how do you solve a problem like spector?
Phil Spector died today at age 81, from natural causes. Spector invented the Wall of Sound, a production technique of layering tracks that, when it works, reaches infectious levels (Tina and Ike’s “River Deep, Mountain High”) and when it doesn’t, induces headaches (“Wah Wah” on George Harrison’s All Things Must Pass is so badly produced it’s actually offensive). He also produced The Beatles’ Let It Be album and Brian Wilson’s favorite album of all time, A Christmas Gift For You.
But whatever his talent or musical panache, Spector was actual scum. He wasn’t the “I’m an eccentric musician” brand he tried to sell, albeit not for lack of trying. There’s nothing Manic Pixie Dream Boy about Phil Spector. He died in prison for murdering actress Lana Clarkson, and were the law less impressed with celebrity and a smidge less misogynistic, he probably would have been in prison a long time ago. Fun fact, he kept his wife Ronnie Spector (of The Ronnettes) an actual prisoner in their home, and bought her a glass casket that was meant for her should she try to leave him. Ronnie eventually escaped barefoot (he hid her shoes) and got very far away. He also chased John Lennon with a gun.
Phil and Ronnie Spector in the studio. Her side-eye says it all.
This presents an interesting dichotomy, although not a new one. Is it morally, ethically sound to support an artist’s work if that artist is either a criminal or just generally gross? What about after that artist dies?
It’s a challenging query we have to ask ourselves again and again, and it becomes even murkier the more extraordinary the talent of the artist. Is it okay to listen to Michael Jackson? Watch the films of Woody Allen? Can we watch movies made by Harvey Weinstein as long as we boo the Miramax Pictures title card?
Like most ethical quandaries, the answer isn’t simple. However, I’d like to introduce to the discussion the notion of karma. In the West, our caustic misunderstanding of karma is along the lines of “if you do bad stuff bad stuff will happen to you.” In actuality, it can be boiled down to cause and effect. If you flip off a light switch, it will be dark. If you drop a glass on concrete, it will break. When it comes to the question of supporting artists that act in ways we don’t wish to support, the karmatic choice is this: know the cause and effect of what supporting that artist will do, and decide if it’s worth it.
For me, I will watch Woody Allen film if they are previously paid for (like a DVD, VHS, LaserDisc, etc) so that Mr. Allen is not receiving any financial support from me. However, with Mr. Spector, even before his death, I still listened to the records he produced. Why? Because he was in prison doing time, and also because the brilliant artists that he worked with are no way implicated in this, especially because the brunt of his work was done thirty or fourty years before the murder. We all have to find what makes sense for our individual ethical standards.
It’s equally important to tell the stories of the people he terrorized in his lifetime, and to celebrate their gifts. So perhaps the best way to stick it to Spector is to play the music of Ronnettes. Ronnie outlived you, Phil. And more people know her voice than know your name. She’s a survivor.
That’s how you solve a problem like Spector.