2016 was a crazy year. It seemed like every week that a musician every week was dying and they were having their 15 minutes on the front pages of newspapers.
Accompanied with their deaths, was the customary item of their sales going up like crazy in a way they hadn’t seen before they died. Out of all the artists that died in 2016, it does raise the question will their deaths elevate their legacy?
The first thing that needs to be looked at is the financial aspect of what is involved after an artist dies. It can be said that an artist’s death is an advertiser’s wet dream. This can basically guarantee them with income for the next few years.It also provides them with excuses to reissue albums in highly expensive boxsets.
It can be said that an artist’s death is an advertiser’s wet dream. This can basically guarantee them with income for the next few years.It also provides them with excuses to reissue albums in highly expensive boxsets.
The main example would be someone that I like, Lou Reed. He died in 2013 and immediately his online sales had soared up by 300%. It seemed to support Reed’s mentor Andy Warhol’s quote of “everyone will be famous for 15 minutes”. It set up a platform for everyone to hope on the bandwagon, but by next week these people had moved onto something else.
It seemed to support Reed’s mentor Andy Warhol’s quote of “everyone will be famous for 15 minutes”. It set up a platform for everyone to hope on the bandwagon, but by next week these people had moved onto something else.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Lou Reed fan, but it wasn’t like he never fulfilled his potential. It hits you like “ah that’s shit” but then you move on.
Reed has a vinyl box set that’s on sale for $149 on Amazon so it does really show that financially, an artist is appreciated.
But now begs the question, are they creatively appreciated when they died? For me, the only death I really cared about was David Bowie, but apart from that, the famous deaths of other artists didn’t just suddenly elevate them in my mind.
Bowie’s artist talent guarantees that his legacy will be celebrated
Prince or George Michael I really didn’t care so it wasn’t like they became my favourite new artist. Or the death of Glenn Fry made literally no difference to me, not least because he was in The Eagles, who were fucking awful.
Famously, Bowie and Leonard Cohen’s albums this year are always going to be linked to their deaths.It adds an air of uneasiness when listening to these albums. It showed that an extra layer is added to the album, elevating it to critical acclaim in a way that maybe wouldn’t have existed if they maybe didn’t die.
The only artists to me that are appreciated hugely when they die are the young artists or members of the ’27 club’.
The members of the famous ’27 Club’
From Ian Curtis to Kurt Cobain, their suicides elevate the artist and creates a ‘cult of personality’around them. A tragic and depressed figure who never fulfilled their creative potential.
These guys have become cultural figures in their deaths due to how young they were when they died. It makes them have an instant connection to younger people, rather than older musicians who fulfilled their potential and had several hit/misses in their music career. are definitely going to be appreciated a lot more.
It’s because of that factor that they are definitely going to be appreciated a lot more.
There is a trend in the general media to hype an artist’s legacy after their death or portray them more than for what they really were.But their deaths aren’t going to elevate their work. If their work was shit before they died, it’s going to shit still after they died.
In ten years time, the musicians that died, their deaths could always remembered as a trend of a certain year or in Bowie’s case, a truly remarkable cultural moment. Which one will be the case? Only time will tell.
Nostalgic Beat 
