LimeWire Music Blog

I don’t know how to say this without sounding cruel, but… I kind of want musicians to do drugs. Not all of them, mind you. Just the ones that happen to find a hit of weed or a line of coke helpful in doing what they do so well. I’m not going to invoke any of that acidhead Timothy Leary bullshit here — you’ve all heard the argument — so perhaps we can just agree that rock ‘n roll wouldn’t be the music we know and love if it weren’t for the free availability of all kinds of fun contraband.

But Marc Marot, the former head honcho of Island Records, is making some noise about how it might not be such a good idea for labels to look the other way when their acts are developing drug problems. As NME reports, he’s proposing a new clause in standard artist contracts that will allow record companies to take action when their cash cows are “self harming.” Meaning, in extreme cases (see Amy Winehouse), self-destructive musicians could even be dropped. In addition to addiction, Marot cites anorexia and depression as conditions that he’d like to see labels get a handle on.

All callousness aside, I don’t think this is a great idea. For one thing, we already treat musicians like children. We don’t need to institute yet another way to punish artists as though they’re teenagers acting up. (Of course, some of them may actually be teenagers acting up, and that’s something else entirely.) I also don’t entirely trust record companies to determine who is and isn’t a risk. Would it be impossible to imagine, for instance, a label dropping an artist who’s losing money over an occasional penchant for pot? But what’s most disturbing is that we’re talking about real psychological problems here. The threat of losing a recording contract is not going to scare addicts, anorexics or depressives straight. They need help; they don’t need further proof that their lives are a mess. That is something they likely know very well. In fact, with the volatile personalities involved, this plan could seriously backfire.