There is a huge difference between a musician and an entertainer. This is similar to the differences between the artist, the master and the master artist.
Musicians just play music without paying attention to how the audience is responding to them. Entertainers are fully engaged in how the audience responds to them and adjusts their performance accordingly.
If you want to really make it in the entertainment industry or music industry, you need to learn to become an entertainer. It's not easy. Since a young age I started developing these skills, mostly by being a pain in the ass to just about every educator that had to deal with me. I'm not going to say I was an attention whore, but I was to the extent that it got people to listen to me. That's what being an entertainer is. It's craftily selling your audience on your presence without annoying them. It's getting people to crave and listen to what you have to say and accept it.
It's hard to be an entertainer. You're always in this state of figuring out how to get people to like you even when you may not necessarily like them back.
This is why you see so many performers and people all over the internet doing stupid shit. They are creating a spectacle. I think this is a timeless requirement of someone who wants to be a great entertainer. They probably even talk about it in books like the 48 laws of power and the Art of War.
A spectacle is basically an unreal situation or scenario that sparks the imagination of the viewer.
Many Fake Artists and Fake Gurus use spectacle by use of expensive inanimate objects such as cars, private jets, stacks of money, and beautiful females. Well the females are animate, but only to people giving them the right dollar figure.
You get what I'm saying.
I don't think the spectacle is bad when you're an artist or entertainer. That's what art is to a great degree. It's your soul speaking out and you trying to create a physical manifestation of a non-physical world.
Fake Artists and Fake Gurus are essentially entertainers. I have a quam with them because they are not classifying themselves as such and they should be. If they did I promise you their business models would be not be the same. The Fake Artist's business model might work but the Fake Guru's would not. If somebody giving alleged business advice told his audience he was only entertaining them and that everything he does is purely for that purpose, he would have no credibility. I mean that's basically what it says in their terms and conditions on their websites, etc. by use of "results may vary" and other various legal jargon. I do the same thing with The Dating App Makeover and Social Media Rehab courses. But I am an entertainer and not presenting myself as anything other than that. That's the difference.
Anyways, you get what I'm saying.
The spectacle is important. How you do that is up to you. I recommend building it into a show or process that creates a sustainable performance out of your spectacle. I think one-off publicity stunts can be exhausting and are more associated with becoming infamous than becoming a master worth of praise or entertainer that could eventually generate some taxable income. The people that climb to the top of skyscrapers for the perfect selfie, etc. That's not really creating a spectacle. That's just a form of gaming the system and buying a ticket to infamy. 300,000 people may like your photo but none of them are going to give you a dollar for it.
The dictionary defines spectacle as a "visually striking performance or display". I would redefine it as a "visually striking performance or display that builds a brand or works towards generating income"
That's the type of spectacle I'm saying you should create.
Anyways, those are my thoughts on creating the spectacle. I might elaborate on that later, but that's all I have for now. Just a little food for thought.