Yesterday I ran into a couple friends, one of which is a Harvey whore and the other a Tori whore and I asked them what they thought of Kylie and they both love her This chick has some pretty broad appeal apparently.

CalhounSq's most popular thread was a Kylie thread

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

NO FAIR!!

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

NO FAIR!!





.
[Edited 4/28/06 17:38pm]

Justin1972UK said:

If you're ever inclined to share, I'd love to hear your labor of love

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

It took me a while to find it but here you go...





Hi-Res 300dpi front cover
http://rapidshare.de/file...t.zip.html

Hi-Res 300dpi back cover
http://rapidshare.de/file...k.zip.html

http://tinyurl.com/kf3zq

.
[Edited 4/29/06 3:31am]

You made that? Great work!

Yeah, I was amazed myself at how tasteful it all looked when finished... What did you think of the mix?

Didn't anybody listen to the mix?

Didn't anybody listen to the mix?

have you heard Loving You?

ehuffnsd said:

No. Is that one of the unreleased Scissor Sisters tracks?

I can't keep up with her. She's as prolific as Prince.

Your new link won't let me either

This is a bit like arguing, "What's better? AIDS or cancer?"

Kylie's a lot less irritating personality and much more fuckable, but her voice makes Madonna sound like Chaka Khan. Her live vocals are the worst I've heard. Kylie is a much nicer person but she just doesn't matter. For better or worse, Madonna does.

Kylie is a much better live singer than Madonna.

whoknows said:

Kylie is a much better live singer than Madonna.

VoicesCarry said:

They're both seriously shit singers. Maybe I'm just a bit more used to Madonna's shitness. Whenever I've tried to watch Kylie concerts on TV I just have to cover my ears, but then all the giant feather boas and angel wings and muscle men in spandex shorts start to offend me and I have to change the channel. Whatever happened to talent? When did motherfuckers become so gullible that they could allow this kind of shallow spectacle to blind them to the fact that the millionaire on the stage has no more talent than most of them do. The best performers I've seen were the ones who could rock it with a just a band and a microphone. Maybe you have to be gay to get it.

Maybe you have to be gay to get it.

whoknows said:

Kylie is a performance-artist more than a pop star.

Kylie's much more intellectually interesting than Madonna. This is primarily because Kylie will be the first to admit that what she does for a living is preposterous, whereas Madonna will defend the supposed loftiness of her work until it no longer becomes fun. Kylie's willingness to accept the transient nature of her music and persona is positively Warhollian.

There's always a feeling that Madonna grabs onto the coat-tails of others to absorb their energy and vision. Kylie is her polar-opposite. Kylie allows herself to be moulded and directed by others and embraces the constraints. Art is always more revealing when created under constrained conditions. If you have the ability to use every colour within a pallette and use each hue on a single canvas, you may as well just look at the original pallette - not the finished painting.

On a technical level, Kylie is a more-than accomplished musician both vocally and on keyboards. She's an adequate actress with a keen sense of comic-timing. Her songwriting is above-average when she chooses to write her own lyrics and music.

Kylie is a performer - not a bona-fide musical genius - she has never claimed to be anything other than a "show pony".

I don't think that you have to be gay to appreciate Kylie. I think that you need to be non-American, to tell you the truth. It's interestng that in nearly every territory other than the U.S., Kylie is an unbridled star. You can draw parallels between Madonna's recent appearance at Coachella and Kylie's planned appearance at the last Glastonbury festival. Kylie had to pull out of Glastonbury because of her recent illness but if she had attended, she would have been the final act of the festival on the main stage - the most prestigious slot of the entire festival. Madonna appeared at Coachella within a dance tent, sidelined away from the main stage. This speaks volumes about the musical tastes of U.S. and European audiences.

There's a bizarre inverse-snobbery in the U.S. which has existed since the early 90s, in that "pop music" can only be openly appreciated in a kitsch ironic manner. This cult of impersonality is killing American music, in which consumers feel a need to subscribe to a pre-ordained tribe, whether it be Emo, Hip-Hop, Industrial, Neo-Soul - or whatever other label the music-press chooses to brand the next big thing, that week.

Luckily in Britain, we have the BBC which doesn't have to pander to advertisers with their needs for target-audiences and supposed demographics. The BBC is the single-biggest factor for the eclectic musical tastes of most Brits. It's no accident that Kylie has chosen Britain as her base of operations whilst working on her music (or that Madonna has, for that matter).

.
[Edited 5/7/06 8:57am]

whoknows said:

Kylie is a performance-artist more than a pop star.

Kylie's much more intellectually interesting than Madonna. This is primarily because Kylie will be the first to admit that what she does for a living is preposterous, whereas Madonna will defend the supposed loftiness of her work until it no longer becomes fun. Kylie's willingness to accept the transient nature of her music and persona is positively Warhollian.

There's always a feeling that Madonna grabs onto the coat-tails of others to absorb their energy and vision. Kylie is her polar-opposite. Kylie allows herself to be moulded and directed by others and embraces the constraints. Art is always more revealing when created under constrained conditions. If you have the ability to use every colour within a pallette and use each hue on a single canvas, you may as well just look at the original pallette - not the finished painting.

On a technical level, Kylie is a more-than accomplished musician both vocally and on keyboards. She's an adequate actress with a keen sense of comic-timing. Her songwriting is above-average when she chooses to write her own lyrics and music.

Kylie is a performer - not a bona-fide musical genius - she has never claimed to be anything other than a "show pony".

I don't think that you have to be gay to appreciate Kylie. I think that you need to be non-American, to tell you the truth. It's interestng that in nearly every territory other than the U.S., Kylie is an unbridled star. You can draw parallels between Madonna's recent appearance at Coachella and Kylie's planned appearance at the last Glastonbury festival. Kylie had to pull out of Glastonbury because of her recent illness but if she had attended, she would have been the final act of the festival on the main stage - the most prestigious slot of the entire festival. Madonna appeared at Coachella within a dance tent, sidelined away from the main stage. This speaks volumes about the musical tastes of U.S. and European audiences.

There's a bizarre inverse-snobbery in the U.S. which has existed since the early 90s, in that "pop music" can only be openly appreciated in a kitsch ironic manner. This cult of impersonality is killing American music, in which consumers feel a need to subscribe to a pre-ordained tribe, whether it be Emo, Hip-Hop, Industrial, Neo-Soul - or whatever other label the music-press chooses to brand the next big thing, that week.

Luckily in Britain, we have the BBC which doesn't have to pander to advertisers with their needs for target-audiences and supposed demographics. The BBC is the single-biggest factor for the eclectic musical tastes of most Brits. It's no accident that Kylie has chosen Britain as her base of operations whilst working on her music (or that Madonna has, for that matter).

.
[Edited 5/7/06 8:57am]

Justin1972UK said:

Kylie never blew up that big in the US because Neighbours never blew up big in the US. Just like Robbie Williams never blew up there because Take That never did. Both these two emerged out of the shell of a separate phenomenon which meant there was much goodwill to them and a platform of interest to build on.

The first Warholian referencing part of your post was spot on. The rest was bollocks. I feel guilty now for reviving this thread because it's an embarassment to P that so much space is being taken up on such irrelavances, but I only just stumbled on the thread and was killing time 'cos my girlfriend's parents are here and I was bored.. Also you shrugged off my "psychology of the gay male" question. That's the only part I'd be interested in.