"Credible Artist"

It's one of those cliches that is uttered so often every time these music reality contests come round.
It's a term that I think is thrown around all too readily.

But in the case of Rowetta, is it not a justified claim?

I'm not just talking about in relation to her fellow contestants right now, I mean in relation to all past music reality show contestants as well.

Most contestants just want to have a go at being a pop star, chance their luck, wander in off the street, and just desire fame for the sake of fame....without learning a skill to a level high enough to acheive that fame.
Their voices may sound good when they sing in the bath, but they haven't tested their voice out and perfected it beyond their bathroom.

Often we get many, many contestants who do well in these contests who embody that familiar euphanism "Style over Substance",....they don't quite deliver what the accolades and praise promise that they'll deliver.
They, for the most part, aren't quite what they say they are on the tin.


When I think of a "credible artist", I think of someone who has worked their way up, and done the hard work to get to a level where they deserve to be credited as "credible".
Where they have learnt by their mistakes, and know what they need to do to improve, and develop their talent.

Rowetta's past pedigree has shown that her voice is a proven attribute, it has already passed the benchmark test of quality control and got the kitemark stamp.
She's done the work, she's already learnt the hard way by testing her voice out on people...and many people liked it.
The people she's performed with as a backing singer have the kudos necessary to add plenty of weight to the term "Credible Artist"

She isn't looking for a free ride, like some. She's worked at this for years and worked hard on her talent.

She didn't just watch a music reality contest on television, and thought, "You know what?..I fancy having a go at being a singer".
She was singing years before your Pop Idols and Fame Academy's etc. came along.

Any fame she may acheive, won't be based on her solely wanting fame for the sake of fame itself. It will be very much based mainly around actual work put in over the years to try and become the best singer she can be.
That's when I believe fame is the most deserved.

There are other people who are good, but Rowetta has proven that her voice is actually capable of making people go out and buy records.
Her track record shows that she can not only perform, but her voice can be a contributing factor in impacting on people's lives.

The only difference now, is that she wants to acheive something in her own right as an individual, by taking centre stage as the main focus.
I don't know exactly what material she would sing post-X Factor, but the ability is obviously there, and her personality and stage presence is impressing many people at the moment.

"But is this experience she has gained fair in regards to the TV competition?"

Don't know,...It's a TV show. Past experience has shown that fairness amounts to bollocks concerning these types of shows.
The show let her be a contestant in the first place, then Rowetta is justified in being on there.
My belief is that any complaints about fairness should be directed squarely to the programme makers, not to the contestants.
The notion of fairness may make a mockery of the programme itself, but it doesn't impact on the ability of a performer.


What's fair or not depends on your priorities. Do you want someone who was inexperienced but not very good to win, because their entry complied with rule number: 163786?
(I made that rule up, just like TV shows do. )

I think if you look beyond what X Factor actually truthfully is as a concept, then experience and nurtured talent is irreplaceable, deserves recognition, and is probably more important as a means to what the program claims it sets out to acheive, than the programme is itself.

You could reword that above question to; "But is it fair if substance wins over style in this competition?"

Last edited by Alrightmate : 02-11-2004 at 06:56

In a word, "No".

I'm not going to quote such a long post Alrightmate. You have made some excellent points and have given many a lot to think about.Well said.I agree with much of your post and believe Rowetta would be a very worthy winner.

I think she would be the most 'credible' winner on a reality programme and is a truly fabulous performer.I'd love to see her winning this but we've got to remember how 'fickle' the GBP can be.

Its not really up to Rowetta now because she is an employee of the production company at the moment.I'm not sure they are actually doing her any favours by the way they are 'over-promoting' her and really hope that this doesn't go against her.

OK so she's very good, although not to my taste anyone cas see/hear that she is talented. The credibility part is difficult, because of her age and experience, her credibility is easier to calculate than say Cassie's who's only 17, but does that maker her a more worthy winner?

Some may feel that because of her contacts and experience in the music business, she could've tried for personal fame through a different channel, and therefore think that an act, that wouldn't otherwise be seen by those that matter, deserves to be in the final more.

There is that question with Rowetta 'if she's been around the people that could maker her famous for so long, then why haven't they signed her up?'

I can see she would make a worthy winner, but so could some of the others, ultimately the choice is with the public and their fickle reasons for voting. By entering the competion she has opted to take her chances with the rest of them, and the same rules now apply to Rowetta as to any of the others, credibility, experience et al will have no bearing on the outcome, and I'm not that sure that it should.

No from me too

Excellent post Kewpee. A well balanced opinion if I ever saw one.

I was talking to some friends the other day, and this seemed to be their opinion, and why they are not voting for Rowetta.

The fact is that Rowetta has been out there in the music industry, seen and heard by many, and yet never made a solo career of it. Why? Not good enough? Didn't want it enough? Can it really be said that 'work put in over the years to try and become the best singer she can be.
That's when I believe fame is the most deserved.' when Rowetta doesn't even want it enough to give up smoking?

It could be argued that she is less deserving of a win in this, beause she has already had chances that the other contestants haven't.

In the same way, it could be said that 10 years plugging away at his career from the back of a van makes Tabby credible, or that going to music college and being classically trained makes G4 credible, to a certain extent I suppose the 'credible' tag could also be applied to Verity.

....good post Spellbound and so true

Of course she's not. She sounds like Rick Astley. she's got an abnormally deep voice for a woman and pretty much sucks....

It'll be interesting if her partying days from her Happy Mondays days come out in the paper before the competitions done and she gets kicked off...

I'm assuming thats why theres been absolutly no mention of her past musical acheivement on the show - coz suddenly everyone will realise her shot nerves and insanity are probobly due to inhaling large ammounts of cocaine and ecstacy.

Yessss!!!
Well you expect that from PIV but Alright's just that...ALRIGHT!!!
You simply can't exclude the fact that Ro has done the spade work from the bottom to the top,it's her turn now.
In the other "credible" thread I've said change the word "credible" for REAL!! and the sentence makes perfect sense.
She is THE MOST REAL music reality contestant,EVER,bar none...oh and this is as usual just IMO.
I want my stars to be human with feet of clay not some simpering vegetable,without an ounce of passion.
So Ro my lovely,I love you because you ARE real,and most of all I say Ro is "FLAWED BUT FABULOUS!!"forget credible,of course she's credible,just look at the track record,most of the other 8 would die for a CV like Ro's.
Get used to it,RO is gonna be a STAR in her OWN right this time round.
GO RO!!!(oops wrong thread! )

Sorry to disagree but 'doing the spadework' doesn't automatically put anyone at the front of the queue. There was a bloke on Opportunity Knocks, years ago, he sang 'Mule Train' and smacked himself on the head with a tin tray, he had been doing it for years, up and down the country in the clubs. It didn't make him credible, although he was incredibly 'real'.

They are all real, whether you like them or not, whether you think they should be the next big thing, or crawl back to obscurity. On entering the competition they all come under the same rules and you can't expect people to vote for someone just because they have put in the leg work. They rise or fall on the next few weeks, in terms of this competition.

No matter how many cases you make for a particular act, at the end of the day they should be judged on what they do now, not yesterday not a month ago and certainly not for the last ten years.

She has an unusually powerful voice for a woman.

I actually think the producers would love it if anything about her past came out in the papers. It would bring them the publicity they're craving.


As for the whole credibility thing I don't really want to get into that. I'm only interested in who the better singer is and in the case of FA who the better songwriter, musician and all round talent is. Credibility gave us Alex Barks, another woman with a deep voice but whose voice is not half as pleasant or melodic as Rowetta's (I might compare their personalities too if Alex had one).

I like Rowetta, I like her cos of her voice, I'd like her even if she had had no experience whatsoever and sang like that. I also like Cassie, far less experience, but I like her voice.
In the end I just support the ones who's singing I enjoy, without trying to back it up by making abusive comments about the ones I dont like.

Rowetta and Cassie are winners for me......such marvellous talent.....

I too am interested in who the better singer is. Rowetta does not fall into the catagory and Alex did not have an unusually deep voice. Her voice was perfectly normal.

Rowetta's voice is obscure, weird and not good sounding....and it's NOT powerful unless she's hitting the high notes which is EXACTLY the same thing I said about fat michelle last year. She had an extremely average voice for 95% of the song but just ahppened to be able to hit the high notes for the last 5% and thats why folk like her - than the fact simons pushed her personality and had the show edited to make her look like a really nice person who's mad a bottle of chips.

She's not. If louis had her on his team Simon wouildn't even dignify her with a "Distinctly Average" in fact she's not...she's worse than that....

What?

Rowetta is not credible. As far as I'm concerned she's just another karaoke singer with a big voice.

So she doesn't deserve it enough, because she wasn't enough of a "wannabe"?
I thought you were one who felt that having learnt and developed a skill or talent was more important than just wanting it.
Now you've changed your mind have you? And being a desperate "wannabe" is more deserving of success?

And no, it couldn't be said that in the same way 10 years plugging away a career in the back of a van makes any one else credible.
But I would say that 10 ways plugging a away at a career, or doing the eductation to be clasically trained, tends to give you more credibilty than someone who is very average in ability, and has just watched Pop Idol and fancies having a go

People are different, it depends on what you do in those 10 years.
Kewpee.
I never said the spadework automatically puts one in front of the cue at all.
I was focusing on what she actually did doing the spadework, and that the contribution she gave to widely respected music by working with other artists is a whole different ball game when it comes to judging credibility than just putting the hours in.

I think some people are putting words in my mouth.
I never said she was more "worthy", I didn't say she was more talented than a 17 year old singer.
And neither was I saying she was more deserving to win than the singers she is left in the competition with.
The voters will decide on whatever they want, "deserving" to win is not really a realistic expectation, and often doesn't really come into it.
I made the suggestion about having credibility, that's all.
Not more deserving to win, not more worthy.
Some people are reading what they want to read.

Give it up
I understand what you are saying about Alex Parks. But that was presented to us as "credibility". Not necessarily the same thing.
It's part of the reason I thought about this post.
Asking if "credibilty" was justified in Rowetta's case.
In Music reality shows, credibilty is a term used so freely, I don't always believe it's appropriate.
Last edited by Alrightmate : 02-11-2004 at 19:46

No she is what she is a passable backing singer with a big gob

Oh, you're not playing the "Nadia" game are you?

Actually I do think that 'wanting it enough' is important, because I believe that it is from this that a person can draw on his or her focus, dedication etc to develop their skill or talent in the first place.

I am not suggesting that Rowetta should be more of a 'desperate wannabe' (your words, not mine ), but I do think that the public might have more respect for a contestant who takes their talent and voice seriously.

Maybe Rowetta does - we only get to see what they show on tv after all, but the fact that she is smoking again suggests that she maybe does not have as much respect for her talent as she should have, which might make her less 'credible' in some eyes.

Spellbound

We already have the charts filled with people "wanting it enough". They want it a lot.
Doesn't mean they're that good though.

I think Nadia and Dan from Big Brother are planning on releasing singles, maybe they want fame enough, so deserve to be famous.

I do think that someone desperate to be famous for simply the sake of fame, can be described as a "desperate wannabe".

Not smoking cigarettes means that someone is more credible than someone who does?
Are you being serious?
Not exactly "Rock and Roll" is it?

The last few decades have had many musicians and singers who have taken drugs, drank alcohol, smoked cigarettes, and done things that may not have been that good for them.
But it didn't make them less credible.

Are you saying sensible, well behaved, government approved, nice Pop Stars are more credible than the ones who are more free-spiritied?

It doesn't matter what your lifestyle choices are (Erm..unless you happen to be Gary Glitter )..it's what you do when you get up and perform that counts the most.

I can't believe that you think that being a non-smoker makes you somehow more credible.

Credibiltiy is not about how perfect you are. Often it's the imperfections, spontanaity and realness of your personality that are traits more commonly associated with credibility.

I personally think that smoking fags, is one extra street-cred point as far as I'm concerned.

So basically you're saying that its good to smoke and kill yourself - just about sums up the sort of person you are

No, AM, I'm not saying that those 'wanting it enough' should automatically be guaranteed fame even if they are devoid of talent, and I would agree that those wanting fame for the sake of fame can be described as 'desperate wannabes'.

That's not really the point I was making.

Nor am I saying that I believe those stars that smoke, drink, whatever, are any less credible as a result. If you read what I put you will see that I actually said:

the fact that she is smoking again suggests that she maybe does not have as much respect for her talent as she should have, which might make her less 'credible' in some eyes.

Some eyes, not MY eyes. Just an observation based on what others have said.

Nor did I say that we should only have 'sensible, well behaved, government approved, nice Pop Stars'. My point is that pop stars, rock stars, whatever, are already established in their careers. They're not relying on the good old GBP to decide their fate. Rowetta is a contestant in a talent show, not a star, not a legend. I just would have thought that she would want to give herself the best possible chance. By smoking she might ruin the quality of her voice, she knows this, and is evidently prepared to take the risk. I just find that a little odd if she wants this as much as she protests.

Did you read the whole post? The poster said nothing of the sort and you are wrong to make character assessments.