smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Christopher" <plattc@optonline.net> |
| Subject | Re: Whiny songwriters |
| Date | Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:43:07 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain us-ascii (1.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
> > Uhhh...co-write credits with these people, (and Celine Dion and Prsley,
> and
> > other high-end Artists), usually means that it was part of the deal. The
> > real writer probably was lucky to get half the publishing if that...
>
> Well the real writer should put the song out instead of selling it,
> then. All parties know what's in it and what's going to happen. Or,
> they should.
>
> And I assume you mean Elvis Presley - I thought everyone knew he
> barely sang OR wrote ANY of his own songs - seriously, try finding
> one. Hard pressed. All old black R&B songs. Not to say they ain't
> good. Love Elvis.
>
Well, this points up that we're really talking about two completely
different animals, the singer-songwriter and the performer. One might argue
that the Beatles were among the first very popular singer-songwriter
artists, and that paved the way for a boatload of them in the '60s, '70s,
and beyond. The "performer" tag still applies to a good many pop artists
(good, bad, or indifferent -- I don't mean either to praise or damn them,
just making a point), and the prevalence of major stage shows with extremely
challenging choreography raises the bar for a "performer" to be that much
more proficient in ways completely aside from songwriting.
Flip side of that coin, a whole lotta singer-songwriters don't have the best
voices or the best stage presence or the best (heaven forbid) dance moves.
Makes for a different kind of art altogether. Neither being more valid than
the other. Depending on one's biases, of course.
Two cents offered. Accepting change in return.
Christopher
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.