The Bluebird of Happiness

Lotte Kestner's 2013 album THE BLUEBIRD OF HAPPINESS is freakin' awesome.  I don't listen to it often b/c it's not something you can just hear and be content with.  A lot of the music I listen to - synth pop etc. - can be appreciated to some extent after the resounding pang from the melodies themselves becomes predictable and thus stops.
I finally bought it a couple months ago.  It's certainly a worthwhile addition to my CD stash.
I wonder how many copies the album sold tho.  I know Anna-Lynne Williams, the one person who writes and orchestrates the music on the albums bearing the name Lotte Kestner, did tour regionally pretty frequently when she was in the band Trespassers William.  She may have came from a somewhat wealthy family, and thus isn't concerned about money.  I don't know.  I spoke with her via email and she said she was raising the prices of her Trespassers William CDs that she sells personally b/c she said she'd lost a lot of the money she had invested b/c of the economic b.s. that was manifesting at that time (I don't remember the date or the year of the email exactly...), which implies she had (at one time at least) money TO invest...which is certainly not the case with me...even if I got "my head out of my ass" and "got a job", I'd still be making peanuts.  A lot of people call their paycheck peanuts b/c they're not being paid wads of cash hand over fist...but then they go to the movie theater **and** buy popcorn+a drink on a regular basis.  I could afford to go to the movie theater, sure, but if you compare the cost of my rent to that of the average Missourian, I'm very lucky.  Thankfully, my sister is my landlord.  Not too many people have that to say about themselves.  Oh, AND I have a roommate to help with the base cost of rent and utilities etc....a lot of my money does get wasted b/c I like to shop and can't find anything truly worth buying that doesn't eat up a large chunk of my money.  I usually end up buying things that I should already own but don't because I got rid of them to make room in my budget for more shopping...it's gotten better...still have some work to do...
But anyway.  Assuming Anna-Lynne Williams was/is not well (or at least OK) to do outside of the monetary benefits of music making...I have to wonder: is her music profitable?  I mean, I know a lot of artists/bands tour, sometimes, as in the case of Aerosmith etc., it's simply because they want to.  Other times I don't get it.  Pearl Jam?  They actually elected not to tour in support of their 2nd album.  I'm glad they were fortunate enough to deal their own cards.  Of course, when you have mega-sales of one individual album, I'd imagine you can threaten your way into getting what you want (or un-getting what you want against).  Michael Jackson toured b/c he was desperate for other people's acceptance/approval.  Katy Perry probably tours b/c she has an ego 3x the size of her brain and likes that feeling of Ms. World Domination.  Beyonce?  I don't even understand her appeal.  I didn't like Destiny's Child and I have no interest in Beyonce's solo career.  So I can't say what it is about her that compels her to tour because she's an artist whose music I'm not interested enough in to bother analyzing.  I didn't realize "Halo" was a Beyonce cover, btw.  I just got done reading about that on PopMatters.  It's a great song, a great performance...Beyonce's version I have no interest in.  It may be good, it may not be.  If Beyonce hadn't been working in a band that defined the cold-blooded nature of the music industry and the overall teenager population that listened to them, I might give it a try.  N.I.
I know it's possible - very much so - for a band/artist that doesn't use payola or pimp themselves out to PepsiCo to succeed in the monetary standard.
But the only bands I can think of that have done that are Taking Back Sunday, Hawthorne Heights, Senses Fail, Silverstein and every other emopop band that cropped up before "emo" became a dirty word...and the only reason they succeeded on that front was because they were part of a trend.  People were coocoo for emo - puffs.  It'd be nice if once in a while an album would sell a large qty of units without the tools of payola, peer pressure, or the artist/band putting on some act that makes people think they have idol potential.  Michael Jackson was the worst about that.  He'd be on stage and you'd think he was King.  Yes, his music was good, he was extremely talented in a variety of ways, but King?  Maybe President; his list of achievements certainly rivals that of any branch of gov't.  But King?  Jesus King OF Kings.  And MJ certainly does not provide water for his people, food to eat or the comfort of the knowledge that salvation awaits those who ask for it.  The moment some SONY exec decides to start branding "Jackson's Own" salad dressing, I'm sure someone will have an argument that they think makes sense...
Anyway.  I keep telling my sister that she should buy the music that she likes, or at least that which she likes most.  She insists that music should not be a job but instead a service that is done for mankind.  I don't know where she gets that idea.  Why not guard the cash register at WalMart as a service to mankind?  Or cut the paychecks of the employees at J.P. Morgan for the same reason?  Jobs ARE a service to mankind.  As appreciation for x service, your are presented with a paycheck.  Now, as far as the way the criminal justice system deals with thieves, as well as other criminals, that's an entirely different issue altogether.