Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Chaste Celebrities

Posted by on Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 10:30 AM

To have no talent is not enough. You gotta have a gimmick.

 

Comments (29) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Now Dan, not all virgins are no-talent pop group members, but they will probably have enlarged prostates later in life.
Posted by Rob on December 31, 2008 at 10:43 AM
2
Wow, I just read up on those Jonas brothers mentioned in the article...Absolutely terrifying. I'd prefer my kids be exposed to 'sexed-up' celebrities than be force-fed that Disney Channel crap.
Posted by Stoppin ze throwinze on December 31, 2008 at 10:50 AM
3
Ah, they're not that bad. Catchy pop music for kids, what's wrong with that? Sure, they're morons, but so are most pop stars. Twenty years from now their old records will be more fun to listen to than any contemporary rock'n'roll drudgery.

I'm a little sceptical of this Jonas Bros. = Spice Girls = Beatlemania, though. Beatlemania was started with plain old hype too, but the fervor was genuine, and huge. These latter-day pretenders are more along the lines of the "phenomenon" of, say, Gerry and the Pacemakers.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 10:58 AM
4
"Bump it with a Trumpet"
I haven't watched that in years it is funny.
Posted by -B- on December 31, 2008 at 11:01 AM
5
"Twenty years from now their old records will be more fun to listen to than any contemporary rock'n'roll drudgery. "

What? No they won't! Do you even like music? Take that back!
Posted by Stoppin ze throwinze on December 31, 2008 at 11:03 AM
6
Fnarf - I don't have a problem with the Jonas Brothers per se. All in good fun and what not. But the whole "we're all virgins and wear promise rings to show that we won't have sex until marriage" gimmick is pretty ridiculous. Especially since the oldest one is 21. It just feeds into the whole abstinence only b.s....

It's very reminiscent of Britney Spears's "I'm a virgin" thing, which, of course, turned out to be ridiculously untrue.
Posted by Julie in Chicago on December 31, 2008 at 11:22 AM
7
Yes, of course -- they're morons, and lying morons to boot. That's never ruined a good pop record before. What, you think Kylie Minogue is some kind of genius?
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 11:28 AM
8
You heard it here first--ballet lessons lead to stripping. Hide your daughters!
Posted by Autumn on December 31, 2008 at 11:30 AM
9
Why are they screaming?
Posted by commentz on December 31, 2008 at 11:50 AM
10
It's not only a gimmick, but it's a completely cynical one (not surprising) at that.

It's all about creating a sense of false approachability; and rather than de-sexualizing this presumably non-threatening aspect of their public personnas, it actually has the opposite effect in that it makes them even more sexually desirable, since, as essentially blank slates with no prior sexual conduct, any young female has the ability to fantasize about being their "first time".

It's the pre-pubescent female analogue to collecting Star Wars Action Figures - their intrinsic value relies solely on the fact that the packaging has never been opened.
Posted by COMTE on December 31, 2008 at 12:05 PM
11
But Comte, it's always been that way. Frank Sinatra provided emotional practice, if you will, for young girls to fantasize about. Why are the cultural training moves of prepuscent boys cool forever -- how many middle-aged dudes do you know who still enthuse over their Star Wars Action Figures or X-Men comics-- but for girls it's dumb? You hear this all the time. Pop music that appeals to girls is contemptible pablum, while plodding shithead rock that appeals to boys is an art form.

In my own experience I remember sitting in the back of the ski bus with the boys and our boom box, grooving to Robin Trower, while those idiot girls were up front rocking to "Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting" by Elton John. God, they were so stupid! And yet, today that Elton song sounds pretty good, while four seconds of Robin Trower would make a normal person want to die.

Just a brief few words in support of the Miley fans out there. Young girls always have the best taste. And don't worry, you'll have the last laugh -- and most of the ones in between.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 12:54 PM
12
Typical conversation at the Fluff, oops I mean the Cuff.
Posted by Sargon Bighorn on December 31, 2008 at 1:08 PM
13
"Young girls always have the best taste. And don't worry, you'll have the last laugh -- and most of the ones in between."

You hate music don't you? 8-16 year old girls are the death of the music industry. I hate what you write. You're not smart.
Posted by Stoppin ze throwinze on December 31, 2008 at 2:07 PM
14
a) There wouldn't BE a music industry without the tastes of young girls. Ever heard of The Beatles? Do you know WHY you've heard of The Beatles?

b) Why is the death of the music industry necessarily a bad thing? People who refer to the music "industry", like people who refer to "guitar work", should for the most part be killed.

c) You're uneducated. You don't even know the subject about which you profess to care so much.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 2:18 PM
15
@Fnarf: I totally agree with your argument (hell, I've written papers on it), but I think you're being too broad. The best of what girls 8-16 listen to is great, but not everything is great, just as not everything boys 8-16 listen to is terrible, although a lot is. Comparing Robin Trower to one of Elton John's best songs is more comparing a mealy Red Delicious apple to a fresh, in season Cara Cara orange. The problem comes in when people assume that, to continue the analogy, all apples are necessarily superior to all oranges, even when it's a crap apple against an excellent orange. And, of course, whether you like an excellent apple or an excellent orange more, that's your own preference and picking one over the other shouldn't be a problem, but it is.

But Miley is no Kylie. (Although Kylie wasn't much at her age, either, so there's a chance?)
Posted by Abby on December 31, 2008 at 2:45 PM
16
Yes, Abby, most of it is crap. Most of everything is crap. But it's interesting that a higher percentage of throwaway fluff turns out to be great fun than the angsty heavy stuff. Pop ephemerality has a much greater chance of lasting if it is fluffy; lightness lasts much longer than heaviness, as a rule.

As for Miley vs. Kylie, Mylie's 15. Give her time -- she might turn out to be a very entertaining fluff merchant. Kylie's 80 years old; she's had time to grow into her current "iconic" status (at one time most of the people who celebrate her now were accusing her of crimes against all that is holy, just like righteous twits do Miley now). Maybe Miley won't; PROBABLY Miley won't; but she's got a much better chance than, oh, I dunno, who's a comparable hard rock idol? I'm a little out of touch -- Linkin Park?

Similarly, the only hip hop artists who will still hold people's attention in twenty years will be the ones who make people laugh. Hip hop is kind of the hair metal of the modern era. Again that lightness -- I can't believe those sunglasses, look, he's got Robitussin and Kristal! -- will prevail.

One thing's for sure -- guitar players NEVER prevail. The list of rock (lead) guitarists whose recordings remain interesting twenty or thirty years after they were made is virtually nil -- Richard Thompson? Maybe, in tiny doses. Grunge, and all 80s-90s "alternative" is completely unlistenable now. In pop, ephemeral is eternal.

Comparing Robin Trower to Elton is EXACTLY what we did back then -- and the absolute consensus (in the back of the ski bus) was that this shit is HEAVY, it SPEAKS TO THE ETERNAL. It's even heavier than fuckin' Uriah Heep or Grand Funk, dude! The girls on the other hand were all "fuck the eternal, let's dance! Oh, wait, you're boys, therefore shitheads who can't, won't dance.

The ones who dance, the ones who float, always, always have more fun. And create better art. The Association were 1,000% better than The Doors.

It's true, the Jonas Brothers aren't likely to be remembered in the way that The Association is, but it's not as clearcut as the (dare I say) "rockist", male, studiously HARD popular consensus has it. Sure, they're more likely to turn out to be Gary Lewis & The Playboys, but you never know. But I'll bet if you hear one of their songs on the radio (if such exists) in 2030, you'll find yourself thinking "who is this, it's catchy". Maybe not.
More...
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 3:13 PM
17
BTW, "I hate what you write" is the loveliest, most heartfelt critique I've ever received. Beautiful stuff, and obviously true. But, you know, bullshit is as finely tuned an artform as any other.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 3:20 PM
18
I agree with you, Fnarf. I don't think the Jonas Brothers are interesting enough to be remembered fondly, or even listened to the way I listened to Duran Duran in high school (through the year 2000 I wanted to be Nick Rhodes), but they are likely to be more enjoyable than Nickleback or the equivalent. And likely more enjoyable than what are becoming the karaoke favorites of people my age- I'm a little dismayed at the amount of times I've heard Third Eye Blind in that setting.

The problem with guitarists is that they too often think that being adept at playing means that they don't have to write interesting songs. There are guitar-based bands that I like very much, but I can't think of a band I enjoy that the point is the guitar.

But in no way is all of 80s-90s "alternative" unlistenable. That's just being provocative for the point of it. Are The Replacements unlistenable? The Wedding Present? Bastards of Young and Careless Memories are both songs as good as the other, and not recognizing the great pop songs in places you aren't expecting it is being as obtuse as you were in grade school, just differently.
Posted by Abby on December 31, 2008 at 3:30 PM
19
Am I the only one a little shocked that the national post just literally called Paris Hilton a whore?
Posted by Sinclair on December 31, 2008 at 3:39 PM
20
The Wedding Present (whom I've seen five or six times) were only briefly "alternative"; before that they were fucking indiepop, dammit -- the alternative to alternative. They certainly never had a chart hit in the US. They (when they are good, which is not always) were a pop band, with pop tunes, and no idiotic soloing or grungeisms. They strummed too fast for that! Guitar doesn't mean lead guitar; almost all of the best groups of the past fifty-odd years have been guitar groups -- RHYTHM guitar. The Ramones were a pop group -- if you listen to the songs, they're the Beach Boys underneath.

Games like Rock Star and Guitar Hero are destroying the world, because their playlists have no good songs on them -- it's all wanky dreck (unless it's funny).

But yes, the pop song is the point, and in mainstream culture (and there has never been anything more mainstream ever than "alternative") pop songs only come into play from the cheesy manufactured end of the spectrum, from, say, Timbaland to points left. In the culture of wilful obscurity, pop songs are pouring out at an absolutely unprecedented rate -- more good songs (not better, necessarily, but good, and more) than in the mid-sixties, even. Heard Bricolage? They sound EXACTLY like Orange Juice, which would be terrible if it was anyone but Orange Juice.

Sadly, no one on Slog has any understanding of camp. The punkest moment of all time was Edwyn Collins of Orange Juice standing up against a hail of beer and spit and shouts of "poof, poof" from the Sham 69 brickheads in 1980, trying to croon "I'll never be man enough for you".

I think that's what it boils down to. Camp versus machismo. Machismo loses every single time.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 4:06 PM
21
Sinclair @19: the national press HATES Paris Hilton, always has. That makes her interesting, in a Jackie Collins sort of way. I think she'll end up being one of the great talk show guests of all time in 30 or 40 years.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 4:09 PM
22
Ah, so that's the thing, Fnarf. We have completely different concepts of the word "alternative" as it refers to music- either simply for generational reasons or the difference between being there and just reading about it. When I think "alternative" I think of an extremely broad swath of music from punk onward, rather than the 90s grunge use of the word. To me, it's about as meaningless/ful (and nearly interchangeable with) the word 'indie'. So the indie-pop of the Wedding Present, and Orange Juice for that matter, falls under the umbrella category of alternative, as does what you're talking about as being crap."Alternative" lost all meaning as a specific genre by the time I was old enough to think too much about music.

So essentially, we're saying the same thing, but words are preventing us from realizing it. (And the Wii version of Rock Band has Roam by the B-52s on it, so that's at least one good song.)
Posted by Abby on December 31, 2008 at 5:11 PM
23
You can keep the Jonas Brothers and every other band mentioned in these comments. Give me GYPSY! That's the only one I'll be wanting to listen to 20 years from now. Thanks for this, Dan Savage. I think I'll dig out the DVD of this and watch this again. Or maybe the Bette Midler version. GYPSY is one of the greatest musicals ever written.
Posted by abel on December 31, 2008 at 5:26 PM
24
"Indie" means nothing to me. "Indie rock" is usually bad, or just kind of flaccid, "Indiepop" is almost always good, even when it's completely ridiculous. That's where I'm coming from. The Weddoes are indiepop because I say so, that's all, and by virtue of coming to the world's attention with the janglepop side of "C-86", which is holy writ in my house (well, not as much as The Shop Assistants or Jesse Garon and the Desperadoes, maybe, but definitely canon).

It all makes sense when you start from there.

I also, as you may have noticed, greatly enjoy fwapping rock'n'rollers around the neck and ears, just for the fun of it, beyond the strength of the arguments themselves.
Posted by Fnarf on December 31, 2008 at 5:30 PM
25
Ahhh, I see. The failure of language, when discussing music- everything is both too specific, and too vague. I'm not sure what "indie rock" is either, except that I like some of it and don't like others, but it's entirely possible that the ones I like are actually something else.

Well, it is fun, I'd agree.
Posted by Abby on December 31, 2008 at 5:40 PM
26
The video, I did not turn the sound on. Those drag queens are kinda cute.
Posted by beelzebufo on December 31, 2008 at 10:55 PM
27
Sorry Fnarf, but you are from a completely different musical planet than me. I understand your point about wanky dreck. A lot of 'heavy' music is just that, but some of it, like many genres, is quite good.

Just who are The Association? Mock me if you must, but I will stick to my Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Dave Matthews Band and yes, The Doors. Happy New Year.
Posted by Sleepless in Toronto on January 1, 2009 at 12:07 AM
28
"Hip hop is kind of the hair metal of the modern era."

This is exactly the quote I needed to usher in 2009. Thanks. Happy new year everyone. I'm going to pass out drunk now and dream of a better world.
Posted by threnody on January 1, 2009 at 2:03 AM
29
The Association had numerous soft-pop hits in the late sixties, including "Windy" (who's trippin' down the streets of the city, everyone knows it's Windy" -- some of the best vocal harmony ever recorded, better even than the ones on "God Only Knows" by the Beach Boys), "Cherish", and "Never My Love" (all Number Ones).

The Sunshine Pop genre during this time was producing so much great stuff -- The Association, The Millennium, Sunshine Company, Yellow Balloon, Roger Nichols and His Small Circle of Friends, The Free Design, The Left Banke, The Cyrkle, Peppermint Rainbow, the list goes on and on. Not to mention the total obscurities that are being released nowadays like the amazing Richard and Thomas Frost record or Margo Guryan. Pretty much every group I've mentioned here blows away the typical rock'n'roll canon promulgated by Rolling Stone Magazine, all those dire Jefferson Airplanes and Zeppelins and boogie whatevers.

My point is, of course, that yes I do come from a different musical planet than you, and not that I am right and you are wrong, but that I know about life on your planet but no one on your planet knows about life on mine. And the music on mine provides a framework for understanding a much broader range of pop music, including pop trash from every decade. Some of my favorite music is trash. I'll take the Cowsills or the 1910 Fruitgum Co. or Britney over all the Dave Matthewses of the world put together.
Posted by Fnarf on January 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy