That is a leopard in India using his last few moments on this planet to take out as many people as possible.

Forever I will celebrate any non-human species that goes out with a fight.  Caring about your survival enough to defend your extinction.  Despite the odds.  Despite the certainty that you will be terminated.  You fight.  To the death.  We are all animals and just because humans have several biological advantages, does not mean everything else should lay down in submission.

I can appreciate when a house gets destroyed by termites, when locusts take out a field of grain, and definitely when any human of any age gets taken out by a non-human.  Not that I have anything against humans.  Despite some accusations otherwise, I am one.  But, I also respect living as something I must earn everyday.  I will fight for my survival and those I care to defend, but that does not mean I cannot respect the other side of the struggle to survive.

Helen Mirren in the motion picture RED

I would like to propose that 67 is the new I-regret-to-inform-you-but-we-must-terminate-you-due-to-the-amount-of-social-resources-that-would-be-required-to-keep-you-incorporated-into-society-for-any-amount-of-future-and-if-you haven’t-accomplished-all-you-ever-dreamed-look-at-it-this-way-you’ve-been-extremely-lucky-to-be-alive-for-60-years-and-get-over-yourself-and-do-something-that-will-add-quality-of-life-and-ensure-the-stability-of-our-civilizations-until-such-time-as-we-can-control-the-population-size-through-other-means.

What if we offered free, full healthcare benefits to anyone under 67?  After that, you’re on your own.  67 is the current average life expectancy for a human on the planet Earth.  We can use that as a gauge.  That way, moving forward, healthcare benefits would adjusted based on our total effort to care for our species.

According to CNET news, “U.S. album sales for the first six months of the year grew 1 percent.” This is the first upswing the industry has seen since 2004. I know it’s only one percent, but I find this to be quite encouraging.

Most of my positive feelings stem from the way that music now being shared and purchased. I think it was around 2004 when I somewhat stopped buying music. There was, what i would call, too much noise in the regular channels. I was bored with KROQ, who still had Sublime’s ‘What I Got’ in regular rotation and MySpace seemed like an over saturated swamp. I tuned out.

Slowly, the tools have increased for P2P sharing on major platforms rather than hidden file transfers. Facebook and Twitter have been no small part of this. They allow you to link to official channels and pages that have the music you want to share. But rather than a marketing email or spammercial, I am getting my recommendations from people I actually want recommendations from. When Dave Holmes tweets a mix, I’m gonna check it out because I respect his taste in music. When a friend on FB posts her new song, I feel like she offered to me in the stream, rather than pushing into my face.

I am buying more music now. I’m participating in the 1% upswing. Of course I always try to get my money to the artist by the most direct means, and I’m not sure how the Nielsen SoundScan report took into account independent record sales. But, I’m buying it. I love music and I want there to be a way for musicians to make money.

One a side note, I’m also super encouraged by the music video world these days.  A recent fave is Steve Shane’s ‘Every Pretty Smile’ which was fan funded through a micro-financing site.

by John T. Unger

As the barriers of production and distribution continue to lower, the protection of individuals rights as a copyright holder become increasingly relevant. The voice and point of view of the individual have always truly been the only elements that mattered in art. But, in the evolution of our society, expression was often restricted or limited by various forces, some through ignorance and some through intent. We live in an unprecedented age of access. More people have the opportunity to disseminate their views to the world since, most likely, the development of civilization. To lose this rare and empowering moment to old systems built on parasitic philosophies would be an ultimate step backward for mankind. Rather than continue in the broadest terms, I encourage you to read the story of independent artist John T. Unger and consider how many of the constructs of our civilization are not prepared for the value and progress being offered by the voices of its participants.

I know folks love to bash the reality TV shows, heck there is probably even a reality show to see who’s best at bashing reality programming. The Bashelor, Are Your Smarter Than A Reality Star, The Not-So-Amazing Race of Humans That Created Reality TV. But, when you look at the aim of the programming, it’s rather encouraging. I think that actual reality, for the majority, is a gauntlet of repetition and searches for base gratification. But reality TV strives for something greater. It attempts to present reality as the most engaging and exciting experience anyone could hope for. Let’s embrace that ideal for a moment and see what we can learn from the reality that is presented to us as reality on television.

1. PLAN AHEAD: The most exciting moments in reality TV are contrived, if not fully scripted, scenarios. A fight, a surprise change of heart, a meal that turned out much better than the chef expected. Incorporating a healthy dose of forethought and planning into you life can seemingly guarantee excitement.

2. EDIT OUT THE BORING PARTS: While you are a contestant on a reality show, they are constantly filming you. Capturing everything you do. Then, they edit out all of the dull and uninteresting portions of your day and show us only the most fascinating moments. Imagine if you took a proactive, self-aware attitude towards that philosophy. Live as if you are editing out the mundane. Every time you feel yourself getting bored take an action to spice things up.

3. ELIMINATE UNPOPULAR CONTESTANTS: Reality shows have judges or call-in voting to decide who stays and goes. In your life, you are the one and only judge. You can choose to eliminate friends and family at your discretion. You don’t even need a good reason. How exciting is that?

4. NAME YOUR GOAL: The folks on The Biggest Loser are not trying to be America’s Next Top Model; they’re trying to be the biggest loser. Every reality show has a clearly defined objective. It provides the contestants with focus and purpose. You most likely will not get what you want if you never say what you want.

5. PLAY TO WIN: As in life, most people on the reality shows do not win. Typically there is only one winner per season. But, everyone gets in there and gives it their best. They try to be the winner. The dedication to really go for your dream even though you know there is an overwhelming chance you will fail takes character and confidence.

For all of these points there is only one thing stopping you from doing them. Will. I think many people do enact versions of the above list into their lives on a daily basis. But, it all comes to will. Do you have the will to tell your mother to never call you again? Do you have the will to start a dance routine in the middle of your office because you know it would be more exciting than finishing the monthly sales report? Do you have the will to take out every dish in the cabinets and lay them out on the floor to confront your roomie about never doing the dishes? Someone on a reality show would.

You watch reality television to escape the reality of you actual life. Imagine the real possibilities if you had the will to make your own reality something you would watch.

Last night at the NYTVF Nick Armstrong won Best Director for his series Team A.P.O.C.A.L.Y.P.S.E. Aside from the award Nick received dozens of compliments about his 22-minute comedy pilot. But, they were not just about how funny the show was. There were lots of adulations about how well the characters were set-up and how it seemed like a series that had direction. As someone, who has put out his fair share of short, silly videos, Nick’s pilot makes me think. I was an actor and a consultant on Nick’s project and had a good seat for observing his process.

Process. A process is a functional mechanism for output that is purely unique to each artist. No two artists will have the same process or come to it by the same path. Some may be similar, but no two are exactly alike. What I like about Nick’s process on this project is that he did not allow technology to manipulate it. Rather he manipulated technology and made it fit into the natural course of his filmmaking.

Nick had not directed many things before and never anything this ambitious. He had decided from the get go that this project was going to be his film school. He was going to take the time he needed to learn while working. It took him two years to make his 22-minute pilot. But, now he knows. He knows how he works. He knows what type of people fit well with his filmmaking style. He knows which jobs he can do, which ones he can’t do and which ones he simply does not want to do. He knows how various emotions like fury, fear and despair manifest themselves in his work. But, most of all, he knows his process.

This is not a process that I believe he could have learned from making a three-minute video and throwing it up online. Nick took the time he needed to grow himself and prepare himself to produce his art, his way for a long time to come. This is bravery. This is ambition.

Our technology allows us so many shortcuts and quick tools for creating that it can be difficult to take the time to get to know ourselves and develop a process to best access and represent our creativity. Not everyone needs two years, but I think it is important to make sure that the artists point of view is being served first. The easier it gets to produce product the more important the individual becomes. Only those ambitious enough to grow a strong, clear, personal and distinct voice will stand out from the pack and create enduring content that can truly be called their art.

For a moment I will ask you to take the word commerce out of your artistic equation. Don’t worry, I’ll get back to it. But, for right now we are going to focus on that thing you felt compelled to produce; your art. Does your art mean anything to you? Do you want people to at least have the opportunity to experience your art? Are you making art that you would like to share with any portion of humanity, no matter how small? If you answered ‘yes’ to any of those questions then why not build a museum.

A public museum. One of the oldest distribution platforms for art. It has evolved over the years, but let’s say the art museum is this: a public place for the people to experience art.

Location, Location, Location. Now since The Internet is the busiest street in the world. Roughly 1.7 billion people walk down it every day. That’s where you’re going to build your museum. Your museum is going to be accessible to people everywhere all of the time. And your museum is going to present you art exactly the way you decide. I’ve heard statements before about: how the label did this or the studio did that. Complaints about how some outside force altered or even ruined an artistic vision. Well, with the personalized museum model those problems are solved. You are the label and you are the studio.

Your museum is a simply your art in a public place. It is any online distribution mechanism you utilize to allow people to experience your art. The catch is your going to let them experience it for free…kinda. When you go to a museum, even a public one, there is usually an entrance fee. For our museum analogy that entrance fee is the price a person pays each month for internet access. It’s a good deal for them. For one low price they get access to millions of museums. But, just like some museums, there is an extra price for certain special exhibits, an IMAX movie perhaps. That is a paid subscription site.

But, let’s say you haven’t built that type of reputation yet. You paid to build your museum and anyone can access your museum by paying the general internet entrance fee. Everyone is welcome in your museum. They can watch, listen, download, share, link, remix, mash-up/down and sideways. As a matter of fact, there’s only one thing visitors are not allowed to do with your art, make money. That’s because you haven’t made any money yet. It’s a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike Museum.

Any money associated with the your art is going to come to you. You see this museum that you’ve built has a gift shop. It’s a nice gift shop that you have created to allow people to participate in your process. Your gift shop allows people that are moved, inspired or otherwise impacted by your art, to connect your art with their lives. It might have CD’s, DVD’s, T-Shirts, Mugs, Prints, Licensing, advertising opportunities, etc. It is a place for anyone who WANTS to buy in to your art.

The gift shop is where you make your money. But you had to earn it as an artist by creating something that impacted at least one person. When you walk out of any museum there is a gift shop. In that gift shop are various items that in someway connect with the original works. People only buy in to the art that they liked. I like Dancers at the Bar by Degas, I did not like Girl with a Hoop by Renoir. Guess which one I’m going to invest my money in? Why does Renoir deserve any money from me? To me, he failed at his job as an artist. Art is wholly subjective. That subjectivity is bound to find it’s way into the commercialization if that art. The question is, do you want to control that commercialization?

Before YouTube and Ask A NInja and Lonely Girl 15, there was Homestar Runner (I know there was lots of stuff before them, but I’m using them as my example). The animated series has been running online for nearly 10 years and is still going strong. HSR has massive fanbase who pay the creators very respectable money year after year through buying merchandise from their store. The show is free and available to anyone online to watch in full. The website is not supported by a label or a studio in any way and have actually turned down several very lucrative offers. The reason? They figured the perfect formula, artists connecting with fans directly. As an artist they present their art to me as best they can. As a fan I know that every dollar I spend in their store goes directly to the artist.

You earn by entertaining and inspiring. If you truly want to express yourself through art, open a museum. Put your art out there for anyone to look at and listen to. Maybe you’re searching for a thousand true fans. Maybe you only need one fan to be satisfied. Maybe you want to take over the world. If you ignore the opportunity to personally control how your fans can pay you, recognize that that is a choice you have made.

Not everyone will pay you. Truthfully, most of the people that come to the museum will pay you nothing for your art. They might not like it. They might be only mildly impacted by it, but certainly not in way that makes them want to incorporate it into their lives. But, the folks that do want to support and engage with you, want the money they spend to come to you. People don’t buy U2 albums because they love Universal Music Group, LLC. They buy it because they love U2. There is no reason that you cannot or should not connect your art to a revenue stream. I don’t care what you do with the income, but I really think it’s best if you have it. You. The artist.