PatrickS77 said:

Its not necessarily her, and its not necesarily about Madonna either. The music industry seems to be full of these relics at the moment who cant come to terms with the way the industry changed, so rather than do something positive, they complain and whinge, and blame others. The naivety of someone believing fashion and music haven't been linked since forever is also a tad stoopid.

CrozzaUK said:

Agree. They were and always will be connected. Would this website even exist if Prince dressed like a bag-lady and looked like Richard Simmons?

Also, say what you like about Madonna, her music, her image...
the one thing she doesn't ever do is criticize other musicians.

superspaceboy said:

Right on! I totally agree.

Paris Hilton's parents are to blame for Paris Hilton.

It's a shame so many of you have responded by personally attacking Susanna Hoffs, rather than addressing the issue. It wouldn't be so bad if your comments weren't so ignorant and uninformed. First of all, Susanna has been talking about this issue ever since the early '90s. She's always maintained that the industry puts too much emphasis on sexiness, especially for female artists. The only difference here is that she's naming Madonna for the first time, but she's been speaking on this for at least 17 years now.

To those who say she's doing nothing positive, do you have something against research? A quick Google search would tell you she's touring regularly, and is releasing albums with Matthew Sweet. That is positive. That's all she can do, unless you want her to set up a protest group and give up her whole life to it. Realistically, all she can do is speak out and try and be a good role model herself.

And to that wacko who said she's jealous 'cos her looks have gone, while Madonna still looks great? Here are recent pictures of the two of them.....






.....CASE FUCKING CLOSED!
[Edited 7/10/08 9:17am]

midnightmover said:

PatrickS77 said:

Ya know?! We sure are seeing some bitterness in this thread and it's not from Susanna. I was actually gonna respond to that post, but it would be like shooting fish in a barrell since CrozzaUK is so emotional, he hasn't bothered to check the most basic facts. "Touring universities with Spandau Ballet on "I Love The '80s" tours""?? WTF? It's not even worth dignifying.

midnightmover said:

And yet you just did.

midnightmover said:

I guess the truth hurts. Susanna Hoffs is performing with the Bangles at the Retrofest event in Scotland in August which is essentially an 80's based festival, not contemporary artists. Spandau Ballet isn't there as there are in a business dispute with each other and don't perform together anymore. But the festival is filled with 80's artists like Kim Wilde, Boy George, Howard Jones, Kajagoogoo, Paul Young, China Crisis etc.
I have a couple of her solo records and I definitely think she has a lot of talent. But she's off base when it comes to Madonna. The fact is Susanna is very attractive, wears makeup and nice clothes and so a large part of her success is also based on her looks. Both Susanna and Madonna are both physically attractive and talented.
You complain about people putting Susannah down, but then you turn around and put Madonna down for how she looks. So you are just as bad as the people you are attacking.

Glindathegood said:

That's a one off gig. The Bangles made a point of avoiding the nostalgia circuit. They've turned down big money offers. This is well known, so your definition of the "truth" is a little off base.

And how am I putting Madge down for her looks? I was responding to a highly ignorant post from Barbara07 that claimed Susanna is bitter because Madonna aged better than her. That's a stupid thing to say, and I proved it by posting those two pictures.

midnightmover said:

1. Deborah Gibson would agree with Susanna Hoffs. Madonna's game changing ways ruined Debbie's career in mainstream pop culture to the point that all of her comeback attempts (including posing topless in Playboy) were never good enough.

2. But why end the controversy there? Why not blame Madonna, Michael (Thriller video), AND Prince (the movie Purple Rain)? All 3 of them change the way the international music industry see & hear music forever.

3. Also, we can also call out Duran Duran for this mess. They made fashion in the music video more important than the music itself. As Milli Vanilli (Rob & Fab) once said, "Image is everything".

superspaceboy said:

Their main rivals were Klymaxx, The Go-Go's, & Vixen. And they also were caught up in the fashion side of the music industry.

lastdecember said:

Exactly.

CrozzaUK said:

The thing is The Bangles were never HUGE. Their singles were big. But I don't think there was a big appeal for them as a group. Music was also changing as the 80's petered out. Their music was no longer going to be popular.

Besides wasn't it Susanna Hoffs that went solo. It was the attention on her that led to their demise anyway.

TonyVanDam said:

I don't see how you can blame either Madonna, Michael Jackson, Prince or Duran Duran. They all had a strong image but they also released great music. If some other people came along later and just thought it was all about image and you didn't have to write great songs, that's their problem not because of Madonna, Michael, Prince or Duran Duran.
Maybe image is everything to a band like Mili Vanilli who had no talent, no good songs, but just their look, but how is that the fault of artists who have both a great look and talent.
I love fashion and I would hate for artists to be taken seriously to have to only wear a t-shirt and jeans. Fashion and makeup is a form of self expression and I don't think artists should be denied that avenue of expression.

The fact is a concert is a visual as well as an audio experience. If you go back further in time, there are artists like Jimi Hendrix who had a very defined look. Or what about Debbie Harry who came before Madoonna? The most memorable artists are the ones who have both style and substance. One without the other is boring to me.

Glindathegood said:

I'm already aware of all of this. But no one can deny the kind of impact (good & bad) that the 80's trinity (Michael/Prince/Madonna) had on people. Even in the 21st century, there are some rising new artists that want to be cultural icons just like them.

midnightmover said:

Ha! Ha! DIG IT!

The thing is U cant have this both ways. You can take anyone from that day and they ALL benefited from Mtv, and as it was said before, they are all good artists and made very different kinds of music. I mean my favorite band of the last 25 years a-Ha benefited from a stupid comic book drawn video that they didnt want any part of, now they are a great band, but had it not been for that groundbreaking video, would they have broken through internationally and been able to maintain stature to continue internationally now? most likely no. Same goes for Duran Duran, i mean GREAT band but never would have made it without videos, Michael? well he already had the Jacksons fame, but LETS be real, those "thriller" videos and the visuals of seeing him lighting up the street squares and the glove etc...that album would have never been the seller it was without video. I totally understand susanna and love her to death, but she has to realize, she too, made it because of video. Thats not saying its reight or wrong, and the acts back then were more UNIQUE than today, but, whats it gonna be? I understand the problem with all about being IMAGE today, but lets face it, themergers of labels and everything caused this, and MTV was part of it, which Susanna and Madonna and the others were very quick to help build up in the day.

I just came back from my second Bangles concert this week... nope, nothing bitter there... still rocking and still looking hot:

I blame global warming.

she has a point, for sure.

on the other hand, she's Susannah Hoffs, lead singer for the GoGo's-Lite, fun and catchy as they may be. good looks and a nice fashion sense certainly didn't hurt her career.

^^^Make that "The Bangles" and you're right!

PatrickS77 said:

that's what I said. Go Go's Lite

lastdecember said:

The Bangles definitely benefited from the visual aspect too, but they were always uncomfortable with it. They went along with it, but that doesn't mean you can't resent it too, particularly if you grew up simply loving music, and spent years playing in bands before you got famous. People forget sometimes that the Bangles were/are a real band. They're not just posing with those instruments. They're really playing them. They write 95% of their material too.

Plus, if you grew up idolizing women like Joni, Bonnie Raitt and Chrissie Hynde, it's gotta come as a disappointment when you see The Spice Girls and Britney being celebrated and so few females of any substance breaking through. I think it's a plain fact that the music would be much better if there were less emphasis on the visuals, although of course, it's ironic coming from someone as good looking as Hoffs. But hey, she can't help being good looking, can she?

PatrickS77 said:

I saw the Bangles live back in 2001 and 2003 and those shows were by far the most enjoyable gigs I ever attended. I've seen Prince, James Brown, Bob Dylan, MJ and a ton of others and I have to say none of those concerts had the same feeling The Bangles shows did. Only Bruce Springsteen really compared. If you'd have told me years earlier that I would prefer a Bangles gig to a Prince gig I'd have thought you were out of your mind. But there was something about the honesty and simplicity of their show that just resonated with me. There was no bullshit. It was just straightforward and fun.

And to think after witnessing that, your next gig will be to see Janet Wack-son, lip synching and doing tired dance routines. Better bring a pillow and a blanket for that one.
[Edited 7/11/08 4:19am]

midnightmover said:

Yeah but you've deliberately taken the worst picture of Madonna and a good one of her. How old is she? The Bangles have always come across as fake to me, when watching their music videos and stuff, just as fake as any Paris Hilton type. Maybe it is because shes good looking, but I doubt it, I can't even see her as a Madonna type artist. She just doesnt come off as a genuine artist type.

If the Bangles are so unconfortable with sex appeal and visual aspect, why are there all wearing miniskirts in that picture, that shows a lot of skin? They are showing more of their bodies than Madonna did in her costumes on the Confessions tour.
An artist like Bonnie Raitt doesn't dress that way, so I fail to see how Susanna Hoffs can put herself in the same category.
There's nothing wrong with looking sexy and hot, as long as you also have talent to go along with it. But to criticize Madonna for being too sexual or based on looks, when you are doing the same exact thing is ridiculous.
The Bangles songs are catchy and yes, they play instruments, but I don't think anyone thinks they are the greatest musicians in the history of the world. They can play, but they're not virturoso players like say Prince is on guitar. So a large part of their appeal is how they look and not merely their musical ability, although they do have ability as well.

...did no one like my picture?...

Arnotts said:

I randomly picked one of the most recent pictures I could find of Susanna. There wasn't a bad one there. By contrast if you want pictures of Madonna looking bad you are spoilt for choice. Susanna is just better looking. Sorry.

And I'm afraid you're guilty of sexism in this post. You basically say Susanna is "fake as any Paris Hilton type" based on one thing and one thing only. The fact that she is good looking. There is no other reason for you to make that claim. You know nothing about her. You are simply judging a book by it's cover.