Regarding the intro topic about freedom in art making, I tend to think that artists make their best work when they are successfully pushing back against corporate/status quo demands. The struggle itself seems to inspire work that is both challenging and accessible at the same time. When artists are totally defeated by the suits, they tend not to create good work. However, when they completely achieve artistic freedom, they tend to become too self-indulgent and self-referential.
I read a great review once of the collaborative album that Metallica did with Lou Reed and it made the case that this was an example of artists having way too much creative freedom and not being sufficiently accountable to outside forces. I think that's probably right. However, you also get a lot of terrible, pedestrian art that is the result of artists having no ability to exercise a personal vision at all.
So to me, it's really about the artist having to push back against something (and winning temporary battles) that makes for good art.
