The Boy/Girl Wonder versus the Seasoned Performer

[sorcerer999]

I’ve been discussing this topic with several friends the past few weeks and it has been extremely interesting getting different viewpoints and opinions on the subject.

Basically, the question came up one night about the differences in a particular artist’s music in regards to their early work versus their later work. My mind went immediately to Tori Amos, who was so extremely talented and prolific for the first decade of her career. It’s just my opinion, of course, but I really enjoyed her first 5 albums – 1992’s “Little Earthquakes” up til 1999’s “To Venus And Back”. Each one is different. Each one is genius. Each one is a gem. However, as a whole, I haven’t really enjoyed anything since. There have been brilliant individual songs on each album, but not much else. Again, this is just MY opinion. Don’t stone me.

I have felt this way about other artists/bands as well ~ Rufus Wainwright, U2, Blondie, David Bowie, Prince, etc. And even to some extent, Fleetwood Mac. It’s like there was a small window of time where their creativity was at its peak, and then everything just became subpar in their endeavors and efforts afterward.

I know I’m not the only person to feel this way. Several others I’ve talked to feel like there must be certain reasons for why this happens. Is it because after personal success, fame, riches become the norm for these artists and so ensconced in their daily lives, that their ability to relate to the common man/woman becomes severely impaired? Do the relatable emotions that come with being a destitute, unloved, tortured ingénue change drastically after happiness, motherhood, marriage and financial stability take hold? Could this be what happened to Tori and her music? As well as many other artists and bands who have found success and fame through the lyrics and music that endeared them to the working class and low income public in the first place?

Have we lost interest in what they have to say nowadays because we can’t relate? Or do we still continue going to their shows and shoveling more and more money into their bank accounts hoping that they will bring their “A Game” back for just one night and take us back to a time when everything they sang about, looked like and represented was so new, cutting edge and relevant to our situation?

I’m sorry for all the questions but I’m really curious as to what you all think about this topic. Obviously, there are PLENTY of seasoned artists and bands that I ADORE who still manage to be an ever evolving, changing creative force from the beginning of their career up to today. Leonard Cohen, Ryan Adams, Patti Smith and Kate Bush are a few who come to mind for me, personally. These people, to me, have never lost that ability to connect with all people from many different walks of life.

Stevie Nicks is still the “be all and end all” for me, and probably always will be. I’m constantly on the fence with her in regards to this topic. Could it be the only reason I adore 24KG is because 90% of the tracks were written during her most prolific and creative period? Is it telling that my favorite tracks off “In Your Dreams”, “Say You Will” and “Trouble In Shangri-La” happen to the “vault songs”? Sure there are some songs that she’s written post “Dance” that I will always adore (“Bombay Sapphires”, “Everybody Loves You”) but for the most part, I kind of think she’s sort of “lost it” as a creative force in songwriting. Again, this is just my opinion and hope that one day SOON she will prove me wrong and start writing new, brilliant and EPIC songs again like she did from '75 - '85.

I still cringe when I hear things she’s written in the past 15-20 years like “Silver Girl”, “That Made Me Stronger”, “I Don’t Care”, “Say You Will”, and a host of many more which I won’t mention for fear of having my “fan club card” being taken away.

What do you guys think? Is there something that comes along with fame and success that stifles creativity for some and fuels the fire for others?