Do SINGERS get an udue popularity as musicians in America?

AMP: sci-fi art, regular art, pictures, photos, comics, music, etc.

Moderator: Beowulf

Do singers get too much attention?

Yes
28
67%
No
1
2%
About right
0
No votes
yes but because of celebrity status / pop-culture
13
31%
 
Total votes: 42

User avatar
thejester
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 2005-06-10 07:16pm
Location: Richard Nixon's Secret Tapes Club Band

Post by thejester »

salm wrote:
thejester wrote: 25 years ago you had bands exactly like that - the Sex Pistols were bloody awful musicians whose fame lies soley in an image masterminded largey by McLaren and created by the likes of Westwood and the conservative press.
It´s woth noting though that bands like the Sex Pistols relied heavily on political attitude whereas modern bands and singers rely more on physical appearance.
Are you kidding? The Pistols created the punk brand - spiky hair, obnoxious piercings, denim, the swastikas, wearing a t-shirt with tits on it to TV interviews, whatever. The Clash were much more politically orienated (ie Strummer's Red Army Faction T-Shirt, or their participation in the Notting Hill riots and then writing White Riot) then the Pistols, who were pretty nihlistic and got their publicity from shock, large amounts of which came from the way they dressed and acted.
Image
I love the smell of September in the morning. Once we got off at Richmond, walked up to the 'G, and there was no game on. Not one footballer in sight. But that cut grass smell, spring rain...it smelt like victory.

Dynamic. When [Kuznetsov] decided he was going to make a difference, he did it...Like Ovechkin...then you find out - he's with Washington too? You're kidding.
- Ron Wilson
User avatar
salm
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 10296
Joined: 2002-09-09 08:25pm

Post by salm »

Yeah, they relied on appearance as well of course. But you just have to read allmost any of their lyrics. The vast majority is either politicaly or critical of society in a way.
View successful bands nowadays rely on political statements now and only on physical appearance.
User avatar
thejester
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 2005-06-10 07:16pm
Location: Richard Nixon's Secret Tapes Club Band

Post by thejester »

salm wrote:Yeah, they relied on appearance as well of course. But you just have to read allmost any of their lyrics. The vast majority is either politicaly or critical of society in a way.
View successful bands nowadays rely on political statements now and only on physical appearance.
But their 'political' lyrics were ridiculous. 'God Save The Queen/A Fascist Regime/It made you a moron/potential H-Bomb'. That's powerful in its own way, but it was always more about the nihilism for the Pistols than politics. The fact that they became so notorious that Rotten was being beaten up on the street and remain so to this day despite their actual musical achievments amount to a single studio album shows that it was all about the image for the Pistols, not the politics. The Clash were a political band. The Pistols were just on a one-way ride to oblivion and they, and everyone else, knew it - and that's where the appeal stems from.
Image
I love the smell of September in the morning. Once we got off at Richmond, walked up to the 'G, and there was no game on. Not one footballer in sight. But that cut grass smell, spring rain...it smelt like victory.

Dynamic. When [Kuznetsov] decided he was going to make a difference, he did it...Like Ovechkin...then you find out - he's with Washington too? You're kidding.
- Ron Wilson
Post Reply