WARNING: Explicit Language
Disney's Divinity wrote:I do have a problem with someone who doesn’t watch it speaking as if they have, or making blanket statements about everything they’ve done when they don’t have any idea what they’re talking about.
I think you're overestimating experience and underestimating instinct. Considering how overexposure to certain influences doesn't necessarily bring about any great wisdom one way or the other, you expect me to actually subject myself to something I equate with torture just so I can meet your "I've seen it and I like it" with "I've seen as much as you have... and I don't"? If that's how I become credible in your eyes- it's not worth it, Div. But even though I haven't seen as much of the show as you have, I've both seen and
heard plenty. Now, seeing as how the issue here is the music (as I plainly stated, and highlighted, in the previous reply), I have just enough experience to know whereof I speak. Plus, I have the opinion of highly trustworthy friends who've also sat through enough of it for me to take their word for it. And then there are folks like junkie- it actually helps when this is about the only thing we can agree on, these days.
So, cut the "you don't have any idea what you're talking about" shit. I'm going to have my say. You're not going to stop me. Just a reminder. Oh yeah, I heard you say
Disney's Divinity wrote:I have no problem with people disliking the show or the music, just like I have no problem disliking shows or music that I do. Plenty of people do.
I just don't buy it.
Not now.
Disney's Divinity wrote:Besides, the music has probably received less criticism than it has because…it’s a TV show! Did you expect Bon Jovi from a TV show? Really? Nobody else has been treating them like serious artists, because they‘re not. Likewise, that whole bit about "silencing" alternate opinions goes both ways.
Oh by all means, have your say. But don't expect me to sign to an "agree to disagree" truce on the show, while allowing you to cut me off when trying to make the point that Glee is getting the red carpet treatment like it's sacred. It is, in fact, LAME. It's the frickin' teen version of Kidz Bop!
And if I really cared about silencing Glee fans... why am I here and not over trolling on the official Glee discussion thread?
I'll say again: Glee's getting off way too easy. But not in this thread. I've just up and decided I'm not going to let it. That decision has partly been fueled by you.
Disney's Divinity wrote:I just have a hard time believing the argument that the music is “so bad” when they mostly use songs that have been huge hits over the decades and often perform some of them a helluva lot better than the originals. Lea Michele > most everybody who’s singing right now.
I think you just let the answer to your own question blow right by you... Back the car up.
If this girl you singled out is so talented, let her get her own contract, record deal, whatever. If her recognition is so important, she needs to realize how most of the big names in the history of music got far enough to her to be covering their songs in the first place. And so, I'm now convinced, do you!!
I said it in another thread and I guess I have to say it again (though it sure as hell should have resonated the first time) - IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE ORIGINAL ARTISTS WHO CREATED THE SONG TO GIVE YOUNG PERFORMERS TODAY A CAREER. And just because some record company exec dickhead can sell these Glee scumbags the rights to cover the original material, doesn't mean these imitators can just slip into a famous song like it's a glove and any hand that fits can wear it. Though the mindless praise they get from people like you will allow them to think otherwise. That's not right. And it's high time someone said so!
The creators of these songs actually worked for their careers and earned them, instead of being given an instant stage and immediate commercial outlet to imitate themselves the same legacy the original song already has in the name of something so oversold, overproduced, over-advertised, and overrated that the performer in question has nothing if you unplug her from the outlet.
I'm sorry... you're telling me, seriously (I assume without a big lip-biting, choking-to-hold-back-the-laughter, expression on your face; you're being serious?), that if these posers can match, or outdo, what you feel is the heart and soul of the original song, that erases history and can / should undermine the whole process by which the original work was created? Well, I'll give you the chance to say that's what you were suggesting but if it was, that's just the cheap kind of thing I would expect from someone who could defend what the show is doing.
I'm not trying to go Goliath on this (especially since for me this issue is WAY bigger than Glee- Glee is just one product sold by our Remake Culture), but, integrity does mean something. To the fans if not the industry. And I'm a fan too. What this show is doing is downright artistic RAPE. They fuck the song, strip it of its' own identity, and as long as they convince enough people that the public asked for it, they bask in the glory of getting away with their crime.
I know that one from doing a Dutch class when I was doing an Erasmus semester in France a few years ago (I also did a Dutch class in the UK as well before that). As a Christmas/St Nicholas Day themed lesson, the teacher put on a song about Sinter Klaas, which she claimed was by a really popular Dutch band and was a huge hit back in the 80s or 90s.
You can all mock me now.
