Pearl Jam Cancels Their NC Show

[Kevin Davis]

This isn't just Bruce; many musicians and filmmakers are vowing not to do business in NC until this law is repealed

It's one thing to make a statement that you're avoiding playing a certain place until they conform to whatever sociopolitical position you deem acceptable*, but not making good on your existing commitments is in extremely poor taste. People have made plans around this show, and since the show is two fucking days away, some of these plans are probably irreversible for some without incurring a great deal of expense or inconvenience. Surely some of Bruce's traveling hordes have booked hotels that won't be as keen to issue refunds as Bruce is being, yeah? Is Bruce Springsteen: American Hero going to be issuing compensation for all the nonrefundable airfare and room deposits that his blue-collar legions blew their tax returns on?

*Though even this seems silly to me -- surely every state has some law on the books that any given performer would find objectionable, so in theory the consistent version of this method of protest would have no artist performing anywhere, ever. I don't mean to suggest that an artist shouldn't use his power to advocate for those he feels need a voice, but it also seems like at some point a cooperative version of this world is going to have to involve occasionally transacting with individuals who differ from you, even in profound capacities, on sensitive issues. Refusing to play concerts on the same block as their government building or buy their chicken sandwiches or whatever else, in my opinion, sends a message that is ultimately very similar to the one being protested: "I can only interact with you in a professional capacity if you agree with me on all sensitive social and political issues."

[Jorge]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

Activism and speaking up and agitating for causes is great. I just question the logic behind state boycotts of this kind as they affect the lifelihood of the state's general populace INCLUDING members of the marginalized communities that people are ostensibly standing up for. As I said in the Transgender Rights thread.

[Strat]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

Activism and speaking up and agitating for causes is great. I just question the logic behind state boycotts of this kind as they affect the lifelihood of the state's general populace INCLUDING members of the marginalized communities that people are ostensibly standing up for. As I said in the Transgender Rights thread.

I get the sense that LGBT community favors someone with a platform the size of Bruce Springsteen to make such statements.

[Jorge]

I'm not just talking about the Springsteen show. There's a number of businesses that will be leaving NC or canceling their plans to expand in the state over this, which will have a substantial effect on the local economy. Yes, they're putting pressure on the state by withholding money, but it's also going to affect people's lives in a real and tangible way.

[BurtReynolds]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

If only we lived in a world that had several options of varying degrees of effectiveness from which we could choose from. But no, we only live in a world where people either do nothing or cancel rock concerts. Thank you for making this clear.

[Wendy Carlos's Twin]

The only thing these dumbshit politicians are likely to respond to is money. This isn't just Bruce; many musicians and filmmakers are vowing not to do business in NC until this law is repealed. That's gonna cost the state a lot in lost revenue. In the long run, as a group, I could see this kind of protest having a legitimate chance of making a difference.

Exactly. The only way to tame these out of control shitbags is to hit them in their pocketbook, because it's the only thing they care about and it's the only thing they will ever care about. In the process, some of the toothless morons who voted for these idiots will think twice next time. I doubt that there are many people in Flint, Michigan right now who voted for Walker and don't feel like complete and total fools.

And also...non-Americans please shut the fuck up.

[BurtReynolds]

yeah that almost never works, and usually has the opposite effect.

[tommymtcom]

I hope for Ruddocks sake that this show goes ahead.

[BurtReynolds]

Maybe we could impose some sanctions on North Korea while we're at it. We'll have this Korea situation solved by Christmas.

[Strat]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

If only we lived in a world that had several options of varying degrees of effectiveness from which we could choose from. But no, we only live in a world where people either do nothing or cancel rock concerts. Thank you for making this clear.

This makes no point nor has anything negative against what Bruce chose to do

[BurtReynolds]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

If only we lived in a world that had several options of varying degrees of effectiveness from which we could choose from. But no, we only live in a world where people either do nothing or cancel rock concerts. Thank you for making this clear.

This makes no point nor has anything negative against what Bruce chose to do

go do yoga.

[Strat]

If nobody does anything, nothing happens, if a few people do a few things and make a statement, things can build and change can happen.

If only we lived in a world that had several options of varying degrees of effectiveness from which we could choose from. But no, we only live in a world where people either do nothing or cancel rock concerts. Thank you for making this clear.

This makes no point nor has anything negative against what Bruce chose to do

go do yoga.

I rather drink my whiskey.

[E.H. Ruddock]

3 shows in Carolinas lol

[B]

From a Facebook friend ...

I respect and support Bruce Springsteen's efforts to lend his weight to efforts to overturn HB2. But that bill passed two weeks ago and he waits until two days before his Greensboro show to boycott NC? At this moment people are flying and driving to now-nonrefundable hotel rooms. Arena workers and parking attendants had shifts scheduled. Wait staff were counting on extra business. Springsteen should have taken this stand a week ago when he could have made just as strong a statement but not caused as much financial harm to people who have nothing to do with our looney legislature.

[spike]

why cancel when you could browbeat a captive audience for 2 hours?

[B]

I don't think the decision to cancel the show is made with a full understanding of our politics.

9 out of 10 of the lawmakers that voted for that bill are running unopposed in gerrymandered districts or won by a landslide in rural communities. This kind of action hurts Raleigh, Durham, Greensboro, and Charlotte. All of those communities have representatives that are in a tiny, liberal minority. The majority could give a shit if Bruce comes or Paypal pulls out of the state. Their constituents just don't want "shims" in their bathrooms. And yes, my coworker used the word "shim" this week.

Our governor's starting to backpedal, and the lawmakers could help him out since it's an election year, but I really don't think they give a shit b/c they've got a huge, veto-proof majority.

[spike]

only liberals listen to bruce springsteen and use paypal?

[digster]

*Though even this seems silly to me -- surely every state has some law on the books that any given performer would find objectionable, so in theory the consistent version of this method of protest would have no artist performing anywhere, ever. I don't mean to suggest that an artist shouldn't use his power to advocate for those he feels need a voice, but it also seems like at some point a cooperative version of this world is going to have to involve occasionally transacting with individuals who differ from you, even in profound capacities, on sensitive issues. Refusing to play concerts on the same block as their government building or buy their chicken sandwiches or whatever else, in my opinion, sends a message that is ultimately very similar to the one being protested: "I can only interact with you in a professional capacity if you agree with me on all sensitive social and political issues."

I'm not really sure how an action such as this one sends that message, precisely for the reason you indicated earlier in the paragraph. Springsteen hasn't applied such a response across the board to every single state that's created legislation or voted into office someone or something he disagreed with. He's played for states that voted for Bush, that at the time had fairly onerous same-sex marriage statutes, etc. Agree with the position or not, he felt that this issue was important enough to cancel the concert over; I don't see how that is therefore asserting that a state has to check every box in correlation with Bruce's ideology before he comes to town.

I see both sides of this; I totally understand the band that, even if it disagrees with the law on the books, decides that it's still better to come play the show, and perhaps use the show as some kind of mobilizing platform against the things they dislike. However, looking at the reaction to Bruce's cancellation, if the intent is to simultaneously be a small part of broader economic boycott to put pressure on the state government, and to draw attention to the issue through your actions, than canceling the show has an impact that putting it on could never have.

[WtOB?]

Cancelling shows for reasons like this is so monumentally stupid. It has no practical effect, other than to flatter the artist's sense of smug self-satisfaction, and only serves to disappoint and frustrate their fans - most of whom probably already agree with the artist's point of view anyway.

they should just do nothing and vote conservative and buy another investment property instead derp!

[Kevin Davis]

*Though even this seems silly to me -- surely every state has some law on the books that any given performer would find objectionable, so in theory the consistent version of this method of protest would have no artist performing anywhere, ever. I don't mean to suggest that an artist shouldn't use his power to advocate for those he feels need a voice, but it also seems like at some point a cooperative version of this world is going to have to involve occasionally transacting with individuals who differ from you, even in profound capacities, on sensitive issues. Refusing to play concerts on the same block as their government building or buy their chicken sandwiches or whatever else, in my opinion, sends a message that is ultimately very similar to the one being protested: "I can only interact with you in a professional capacity if you agree with me on all sensitive social and political issues."

I'm not really sure how an action such as this one sends that message, precisely for the reason you indicated earlier in the paragraph. Springsteen hasn't applied such a response across the board to every single state that's created legislation or voted into office someone or something he disagreed with. He's played for states that voted for Bush, that at the time had fairly onerous same-sex marriage statutes, etc. Agree with the position or not, he felt that this issue was important enough to cancel the concert over; I don't see how that is therefore asserting that a state has to check every box in correlation with Bruce's ideology before he comes to town.

I see both sides of this; I totally understand the band that, even if it disagrees with the law on the books, decides that it's still better to come play the show, and perhaps use the show as some kind of mobilizing platform against the things they dislike. However, looking at the reaction to Bruce's cancellation, if the intent is to simultaneously be a small part of broader economic boycott to put pressure on the state government, and to draw attention to the issue through your actions, than canceling the show has an impact that putting it on could never have.

Maybe it doesn't send that message, I don't know. I tend to take a very cynical view of boycott-style protest in general, so I'm probably the wrong guy to comment on this. But nevertheless I think the class move here would have been to honor his commitment and then announce at the show that it would be his last performance in NC until the law is overturned.

I get that there are battles to be fought in this world, but it's tough after having watched so many rock musicians act like buffoons in the service of their causes to feel like there isn't some element of posturing in all of this. At the very least I think it shows Bruce to be something of a jaded rich dope who lacks an understanding of what financial and circumstantial inconvenience his fans go to to give him the life he has.