Madonna fans and Bjork fans are so snobby about thier diva worship. Neither seems to give props to the other diva and there seems to be hostility towards one diva in regards to her "greatness" compared to the other. But to me it's obvious that both divas are opposite sides of the same coin.

Both are reinventers of style. Both are video mavericks. Both have a sense of the avant garde. Both seem to survive despite current trends. Both respect each other tremendously. Bjork even co-wrote a song for Madonna at her request.

People always say that Madonna wishes she were Bjork, but in all honesty she doesn't have to because she's just a stones throw away from being her. The reason she won't entirely be is because she is a pop star and therefore will never give in to (or is incapable of) flat out quirkiness. Madonna is much too level headed to do the things she admires in Bjork. The reason Bjork won't entirely be Madonna is truly a matter of her not having a pop singing voice. Pop is the line that defines who these two are. Remove the line and they almost blend together. How fans of both divas don't see this is a mystery.

A blank response? Is that a way of saying I'm right or I'm wrong?

I find more conflict between Janet fans and Madonna fans.

A lot of Madonna fans listen to Bjork, according to the message boards i visit.
But Janfans and Madfans disrespect each other tremendously...
Unless of course they're fans of both....

pretty close to being right... though people don't assocate Madge to avant gaurd because she is pop.

ehuffnsd said:

Avant garde was probably a bad choice. She has (or had) an adventurous side that one could consider at best cutting edge and at worst subcultural raping.

jayaredee said:

Madonna didn't help matters by showing playful antagonism (is this a word? lol) in "Truth or Dare" or attacking a blameless Latoya back in the 90's.

Janet has always been accused of being a Madonna copy but I never saw it. Apart from both being pop singers there's really no comparisons to be made. Jody Watley's brilliant 80's comeback seemed mre in line with Madonna to me.

CynicKill said:

I agree, i am only stating the facts though....

As a Madonna fan, i get defensive only because i've studied the woman for so long, and when people start making up shit just to bring her down i will correct them.
And yes i don't like the negative comments about her looks so i get defensive over that too.
I guess when someone's your idol you wanna be there to support them and such but a lot of Madonna fans will get a bad rap because of it, and i can understand from a non-fan's perspective.

Still, there are many snooty Prince fans on this site and MJ fans for that matter. It is not fair to center out Bjork and Madge fans is it now?

jayaredee said:

tell us how you really feel?

CynicKill said:

I disagree. Both Madonna and Bjork can do whatever the hell they want. Madonna is no longer a pop star, she’s an Icon. She’s has carblanche to do whatever she feels like artistically. Bjork could easily do a song like What It Feels Like for a Girl or Hollywood in her own style (which would be great.) Madonna could easily do a song like Sick for Toys. You can be avant-garde and pop at the same time. Madonna and Bjork are both pop artists in general terms.

I can see how you would think they're related. I like both of them, but I don't listen to them for the same reasons at all. Nor do I get a similar feeling from their music, videos or concerts. I don't even think they have the same motivations which makes their work very separate from eachother.

Madonna always has said that she didn't get into the business because she thought she had a great voice or incredible talent. She did it because she felt she had something to say. She's also said that she wanted to get famous any way she could and music just happened to be the avenue that stuck. This shows in everything she does. It's clear that she's out to prove something constantly, whether it be about sexuality, politics, spirituality, fashion, her own relevance, how fabulous she is, whatever. More power to her cuz that's what she wants. I listen to Madonna to feel good about myself and she's among the best to sing along with. She writes classic songs and killer melodies that are memorable upon first listen. She's fun.

Bjork on the other hand I find to be just a force of nature trapped in an artist's body. I can't think of a musical artist out there right now with more pure motives than her. I think Anxiety said it best when he described her as a conduit for naturally existing ideas that no one else had discovered. When I listen to her work, I get a better sense of color, shape, dimension and time than anyone - talk about a visual artist. Bjork eats, sleeps and breathes art and music and it seems that she feels it's her sole reason for living. Her work often deals with self-actualization, self-sufficiency, nature, mystery and healing, all in abstract but easy to understand ways. She doesn't have one pretentious bone in her body and I never know what to expect from her. I listen to Bjork to connect with the most instinctual and animal parts in myself. She's absolutely astonishing.

lilgish said:

But the reason I doubt either of them would do what you suggest is that pop line that seperates the two artists. Sure they can do whatever they want, but do you honestly think Bjork will ever show up to an awards show in a Versace dress or that Madonna's next single will "Bachelorette II?" No matter how much alike they are in terms of their artistic and personality levels.

jayaredee said:

The reason I chose Madonna and Bjork is because there is some general snobbery that from my naive perspective I don't understand as described in the title of this thread. Sure I can see a purely pop fan not particularily liking Bjorks work and vice versa a music "snob" not liking Madonna's heavy pop leanings. But to say the other is trash out of hand like I often hear is somewhat surprising given what they do.
Prince and Michael rivalries are a little different in that even if you prefer one over the other they're quite different. Same with Madonna and Janet Jackson. I guess what I'm trying to say is the "hatred" is easier to pass off.

CynicKill said:

Oh please. Surely you can see that Madonna and Janet are A LOT more similar than Madonna and Bjork.

I like Bjork, I don't like Madonna...but I hear madonna in alot of so called "avantgarde" work. I think Kate Bushes "Big Sky" sounds like a madonna song.

GangstaFam said:

Yeah they're both pop singers. But Janet has an even stronger pop sense (stranglehold) then Madonna. Madonna has made choices Janet would never dream of making because they're too "out there". Their music is more similar, but not any more then any other pop diva. Or Janet just doesn't belong in his arguement, take your pick. I'd mention Nipplegate but it was so wrongheaded I'd just assume not.

But I stand by Prince and Michael.

i said it before and i will say it again : BJORK SUCKS!@!!@#@#!!!

Xavier23 said:

Oh thanks. You've almost changed my mind. Keep it up and I might just end up hating her like you do.

GangstaFam said:

Very well stated Nathan. Madonna is fun ~ and adds that extra dimension ~ the drama so many other artists step away from.
Bjork ~ astonishing ~ absolutely. She adds infinite possibilities ~ creates art from the absurd and the ordinary. Without exception, my favourite artist and as you've said many times, never disappoints.

GangstaFam said:

GREAT ,I'VE ALMOST SUCCEEDED IN CONVERTING YOU , HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

Xavier23 said:

Not!

GangstaFam said:

WELL eventually i might...

Xavier23 said:

Not likely. You'd have a better chance of converting me to Evanesence fandom.

GangstaFam said:

"Haunting" piano prelude + "rock-it-hard" break + whiny goth girl vocals - talent - originality = Evanescence

VoicesCarry said:

VoicesCarry said:

You make it sound so appetizing!

Xavier23 said:

Well, prove me wrong.

VoicesCarry said:

thier debut album "Fallen" has sold like 6 million copies in the U.S alone.

Xavier23 said:

Well, in this day and age big sales usually add up to major suckage.