smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Jaimie Vernon" <bullseyecanada@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: INXS thread, my two cents (Canadian) |
| Date | Sun, 04 Dec 2005 17:19:08 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
At Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:41:36 Paul wrote:
> First off, let me mildly chide Jamie Vernon. While I champion your
>eloquent defense of the band for soldiering (soldering?) on, I hasten to
>point out a seeming contradiction in your dismissal of the reality show.
>First you state, "Having not seen the TV show I wasn't sure what his
>qualifications were for getting the gig..." but later you seem to have seen
>it in full. How else could you pronounce that, and I quote, "the TV show
>was a gratuitous self-promotional indulgence.." and that " the band
>crossed the line into whoredom with the reality show idea..." which,
>presumaby, "cheapens the product."
>With all due respect, and I say that sincerely, perhaps calling the final
>output "product" is already an admission of its cheapened status.
I did not see the show. Ever. My comments are based on the fact that reality
shows are anything but. I don't need to see INXS or these singers on the
show to comment on how they've sold themselves as whores....musically and
professionally as entertainers. Isn't the premise of Rockstar, aside from
its supposed search for the band's lead singer just an episodic infomercial
for the band? I don't need to know what the content is to get a poor
impression of a band I once respected as good songsmiths. The reality show
premise focuses on everything but what this should be about -- the music.
The name of the show kinda sums it up: "Rock Star". Not "Song Star" or
"Music Star".
Jaimie Vernon
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.