That’s not why I chose the title for this post, however. This is more about Megaplex 2010’s guest of honor, Paul Zaloom. Most folks my age or slightly younger know him as the mad scientist with hair that won’t quit, Beakman. I enjoyed the opportunity to chat, drink, caffeinate, and stew in Florida’s heat with this award-winning actor, puppeteer, and comedian. I should add blossoming nerd as well since he may end up coming to more of these conventions as an attendee in the future. He’s delighted children for years now and inspired quite a few to become real-world scientists.

He also has a puppet with a talking penis.

Anyone who remembers Mr. Conductor shouldn’t be surprised at that last bit. It’s this duality that got me typing this morning. Sometimes I forget that the people who entertain our children are also, you know, people. Fully grown adults with the same sick sense of humor as me. Hello, ever heard the Thundercats outtakes before? I believe this duality is not only healthy but absolutely necessary to nurture the artist.

After his Beakman presentation at Megaplex, Zaloom regrouped for an original puppet show later that day, this time for adults only. The tone of the show was on a par with South Park and Robot Chicken, making most of us laugh while the rest run to cover the ears of nearby children. Yet, as with all good comedy, the bawdy veneer surrounded a collection of social statements and real-world issues. Honestly, without the grown-up comedy, discussing these issues in a clinical way would make some even more uncomfortable. It was all in good fun, but definitely not for the kids.

At the end of the day, Zaloom is simply himself. He can’t be kid-friendly all the time, neither could George Carlin. That’s the job of Beakman, a fictional character. If I expected Zaloom to be Beakman, I’d expect him to be only a fraction of who he is. An artist requires more than one expressive avenue like a plant requires more than just sunlight to survive. Proper care and feeding of an artist means that the audience must be mature enough to separate the man from the role.

Maybe next year we’ll see him back at Megaplex simply as Paul Zaloom. Though I won’t be able to return as Dr. Frank-N-Furter, I do hope that I can return simply as Matthew Ebel.

As seen, heard, and read on WBUR

That idea doesn’t sit well with everyone, including Boston musician and rock critic Dave Wildman. “I don’t know, it freaks me out,” he says with a laugh. Wildman likens Ebel to a talented street performer on the information super highway.
WBUR.org

It’s success if that’s what he wanted, definitely. If not…then no, he’s still got more work to do.

My guess? Dude still has a lot more work to do.
Justin Boland, comment on Hypebot.com

These two comments, though lamentably myopic, are understandable. Believe me, I can level with these opinions by making only one assumption: Their definition of “success” is stuck in the coke-filled limousine of Motley Crue, 1985.

Back then, a “successful” musical act played to hundreds of thousands of screaming fans in any venue the bus rolled up to. Anything less wasn’t worthy of a mention by a VJ on MTV, let alone the envy of aspiring musicians around the globe.

Fast-forward to damn-near-2010 and see where that definition of “success” has left the music industry. The big-production high-overhead “success” acts are barely staying afloat through flagging CD and online sales while the record labels try to own more and more of the artist’s work. So far only one forward-thinking group of industry insiders has put their finger on the pulse of the problem:

For the past 50 years the Artist business has been fractured with multiple competing interests. A) Record Companies whose main interest was the exploitation of the artists recorded music (masters). B) Publishers whose interests are similar but share in mostly the same income pot as the Record Labels. C) Live concert promoters, focused on selling concert tickets and sponsorships. D) Merchandisers mostly focused on selling various clothing and souvenirs at concerts and traditional retail.

Mixed in with all this you have Business Managers, Lawyers, Agents and Artist Managers whose roles are to not only coordinate the Artists schedules and business strategies but also have all of the above parties cooperate with each other.
Terry McBride, founder of Nettwerk and co-founder of Polyphonic

So given the current state of the economy, the music business, and technology, this leaves us with the million-Euro question: What is Success in the Music Business? I believe it is the same success that has driven Apple since day one… profit. If a music act can continue to bring in more money than it spends, it’s a success.

Take it a step further and we arrive at the crux of my definition of success as an artist: If you can remain profitable and grow as a business, you are not a success– you are a series of successes. Every step up is another success, a bigger success, and another bit of weight to add to the momentum like Katamari Damacy building the moon.

1. I released self-produced albums. Success.
2. I backed up a star at the Grand Ole Opry. Success.
3. I no longer need a “day job”. Success.
4. I have thousands of fans in more than a dozen countries. Success.
5. I no longer need to play shitty 4-hour Journey-and-Bon-Jovi-laden bar gigs to pay my rent. Success like you wouldn’t believe it.
6. Update: I just got mentioned in Amanda F*cking Palmer’s blog. Success, if only ’cause she rocks.

Is Mr. Boland correct? Absolutely. I am only beginning this journey and God only knows where it will lead me. Am I where I want to be? Yes… but not where I’ll want to be tomorrow. That means I can’t rest on some deflated view of “success”, I have to move forward. Am I a failure because I don’t own a private jet powered by strippers and hundred dollar bills? Absolutely not.

We are only failures if we subject ourselves to the narrow limitations of others. I choose to be a success.