|
||||||||
Sex Selling Records: Do We Care? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Sex Selling Records: Do We Care?
Just reading three topics on here...the T.A.t.U one, the Avril Lavigne one and the Christina Aguilera one, and three things occurred to me.
1. I first saw 'Complicated' on video, prior to hearing it on the radio or on MP3. I thought it was a cool song, but would have forgotten it instantly if it wasn't for Avril's ohmygodyou'resocuteimusthaveyounow doe-eyed gaze at the end of the video. I bought the album the next day. 2. I first saw 'All The Things She Said' on video, prior to hearing it on the radio or on MP3. I thought it was a cool song, but would have forgotten it instantly if it wasn't for wet school uniforms, lesbianism and panty-flashing camera angles. I bought the album the next day. 3. I dismiss Christina Aguilera as an artist every time i hear her latest song, which invariably then gets lots of video airplay, which I see. I always end up liking the song. Christina always ends up turning me on in the video. Okay, before you dismiss me as a complete crotch-led horndog, I am wondering whether my finely-tuned music sensors can be over-ridden by some cleverly-targeted female loveliness. I mean i love music. I live for music. And believe me when i tell you i get no sexual thrill from Jurassic 5, The Streets, Linkin Park or Burt Bacharach. Well, maybe Burt a bit. But i am just *the* biggest sucker for pretty girls. And while i am *positive* that i like songs and albums for their musical content (i happen to believe that Avril's album kicks ass in so many ways), i may have an inbuilt double-standard that gives attractive female artists a head start on all other music. Damnit, Vanessa Carlton is hot as well. Any other readers have the same suspicions about *their* long-held musical convictions? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Near Birmingham
Posts: 3,470
|
Yes Vanessa Carlton is a good looking woman, but her songs are catchy beyond that.
Yes, I do have a problem with it. The song should sell the song, not a video. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kataan
Posts: 10,939
|
Not sure. maybe on a subconcious level?
Ok..Ill do an honest list. 1) Holly Valance. Lovely girl, never liked any of her songs though. 2) Avril lavigne, yes the doe eyes certainly grabs ones attention, shes the sort of girl Id go for anyway. But I also think the song is a good one as well. 3 Christina Agulera. Never liked any of her stuff, I especially hated the 'dirty' song. The only thing I liked by her was the mix of Genie in a bottle with The Strokes 'hard to explain'. 4) TATU. Heard the song liked it a LOT, liked the video because as well as the obvious, it actually semed to be saying something, that worked with the record very well. 5) Kylie Minogue. Ok..hands up, shes just so lovely Ill forgive her any old rubbish. I did like her fever album though. 6) Britney spears..fine looking women, never liked any of her music stuff at all though. 7) Vanessa carlton. passes me by really, no strong opinions. 8) Norah Jones. jackpot!!!. Great looking women and great songs!!. 9) Kate Bush. back in 1977 she was just the absolute goddess for me and my mates. I dont think ive ever since fancied a celeb as much as I fancied her in 1977! . oh..music was good as well, mostly, although she did have her bad moments.10) Debbie Harry. another jackpot!!...great look, gorgeous and great songs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pergatory, it be near Croydon
Posts: 15,503
|
The song should sell the song, not a video
And before videos there was little other way of selling except by the music Video is a medium used to good effect, in exactly the same way as editing suites with hi tech processing to ensure one hits the notes right. Then theres the make up that covers up all manner of blemishes, plastic surgery for the real mistakes, and dubbing for those that fake everything in the music career You can be terrible at singing and still sound/look good on the vinyl. What next - virtual music ala www.vbirds.com ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Yes, of course...in full agreement there.
I'm not arguing that's what *should* happen...i'm wondering aloud whether any of us are truly strong enough to totally shun image when formulating our opinions? For some, they cannot bring themselves to admit to liking manufactured pop music for fear of being a 'traitor' to their ideas of what comprises real music. For me, i am fearful that for all my thinking of and appreciation of music, part of my personal process on deciding how i view songs and artists is hijacked by libido. Weakness indeed. I wonder if i would defend my perception that Britney Spears performs the best pure pop music i've heard since the '80s quite so vehemently if she wasn't surpremely cute... |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Near Birmingham
Posts: 3,470
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie I agree she does, on a musical level definitely.[BBritney Spears performs the best pure pop music i've heard since the '80s quite so vehemently if she wasn't surpremely cute... [/b] Visually she is again a good looking girl. But, the best singers are usually the backing singers, that don't have front person looks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Peej Kerton But that doesn't make them the best performers, does it?But, the best singers are usually the backing singers, that don't have front person looks. Over and above ANY artist who you can point to and say "okay, *there* is someone deserving of our respect", there will be ten people in the wings who had more talent, who were more deserving, but who never even got the shot that Artist X did - simply because they weren't in the right place at the right time, or because their image wasn't attractive even to the 'independent' labels that 'real music' fans champion. Even Tenacious D, who are about as far removed from the conventional pop star image as possible, fit the cookie cutter for *some* A&R man, simply because they push the right buttons for a certain demographic. Even indie labels (if such a thing even exists beyond garage-produced music) are in it for the money. They may be one step closer to the idealism of the 'real music' meritocracy, but they are still just pimping their wares on poor saps like us! My advice? Ignore the power politics and the blatant manipulation of the public, and judge a song on how it makes you feel. If S Club Juniors perform songs that make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up then more power to you. If you float on air every time you hear Rammstein, then go for it. But don't make subjective judgements on artists based on public perception, perceived 'talent', whether they 'deserve' their limelight, or how they are marketed. Just judge the music. Which of course makes me a hypocrite, because i am a sucker for nubile young girls in short skirts. But at least i can recognise my weakness
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Actually, while we're on the subject, i would be interested to hear peoples' views on whether marketing the likes of T.A.t.U through their obvious sexual appeal is wrong.
Personally, being both a libertarian (no, not someone who works in a library!) and a red-blooded male, i honestly don't think there's anything wrong with it. Some might also say that it's teaching young girls that sex is the way to get what you want in life. But then again, i would be stabbing my 15 year old self in the back if i said that *that* was a bad thing too ![]() Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 65
|
I think we already covered that in the T.A.t.U thread. Must have!!! If you got an hour, read through it all.
If I wanted to watch smut. I'd buy a Rorno rather than buy Christen Arguialelfsal@er album for her music videos. (Even though it is a pretty close alternative). Whats a Libertarian? Does it mean you oppose to eating vegatables? |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Where do you get these 'Rornos' from?
![]() Some of us like a little cerebral activity with our smut...nothing is worse than some faceless stud hammering away at some random girl with engineered breasts. Less is more...and Christina *is* very pert ![]() Seriously, the debate as regards T.A.t.U was more along the lines of "they're not good enough to be in the charts on their own, it's only the fact that they're hot lesbian schoolgirls". What i'm asking is whether it's right for them to sell sex to us like that at all...not just as a means to sell records. A Libertarian is someone who likes Liberace. Possibly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 65
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie I've ordered them from http://www.christinaaguilerasdirrrrr...rnoarchive.comWhere do you get these 'Rornos' from? ![]() Her managers told her sex sells, poor girl toke it the wrong way.(maybe I should re-word that) . Heres a link to the other thread where its been discussed. Some really good points but heck it'll take me time to regougatate the whole points. http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...0&pagenumber=4 (I bet loads of people have clicked on that first link. Ohh yes you have. Anything with Aguilera and Rorna in the same link and your away! Filth) Last edited by ttcook : 20-01-2003 at 17:33. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kataan
Posts: 10,939
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie Most music is sold with image as well, always has and always will. its nothing to worry about. Your brain uses visual and audio clues to decide whever the experience is pleasurable. if you find Britney Spears attractive, then your brain might associate a melody from her songs with the pleasure you felt at seeing her. the net result is that you LIKE the tune. I dont see anything wrong with this. Your perception is moulded by experience and of course, this differs wildy between individuals. one person will listen to a song, and will enjoy the effect the song has, another will hear exactly the same , but get irritated about it.Yes, of course...in full agreement there. I'm not arguing that's what *should* happen...i'm wondering aloud whether any of us are truly strong enough to totally shun image when formulating our opinions? For some, they cannot bring themselves to admit to liking manufactured pop music for fear of being a 'traitor' to their ideas of what comprises real music. For me, i am fearful that for all my thinking of and appreciation of music, part of my personal process on deciding how i view songs and artists is hijacked by libido. Weakness indeed. I wonder if i would defend my perception that Britney Spears performs the best pure pop music i've heard since the '80s quite so vehemently if she wasn't surpremely cute... Anyway what is a 'good' tune?. what makes one?. can Richard Ashcroft ever do anything that will attract critisism, can Will young ever do anythign that will attract music media praise ?. image. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kataan
Posts: 10,939
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie *applause*.But that doesn't make them the best performers, does it? Over and above ANY artist who you can point to and say "okay, *there* is someone deserving of our respect", there will be ten people in the wings who had more talent, who were more deserving, but who never even got the shot that Artist X did - simply because they weren't in the right place at the right time, or because their image wasn't attractive even to the 'independent' labels that 'real music' fans champion. Even Tenacious D, who are about as far removed from the conventional pop star image as possible, fit the cookie cutter for *some* A&R man, simply because they push the right buttons for a certain demographic. Even indie labels (if such a thing even exists beyond garage-produced music) are in it for the money. They may be one step closer to the idealism of the 'real music' meritocracy, but they are still just pimping their wares on poor saps like us! My advice? Ignore the power politics and the blatant manipulation of the public, and judge a song on how it makes you feel. If S Club Juniors perform songs that make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up then more power to you. If you float on air every time you hear Rammstein, then go for it. But don't make subjective judgements on artists based on public perception, perceived 'talent', whether they 'deserve' their limelight, or how they are marketed. Just judge the music. love ya work Eddie. I think I agree with 99% of what you say.! |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NE England
Posts: 3,096
|
Interesting thread, I didn't realise men bought records because primarily they liked the looks of the woman singing the song. The marketing companies have definitely got in right then, get their young female singers to parade around in virtually their undies and you are guaranteed to sell records!
I judge songs on their merit not on how attractive the person is singing it. Personally I am getting a bit sick of seeing all this bare female flesh. It is sad that many female artists have to dress in this manner. You don't see male artists in skimpy little outfits do you? Well not that often, remember Robbie in Rock DJ? Good song though. I think Avril's cd is one of the best albums I have heard in a long time. I don't know what the video was like for Complicated but have seen the one for Skater Boy. The latter she is fully clothed yet a lot of you have said she is still attractive which proves the point that you shouldn't need to undress to sell records, the song should sell itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,366
|
I didnt think sex sells but after finding out the box wont playlist Delta Goodrems song Born to try for the last 2 weeks you have to kinda wonder that if she did take all her clothes of. The video would have been playlisted before the record compnay wanted it to be.
I did despise Avrils song compicated but them when i saw those eyes it kinds of put you into a trance. But that was sex it was just cuteness. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Kataan
Posts: 10,939
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wicket well yes. the song should sell itself, but imgine a world without videos at all, just the music?. Interesting thread, I didn't realise men bought records because primarily they liked the looks of the woman singing the song. The marketing companies have definitely got in right then, get their young female singers to parade around in virtually their undies and you are guaranteed to sell records! I judge songs on their merit not on how attractive the person is singing it. Personally I am getting a bit sick of seeing all this bare female flesh. It is sad that many female artists have to dress in this manner. You don't see male artists in skimpy little outfits do you? Well not that often, remember Robbie in Rock DJ? Good song though. I think Avril's cd is one of the best albums I have heard in a long time. I don't know what the video was like for Complicated but have seen the one for Skater Boy. The latter she is fully clothed yet a lot of you have said she is still attractive which proves the point that you shouldn't need to undress to sell records, the song should sell itself. maybe it would be better, but those times have long gone and arent coming back. I do believe that the song itself has to have appeal though. A 'sexy' video will get more publicity for a good song, record companies know this. A bad song(or rather a song that doesmt appeal to hardly anyone) will fail regardless imo. Example Holly Valance. her last single didnt do to well, in spite of a 'sexy' video, mainly because the song wasnt very good. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Quote:
Originally posted by wicket There was actually an interesting program on VH1 last year about this - it questioned why to sell records to teenager boys the record companies use the sexually-predatory virgin/slut paradigm (Britney, Christina, Kaci) but to sell records to teenage girls the record companies market male artists as the most unthreatening, least sexual beings on the planet. It just reflects what sells, and to an extent it's true - lads want a girl who is sweet and innocent but who wants to be very naughty. Girls want guys who are sensitive and won't take advantage of them.Interesting thread, I didn't realise men bought records because primarily they liked the looks of the woman singing the song. The marketing companies have definitely got in right then, get their young female singers to parade around in virtually their undies and you are guaranteed to sell records! I find it fascinating rather than offensive - i'm strong enough to make my own choices - and it was brilliant how Will Young's videos went from standard boyband dross (Evergreen) to camp retro chic (Light My Fire) to pretty much exclusively gay (You And I). No better reflection of the current marketing methods than Girls Aloud and One True Voice. Slutty, council estate, dirty lo-fi pop versus squeaky-clean grinning idiots singing a song that would have shamed a Rick Astley B side... |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,146
|
Interesting debate, but nobody seems to have mentioned the obvious: none of this is new. Sex has always been used to sell pop music, and always will be. Take a look at shots of The Beatles arriving at Shea. Think of the reaction to Elvis' pelvis. Abba. New Kids On The Block. Transvision Vamp. The Osmonds. Mick Jagger. David Bowie. Blondie. Nico. Madonna. Peggy Lee. There have been plenty plenty of artists who used sex appeal to sell records, and plenty plenty record companies, too. Image and marketing usually need to be allied to some sort of charisma, and some sort of musical talent, to be successful for very long, though. Jessica Simpson is just as good looking as Britney Spears: but her songs aren't as catchy, and she was never marketed well. Aguilera is less conventionally good-looking than either - but she has a great voice, and the people managing her have made some clever decisions.
Sex was one of the main ingredients of popular music in the last century, and will continue to be in this. If you think that sex shouldn't be used to sell records, Elvis' swivel, Jagger's swagger and the rest of it vanish from history. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Totally true...if anything, the 'ideal' that music should be 'pure' and free of image was just a kink in the road between the great age of the all-powerful songwriting studios (and the easy-on-the-eye and plainly sexual artists who sang early rock'n'roll) and the current pop genre.
The beauty of it all to me is that while the 'real music' lobby champion any and every artist who appears to buck this trend, those who hold all the power have not only the best PERFORMERS, but also the best MUSIC. Money talks, and the best songwriters or producers aren't left to self-produce acclaimed albums. They are snapped up and paid handsomely to ensure that the 'establishment' artists (yes, including both Britney *and* Korn and everything in between) have an advantage going onto the battleground from the off. Bleat and whine all you like about manufactured music or the strip-mining of hereto-untapped genres...but in most cases the commercial explosion of a genre has led to the best pieces of music from that genre being made. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,146
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie Absolutely. And all these great artists are strip-mining other forms of music anyway. We all know that, but we never really examine it: I was quite shocked when I first heard Bo Diddley's I'm A Man. I thought, hey! Jagger didn't just get "influenced" by this guy - that's a f***ing rip-off. Well, no, not really - he added to it. And it goes all the way down the line to Electric Six.Bleat and whine all you like about manufactured music or the strip-mining of hereto-untapped genres...but in most cases the commercial explosion of a genre has led to the best pieces of music from that genre being made. We now think of Carole King as a great songwriter, perhaps partly because of Tapestry, which was arguably the first album to really celebrate that art. King wrote Do You Still Love Me Tomorrow and a stirng of other Motown hits. Ashford and Simpson wrote all those great duets like Ain't No Mountain High Enough and Ain't Nothing Like The Real Thing. Again, they had their own careers afterwards as performers. Yet nobody takes the peoplewho are writing hits today seriously. Don't be so sure it's because the music isn't as "good". There's a snobbery about the past that exists in all art - it's why Stephen King is trash and Charles Dickens is great literature - fast forward a couple of hundred years and people might be studying King. While it's true that our subconscious can make us believe that rubbish songs are good because the singer is attractive, it can go one step further than that, into a comment much like the one that started this thread: because a singer is attractive, we convince ourselves that the marketing has played a trick on us, and that the song can't be any good. After all, it's not Motown, is it? Well, Motown was a hit factory. Hit Me Baby, One More Time is a great pop song: Britney's pout, pleats and uniform made sure it was a hit, but it deserved to be one. It's no different from Helen Shapiro performing barefoot (and she was 15, I think). |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
And here endeth the lesson. Brilliantly summed up.
Now i'm going to go and listen to Daphne & Celeste. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pergatory, it be near Croydon
Posts: 15,503
|
posted by Fasteddie somewhere near the beginning
Which of course makes me a hypocrite, because i am a sucker for nubile young girls in short skirts. But at least i can recognise my weakness You call that a weakness ? Many great singers have been like that anyway, without having to emphasise the part on any video, all more reason for the music industry shakers to get them into the charts, perpetuating their rise. I would like to add one other name to the chart list - Natalie Imbruglia, who positively shines in the vids and has a voice to die for. Musical content has been up and down in her career, but this is more to do with the launch into mainstream somewhat too spectacularly. Then the other post re Robbie Williams Rock DJ, the song was great without the vid, but whoever chose the storyline behind the action was genius in serving him up a shock tactic Hellraiser territory ending. It would only have worked with a striptease. The storyline was sooooo remote from the song, but it worked perfectly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Here? In this girls' boarding school? With my reputation? What *were* they thinking?
Posts: 3,393
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Channel Hopper Very true - Torn is up there as possibly the very best pop song of all time IMO, and her album was great - but she never again achieved the heights. Personally i loved 'That Day' but it bombed commercially. That said, i never really fancied her that much - maybe that's why i have such fond memories of the songs rather than anything else.
I would like to add one other name to the chart list - Natalie Imbruglia, who positively shines in the vids and has a voice to die for. Musical content has been up and down in her career, but this is more to do with the launch into mainstream somewhat too spectacularly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,146
|
Quote:
Originally posted by FastEddie ...and a classic example of how image and marketing are essential. It's just what you were saying before: the record companies try to get the best songs to give the most marketable artists the best head start. It's a great pop song that was searching for a sellable performer. It was actually written by a rock band called Ednaswap in 1993, along with Phil Thornally of The Cure. Ednaswap have done several versions of it - see if you can find one, they're damn good - and so have many others. A Dane called Lis Sørensen recorded it five years before Imbruglia. A version by Trine Rein went to number one in Norway two years before Imbruglia recorded it. Both of those artists are quite attractice, but older than Imbruglia. But Imbruglia had the right history, recognition, profile, bone structure and, well, branding, to make the song a worldwide hit. Listen to Rein's version: it's almost identical.Very true - Torn is up there as possibly the very best pop song of all time IMO If I was managing Holly Valance right now, I'd get her to do a cover of the Gin Blossoms' Hey Jealousy, or an early Gregg Alexander track. Can't fail. Last edited by misterpartridge : 21-01-2003 at 12:36. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pergatory, it be near Croydon
Posts: 15,503
|
the record companies try to get the best songs to give the most marketable artists the best head start. It's a great pop song that was searching for a sellable performer.
This has never really changed, Kate Bush was probably the earliest example I know of where the imagery was right for the songs, which had probably been floating around in the composers heads for a while. Man with the Child in His Eyes does it for me every time.....pant |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:29.



. oh..music was good as well, mostly, although she did have her bad moments.