Spoiler-Chris Isaak-Christmas!

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

Right, and when she does sing the phone book someday, let me know how you're feeling.

But that was the point I was making... I might not like it personally, but I'd still respect her decision as an artist.

Originally Posted by dissention

It may be art, but it's still a product. It's manufactured to sell, that's why she prays to the commercial gods.

When I draw or paint, I want as many people to enjoy it and appreciate it as possible... I think that's a normal desire for an artist.
For recording artists, one of the most noticeable signs of people appreciating your art, is how much it sells.

A lot of music is manufactured for absolutely no other reason than to sell.
But for Stevie, I think that she creates for artistic purposes first, and then hopes that it will be appreciated by as large a group of people as possible (ie: sells well).

[amber]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

But that was the point I was making... I might not like it personally, but I'd still respect her decision as an artist.



When I draw or paint, I want as many people to enjoy it and appreciate it as possible... I think that's a normal desire for an artist.
For recording artists, one of the most noticeable signs of people appreciating your art, is how much it sells.

A lot of music is manufactured for absolutely no other reason than to sell.
But for Stevie, I think that she creates for artistic purposes first, and then hopes that it will be appreciated by as large a group of people as possible (ie: sells well).

hear, hear!!!!

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

But that was the point I was making... I might not like it personally, but I'd still respect her decision as an artist.

And the point I was making is that while you may respect their decision as an artist, it does not mean that you don't wish they could have done something else, like the stuff they had done previously. Don't you get it? It's got nothing to do with respecting artistic choices, it has to do with likes and dislikes and what you may have wanted to hear. People don't like the new Smile At You because it doesn't stack up to the demo, that doesn't make them selfish. People wanted to hear Sara desperately over the past 15 years and were disappointed that they didn't, that doesn't make them selfish.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

When I draw or paint, I want as many people to enjoy it and appreciate it as possible... I think that's a normal desire for an artist.
For recording artists, one of the most noticeable signs of people appreciating your art, is how much it sells.

A lot of music is manufactured for absolutely no other reason than to sell.
But for Stevie, I think that she creates for artistic purposes first, and then hopes that it will be appreciated by as large a group of people as possible (ie: sells well).

And that's where the logic abruptly stops. A truly artistic person doesn't hope for any appreciation, big or small, they do what they need to do and to hell with how others perceive it. I've always thought that Stevie writes for artistic purposes, but when it comes to recording her material, she makes it as commercial as she can to sell records. But we'll just have to disagree.

EDIT: I missed the part about you painting and wanting people to enjoy it, which makes my comment sound bitchier and meaner than it was meant to be. Apologies all around.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by dissention

A truly artistic person doesn't hope for any appreciation, big or small, they do what they need to do and to hell with how others perceive it.

On the otherside, a truly artistic person still has to eat.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

On the otherside, a truly artistic person still has to eat.

Of course. Which is why I donate to the food bank every month. j/k

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

And the point I was making is that while you may respect their decision as an artist, it does not mean that you don't wish they could have done something else, like the stuff they had done previously. Don't you get it? It's got nothing to do with respecting artistic choices, it has to do with likes and dislikes and what you may have wanted to hear. People don't like the new Smile At You because it doesn't stack up to the demo, that doesn't make them selfish. People wanted to hear Sara desperately over the past 15 years and were disappointed that they didn't, that doesn't make them selfish.

I guess I don't "get" wanting an artist to fit OUR perception of them. Hoping they'll perform a certain song on stage is one thing, but when we say "Stevie shouldn't sing like that," or "Stevie should try something different," for whose benefit is that?
Ours, right? Not Stevie's.
When we desire something for our own benefit, it is a selfish impulse, no?

Originally Posted by dissention

And that's where the logic abruptly stops. A truly artistic person doesn't hope for any appreciation, big or small, they do what they need to do and to hell with how others perceive it. I've always thought that Stevie writes for artistic purposes, but when it comes to recording her material, she makes it as commercial as she can to sell records. But we'll just have to disagree.

I'm not one of those people who buys into the whole "being truly artistic means you don't give a flying fig whether or not anyone else likes it" mentality. Certainly not when it comes to pop/rock singers... otherwise they never would have bothered signing a record contract in the first place.

The first time you ever show someone something you've painted, or the first time you ever play for someone a song you've written, you've demonstrated a desire for someone else to appreciate what you've created.
And when you release an album, you do not do so just for every last copy of it to sit on record store shelves collecting dust. You do it in the hopes that people will buy and appreciate your art.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I don't mind the criticisms and opinions, etc. (and God knows, I LOVE the debates), but I do think sometimes that we... myself included... sound like spoiled little brats.

"Stevie should sing the way I like best."
"Stevie should write her lyrics the way I say she should."
"Stevie should wear the clothes and footwear I think she'd look best in."
"Stevie should only record the songs that I like."

It is pretty self-centered, and we've all been guilty of it from time to time, and to one degree or another.

You forgot one........Stevie should sing in MY house in person hehe

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

EDIT: I missed the part about you painting and wanting people to enjoy it, which makes my comment sound bitchier and meaner than it was meant to be. Apologies all around.

No worries!

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I guess I don't "get" wanting an artist to fit OUR perception of them. Hoping they'll perform a certain song on stage is one thing, but when we say "Stevie shouldn't sing like that," or "Stevie should try something different," for whose benefit is that?
Ours, right? Not Stevie's.
When we desire something for our own benefit, it is a selfish impulse, no?

Sorry, but no, not when we're the consumer. If I was getting it for nothing, then it would be selfish.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I'm not one of those people who buys into the whole "being truly artistic means you don't give a flying fig whether or not anyone else likes it" mentality. Certainly not when it comes to pop/rock singers... otherwise they never would have bothered signing a record contract in the first place.

I am. If someone wants to do nothing but express their art, they're concerned about their art and not how people view their art. Patti Smith is a true artist, Basquiat was a true artist, Warhol was a true artist, etc. Most rock stars, almost by definition, are in it for the money AND the art. And if getting the cash means being more commercial, most comply.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

The first time you ever show someone something you've painted, or the first time you ever play for someone a song you've written, you've demonstrated a desire for someone else to appreciate what you've created.
And when you release an album, you do not do so just for every last copy of it to sit on record store shelves collecting dust. You do it in the hopes that people will buy and appreciate your art.

Not me. I don't give a flying fig what anyone else thinks of stuff I create (other than the stuff I create for my job because I have to design stuff based on what they tell me). I wish more "artists" were like that, but they aren't, especially rock stars.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

Sorry, but no, not when we're the consumer. If I was getting it for nothing, then it would be selfish.

I'm a consumer when I buy something functional and utilitarian like a washing machine or a refrigerator.
I buy CDs as an appreciator of music and the artists who create it.

I have to get going, so I'll try to comment on the rest of your post later.

[MACFAN]

I dont really feel Stevie has lost much of her range. The vibrato is still there and she still sounds awesome to me. Aging has a lot to do with vocal capabilities as well as abuse does. I just saw Linda Ronsdadt on CBS this morning and she definately does not sing like she used to. I saw Debbie Harry twice recently. On that Diva's show she truly sucked. She was very flat. And she appeared, to me anyway, that she was trying way to hard to be the "blondie" of years past and it did not work that well. I also saw her on another TV show and she was horrid. We talk about Stevie's clothes well at least she wears things that fit her instead of squeeziing herself into clothing that is 2 sizes to small for her. Pattie Labelle was always a screamer and I never cared for her, all that throwing herself on the floor and screaming did not do it for me. I saw Pattie in the 80's and was not impressed at all, I was like why don't you pull your hair out of your head and be done with it. I may be the only gay man in the world who does not bow to queen Pattie. Ann Wilson has lost range and she sounds a little duller than she used to but still like her alot.

[GODDESS6]

Call me deluded (shut it, dissention ),
[QUOTE=dissention]Hi, Deluded!

sorry, this made me laff out loud this mornin'!!!!!!!!! 2 where my hubby & my son cme from what they were doin' 2 c what was so damn funny~ thanx 4 the laff!!!~

[dissention]

Originally Posted by MACFAN

I dont really feel Stevie has lost much of her range. The vibrato is still there and she still sounds awesome to me. Aging has a lot to do with vocal capabilities as well as abuse does. I just saw Linda Ronsdadt on CBS this morning and she definately does not sing like she used to. I saw Debbie Harry twice recently. On that Diva's show she truly sucked. She was very flat. And she appeared, to me anyway, that she was trying way to hard to be the "blondie" of years past and it did not work that well. I also saw her on another TV show and she was horrid. We talk about Stevie's clothes well at least she wears things that fit her instead of squeeziing herself into clothing that is 2 sizes to small for her. Pattie Labelle was always a screamer and I never cared for her, all that throwing herself on the floor and screaming did not do it for me. I saw Pattie in the 80's and was not impressed at all, I was like why don't you pull your hair out of your head and be done with it. I may be the only gay man in the world who does not bow to queen Pattie. Ann Wilson has lost range and she sounds a little duller than she used to but still like her alot.

Take all of those singers, stack them next to Stevie, and they've lost such a miniscule amount of their ranges that it's rather negligible.

Everyone loses some of their range eventually, including all the women I mentioned. It's natural. But they haven't lost nearly as much as Stevie because of the simple fact that they sang properly over the years. When it comes to range and vocal stamina, every one of them could blow Stevie away. Stevie used to be able to sustain some pretty high notes, she no longer can. Say what you want about all the women I mentioned, they certainly can and then some, due to the simple fact that they knew how to maintain their voices.

This is not to say that I dislike Stevie's voice, I like her older voice much better than the high-pitched one she had in the early seventies. I love the strength she had during Street Angel through Enchanted. Her voice would never have been like that if she hadn't f*cked it up so badly over the years. But because she f*cked it up so badly, that's why it continues to change, no matter what she does for vocal exercises or lessons. Eventually, she just will not be able to tour because of it. I've made no secret about the fact that her voice, to me, lost something very magical about it during 2001. I still enjoy it for the most part, but something about it has become monotonous and very tired. That's simply how I feel.

Stevie's current voice is not simply due to aging, it has to do with using it improperly and abusing it for twenty years. One listen to her albums back to back shows you exactly how much damage to did to it; she had a different voice for each one. That is not from simply "aging," not one bit.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I'm a consumer when I buy something functional and utilitarian like a washing machine or a refrigerator.
I buy CDs as an appreciator of music and the artists who create it.

I have to get going, so I'll try to comment on the rest of your post later.

That's you.

It may be art, but it's still made for money. When it is purchased, it is a product and we are the consumer. We can call it whatever we want, but the simple fact is that it is a product.

[ontheEdgeof17]

Originally Posted by dissention

That's you.

It may be art, but it's still made for money. When it is purchased, it is a product and we are the consumer. We can call it whatever we want, but the simple fact is that it is a product.

Agreed. The only reason I buy their material is to support them financially. If I was doing it for the "appreciation of the art", I would just download it and be done.