Quote:
Originally posted by Curve Dominant
This is, after all, SHOW business. The artist doesn't have perfect pitch. So what? The show must go on. The audience in attendence CHOSE to shell out the $$$ and the time to see their favorite artist perform. We are at the service of both that artist and his/her audience to present the best possible show.
We are in the business of illusion. When you go to the movies to see your favorite pretty faces, do you really think they are that pretty in "real life"?? Do you care? It's a movie, after all. |
I see your point, Curve. The deeper question is why does a singer (who can't sing) have any fans, to begin with?
Shouldn't the most basic requirement for a singer, be (by the very definition)
someone who is able to sing? Seems logical, to me...
These comments bring to mind a question I've considered, about entertainers of today vs. the past:
Does anyone remember when an 'entertainer' could probably sing, dance, tap, play 3 or 4 instruments, act, do comedy, juggle, etc...?
The major studios had 'star school' and even if you were 'just' an actor, you still had dance class, vocal lessons, etc.
Bob, didn't Motown have a 'finishing school' for all their artists?
What IS considered to be talent, these days?
SHORT ANSWER: Marketability, of course!
On with the downward spiral...
We don't need no stinkin talent... We got Pro Tools!
A wise man once said: "You can't make chicken-salad out of chicken shit. No matter how good it smells..."
Perhaps this in no longer true. I turn on the radio and there is chicken(shit)salad, everywhere... Nothing but. I cook it up (myself) most days. But is that a good thing?
Talent has not ceased to exist... Why is it so rare? Should we even care?