|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 11:34:30 GMT -5
Britney's also trash. she can't sing. and the visuals she gives off are so drained of anything even remotely interesting or arresting, that i can't belive you're actually touting her as some kind of unwitting artist.
in fact, Matheus, you seem to be proposing a kind of trash-aesthetic. which is fine for what it is, but i don't think you can confuse the concept with Artist.
i know regular people who are at least as interesting as Britney's iconography, and they surely didn't need an unwitting consumerist tool to tell them they're special.
|
|
|
Post by KooL on May 2, 2007 11:46:43 GMT -5
I think Britney can sing. I can't say I like her [nasal] voice, or that it's as powerful as her buddy Aguilera's is, but she can carry a note just fine. It's just that the sound of her voice can sometimes come off as irritating. That's got nothing to do with her singing abilities.
As for Paris, I think she's yet to make a live singing appearance. She's practically the modern day Milli Vanilli.
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 11:53:43 GMT -5
she can sing, eh?
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on May 2, 2007 12:22:11 GMT -5
I'm actually going to defend Matt with the Paris Hilton thing somewhat here. I think Matt is applying a very Warholian aesthetic here to the equation of "Pop". Edie Sedgewick was rich, blonde, thin, young and pretty much only famous because she the press and Warhol had "deemed" her so. She was pretty much the beginning of being famous for doing absolutely nothing, yet now she has a Focus Feature film about her life and is still discussed at great length. I believe that Paris Hilton isn't that far from the Edie Sedgewick model and is viewed by some as a "living work of art". Love her or hate her, depending on your views on art and how you feel about modern art, the argument can be made that Paris Hilton is an "artist".
Marcel Duchamp made ready made art from bits of trash in a response to some of the heightened ridiculous touting of people in the art scene. In the process it wound up turning on him and some people were touted as geniuses for putting Comet on a removeable tiles and sticking it in a gallery in Soho. I have to say it might be all in how you look at things.
Also, I love my Throbbing Gristle but Genesis can hardly sing and I think they did more for music in the 20th Century than most. I think the same can be said about Stephen Malkmus, Lou Reed, Kris Kristopherson and really just countless others.
Let's not forget that for a while The Who also played a ton of covers and smashed their instruments to bits. Did maybe the descruction of the equipment cover up the fact that at the time they just didn' have anything of substance? Did Jimi Hendrix lighting his guitar on fire take away from the fact that most people just thought he was hideous noise?
I guess it's just all in how you look at it.
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 12:26:25 GMT -5
fair enough, but comparing P.Orridge to Paris Hilton is a bit much. or Lou Reed for that matter.
Viewing all things as equal in your worldview is not exactly a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on May 2, 2007 12:41:47 GMT -5
Hey, I personally think that P-Orridge is light years above Hilton for what it's worth.
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 12:45:48 GMT -5
then why don't you call it as you sees it?
|
|
|
Post by Matheus on May 2, 2007 13:33:20 GMT -5
I would think that we could go round and round like a circle about whether or not Britney is an artist, and even moreso for Paris. I am well aware of the era that I grew up in, and I realize that popular artists are popular not only for their music but for the images they portray. I find it even more interesting when you pull someone like Paris Hilton into the fray. She basically became popular for being a rich socialite. Her fame caused her to have a television show, an album, seen in a few movies, and she's still all over the tabloids. Isn't that interesting, even in the least? It is a dark side of our society whether anyone wants to believe it or not.
Whether or not Paris is an artist is up for debate. I think so. She comes from a business family and I think she knows exactly what she's doing. It is also well known that The Simple Life is a scripted reality show based around the PROJECTED life of Paris Hilton. Paris knows this, and she knows exactly the image she wants to portray. It should also be noted that her porn tape just so happened to be released like a week before the premiere of The Simple Life... yet another layer to what is Paris Hilton who is someone that we made famous based on our celebrity-driven culture. Paris knows that, and that's her art.
|
|
|
Post by Matheus on May 2, 2007 13:33:50 GMT -5
I'm actually going to defend Matt with the Paris Hilton thing somewhat here. I think Matt is applying a very Warholian aesthetic here to the equation of "Pop". Edie Sedgewick was rich, blonde, thin, young and pretty much only famous because she the press and Warhol had "deemed" her so. She was pretty much the beginning of being famous for doing absolutely nothing, yet now she has a Focus Feature film about her life and is still discussed at great length. I believe that Paris Hilton isn't that far from the Edie Sedgewick model and is viewed by some as a "living work of art". Love her or hate her, depending on your views on art and how you feel about modern art, the argument can be made that Paris Hilton is an "artist". Marcel Duchamp made ready made art from bits of trash in a response to some of the heightened ridiculous touting of people in the art scene. In the process it wound up turning on him and some people were touted as geniuses for putting Comet on a removeable tiles and sticking it in a gallery in Soho. I have to say it might be all in how you look at things. Also, I love my Throbbing Gristle but Genesis can hardly sing and I think they did more for music in the 20th Century than most. I think the same can be said about Stephen Malkmus, Lou Reed, Kris Kristopherson and really just countless others. Let's not forget that for a while The Who also played a ton of covers and smashed their instruments to bits. Did maybe the descruction of the equipment cover up the fact that at the time they just didn' have anything of substance? Did Jimi Hendrix lighting his guitar on fire take away from the fact that most people just thought he was hideous noise? I guess it's just all in how you look at it. You nailed it on the head...
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 13:49:31 GMT -5
Britney's also trash. she can't sing. and the visuals she gives off are so drained of anything even remotely interesting or arresting, that i can't belive you're actually touting her as some kind of unwitting artist. in fact, Matheus, you seem to be proposing a kind of trash-aesthetic. which is fine for what it is, but i don't think you can confuse the concept with Artist. i know regular people who are at least as interesting as Britney's iconography, and they surely didn't need an unwitting consumerist tool to tell them they're special.
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on May 2, 2007 14:16:46 GMT -5
then why don't you call it as you sees it? Eh, I think of Genesis and the "techno" Psychic TV and that stuff is just terrible. Also, I like it when people challenge where the lines of art and entertainmnet blur and who is an "artist".
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 14:39:12 GMT -5
yeah, so do i. but not to the extent of claiming that Paris Hilton is art. it's not a bold statement at all. just a shallow one.
|
|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on May 2, 2007 15:07:39 GMT -5
I beg to differ. I'm not trying to make a bold statement for bold's sake nor am I trying to condone shallow statements either. It's all a matter of perception as far as I'm concerned.
If you don't care for her though, then it shouldn't matter.
I think music, in a lot of ways, can be very much a mirror of the art world. You either dig the weird stuff or you don't. You either dig the safe stuff or you don't. I think the main question for a lot of people is which is more honest and which is more fake. I see both of those worlds blur all of the time.
I think my problem is that I see some many sides of this issue that I'm going to constantly contradict myself, but this is exactly why I love this topic.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on May 2, 2007 16:01:35 GMT -5
E-Gads! This has turned into a Paris Spears thread!!!
I would love to see the video come back - what a novel idea, and one MTV has murdered! Do they even still have the audacity to have the VMAs?
Anyway, videos are a great way to bridge the music and visuals. It's merging two forms of art into one, and it's a great thing. Really of all the bands in the MTV age, I honestly feel the Beastie Boys did the best job at this. They single handedly brought back 70's retro fashion, proved you don't need 1 million dollars to shoot a vid - I swear, "So Whatcha Want" inspired the Blair Witch Project! They are the masters of the low budget vid, and they are widely influential on pop fashion. Go look at pic of Mike D circa 1993 - platinum blonde hair, a lacosste (sp?) shirt, and visor. Know anyone else who dressed like that about 6 years later??? Slim Shady anyone? Hell, w/ the new album on the horizon I've gone on a BBoy kick, and watching some of their old vids from the 90's, you'd think they were made yesterday! People still act like they do, and dress like they do - go watch the "Root Down" vid...cats today are still wearing that same fashion! Anyway, I gotta run, but just wanted to point out that I think the Beasties are one of the best merging pop art/culture and music.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on May 3, 2007 10:23:10 GMT -5
This was a really interesting thread - I kept wanting to contribute but I've been so swamped in grading for the past few days I haven't had the chance to write anything particularly interesting. Still waaaay too busy to chime in seriously, but I thought I'd remind everyone of this book: Pretty much in the spirit of what matheus is arguing... ...I can go with a lot of what you guys are saying, but I have to draw the line at Paris Hilton. I just don't see "artist" in spoiled rich brat. Edie Sedgwick is a different case, she had a genuinely haunting presence as both a model and an actress.
|
|