunt to sell a record.
Maybe our next announcement will make it more clear that this is a genuine concept, with a genuine core and goal to achieve and that we will not compromise on its integrity by trying our very best to maintain the course of this album as a work of art, even after its sold.
Peace ringz, good response. I've been watching everyone melt down in this thread, which is understanble. But I think everyone agrees deep down that it's a good idea.
I guess the main thing people want is to hear this thing, in their own environment.
So I guess my question is
Do you think in due time we will get to listen to this music wherever we please?
Shit maybe one of the "investors" is going to be the one who buys it and distributes it, keeping all the profits in house for who was involved.but I guess that would mean the artwork and box it is in are kind of irrellevant. I dunno.
Last edited by cunt; 04-30-2014 at 08:57 PM.
If the concept is maintained and not compromised by a corporate approach, then I believe the album will never make its way to your iPod. We can never fully stop a buyer from doing with it what he wants, but we can discourage commercialization by making it difficult and expensive to the point where it won't make much sense to do so.
well I guess I hope it is compromised by a corporate approach hahaha
People are not going to like this suggestion but wouldn't it be a strong statement if the music was made available by the buyer, in agreement with Cilva (& RZA), after a fixed period of say 50 or even better yet a 100 years. (Given the time frame, by the buyer's heirs.) And yes, this does mean that people active on the forum now will never hear it. But their children or grandchildren might.
Think of how it would rekindle the Wu legacy. Think of how it might influence hiphop in that future time period. Seems really exciting to me.
Will there still be hiphop in 50 years? I'm pretty sure it will be alive and kicking. What about in 100 years... Not too sure about that. Wouldn't it be great if it were released to the general public under those circumstances. Who better than Wu to put hiphop back on the map then?
As you might suspect from this post I'm actually all for the idea of making it a one of a kind piece of art. With one caveat, I think the buyer should be talked into having the album tour the world every few years instead of just the once. (Especially if the idea I suggested above would not be a feasible option for Cilvaringz or the buyer.)
Obviously, if it IS going to leak somewhere down the line I'll be very curious to hear it too in the comfort of my own home.
But I think this whole idea is a strong statement.
And, to put things in perspective... Are our lives really going to be that much worse without having this one album to listen to on constant rotation. The Wu is going to release new material (probably not in full group mode, though) and it is inevitable that sooner or later more old material by generals and Killa Bees is going to be sold or leaked to satisfy us. (Just think of the Wuki pack.) It wouldn't surprise me if those 5 finished 'The Cure' tracks popped up some time in the next ten to fifteen years, for instance.
Retired.
whats the difference between people in 50 years time hearing this album for the first time or hearing Only Built for Cuban Links for the first time? One's a classic and one's a Cilvaringz album is a difference, but besides that?
The difference to me is that nobody (except for the original buyer) will have heard the Cilva album in the mean time. So people can't influence other people's opinion on it. 'Once Upon..." would be like a music time capsule.
Also, the fact that it would be released after 50 or 100 years would definitely attract a lot of media attention, which would turn this into a big event on a mass level - different from listening to OB4CL as a young kid in say the year 2115, which could be a big event on that kid's personal level.
Retired.
I see what u r saying now
Why you delete the snippet thread then?
Posts by The Hound are signed TH.
Quoting ≠ Agreement.
Its still a shit idea because nobody knows silverrings its pretentious. If they did this with Tupac, michael jackson or Big's posthumous material it might have worked
Is the track listing still the same as the one posted a few months ago? I only ask because the albums being promoted as 31 Clan tracks when in reality its Shabazz and the Clan introduces: Once Upon a Time in Shaolin. Just wondering if you have informed any potential buyers of just how many appearances the full Clan members do actually make on this album?
And another thing, if Cilva can use already recorded verses to new beats, then how come RZA isnt prepared to dig in the crates and pull out Raekwon verses to use on ABT so the fans get what we want which is Rae on the "last ever Wu album"?
Coz Wu don't care about fans. They all about mingling with the high Jew society
Posts by The Hound are signed TH.
Quoting ≠ Agreement.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks