New topic
PrintableIsel said: skyecute said: I really don't think the Superbowl incident is the reason for all of the "backlash" against Janet. Something that I noticed during her Damita Jo album was that the same DJ's who have always loved her started saying that she CAN'T sing. Of course, these same DJ's have always known that she doesn't have a voice, but they overlooked it because they loved how she looked. I now hear the exact same thing that I did during the Damita Jo album, they all say that she can't sing. When they played "Call on Me", and that was very seldom in my area, they would never comment and just move on. DJ's in my area LOVED Janet and would overlook any flaw(weak voice) because of their love for her. It doesn't seem the same now, because they have finally admitted that she is not a good singer. It has been even more obvious with the rise of Beyonce who can do it ALL-sing her ass off, excellent entertainer/performer, etc. Janet's constant USE of her looks/sex appeal has become a turnoff for the people who USED to love that sort of thing.People are beginning to notice her talent or "lack of singing skills" when they never did before. When you hear MEN saying that she needs to KEEP her clothes on, then you know that something is wrong.When you hear DJ's say that, it really is surprising. I can't believe that this is the same woman who sat on Entertainment Tonight and said that when a person TRIES to be sexy, then they are not sexy at all. It seems that she is not living by her own words. She was much sexier, when she didn't TRY to be sexy.Rene Elizodo's input was more than people want to admit. When he was around, you did't have this type of desperation to "look sexy". Her sexiness was natural. Now, it looks forced. So now, let's make a distinction between subtle sexiness and overt sexiness. So now because Janet is 40, her sex-appeal is forced and too much? Are you sure it's not because she's 40? Much younger, Christina has been way more overt than Janet, but that's OK for Christina, and of course Christina can sing--so she gets a pass. And of course there is Jessica Simpson who is a beautiful girl and has a nice voice, but to watch her perform is quite painful--well it looks painful because her expressions indicate she must be in some sort of pain. But Jessica is young and beautiful, so people aren't quite as critical. Well what does being good-looking have to do with being a good vocalist or performer anyway? In addition, there have been quite a few mediocre if not downright bad singer capitalizing on their sex appeal who have been quite successful in the music business. In fact, with certain genres, a performer doesn't even have to sing at all. For those who attempt it, Anthony Keides of the Peppers and even Mick Jaggar of the Stones can't sing either---particularly Anthony live.I remember the first time I heard Anthony K. sing live: I was shocked. He sang so off-key that my ears hurt. It was horrible. And Mick, well people criticize him, but it's not that serious because "it's the Stones, man." He still projects this image of a hard-living rocker even in his 60's even though I've read he's far from the party-boy he used to be. Plus they and others men young and old still flaunt their sex-appeal. Then are Janet's contemporaries like Madonna. Madonna can't sing, but somehow she always seems to have an answer for any controversy that comes her way and the general public plus people in the music industry are more than willing give her a pass. At age 50 Madonna is humping dancers in videos and still writhing around on stage, but people in the music industry and some in the media-- her good friend Liz Smith and MTV come to her defense.Don't get me wrong: I say Madonna can to what she wants. I'm not going to agree with it all the time, but she can do what she wants. She apparently puts on a good show, but it's a different style of show than say Bonnie Raitt would present. The only reason I'm bringing Madonna up is that it seems people--some in the music industry-- praise Madge and others, but just don't want to give Janet a break for doing essentially the same thing. From my observation, after the Super Bowl, it just became fashionable to bash Janet--as someone said earlier like she represents everything wrong with the music business. Well, the truth is that there are some respected artists who have the same weaknesses as Janet. But somehow these vocally-challenged performers aren't criticized as harshly or their weaknesses are completely overlooked. There have been a lot of people in the music business who can't necessarily sing. I could name a few legends who can't sing or have weak voices. But they have strengths in other areas--even genius in other areas that more than make-up for it. Well Janet might not be a genius, but she is a very strong performer--entertaining performer if nothing else. I just think people judge her way too harshly, and now it's "in" to diss her because if fans like me enjoy her, well we obviously don't know real music. That's not the case at all because I have a varied music collection and really suppport live bands more than anything else. I just enjoy Janet and her style, too. As far as the sex-up image stuff, well I guess it's OK for younger performers (and even older men) to exploit their sex-appeal, but not Janet?? To me, if a person is going to criticize Janet for exploiting that side of herself, well he/she should have been criticizing her all along because overweight or not--whether her sexiness is understated or overt, Janet has always been beautiful. Would an unattractive Janet whether she could sing or not have made it at all? And then if these same people are going to criticize Janet and then these younger artists, criticize the entertainment industry as a whole because "looks matter" in promoting all of its female "stars" nowadays. Why should Janet be made the scapegoat when there are so many to choose from--even among those who are more gifted singers? This is what I don't understand. And I'm someone who is pretty objective because I know Janet is not as strong vocally and musically as some or as gifted on many levels. But as I stated before, I still don't think she is the worst music artist either. I just think it's become fashionable for the same people who promoted her early-on to now bash her because they don't have the guts just to take her for what she is--like apparently they can with other artists whom they promote non-stop. I know that Janet is a mult-millionaire, and she's not going to be starving whether her music is a flop or a hit, but it's the double-standard on many levels that annoys me. If people are going to harshly criticize Janet, well at least be consistent and to the same thing with other artists--even some who aren't in the music/video type artist genre or in the music industry at all. I just don't think Janet has any more than any other artist who has the same weaknesses and then even strengths since sex-appeal is a strength but has somehow managed to have a career in spite and because them. [Edited 9/24/06 5:50am] This is the most eloquent post I've read on the org. concerning Janet...To me it's quite funny that folks forget that she released some albums that were critically and commercially acclaimed...Before this Superbowl blowup, no was writing threads that dismissed her as a talentless hack on the level of Cassidy...I'm not even that big of a fan of the new album (it's better than i thought it would be, but Jimmy and Terry should have had a bigger say in the production...) but I'm pulling for the chick because the media have been all too happy to dance on her grave... Yeah, Janet didn't help her case by getting herself into this mess in the first place, but the backlash to me shows that there is still two Americas and two set of rules....No matter how folks try to dress Madonna (who I respect) up as a brave, thoughtprovoking artist, she gets away with a lot of shit simply because she's white...Justine Timberlake is given access to the MTV airwaves while Janet is relegated to MTV 2 status...Again, i realize that the chick is not without blame...But this hate on this chick is getting ridiculous and a little disturbing... [Edited 9/24/06 7:58am] | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
murph said: Isel said: So now, let's make a distinction between subtle sexiness and overt sexiness. So now because Janet is 40, her sex-appeal is forced and too much? Are you sure it's not because she's 40? Much younger, Christina has been way more overt than Janet, but that's OK for Christina, and of course Christina can sing--so she gets a pass. And of course there is Jessica Simpson who is a beautiful girl and has a nice voice, but to watch her perform is quite painful--well it looks painful because her expressions indicate she must be in some sort of pain. But Jessica is young and beautiful, so people aren't quite as critical. Well what does being good-looking have to do with being a good vocalist or performer anyway? In addition, there have been quite a few mediocre if not downright bad singer capitalizing on their sex appeal who have been quite successful in the music business. In fact, with certain genres, a performer doesn't even have to sing at all. For those who attempt it, Anthony Keides of the Peppers and even Mick Jaggar of the Stones can't sing either---particularly Anthony live.I remember the first time I heard Anthony K. sing live: I was shocked. He sang so off-key that my ears hurt. It was horrible. And Mick, well people criticize him, but it's not that serious because "it's the Stones, man." He still projects this image of a hard-living rocker even in his 60's even though I've read he's far from the party-boy he used to be. Plus they and others men young and old still flaunt their sex-appeal. Then are Janet's contemporaries like Madonna. Madonna can't sing, but somehow she always seems to have an answer for any controversy that comes her way and the general public plus people in the music industry are more than willing give her a pass. At age 50 Madonna is humping dancers in videos and still writhing around on stage, but people in the music industry and some in the media-- her good friend Liz Smith and MTV come to her defense.Don't get me wrong: I say Madonna can to what she wants. I'm not going to agree with it all the time, but she can do what she wants. She apparently puts on a good show, but it's a different style of show than say Bonnie Raitt would present. The only reason I'm bringing Madonna up is that it seems people--some in the music industry-- praise Madge and others, but just don't want to give Janet a break for doing essentially the same thing. From my observation, after the Super Bowl, it just became fashionable to bash Janet--as someone said earlier like she represents everything wrong with the music business. Well, the truth is that there are some respected artists who have the same weaknesses as Janet. But somehow these vocally-challenged performers aren't criticized as harshly or their weaknesses are completely overlooked. There have been a lot of people in the music business who can't necessarily sing. I could name a few legends who can't sing or have weak voices. But they have strengths in other areas--even genius in other areas that more than make-up for it. Well Janet might not be a genius, but she is a very strong performer--entertaining performer if nothing else. I just think people judge her way too harshly, and now it's "in" to diss her because if fans like me enjoy her, well we obviously don't know real music. That's not the case at all because I have a varied music collection and really suppport live bands more than anything else. I just enjoy Janet and her style, too. As far as the sex-up image stuff, well I guess it's OK for younger performers (and even older men) to exploit their sex-appeal, but not Janet?? To me, if a person is going to criticize Janet for exploiting that side of herself, well he/she should have been criticizing her all along because overweight or not--whether her sexiness is understated or overt, Janet has always been beautiful. Would an unattractive Janet whether she could sing or not have made it at all? And then if these same people are going to criticize Janet and then these younger artists, criticize the entertainment industry as a whole because "looks matter" in promoting all of its female "stars" nowadays. Why should Janet be made the scapegoat when there are so many to choose from--even among those who are more gifted singers? This is what I don't understand. And I'm someone who is pretty objective because I know Janet is not as strong vocally and musically as some or as gifted on many levels. But as I stated before, I still don't think she is the worst music artist either. I just think it's become fashionable for the same people who promoted her early-on to now bash her because they don't have the guts just to take her for what she is--like apparently they can with other artists whom they promote non-stop. I know that Janet is a mult-millionaire, and she's not going to be starving whether her music is a flop or a hit, but it's the double-standard on many levels that annoys me. If people are going to harshly criticize Janet, well at least be consistent and to the same thing with other artists--even some who aren't in the music/video type artist genre or in the music industry at all. I just don't think Janet has any more than any other artist who has the same weaknesses and then even strengths since sex-appeal is a strength but has somehow managed to have a career in spite and because them. [Edited 9/24/06 5:50am] This is the most eloquent post I've read on the org. concerning Janet...To me it's quite funny that folks forget that she released some albums that were critically and commercially acclaimed...Before this Superbowl blowup, no was writing threads that dismissed her as a talentless hack on the level of Cassidy...I'm not even that big of a fan of the new album (it's better than i thought it would be, but Jimmy and Terry should have had a bigger say in the production...) but I'm pulling for the chick because the media have been all too happy to dance on her grave... Yeah, Janet didn't help her case by getting herself into this mess in the first place, but the backlash to me shows that there is still two Americas and two set of rules....No matter how folks try to dress Madonna (who I respect) up as a brave, thoughtprovoking artist, she gets away with a lot of shit simply because she's white...Justine Timberlake is given access to the MTV airwaves while Janet is relegated to MTV 2 status...Again, i realize that the chick is not without blame...But this hate on this chick is getting ridiculous and a little disturbing... [Edited 9/24/06 7:58am] You have point there. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
murph said: Isel said: So now, let's make a distinction between subtle sexiness and overt sexiness. So now because Janet is 40, her sex-appeal is forced and too much? Are you sure it's not because she's 40? Much younger, Christina has been way more overt than Janet, but that's OK for Christina, and of course Christina can sing--so she gets a pass. And of course there is Jessica Simpson who is a beautiful girl and has a nice voice, but to watch her perform is quite painful--well it looks painful because her expressions indicate she must be in some sort of pain. But Jessica is young and beautiful, so people aren't quite as critical. Well what does being good-looking have to do with being a good vocalist or performer anyway? In addition, there have been quite a few mediocre if not downright bad singer capitalizing on their sex appeal who have been quite successful in the music business. In fact, with certain genres, a performer doesn't even have to sing at all. For those who attempt it, Anthony Keides of the Peppers and even Mick Jaggar of the Stones can't sing either---particularly Anthony live.I remember the first time I heard Anthony K. sing live: I was shocked. He sang so off-key that my ears hurt. It was horrible. And Mick, well people criticize him, but it's not that serious because "it's the Stones, man." He still projects this image of a hard-living rocker even in his 60's even though I've read he's far from the party-boy he used to be. Plus they and others men young and old still flaunt their sex-appeal. Then are Janet's contemporaries like Madonna. Madonna can't sing, but somehow she always seems to have an answer for any controversy that comes her way and the general public plus people in the music industry are more than willing give her a pass. At age 50 Madonna is humping dancers in videos and still writhing around on stage, but people in the music industry and some in the media-- her good friend Liz Smith and MTV come to her defense.Don't get me wrong: I say Madonna can to what she wants. I'm not going to agree with it all the time, but she can do what she wants. She apparently puts on a good show, but it's a different style of show than say Bonnie Raitt would present. The only reason I'm bringing Madonna up is that it seems people--some in the music industry-- praise Madge and others, but just don't want to give Janet a break for doing essentially the same thing. From my observation, after the Super Bowl, it just became fashionable to bash Janet--as someone said earlier like she represents everything wrong with the music business. Well, the truth is that there are some respected artists who have the same weaknesses as Janet. But somehow these vocally-challenged performers aren't criticized as harshly or their weaknesses are completely overlooked. There have been a lot of people in the music business who can't necessarily sing. I could name a few legends who can't sing or have weak voices. But they have strengths in other areas--even genius in other areas that more than make-up for it. Well Janet might not be a genius, but she is a very strong performer--entertaining performer if nothing else. I just think people judge her way too harshly, and now it's "in" to diss her because if fans like me enjoy her, well we obviously don't know real music. That's not the case at all because I have a varied music collection and really suppport live bands more than anything else. I just enjoy Janet and her style, too. As far as the sex-up image stuff, well I guess it's OK for younger performers (and even older men) to exploit their sex-appeal, but not Janet?? To me, if a person is going to criticize Janet for exploiting that side of herself, well he/she should have been criticizing her all along because overweight or not--whether her sexiness is understated or overt, Janet has always been beautiful. Would an unattractive Janet whether she could sing or not have made it at all? And then if these same people are going to criticize Janet and then these younger artists, criticize the entertainment industry as a whole because "looks matter" in promoting all of its female "stars" nowadays. Why should Janet be made the scapegoat when there are so many to choose from--even among those who are more gifted singers? This is what I don't understand. And I'm someone who is pretty objective because I know Janet is not as strong vocally and musically as some or as gifted on many levels. But as I stated before, I still don't think she is the worst music artist either. I just think it's become fashionable for the same people who promoted her early-on to now bash her because they don't have the guts just to take her for what she is--like apparently they can with other artists whom they promote non-stop. I know that Janet is a mult-millionaire, and she's not going to be starving whether her music is a flop or a hit, but it's the double-standard on many levels that annoys me. If people are going to harshly criticize Janet, well at least be consistent and to the same thing with other artists--even some who aren't in the music/video type artist genre or in the music industry at all. I just don't think Janet has any more than any other artist who has the same weaknesses and then even strengths since sex-appeal is a strength but has somehow managed to have a career in spite and because them. [Edited 9/24/06 5:50am] This is the most eloquent post I've read on the org. concerning Janet...To me it's quite funny that folks forget that she released some albums that were critically and commercially acclaimed...Before this Superbowl blowup, no was writing threads that dismissed her as a talentless hack on the level of Cassidy...I'm not even that big of a fan of the new album (it's better than i thought it would be, but Jimmy and Terry should have had a bigger say in the production...) but I'm pulling for the chick because the media have been all too happy to dance on her grave... Yeah, Janet didn't help her case by getting herself into this mess in the first place, but the backlash to me shows that there is still two Americas and two set of rules....No matter how folks try to dress Madonna (who I respect) up as a brave, thoughtprovoking artist, she gets away with a lot of shit simply because she's white...Justine Timberlake is given access to the MTV airwaves while Janet is relegated to MTV 2 status...Again, i realize that the chick is not without blame...But this hate on this chick is getting ridiculous and a little disturbing... [Edited 9/24/06 7:58am] I think you're missing the point. No one has forgotten the good work she did in the past. It's precisely because of that good work that they're so disappointed in what she's doing now. Nor does race have anything to do with the subject at hand; i.e. people getting bored with Janet, and in many cases just plain outgrowing her. I personally got bored with her long before The Superbowl. That incident just emphasised what I already knew about her. For me her flashing her nipple and then lying about it afterwards was nowhere near as scandalous as the fact that she was singing with Dustbin Timberfake in the first place. But she'd already made her designs on the Britney/ NSync market pretty plain 2 years earlier, when she started making Backstreet b sides. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: murph said: This is the most eloquent post I've read on the org. concerning Janet...To me it's quite funny that folks forget that she released some albums that were critically and commercially acclaimed...Before this Superbowl blowup, no was writing threads that dismissed her as a talentless hack on the level of Cassidy...I'm not even that big of a fan of the new album (it's better than i thought it would be, but Jimmy and Terry should have had a bigger say in the production...) but I'm pulling for the chick because the media have been all too happy to dance on her grave... Yeah, Janet didn't help her case by getting herself into this mess in the first place, but the backlash to me shows that there is still two Americas and two set of rules....No matter how folks try to dress Madonna (who I respect) up as a brave, thoughtprovoking artist, she gets away with a lot of shit simply because she's white...Justine Timberlake is given access to the MTV airwaves while Janet is relegated to MTV 2 status...Again, i realize that the chick is not without blame...But this hate on this chick is getting ridiculous and a little disturbing... [Edited 9/24/06 7:58am] I think you're missing the point. No one has forgotten the good work she did in the past. It's precisely because of that good work that they're so disappointed in what she's doing now. Nor does race have anything to do with the subject at hand; i.e. people getting bored with Janet, and in many cases just plain outgrowing her. I personally got bored with her long before The Superbowl. That incident just emphasised what I already knew about her. For me her flashing her nipple and then lying about it afterwards was nowhere near as scandalous as the fact that she was singing with Dustbin Timberfake in the first place. But she'd already made her designs on the Britney/ NSync market pretty plain 2 years earlier, when she started making Backstreet b sides. With all due respect, I think you are missing the point. A lot of artists change or even "decline," or if not decline morph into something more commercial. I mentioned the Peppers, I wasn't overly impressed with their Stadium Arcadium cd. It's OK. It's not bad, but me it's more of a commercial form of what they once were. Anthony Keidis (sp??) is still running around shirtless, singing about California, but no one ever mentions anything about that. He's probably still singing off-key, too, but after I heard it once, I figured that's just the Peppers. I don't refuse to buy their cd's because of it. No, Anthony isn't posing on King mag as I read now that Janet has done, but MTV is still playing the Peppers. I don't know if they've scored a Rolling Stone cover recently, but they are respected for what they do. Look at Justin.. that one interview he is talking about he's such bad-ass.. But that's OK for Justin to be that way. He's morphing from a back-street boy to bad-ass man, then paying tribute to Prince in order to come-up with a cd that will sell. Interesting he is doing that now. Hey Lenny Kravitz has always loved Prince, whether Prince was the guy to respect or not. But it's acceptable for Justin to morph because yeah.. he's got this hot cd and he can dance and some think he's hot.(I don't at all--and I'm a blond white girl--well woman.) Well he should have a hot cd if he is using Prince as a model--particularly the funk-master Prince. Look, I feel very badly that Janet has been reduced to being what sells in the industry. I just glanced over at that King mag. thread, and it breaks my heart.. really. But then again, what I'm trying to say is maybe Janet like the Peppers, like Justin even and then like Christina, Jessica.... rap artists--whoever or whatever are just doing what it takes to be commercial. My point is that why are we holding Janet to this standard, then when she can't reach this standard-- or is somehow trying to prove she has still got it, then it's Janet who is very harshly criticized, but other artists do the same thing all of the time. I just don't think Janet is different from any other artist really. At one point, we fans have just have to take them for what they are in a very competitive industry. Not everyone is like Beck or even Prince even though he has done his share of compromising as well. So have the STones to a certain extent. It takes real guts to completely turn it all around. I saw this deal on Kid Rock yesterday--well that guy has guts to at least try something completely new and risk his entire fanbase--going country for cryin' outloud? Not everyone has the desire or strength--or maybe it's foresight. Janet might not have that any of those things--but she's in good company from my observation because a lot of other artists don't either...and they sell music all the time. But now Janet is the symbol for mediocrity, and takes the heat for everyone else's artistic transgressions. So MTV will promote Ashlee Simpson, but not Janet? I don't even understand that at all. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: murph said: This is the most eloquent post I've read on the org. concerning Janet...To me it's quite funny that folks forget that she released some albums that were critically and commercially acclaimed...Before this Superbowl blowup, no was writing threads that dismissed her as a talentless hack on the level of Cassidy...I'm not even that big of a fan of the new album (it's better than i thought it would be, but Jimmy and Terry should have had a bigger say in the production...) but I'm pulling for the chick because the media have been all too happy to dance on her grave... Yeah, Janet didn't help her case by getting herself into this mess in the first place, but the backlash to me shows that there is still two Americas and two set of rules....No matter how folks try to dress Madonna (who I respect) up as a brave, thoughtprovoking artist, she gets away with a lot of shit simply because she's white...Justine Timberlake is given access to the MTV airwaves while Janet is relegated to MTV 2 status...Again, i realize that the chick is not without blame...But this hate on this chick is getting ridiculous and a little disturbing... [Edited 9/24/06 7:58am] I think you're missing the point. No one has forgotten the good work she did in the past. It's precisely because of that good work that they're so disappointed in what she's doing now. Nor does race have anything to do with the subject at hand; i.e. people getting bored with Janet, and in many cases just plain outgrowing her. I personally got bored with her long before The Superbowl. That incident just emphasised what I already knew about her. For me her flashing her nipple and then lying about it afterwards was nowhere near as scandalous as the fact that she was singing with Dustbin Timberfake in the first place. But she'd already made her designs on the Britney/ NSync market pretty plain 2 years earlier, when she started making Backstreet b sides. Not the same though....I can understand folks not digging the music...that's natural...But this has flared up into a very disturbing witch hunt...As for Timberlake, I have made it known in past posts that his handeling of the Superbowl incident (and not to mention the way the media gave him a eyebrow raising pass..) showed his lack of character and that America is on some double standard shit...But as a music head, I can admit that his work with Timberland and Pharell was far more superior to anything he did when he dancing for a boy band....Simply put, artistically he has little in common with Britney Spears and the like...(that much I can hear if I listen to dude without tainted ears...) But I won't be buying his albums and that has more to do with my personal thoughts about the man than the quality of his output, which is surprisingly good for what it is...I'm not ready to give dude his ghetto pass back....But a good album is a good album... [Edited 9/24/06 9:22am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: whoknows said: I think you're missing the point. No one has forgotten the good work she did in the past. It's precisely because of that good work that they're so disappointed in what she's doing now. Nor does race have anything to do with the subject at hand; i.e. people getting bored with Janet, and in many cases just plain outgrowing her. I personally got bored with her long before The Superbowl. That incident just emphasised what I already knew about her. For me her flashing her nipple and then lying about it afterwards was nowhere near as scandalous as the fact that she was singing with Dustbin Timberfake in the first place. But she'd already made her designs on the Britney/ NSync market pretty plain 2 years earlier, when she started making Backstreet b sides. With all due respect, I think you are missing the point. A lot of artists change or even "decline," or if not decline morph into something more commercial. I mentioned the Peppers, I wasn't overly impressed with their Stadium Arcadium cd. It's OK. It's not bad, but me it's more of a commercial form of what they once were. Anthony Keidis (sp??) is still running around shirtless, singing about California, but no one ever mentions anything about that. He's probably still singing off-key, too, but after I heard it once, I figured that's just the Peppers. I don't refuse to buy their cd's because of it. No, Anthony isn't posing on King mag as I read now that Janet has done, but MTV is still playing the Peppers. I don't know if they've scored a Rolling Stone cover recently, but they are respected for what they do. Look at Justin.. that one interview he is talking about he's such bad-ass.. But that's OK for Justin to be that way. He's morphing from a back-street boy to bad-ass man, then paying tribute to Prince in order to come-up with a cd that will sell. Interesting he is doing that now. Hey Lenny Kravitz has always loved Prince, whether Prince was the guy to respect or not. But it's acceptable for Justin to morph because yeah.. he's got this hot cd and he can dance and some think he's hot.(I don't at all--and I'm a blond white girl--well woman.) Well he should have a hot cd if he is using Prince as a model--particularly the funk-master Prince. Look, I feel very badly that Janet has been reduced to being what sells in the industry. I just glanced over at that King mag. thread, and it breaks my heart.. really. But then again, what I'm trying to say is maybe Janet like the Peppers, like Justin even and then like Christina, Jessica.... rap artists--whoever or whatever are just doing what it takes to be commercial. My point is that why are we holding Janet to this standard, then when she can't reach this standard-- or is somehow trying to prove she has still got it, then it's Janet who is very harshly criticized, but other artists do the same thing all of the time. I just don't think Janet is different from any other artist really. At one point, we fans have just have to take them for what they are in a very competitive industry. Not everyone is like Beck or even Prince even though he has done his share of compromising as well. So have the STones to a certain extent. It takes real guts to completely turn it all around. I saw this deal on Kid Rock yesterday--well that guy has guts to at least try something completely new and risk his entire fanbase--going country for cryin' outloud? Not everyone has the desire or strength--or maybe it's foresight. Janet might not have that any of those things--but she's in good company from my observation because a lot of other artists don't either...and they sell music all the time. But now Janet is the symbol for mediocrity, and takes the heat for everyone else's artistic transgressions. So MTV will promote Ashlee Simpson, but not Janet? I don't even understand that at all. What we have here is a failure to communicate. Your argument seems to be that everyone else sucks so it's okay for Janet to suck too. My argument is, today's music industry sucks and Janet is a sheep so she follows the trend. That may be acceptable to you, but it's not to me. None of the artists you mentioned mean jack shit to me, so I sure as hell wouldn't defend them either. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
skyecute said: Isel said: May I ask: what do you consider to be good music? I was just wondering about your taste in music--if you and I share the opinion of what artists we would considered good--at least some artists. I'm just curious more than anything else. Can't Janet have a hit and her music be enjoyable--just on a visceral level if nothing more? I just have never understood this sort of negativity with Janet. I go through here, and read a lot of the threads, but Janet is always one of the artists everyone has something really emotional, for lack of a better word, to post about. It's like she really brings out the hate or dislike in people for some reason? She really doesn't even do that much to be controversial except for the SB incident. Really before that happened, nobody seemed to be as critical of her. I really don't think the Superbowl incident is the reason for all of the "backlash" against Janet. Something that I noticed during her Damita Jo album was that the same DJ's who have always loved her started saying that she CAN'T sing. Of course, these same DJ's have always known that she doesn't have a voice, but they overlooked it because they loved how she looked. I now hear the exact same thing that I did during the Damita Jo album, they all say that she can't sing. When they played "Call on Me", and that was very seldom in my area, they would never comment and just move on. DJ's in my area LOVED Janet and would overlook any flaw(weak voice) because of their love for her. It doesn't seem the same now, because they have finally admitted that she is not a good singer. It has been even more obvious with the rise of Beyonce who can do it ALL-sing her ass off, excellent entertainer/performer, etc. Janet's constant USE of her looks/sex appeal has become a turnoff for the people who USED to love that sort of thing.People are beginning to notice her talent or "lack of singing skills" when they never did before. When you hear MEN saying that she needs to KEEP her clothes on, then you know that something is wrong.When you hear DJ's say that, it really is surprising. I can't believe that this is the same woman who sat on Entertainment Tonight and said that when a person TRIES to be sexy, then they are not sexy at all. It seems that she is not living by her own words. She was much sexier, when she didn't TRY to be sexy.Rene Elizodo's input was more than people want to admit. When he was around, you did't have this type of desperation to "look sexy". Her sexiness was natural. Now, it looks forced. Everything you said was on point but what is bolded hit home. The girl has ALWAYS been sexy to me. She was real sexy to me during Rhythm Nation and the janet. CD. She was just being herself and I agree, Rene, I think, had a big role in the behind the scenes aspect of things and his imput is truely missed. I'm not a fan of "old Prince". I'm not a fan of "new Prince". I'm just a fan of Prince. Simple as that | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
murph said: whoknows said: I think you're missing the point. No one has forgotten the good work she did in the past. It's precisely because of that good work that they're so disappointed in what she's doing now. Nor does race have anything to do with the subject at hand; i.e. people getting bored with Janet, and in many cases just plain outgrowing her. I personally got bored with her long before The Superbowl. That incident just emphasised what I already knew about her. For me her flashing her nipple and then lying about it afterwards was nowhere near as scandalous as the fact that she was singing with Dustbin Timberfake in the first place. But she'd already made her designs on the Britney/ NSync market pretty plain 2 years earlier, when she started making Backstreet b sides. Not the same though....I can understand folks not digging the music...that's natural...But this has flared up into a very disturbing witch hunt...As for Timberlake, I have made it known in past posts that his handeling of the Superbowl incident (and not to mention the way the media gave him a eyebrow raising pass..) showed his lack of character and that America is on some double standard shit...But as a music head, I can admit that his work with Timberland and Pharell was far more superior to anything he did when he dancing for a boy band....Simply put, artistically he has little in common with Britney Spears and the like...(that much I can hear if I listen to dude without tainted ears...) But I won't be buying his albums and that has more to do with my personal thoughts about the man than the quality of his output, which is surprisingly good for what it is...I'm not ready to give dude his ghetto pass back....But a good album is a good album... [Edited 9/24/06 9:22am] I guess what it boils down to is that I'm less interested in the witch hunt and more bothered by the total absence of integrity, individuality, and talent so prevalent in today's industry. The shameless gimmicks and bandwagon hopping which Janet employs and the crapness of her current music seem to typify the state of things. For a sign of the way it could and should be just listen to Gnarles Barkley's Crazy. A great song from a really individual, interesting group. From what I hear, the rest of the album is nowhere near as good, but there's a definite sign there of the way I hope things will go in the future. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: skyecute said: I really don't think the Superbowl incident is the reason for all of the "backlash" against Janet. Something that I noticed during her Damita Jo album was that the same DJ's who have always loved her started saying that she CAN'T sing. Of course, these same DJ's have always known that she doesn't have a voice, but they overlooked it because they loved how she looked. I now hear the exact same thing that I did during the Damita Jo album, they all say that she can't sing. When they played "Call on Me", and that was very seldom in my area, they would never comment and just move on. DJ's in my area LOVED Janet and would overlook any flaw(weak voice) because of their love for her. It doesn't seem the same now, because they have finally admitted that she is not a good singer. It has been even more obvious with the rise of Beyonce who can do it ALL-sing her ass off, excellent entertainer/performer, etc. Janet's constant USE of her looks/sex appeal has become a turnoff for the people who USED to love that sort of thing.People are beginning to notice her talent or "lack of singing skills" when they never did before. When you hear MEN saying that she needs to KEEP her clothes on, then you know that something is wrong.When you hear DJ's say that, it really is surprising. I can't believe that this is the same woman who sat on Entertainment Tonight and said that when a person TRIES to be sexy, then they are not sexy at all. It seems that she is not living by her own words. She was much sexier, when she didn't TRY to be sexy.Rene Elizodo's input was more than people want to admit. When he was around, you did't have this type of desperation to "look sexy". Her sexiness was natural. Now, it looks forced. So now, let's make a distinction between subtle sexiness and overt sexiness. So now because Janet is 40, her sex-appeal is forced and too much? Are you sure it's not because she's 40? Much younger, Christina has been way more overt than Janet, but that's OK for Christina, and of course Christina can sing--so she gets a pass. And of course there is Jessica Simpson who is a beautiful girl and has a nice voice, but to watch her perform is quite painful--well it looks painful because her expressions indicate she must be in some sort of pain. But Jessica is young and beautiful, so people aren't quite as critical. Well what does being good-looking have to do with being a good vocalist or performer anyway? In addition, there have been quite a few mediocre if not downright bad singer capitalizing on their sex appeal who have been quite successful in the music business. In fact, with certain genres, a performer doesn't even have to sing at all. For those who attempt it, Anthony Keides of the Peppers and even Mick Jaggar of the Stones can't sing either---particularly Anthony live.I remember the first time I heard Anthony K. sing live: I was shocked. He sang so off-key that my ears hurt. It was horrible. And Mick, well people criticize him, but it's not that serious because "it's the Stones, man." He still projects this image of a hard-living rocker even in his 60's even though I've read he's far from the party-boy he used to be. Plus they and others men young and old still flaunt their sex-appeal. Then are Janet's contemporaries like Madonna. Madonna can't sing, but somehow she always seems to have an answer for any controversy that comes her way and the general public plus people in the music industry are more than willing give her a pass. At age 50 Madonna is humping dancers in videos and still writhing around on stage, but people in the music industry and some in the media-- her good friend Liz Smith and MTV come to her defense.Don't get me wrong: I say Madonna can to what she wants. I'm not going to agree with it all the time, but she can do what she wants. She apparently puts on a good show, but it's a different style of show than say Bonnie Raitt would present. The only reason I'm bringing Madonna up is that it seems people--some in the music industry-- praise Madge and others, but just don't want to give Janet a break for doing essentially the same thing. From my observation, after the Super Bowl, it just became fashionable to bash Janet--as someone said earlier like she represents everything wrong with the music business. Well, the truth is that there are some respected artists who have the same weaknesses as Janet. But somehow these vocally-challenged performers aren't criticized as harshly or their weaknesses are completely overlooked. There have been a lot of people in the music business who can't necessarily sing. I could name a few legends who can't sing or have weak voices. But they have strengths in other areas--even genius in other areas that more than make-up for it. Well Janet might not be a genius, but she is a very strong performer--entertaining performer if nothing else. I just think people judge her way too harshly, and now it's "in" to diss her because if fans like me enjoy her, well we obviously don't know real music. That's not the case at all because I have a varied music collection and really suppport live bands more than anything else. I just enjoy Janet and her style, too. As far as the sex-up image stuff, well I guess it's OK for younger performers (and even older men) to exploit their sex-appeal, but not Janet?? To me, if a person is going to criticize Janet for exploiting that side of herself, well he/she should have been criticizing her all along because overweight or not--whether her sexiness is understated or overt, Janet has always been beautiful. Would an unattractive Janet whether she could sing or not have made it at all? And then if these same people are going to criticize Janet and then these younger artists, criticize the entertainment industry as a whole because "looks matter" in promoting all of its female "stars" nowadays. Why should Janet be made the scapegoat when there are so many to choose from--even among those who are more gifted singers? This is what I don't understand. And I'm someone who is pretty objective because I know Janet is not as strong vocally and musically as some or as gifted on many levels. But as I stated before, I still don't think she is the worst music artist either. I just think it's become fashionable for the same people who promoted her early-on to now bash her because they don't have the guts just to take her for what she is--like apparently they can with other artists whom they promote non-stop. I know that Janet is a mult-millionaire, and she's not going to be starving whether her music is a flop or a hit, but it's the double-standard on many levels that annoys me. If people are going to harshly criticize Janet, well at least be consistent and to the same thing with other artists--even some who aren't in the music/video type artist genre or in the music industry at all. I just don't think Janet has any more than any other artist who has the same weaknesses and then even strengths since sex-appeal is a strength but has somehow managed to have a career in spite and because them. [Edited 9/24/06 5:50am] That was a great post Isel. I'm not a fan of "old Prince". I'm not a fan of "new Prince". I'm just a fan of Prince. Simple as that | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: Isel said: With all due respect, I think you are missing the point. A lot of artists change or even "decline," or if not decline morph into something more commercial. I mentioned the Peppers, I wasn't overly impressed with their Stadium Arcadium cd. It's OK. It's not bad, but me it's more of a commercial form of what they once were. Anthony Keidis (sp??) is still running around shirtless, singing about California, but no one ever mentions anything about that. He's probably still singing off-key, too, but after I heard it once, I figured that's just the Peppers. I don't refuse to buy their cd's because of it. No, Anthony isn't posing on King mag as I read now that Janet has done, but MTV is still playing the Peppers. I don't know if they've scored a Rolling Stone cover recently, but they are respected for what they do. Look at Justin.. that one interview he is talking about he's such bad-ass.. But that's OK for Justin to be that way. He's morphing from a back-street boy to bad-ass man, then paying tribute to Prince in order to come-up with a cd that will sell. Interesting he is doing that now. Hey Lenny Kravitz has always loved Prince, whether Prince was the guy to respect or not. But it's acceptable for Justin to morph because yeah.. he's got this hot cd and he can dance and some think he's hot.(I don't at all--and I'm a blond white girl--well woman.) Well he should have a hot cd if he is using Prince as a model--particularly the funk-master Prince. Look, I feel very badly that Janet has been reduced to being what sells in the industry. I just glanced over at that King mag. thread, and it breaks my heart.. really. But then again, what I'm trying to say is maybe Janet like the Peppers, like Justin even and then like Christina, Jessica.... rap artists--whoever or whatever are just doing what it takes to be commercial. My point is that why are we holding Janet to this standard, then when she can't reach this standard-- or is somehow trying to prove she has still got it, then it's Janet who is very harshly criticized, but other artists do the same thing all of the time. I just don't think Janet is different from any other artist really. At one point, we fans have just have to take them for what they are in a very competitive industry. Not everyone is like Beck or even Prince even though he has done his share of compromising as well. So have the STones to a certain extent. It takes real guts to completely turn it all around. I saw this deal on Kid Rock yesterday--well that guy has guts to at least try something completely new and risk his entire fanbase--going country for cryin' outloud? Not everyone has the desire or strength--or maybe it's foresight. Janet might not have that any of those things--but she's in good company from my observation because a lot of other artists don't either...and they sell music all the time. But now Janet is the symbol for mediocrity, and takes the heat for everyone else's artistic transgressions. So MTV will promote Ashlee Simpson, but not Janet? I don't even understand that at all. What we have here is a failure to communicate. Your argument seems to be that everyone else sucks so it's okay for Janet to suck too. My argument is, today's music industry sucks and Janet is a sheep so she follows the trend. That may be acceptable to you, but it's not to me. None of the artists you mentioned mean jack shit to me, so I sure as hell wouldn't defend them either. Well, I didn't say that being commercial is sucky! lol I didn't think that Stadium Arcadium sucked. I just don't think it's a masterpiece--or representative of the what the Peppers used to be. And I want to reinterate that just because Anthony sings off-key doesn't mean he or the rest of the Peppers don't have something to offer musically. They're a great band. Anthony writes some great lyrics even though he is Cali-centric at times. And his naked chest isn't bad either. lol Flea, John, Chad are great musicians if not vocalists. As far as Janet, to tell you the truth, I didn't think Damita Jo or All4You sucked either even though I do agree that neither were as good as say The Velvet Rope or Janet's earlier work.I haven't heard all of 20Y.O., but from what I have heard, the tracks don't really suck they just aren't memorable. Then I've read that there are a few tracks that are pretty good. I'll buy it. It might not be her best work, but I'm sure I'll find something to like. I'm not a huge fan of J.D.'s either. But... we'll see. And I'm not into covers like King mag., but then again a lot of female artists promote themselves like that. I won't be buying King magazine. It's sad that women in general feel the need to be sex-objects in the entertainment business. I haven't seen too many ugly female entertainers on magazine covers where as men can be ugly, old, fat, balding, gray-headed, skinny, etc., and still be considered unconventionally attractive in some way even--FULLY DRESSED without showing any skin whatsoever. There is a God. lol If you think Janet's music sucks..well fine. But I disagree because I still think that she has something to offer musically even though it might not be as memorable as it once was. I just think that it's a shame that some can't admire Janet following a trend with the same enthusiasm as we have admired her for setting trends. A lot of artists follow trends at certain time in their careers if not their entire careers. That's the truth whether some observers want to admit it or not. I just don't think it's all that serious. From what I've read here, it just seems like it's all or nothing as far as Janet is concerned, but with other artists people are more forgiving. [Edited 9/24/06 10:19am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: whoknows said: What we have here is a failure to communicate. Your argument seems to be that everyone else sucks so it's okay for Janet to suck too. My argument is, today's music industry sucks and Janet is a sheep so she follows the trend. That may be acceptable to you, but it's not to me. None of the artists you mentioned mean jack shit to me, so I sure as hell wouldn't defend them either. Well, I didn't say that being commercial is sucky! lol I didn't think that Stadium Arcadium sucked. I just don't think it's a masterpiece--or representative of the what the Peppers used to be. And I want to reinterate that just because Anthony sings off-key doesn't mean he or the rest of the Peppers don't have something to offer musically. They're a great band. Anthony writes some great lyrics even though he is Cali-centric at times. And his naked chest isn't bad either. lol Flea, John, Chad are great musicians if not vocalists. As far as Janet, to tell you the truth, I didn't think Damita Jo or All4You sucked either even though I do agree that neither were as good as say The Velvet Rope or Janet's earlier work.I haven't heard all of 20Y.O., but from what I have heard, the tracks don't really suck they just aren't memorable. Then I've read that there are a few tracks that are pretty good. I'll buy it. It might not be her best work, but I'm sure I'll find something to like. I'm not a huge fan of J.D.'s either. But... we'll see. And I'm not into covers like King mag., but then again a lot of female artists promote themselves like that. I won't be buying King magazine. It's sad that women in general feel the need to be sex-objects in the entertainment business. I haven't seen too many ugly female entertainers on magazine covers where as men can be ugly, old, fat, balding, gray-headed, skinny, etc., and still be considered unconventionally attractive in some way and FULLY DRESSED. There is a God. lol If you think Janet's music sucks..well fine. But I disagree because I still think that she has something to offer musically even though it might not be as memorable as it once was. I just think that it's a shame that some can't admire Janet following a trend with the same enthusiasm as we have admired her for setting trends. A lot of artists follow trends at certain time in their careers if not their entire careers. That's the truth whether some observers want to admit it or not. I just don't think it's all that serious. From what I've read here, it just seems like it's all or nothing as far as Janet is concerned, but with other artists people are more forgiving. [Edited 9/24/06 10:07am] Do you think I'm forgiving of Britney, JLo, Ciara and the rest of Janet's partners in mediocrity?! Hell no! I'd slag them off just as hard without a second thought, except they started off shit, whereas Janet has only become shit now that her team is not as good. I doubt very much if we'd have the pathetic spectacle of her posing as a soft porn star time after time if Rene was around. One thing I respect about Madonna, for instance, is that she has always walked her own path. Working with people outside the mainstream like William Orbit, Mirwais, etc. has helped her to carve out a totally unique place in the industry. Just compare her photo sessions alone with Janet's and you see how Madonna kicks her ass. Madonna gives you fresh interesting images to contemplate, whereas Janet gives her fans lazy, boring cliches like on the cover of King. I admire individuality. Janet has none. I admire integrity. Janet has none. I like music. I've hardly ever heard Janet even talk about music in 20 years. Janet's already had way more years on top than her talent deserves. She's had way more than Prince had. Do you think that's fair? I know I don't. When she disappears it will be one less robot clogging up the charts. It won't change much, but it will be a good start. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: Isel said: Well, I didn't say that being commercial is sucky! lol I didn't think that Stadium Arcadium sucked. I just don't think it's a masterpiece--or representative of the what the Peppers used to be. And I want to reinterate that just because Anthony sings off-key doesn't mean he or the rest of the Peppers don't have something to offer musically. They're a great band. Anthony writes some great lyrics even though he is Cali-centric at times. And his naked chest isn't bad either. lol Flea, John, Chad are great musicians if not vocalists. As far as Janet, to tell you the truth, I didn't think Damita Jo or All4You sucked either even though I do agree that neither were as good as say The Velvet Rope or Janet's earlier work.I haven't heard all of 20Y.O., but from what I have heard, the tracks don't really suck they just aren't memorable. Then I've read that there are a few tracks that are pretty good. I'll buy it. It might not be her best work, but I'm sure I'll find something to like. I'm not a huge fan of J.D.'s either. But... we'll see. And I'm not into covers like King mag., but then again a lot of female artists promote themselves like that. I won't be buying King magazine. It's sad that women in general feel the need to be sex-objects in the entertainment business. I haven't seen too many ugly female entertainers on magazine covers where as men can be ugly, old, fat, balding, gray-headed, skinny, etc., and still be considered unconventionally attractive in some way and FULLY DRESSED. There is a God. lol If you think Janet's music sucks..well fine. But I disagree because I still think that she has something to offer musically even though it might not be as memorable as it once was. I just think that it's a shame that some can't admire Janet following a trend with the same enthusiasm as we have admired her for setting trends. A lot of artists follow trends at certain time in their careers if not their entire careers. That's the truth whether some observers want to admit it or not. I just don't think it's all that serious. From what I've read here, it just seems like it's all or nothing as far as Janet is concerned, but with other artists people are more forgiving. [Edited 9/24/06 10:07am] Do you think I'm forgiving of Britney, JLo, Ciara and the rest of Janet's partners in mediocrity?! Hell no! I'd slag them off just as hard without a second thought, except they started off shit, whereas Janet has only become shit now that her team is not as good. I doubt very much if we'd have the pathetic spectacle of her posing as a soft porn star time after time if Rene was around. One thing I respect about Madonna, for instance, is that she has always walked her own path. Working with people outside the mainstream like William Orbit, Mirwais, etc. has helped her to carve out a totally unique place in the industry. Just compare her photo sessions alone with Janet's and you see how Madonna kicks her ass. Madonna gives you fresh interesting images to contemplate, whereas Janet gives her fans lazy, boring cliches like on the cover of King. I admire individuality. Janet has none. I admire integrity. Janet has none. I like music. I've hardly ever heard Janet even talk about music in 20 years. Janet's already had way more years on top than her talent deserves. She's had way more than Prince had. Do you think that's fair? I know I don't. When she disappears it will be one less robot clogging up the charts. It won't change much, but it will be a good start. I could actually respond in regard to Madonna. I have a few observations and criticisms I could make. I've made them before though, so why harp on it? She has a lot of fans. She has made an impact in the music industry, so I'll give her credit for that. She's a genius, too. So I always admire intelligence. Well, obviously you won't be buying 20 Y.O. Ok... That's fine. And I guess it's safe to say that you won't be buying Britney's either. But as I recall Madonna actually teamed-up with Britney for a song a video. In fact, they shared a kiss on national television--oh wait it was MTV. Now, that was art. And it took a lot of effort, too. Well, apparently Madonna sees something Britney that you and I don't. See, I'm not a huge Britney fan either sooo I'd have to pass on that one, too. But Britney has lots of fans, though, including Madonna amazingly enough. I wish women would not feel the need to objectify themselves. It just doesn't seem to be very fair since men don't feel that same need. It's really sad for me to see Janet falling to that trap as well. [Edited 9/24/06 12:05pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: murph said: Not the same though....I can understand folks not digging the music...that's natural...But this has flared up into a very disturbing witch hunt...As for Timberlake, I have made it known in past posts that his handeling of the Superbowl incident (and not to mention the way the media gave him a eyebrow raising pass..) showed his lack of character and that America is on some double standard shit...But as a music head, I can admit that his work with Timberland and Pharell was far more superior to anything he did when he dancing for a boy band....Simply put, artistically he has little in common with Britney Spears and the like...(that much I can hear if I listen to dude without tainted ears...) But I won't be buying his albums and that has more to do with my personal thoughts about the man than the quality of his output, which is surprisingly good for what it is...I'm not ready to give dude his ghetto pass back....But a good album is a good album... [Edited 9/24/06 9:22am] I guess what it boils down to is that I'm less interested in the witch hunt and more bothered by the total absence of integrity, individuality, and talent so prevalent in today's industry. The shameless gimmicks and bandwagon hopping which Janet employs and the crapness of her current music seem to typify the state of things. For a sign of the way it could and should be just listen to Gnarles Barkley's Crazy. A great song from a really individual, interesting group. From what I hear, the rest of the album is nowhere near as good, but there's a definite sign there of the way I hope things will go in the future. Gimmicks have always been a part of pop music...nothing new there...Madonna singing "Like A Virgin" grinding on the stage in a wedding dress back in the '80s; Kissing Britney Spears two years ago....not exactly high art...Now I'm not saying that Janet has never played the game and benefited from being acceptable by the majority...But the bottom line is race matters... [Edited 9/24/06 13:24pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
murph said: whoknows said: I guess what it boils down to is that I'm less interested in the witch hunt and more bothered by the total absence of integrity, individuality, and talent so prevalent in today's industry. The shameless gimmicks and bandwagon hopping which Janet employs and the crapness of her current music seem to typify the state of things. For a sign of the way it could and should be just listen to Gnarles Barkley's Crazy. A great song from a really individual, interesting group. From what I hear, the rest of the album is nowhere near as good, but there's a definite sign there of the way I hope things will go in the future. Gimmicks have always been a part of pop music...nothing new there...Madonna singing "Like A Virgin" grinding on the stage in a wdding dresses....not exactly high art... Whooah! Don't think for a second that I actually like Madonna. I can't stand her. She's played a major role in changing the emphasis from the music to the publicity stunt. I just recognise the qualities she has which Janet lacks. She's carved out her own niche, and stayed ahead of her audience. Publicity stunts only bother me when they take the place of artistic excellence. When artists think the gimmick can cover up for musical shortcomings. Check the link I posted on the previous page to a Cyndi Lauper and Patti Labelle performance and you'll see the difference between an artist aiming for the heart, and an artist aiming for column inches. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: murph said: Gimmicks have always been a part of pop music...nothing new there...Madonna singing "Like A Virgin" grinding on the stage in a wdding dresses....not exactly high art... Whooah! Don't think for a second that I actually like Madonna. I can't stand her. She's played a major role in changing the emphasis from the music to the publicity stunt. I just recognise the qualities she has which Janet lacks. She's carved out her own niche, and stayed ahead of her audience. Publicity stunts only bother me when they take the place of artistic excellence. When artists think the gimmick can cover up for musical shortcomings. Check the link I posted on the previous page to a Cyndi Lauper and Patti Labelle performance and you'll see the difference between an artist aiming for the heart, and an artist aiming for column inches. But I'm not slighting Madonna...What i'm saying is she's had a fair share of "gimmicks," but rarely gets called out for it (The Sex book was the one time...)...And I'm not going to dismiss her totally...I dig some of her '80s shit and a little of the '90s stuff...My only point is the backlash against Janet has been blown out of proportion and taken a disturbing turn...The woman should not be held by any more higher standards than the next artist....and yet she is... [Edited 9/24/06 13:28pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
murph said: whoknows said: Whooah! Don't think for a second that I actually like Madonna. I can't stand her. She's played a major role in changing the emphasis from the music to the publicity stunt. I just recognise the qualities she has which Janet lacks. She's carved out her own niche, and stayed ahead of her audience. Publicity stunts only bother me when they take the place of artistic excellence. When artists think the gimmick can cover up for musical shortcomings. Check the link I posted on the previous page to a Cyndi Lauper and Patti Labelle performance and you'll see the difference between an artist aiming for the heart, and an artist aiming for column inches. But I'm not slighting Madonna...What i'm saying is she's had a fair share of "gimmicks," but rarely get called out for it...And I'm not going to dismiss her totally...I dig some of her '80s shit and a little of the '90s stuff...My only point is the backlash against Janet has been blown out of proportion...The woman should not be held by any more higher standards than the next artist....and yet she is... I've called her out for it many times as several Madonna fans around here know. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: murph said: But I'm not slighting Madonna...What i'm saying is she's had a fair share of "gimmicks," but rarely get called out for it...And I'm not going to dismiss her totally...I dig some of her '80s shit and a little of the '90s stuff...My only point is the backlash against Janet has been blown out of proportion...The woman should not be held by any more higher standards than the next artist....and yet she is... I've called her out for it many times as several Madonna fans around here know. I don't know where you've been but I'm a child of the 80's, been around Madonna since day one and believe me, Madonna has been dissed and criticized before. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
wonder505 said: whoknows said: I've called her out for it many times as several Madonna fans around here know. I don't know where you've been but I'm a child of the 80's, been around Madonna since day one and believe me, Madonna has been dissed and criticized before. Exactly! In fact when she brought out the Sex book she quite rightly got the shit kicked out of her by the media and the public, just like Janet is getting now. Madonn was able to learn and grow from the experience. I see no sign that Janet has learned anything. In true Jackson fashion her response has been simply denial. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: wonder505 said: I don't know where you've been but I'm a child of the 80's, been around Madonna since day one and believe me, Madonna has been dissed and criticized before. Exactly! In fact when she brought out the Sex book she quite rightly got the shit kicked out of her by the media and the public, just like Janet is getting now. Madonn was able to learn and grow from the experience. I see no sign that Janet has learned anything. In true Jackson fashion her response has been simply denial. Madonna been dissed, Beyonce been getting dissed since the Beyonce and Dem days, Britney Spears is a laughing stock, lord knows Prince has been dissed, MJ, etc. Everyone has had their share of criticism and I think Janet fans just are just not used to their girl getting criticized. I mean face, Janet has enjoyed great popularity and positve feedback for the most of her career so now that she has peaked, the criticisms are going to pour in and her fans are just not used to that. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
wonder505 said: whoknows said: Exactly! In fact when she brought out the Sex book she quite rightly got the shit kicked out of her by the media and the public, just like Janet is getting now. Madonn was able to learn and grow from the experience. I see no sign that Janet has learned anything. In true Jackson fashion her response has been simply denial. Madonna been dissed, Beyonce been getting dissed since the Beyonce and Dem days, Britney Spears is a laughing stock, lord knows Prince has been dissed, MJ, etc. Everyone has had their share of criticism and I think Janet fans just are just not used to their girl getting criticized. I mean face, Janet has enjoyed great popularity and positve feedback for the most of her career so now that she has peaked, the criticisms are going to pour in and her fans are just not used to that. I'm far from a fan...My beef has little to do with people "dissing" janet Jackson...It has to do with her treatment by MTV and the other powerbrokers of the music industry...Meanwhile Justin (Who actually has a good album on his hands...) has been welcomed like nothing ever happened...Janet Jackson was getting shitted on way before the overtly sexy magazine covers....That's my beef... [Edited 9/24/06 14:18pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well, I'm not so sure Madonna has learned all that much. I'll leave it a that.
She's a great business woman. She covers her bases--always has. She attaches herself to music trends which compliment her style--always has. Enough said. Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork. But she is very good at what she does if a person enjoy Madonna's type of music--which I'm not such a fan--although I appreciate Confessions... I think she is an excellent as far as visual concepts. And first and foremost, she is a genius at marketing herself. I don't own a lot of her music. I guess I became interested in Janet due to more of the R&B influence. I think it would be interesting if she worked with someone like Rick Ruben, not William Orbit, because at least Rick would retain what is Janet. Actually, I think Madonna has even worked with Rick Ruben, too? And I would say that Madonna's fans don't like her being criticized very much at all. For a Janet fan, I'm pretty objective because it's all a matter of discussion to me. I can accept and even dish-out criticism as far as Janet. I'm not that emotionally involved to forget that the woman is a multi-millionaire, so she'll be fine whatever happens and whatever people think. Frankly, I just don't think Janet's heart is in the music business and maybe never has been. So to tell you the truth it's not really about criticism for me. It's more about the viciousness of the attacks on Janet by a number of sources. And I just don't look at Janet as leader of the pack in regard to mediocrity. It just seems to me that now Janet is the whipping post because she is wearing this sort of scarlet "A," particularly since the SB. I don't really buy into to it because a lot of artists have made the same poor choices and don't receive half the criticism and backlash. It's too weird. See, I think timing was really bad for Janet. Yeah, Madonna did that SEX book, but once again, she was young. So Madonna could recover from her mistakes--if one would call the SEX book a mistake. But Janet's "faux pas" occurred when she was older. And I think it is just more difficult when a person messes-up when they're older in any industry. So given that mistake, and then Janet's relying too heavily on someone like J.D., well--. I just think Janet had to prove that she was sorry with this cd and the promotion of it. Well, she's not sorry. She's even defiant. So... I think a lot of people just aren't even willing to give her a chance at all. It might be race and sexism, too, because obviously Justin didn't have to work so hard. He's not posing anywhere in his underwear, but the lyrics of his songs, from what I've heard, and his interviews are provocative. The whole thing is just very odd and reflective of a lot of problems in our culture. [Edited 9/24/06 15:09pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork.
 love is a fate resigned memories mar my mind love it is a fate resigned Over futile odds and laughed at by the Gods and now the final frame Love is a losing game | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Scorpion said: Isel said: Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork.
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Scorpion said: Isel said: Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork.
why are you laughing Beyounce's ass isn't either | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: Well, I'm not so sure Madonna has learned all that much. I'll leave it a that.
She's a great business woman. She covers her bases--always has. She attaches herself to music trends which compliment her style--always has. Enough said. Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork. Firstly. Alicia Keys sucks. Secondly, you're missing the point. No one's saying Madonna's a great musical talent. Madonna sucks too. The point is these two soulless pop tarts have had parallel careers, and a simple comparison shows up many of Janet's flaws. Madonna has just been a hell of a lot smarter in staying ahead of her audience and surprising them. Janet's been unable to do this. That's the point. Also, Madonna is her own person. Janet doesn't seem to have a mind of her own. She's a sheep. Say what you like about Madonna, but she's never been a sheep. That, again, is the point. See, I think timing was really bad for Janet. Yeah, Madonna did that SEX book, but once again, she was young. So Madonna could recover from her mistakes--if one would call the SEX book a mistake. But Janet's "faux pas" occurred when she was older. And I think it is just more difficult when a person messes-up when they're older in any industry
This is wrong. Madonna was only 3 years younger when she did Sex. She was 34. Janet was 37 at the time of Nipplegate. If Janet had pulled the same stunt in concert or even at the MTV awards, it would have gone unnoticed. Her mistake was she did it on The Superbowl, which has the biggest, wholesome family audience watching. I'm getting bored with this subject now. My final words; you yourself have said you don't think Janet's heart is even in music and I agree with you on that. The difference is; I can't support the music of someone who has no passion for it. Who's more interested in mass approval than in just making great music. If you support Janet then fine, but you may as well support Britney as well, since there's no difference between the two. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
skyecute said: Isel said: May I ask: what do you consider to be good music? I was just wondering about your taste in music--if you and I share the opinion of what artists we would considered good--at least some artists. I'm just curious more than anything else. Can't Janet have a hit and her music be enjoyable--just on a visceral level if nothing more? I just have never understood this sort of negativity with Janet. I go through here, and read a lot of the threads, but Janet is always one of the artists everyone has something really emotional, for lack of a better word, to post about. It's like she really brings out the hate or dislike in people for some reason? She really doesn't even do that much to be controversial except for the SB incident. Really before that happened, nobody seemed to be as critical of her. I really don't think the Superbowl incident is the reason for all of the "backlash" against Janet. Something that I noticed during her Damita Jo album was that the same DJ's who have always loved her started saying that she CAN'T sing. Of course, these same DJ's have always known that she doesn't have a voice, but they overlooked it because they loved how she looked. I now hear the exact same thing that I did during the Damita Jo album, they all say that she can't sing. When they played "Call on Me", and that was very seldom in my area, they would never comment and just move on. DJ's in my area LOVED Janet and would overlook any flaw(weak voice) because of their love for her. It doesn't seem the same now, because they have finally admitted that she is not a good singer. It has been even more obvious with the rise of Beyonce who can do it ALL-sing her ass off, excellent entertainer/performer, etc. Janet's constant USE of her looks/sex appeal has become a turnoff for the people who USED to love that sort of thing.People are beginning to notice her talent or "lack of singing skills" when they never did before. When you hear MEN saying that she needs to KEEP her clothes on, then you know that something is wrong.When you hear DJ's say that, it really is surprising. I can't believe that this is the same woman who sat on Entertainment Tonight and said that when a person TRIES to be sexy, then they are not sexy at all. It seems that she is not living by her own words. She was much sexier, when she didn't TRY to be sexy.Rene Elizodo's input was more than people want to admit. When he was around, you did't have this type of desperation to "look sexy". Her sexiness was natural. Now, it looks forced. Yeah rene elizondo's input was great. If so, Where the hell is his great talents now? He was just a mooch who just happened to capitalize off janet being her boyfriend. Rene didn't force her to show off her body. Yeah that is why his hands were all over janet's tits on the cover of the janet cd.  Don't laugh at my funk
This funk is a serious joint | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: Isel said: Well, I'm not so sure Madonna has learned all that much. I'll leave it a that.
She's a great business woman. She covers her bases--always has. She attaches herself to music trends which compliment her style--always has. Enough said. Bonnie Raitt, she ain't. Alicia Keys she ain't either. PJ Harvey she ain't. She ain't even Bjork. Firstly. Alicia Keys sucks. Secondly, you're missing the point. No one's saying Madonna's a great musical talent. Madonna sucks too. The point is these two soulless pop tarts have had parallel careers, and a simple comparison shows up many of Janet's flaws. Madonna has just been a hell of a lot smarter in staying ahead of her audience and surprising them. Janet's been unable to do this. That's the point. Also, Madonna is her own person. Janet doesn't seem to have a mind of her own. She's a sheep. Say what you like about Madonna, but she's never been a sheep. That, again, is the point. See, I think timing was really bad for Janet. Yeah, Madonna did that SEX book, but once again, she was young. So Madonna could recover from her mistakes--if one would call the SEX book a mistake. But Janet's "faux pas" occurred when she was older. And I think it is just more difficult when a person messes-up when they're older in any industry
This is wrong. Madonna was only 3 years younger when she did Sex. She was 34. Janet was 37 at the time of Nipplegate. If Janet had pulled the same stunt in concert or even at the MTV awards, it would have gone unnoticed. Her mistake was she did it on The Superbowl, which has the biggest, wholesome family audience watching. I'm getting bored with this subject now. My final words; you yourself have said you don't think Janet's heart is even in music and I agree with you on that. The difference is; I can't support the music of someone who has no passion for it. Who's more interested in mass approval than in just making great music. If you support Janet then fine, but you may as well support Britney as well, since there's no difference between the two. Exactly who doesn't suck in today's music according to your standards? Sounds to me that in your opinion, anyone who has success in the commercial market sucks. I'd be really curious to know the artists whom you deem worthy enough to actually spend money on their music. I wonder if I would deem those same artists as worthy of my dollar? As far as Madonna, you said that Madonna had integrity, right--or was that someone else? I don't think she's been any more consistent than Janet throughout her career regardless of intentions or "vision." She's made some dubious choices herself as I already mentioned. As a matter of fact, Madonna is not very original, in my opinion: she just follows trends. She is great at reading the market. So she's a sheep, too, -- albeit a smart one particularly in regard to convincing people of her artistry. She's not above commercialism. But then again, a lot of people enjoy her work, so more power to her and to her fans. She makes a lot of people happy. So what do I care? In regard to the SEX book, I still stand by my opinion. Madonna was closer to 30 than she was 40. Janet was closer to 40 when the SB incident occurred, and the media kept reminding her of that time and time again. And I don't follow Madonna as closely, but didn't she release ROL, having a spiritual epiphany after Lourdes' birth? So now she's a mom, and Earth Mother, and not a slut, at 40. She grew-up according to the public's standards. Apparently, Janet at 40 is not going to do what is generally expected of her until she's damn good and ready--if ever. So in a way, Janet's is being defiant by not doing what is expected in a sense. If she were a complete sheep, she'd be kissing ass all over the place. So in a round-about-way, she's got a little bit of integrity. As a matter of fact, because of this her defiant attitude, I just think there is a lot going-on more than just the music and image concerning some of the Janet "hate". As far as Britney and Janet, I've already said I prefer Janet because of her R&B influence. I prefer John Lennon over Paul McCartney because I prefer John's rock style over Paul's more pop. So what? If I were Britney fan, I'd say so. I'd own it and be proud of it. However, her music is too "pop" for me. I'm typically not a pop-music fan. In fact,I probably wouldn't have ever been a fan of Janet's at all if her music didn't lean a little more toward R&B. Finally, I appreciate your point about not wanting to support a half-assed effort(??), but just because Janet has probably had other dreams, doesn't mean that she doesn't try to do her best in music. A lot of us are in professional situations where we might not have been if circumstances were different, but that doesn't mean that we don't excel. From what I've read, she's pretty competitive. Janet is not trying to personally offend you or anybody else with her music: she is just trying to please herself by her standards, put a product to reach her fans, and maybe gain some new ones. I just don't think it's all that serious. If a person wants to buy what I consider crap, that's fine. Why should I or anyone else be the definitive authority on what is "art" or worthwhile to purchase? Didn't Frank Zappa say something about that once?: "What makes something art or not is how it is experienced by the audience... (Leo Tolstoy). Art is making something out of nothing then selling it." I've read some pretty positive reviews of 20 Y.O. not only from fans but from critics. So as much as you or anybody else might think it sucks, well a number of people disagree. But that's usually the way it is. [Edited 9/25/06 11:24am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
shortstuff45220 said: Scorpion said: why are you laughing Beyounce's ass isn't either What the fuck does Beyoncé have to do with it? She on yo mind these days? Sounds like some sort of personal problem.love is a fate resigned memories mar my mind love it is a fate resigned Over futile odds and laughed at by the Gods and now the final frame Love is a losing game | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: whoknows said: This is wrong. Madonna was only 3 years younger when she did Sex. She was 34. Janet was 37 at the time of Nipplegate. If Janet had pulled the same stunt in concert or even at the MTV awards, it would have gone unnoticed. Her mistake was she did it on The Superbowl, which has the biggest, wholesome family audience watching. I'm getting bored with this subject now. My final words; you yourself have said you don't think Janet's heart is even in music and I agree with you on that. The difference is; I can't support the music of someone who has no passion for it. Who's more interested in mass approval than in just making great music. If you support Janet then fine, but you may as well support Britney as well, since there's no difference between the two. As far as Madonna, you said that Madonna had integrity, right--or was that someone else? Just dropped in to correct your misundestanding. I never said Madonna had integrity. I said I admire integrity and Janet has none. Never said anything about Madonna having it either. I don't like Madonna. If she disappeared tomorrow I'd be very happy, but as far as talentless pop tarts go I'd place her several leagues above that zombie you love giving your money to. Hopefully that's cleared that up. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whoknows said: Isel said: As far as Madonna, you said that Madonna had integrity, right--or was that someone else? Just dropped in to correct your misundestanding. I never said Madonna had integrity. I said I admire integrity and Janet has none. Never said anything about Madonna having it either. I don't like Madonna. If she disappeared tomorrow I'd be very happy, but as far as talentless pop tarts go I'd place her several leagues above that zombie you love giving your money to. Hopefully that's cleared that up. whoknows said: One thing I respect about Madonna, for instance, is that she has always walked her own path. Working with people outside the mainstream like William Orbit, Mirwais, etc. has helped her to carve out a totally unique place in the industry. Just compare her photo sessions alone with Janet's and you see how Madonna kicks her ass. Madonna gives you fresh interesting images to contemplate, whereas Janet gives her fans lazy, boring cliches like on the cover of King. I admire individuality. Janet has none. I admire integrity. Janet has none. I like music. I've hardly ever heard Janet even talk about music in 20 years.
I guess I was confused because you made the "integrity" comment after talking about Madonna walking her own path and other accolades. The whole paragraph was about what you admire in Madonna. I was assuming you were talking about Madonna when you mentioned integrity as well. So you weren't very clear. That's why I was confused. Boy for someone who thinks Madonna sucks, you sure have some pretty positive things to say about her. One final comment, then I'm done with this thread. Honestly, I don't care if you think Janet is a zombie just like I'm sure Madonna's fans don't care if I'm not completely sold on her artistry or if you ultimately think she sucks in spite of having some pretty complimentary things to say about her. If I want to buy 10 of her cd's tomorrow, it will be my business. I like Janet and I enjoy her as an entertainer, simple as that. [Edited 9/25/06 18:01pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |