I'm currently going through an interesting (yet common) phenomenon with pseudo-client Alice, on her "Get Lit" logo. Put bluntly, I don't have any real interest in finishing it out. Yes, I know that's a very unprofessional attitude, but that's just where we are these days.
At the start of Alice’s project, the logo was actually to say “Books on Fire,” and I was very excited by her creative request, and the possibilities behind it. But as the desired messaging has shifted around, throughout the project—which has affected the look and visual logic of everything, more than once—my enthusiasm for this logo has pretty much run its course.
The “nail in the coffin” for me was when I made certain well-reasoned design choices, in an effort to accommodate the request to change the logo to say “Get Lit” instead. (Which, as I said, totally changed the look/feel of the logo from when the direction was based on “Books on Fire.”) Initially, I managed to convince her that my new creative choices made visual sense. But later in the project, she came back admitting that she just couldn’t deal with them—requesting an obvious creative direction that I’d already tried and deemed was not very effective. But she’s the client—she gets what she wants.
One thing I’ve not yet learned to deal with myself is when clients say stuff like “I trust you…you’re the expert!” but then turn around and *not* trust my expertise. It just lets me know that, with Alice, her stuff is never worth spending much time on, or getting too creatively invested in. Shame…but it is what it is.
* * *
Even when I was freelancing design full-time, I obviously couldn’t muster up enough passion for the game to keep my allegiance, despite all the client shenanigans—particularly if I was working with a PTE, or doing the job for way less money than it was worth. (The two most consistent aspects of working with Alice.) Now that I'm temporarily back in the design freelance game, I'm operating from a set of rules that will hopefully keep me from burning out this time.
Also, I see that Music will likely become more and more a part of my self-employment toolbox. So, how will I approach it, so the same fate doesn't happen? After all, the thought of my eventually thinking of music in the same jaded, “used to be fun” way as I do design, I’m still not cool with.
But maybe, I need to just get cool with it. Because the fact is, anything you decide to do for clients, you’re taking your own creative tastes/needs out of the equation, in order to satisfy theirs—and get paid in the process. (Let’s never leave that part out. Even uncle Ray may love every minute of having been a professional musician his whole life—but I doubt he’d love it so much if he wasn’t getting paid.)
Regardless, this is likely why I’m so uncomfortable with the idea of Megan now wanting to *pay me* to do the new intro/outro music for her podcast. On one hand, I think the desire is very noble and righteous of her. But on the other, I don’t want our musical collaborations to become just transactional—in the same way as Alice’s projects have become—because that automatically takes the interest and fun out of it for me. As soon as she says, “Nope, even though you’re the ‘expert,’ I think I’ve really got to have it this other way”—stripping away any ability of mine to at least *pretend* my creative opinion still matters—I’m out. I’m just all about getting it done, so I can get paid and move on. No life, no soul, no fun…just a transaction.
Trying to look at it from the Megan side, I suppose I can see how her enterprise might be *outgrowing* someone who’s just a hobbyist. Maybe her musical needs are becoming more consistent or pressing, and she needs someone she can depend on in a more dedicated and reliable way than “ol’ Terry dabbling around in LogicPro after work—that is, on nights when he’s not too tired.” Maybe her offer to pay me is a way to see how willing I am to become that person for her. Then, maybe I’m overthinking it…
Regardless, transaction-land is not where I want to end up—at least regarding my more collaborative music projects. I have no desire to become this jaded, unexcited, ambivalent curmudgeon. But is it avoidable? Is it possible to keep my music in that higher place? Or is it doomed to just become more work, like everything else?
GCI Music: How It Will Break Down
Currently, the fuzzy picture in my head of “Music As Self-Employment” is as follows:
Creative Collaborations (CC). ES (Aaron), Meg, and others I choose to do 50/50 music partnerships with. There is moneymaking potential for CC. But for the most part, this work will offer a creative outlet, help promote GCI Music in general, and contribute to other areas of the music operation. Given that, CC is a vital part of the operation. (Ideal percentage of music endeavor: 25%.)
Ambient Arts (AA). My personal outlet for original music for independent distribution. Specializing in jazz-inspired, ambient, and cinematic sounds—created mostly for listener enjoyment and relaxation. Also, AA may eventually become a distributor for projects by other likeminded artists. (Ideal percentage of music endeavor: 40%.)
Freelance Music Engineering (FME). Particularly regarding mixing and/or mastering. Open to studio/recording work, if it presents itself—and as an opportunity to grow my skills/knowledge. But my preference will be to mix/master prerecorded projects. (Ideal percentage of music endeavor: 20%.)
Atmospherics Media (AM). Music created for media applications, such as commercial stock and licensing. (Ideal percentage of music endeavor: 15%.)
Hopefully this setup/breakdown allows enough flexibility and variety to make music a viable, enjoyable part of my "self-employment toolbox"—and not just more work.
[IDEA: Approach Winston Stewart asking if he still does his own music. If so, find out how he gets his music mixed and mastered. Does he doe it himself, or does he use an engineer? From this, see if you can get some mentoring or guidance...or maybe even an opportunity to engineer!]