Home Forums |
TOPIC: James Blunt wins Mercury
|
|
Re:James Blunt wins Mercury 11 Years, 7 Months ago
|
|
The flaw for me is in the basic concept. Albums were started by the music INDUSTRY - and I emphasise the word - to profit from the sales and publicity around a single. Usually the collection consisted of one hit and 11 pieces of shit.
Leaving aside the obvious (classical concertos, concept albums, hit collections) they have remained so; allowing the artistes to put out second rate tracks instead of having to improve them.
Surely PSY, with his clever (if derivative and, for me, ghastly Gangnam Style), was a far more worthy ARTISTE than James Blake? Like it or not, it captivated millions instead of hundreds.
The entire silly concept than one is "better" than the other is time wasting bollocks, of course. PSY is better at what he does; Blake is better at what he does.
I think I'm better (at what I do) than many more highly respected artistes. The Ooga Chagga in Hooked On A Feeling, the words of When Caravaggio met MichelAngelo, the sound of Satisfaction - genius in their field (not Rachmaninoff though).
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|