In 2002 Kurt Cobain’s journals were released in book form. The book instantly became a best seller, but not without controversy. Would Cobain really want his journal to be read? Many reviews, including this on by the UK's Telegraph, cite the quote "Do not read my diary when I am gone.” (It does, however, continue with “OK, I'm going to work now, when you wake up this morning, please read my diary. Look through my things, and figure me out.") Let’s not forget the cover of Kurt’s red Mead ringed notebook has “If you read you will judge.” scribbled on it.
Was it an invasion of privacy? An important book for his fans and legacy? In the end I bought the book, but flipped through and felt terrible reading it. It is now mostly unread and on my bookshelf. Did you buy it? Read it?
Though on the other end of the spectrum, the internet era has made it close to impossible for an artist to enforce a 'no recordings' or 'no cameras' rule. Every mobile phone is now a multifaceted recording device. When Death From Above 1979 posted that they would be testing out new material on the road, they asked audience members to "respect the sanctity of what we are doing" and not record video or audio. Though they mentioned not enforcing this at the shows, “It is our preference to keep what we are doing on this tour between us."
Not surprisingly, the day after their first show in Hamilton, live video of new songs was found on Youtube (it has since been taken down due to copyright claim by their label.)
If an artist asks you not to record, take photos, re-post leaked information, do you respect their wishes?
Why? Why not?
Post your comments on the blog or tweet @CBCRadio3