Dissent is not allowed
- Thread starter MisterMark
- Start date
madame_zora
Sexy Member
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: [/b][/quote]
:lol: I couldn't be left out on this one!
I'm not into Linda Ronstadt's music too much anymore, but I would assume anyone going to her shows knows she's a hippy chic from the 70's, so no big surprise there, eh? Is her music art? I'll let someone smarter than me decide, it's just not my taste. Much of music IS art, and much is literature. Then there's this corporate-mainstream-bullshit being passed off as music ala Brittney Spears, 98 Degrees, etc., where they don't write, play instruments, provoke thought other than fucking, blah- it's an offense to everything I hold dear. At least Ronstadt is a real musician!
She has ALWAYS made political, social or relevant statements as part of her show. She has been a civil rights activist forever. So, why the big surprise? Lotta' crap from a bankrupt casino. She has been dedicating "Desperado" to Michael Moore in every concert, in every city. Suddenly an outcry? Something stinks. And, she doesn't "lip sync".
Except the comments were made on stage in London, where we are less than popular lately. Probably not all that many registered Republicans in the audience.
[/b][/quote]Hmm, didn't know it was in London. But I think it still holds true for country music fans as a group.
[A note on the Dixie Chicks, I hated them before they became outspoken. There are many more country artists who are better in many ways, not to mention far more attractive.]
CNN is just as biased as Fox News, and I have no problem with that. News networks are businesses and have a target audience. They are both doing well, so why should either of them change now. People aren't going to stop watching them.
And, who is going to say "I hope we lose!" during a war?
There are many more country artists who are better in many ways, not to mention far more attractive.]CNN is just as biased as Fox News, and I have no problem with that. News networks are businesses and have a target audience. They are both doing well, so why should either of them change now. People aren't going to stop watching them.
And, who is going to say "I hope we lose!" during a war?
- jonb,
Actually, CNN has a greater range of viewpoints; most of their guests are actually in the middle of the political spectrum. The important thing to remember is that not all degrees of bias are equal.
Here's something interesting from Fox News I'd call it a wardrobe malfunction, but she doesn't have any wardrobe.
Here's something interesting from Fox News I'd call it a wardrobe malfunction, but she doesn't have any wardrobe.
Ever since Linda Ronstadt praised Castro a few ago as one of the greatest things that ever happened to Cuba (and other inane statements like that) she permanently lost me. It hardly surprises me that someone who thinks highly of a repressive dictator like Fidel would also like a propagandist like Moore.
I agree with those folks who believe it is totally inappropriate for a performer, during a musical performance, to inflict their personal politics on their audience unless it's within the context of their art. The audience is paying for the musician's time and has ever right to protest when abused in this way. :angry:
I agree with those folks who believe it is totally inappropriate for a performer, during a musical performance, to inflict their personal politics on their audience unless it's within the context of their art. The audience is paying for the musician's time and has ever right to protest when abused in this way. :angry:
Terrible argument. The idea that just because you're paying for someone's time, you have the right to dictate how that person spends the paid-for time is weak.
Speeders don't get to tell police officers to "just leave me alone -- I'm paying for your time!"
My students don't get to tell me, "no word problems on this test -- I'm paying for your time!"
And I certainly wouldn't get to drop some money in the collection basket at your church and tell the pastor "hey, put in a good word for gay marriage -- I'm paying for your time!"
Attending a concert doesn't equate to hiring the performer. Certainly, audience members have the right to protest when "abused", but any audience member who felt abused because Ronstadt performed in a manner consistent with all of her previous performances is either being ignorant or silly.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Very valid points, Mindseye. We get to vote with our money for performers, not control their performance. Last year I stopped going to shows of one of my favorite bands of all time because the singer had taken to heckling the audience in a very unkind manner, so I decided I didn't want to pay him anymore. I don't have to agree with a person's statements to appreciate their right to make them, I do think that's immature. If someone had never heard of Linda Ronstadt before and was seeing her for the first time, they had a right to be surprised, even unpleasantly, but as this was nothing new for her I can't imagine what all the fuss was about.
Nope, Mindseye, I stick by what I said because it's valid.
Of course, one form of feedback to a performer is to get up and leave as Madame points out. And not come back again.
Your examples are poor. We pay the police (through taxes) to enforce the law which means exercising discretion to enforce it by possibly giving lawbreakers a ticket or arresting them if necessary. Nobody who receives a ticket appreciates it as a recipient but collectively we WANT the police to handle lawbreakers effectively. And people DO protest tickets and, as everyone knows, some people DO talk their way out of tickets at least some of the time.
The students (or their parents) pay for the education the kids get and DO have input in the larger sense through school boards and PTAs. Of course if its public schools, we're not allowed to stop paying into that system through our taxes but, for those that can afford it, many do pull their kids out because of the questionable job so many schools do. And vote down school budgets (because they ARE paying for it).
Depending on the religion, your cleric just might be interested in knowing what his flock thinks. You needn't reminder him that your donations help pay his salary. Use some discretion.
Of course, one form of feedback to a performer is to get up and leave as Madame points out. And not come back again.
Your examples are poor. We pay the police (through taxes) to enforce the law which means exercising discretion to enforce it by possibly giving lawbreakers a ticket or arresting them if necessary. Nobody who receives a ticket appreciates it as a recipient but collectively we WANT the police to handle lawbreakers effectively. And people DO protest tickets and, as everyone knows, some people DO talk their way out of tickets at least some of the time.
The students (or their parents) pay for the education the kids get and DO have input in the larger sense through school boards and PTAs. Of course if its public schools, we're not allowed to stop paying into that system through our taxes but, for those that can afford it, many do pull their kids out because of the questionable job so many schools do. And vote down school budgets (because they ARE paying for it).
Depending on the religion, your cleric just might be interested in knowing what his flock thinks. You needn't reminder him that your donations help pay his salary. Use some discretion.
How about Madonna's performance in Rome during her Bland Ambition tour? After performing Like a Prayer dressed as a nun getting fucked by a priest while bent over a Church kneeler, with a segue into Papa Don't Preach, the Roman audience booed her and over half the audience left the concert while it was still going on. Later in an interview, Madonna claimed that she had no idea why the audience found that vignette offensive. Really, Moo? You were performing in possibly the most Catholic city in the world, you're Catholic yourself, and you have no idea why they were offended? Forgot to mention: onstage during the scene was a huge Papal cross lit up in neon. A Papal cross, just a few miles from the Vatican, over a scene of a priest and nun fucking doggy position. Am I the only non-Roman who understands why the audience disapproved? Anyway, she was forced to cancel her other concert date in Rome, and that particular set in the concert was toned down for the rest of the tour. The version seen on the HBO concert special was the cleaned-up rendition. I didn't exactly care for Moodonna before that scene. That did nothing to change those feelings. Remember, I am Catholic. Her quote in an interview about why she wore crucifixes I found to be particularly tacky: "A naked man on a cross is sexy. If I weren't a singer, I'd be a nun." Singer? She's a singer? Oh, I'm getting a bit off-topic, aren't I?
Though I don't care for Linda Ronstadt's comments concerning Cuba (my family left for a reason ... duh!
, I do like her music as a retro thing ... especially the Stone Ponies days. She is entitled to her opinions, and she has every right to voice them, just like Moodonna has every right to be a tasteless, on-stage slut, but she can't expect everyone to approve of her decision to do so.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
You are so right, DMW! I doubt Moodonna expects or wants to be accepted, she is one big publicity stunt incarnate. I appreciate her as a business even though her "music" is not my taste. I've liked a few random songs here and there, but she doesn't write most of them anyway. Kinda like Marylin Manson, I appreciate his ability to incite controversy more than his music, although I do like a lot of it. As for Ronstadt, I don't think her comments were in any way as provocative as Madonna's performance, just personal opinions. I hate the thought that simple free speech is frowned upon, even when it is not agreed with. I said earlier that KISS made some pro-Bush comments, and although I don't like Bush, I did appreciate the fact that they used their position of popularity to voice their views on something more topical than "I wanna rock and roll all night"- how did I ever get rooked into going to that show? Anyway, maybe someone will be encouraged enough to vote who might not have before the show, that's all I can hope for. I certainly wasn't angry at them for saying something I didn't agree with, I am glad we live in a free society where people are able to express their views. I seriously hope we are not so weak minded as to deeply care what performers think about politics! I like to hear everyone's views, but ultimately it's me in the booth on election day.
Exactly. She isn't a gifted singer. She isn't a talented actress. She isn't an exceptional beauty. She's not a very good author of children's stories. To be honest, she is a pretty good dancer. But what she really does for a living is package herself and sell controversy. Her business is not in the arts she appears to be involved in; her business is being Moodonna, and I have to admit she does that quite well. She does have a talent: she knows what sells.
madame_zora
Sexy Member
Truer words have never been spoken! Having been in sales of various forms for many years, I can't help but respect her from that standpoint. She isn't a musician or writer, or as you said even a true beauty, but she does have a way of making people care about what she says and does. This talent alone is noteworthy, as for her "albums", I'll save my $17.99 for porn!
- jonb,
There are a lot of those acts where I wonder What were they thinking? I've learned that saying anything about a particular religion will ruin one's reputation with the followers of that religion. (Sinead O'Connor, anyone?) That being said, celebrities should speak up politically; if we don't allow artists to express their opinions, what's the point?
As for Cuba, just remember that the US wouldn't care if not for how friendly Batista (who made Castro look like a juvenile delinquent) was to the US.
As for Cuba, just remember that the US wouldn't care if not for how friendly Batista (who made Castro look like a juvenile delinquent) was to the US.
Exactly, Madame. Although I probably would've said it with a lot of sarcasm.
And for all the rest: To presume that it's a "publicity stunt" is simply an attempt -- an arrogant one at that -- to discount the content of the message, and debase the point of view. Fucking duh, a 3-year-old can see through that game.
Entertainers have *always* been vocal about their views. You give them that right when you make them celebrities. If you expect never to hear an entertainer make a political/cultural/social comment, then use ear plugs. It's called freedom of speech, and yeah, it's unfortunate at times that it goes both ways. Cope.
And I'll most certainly wager it's not the Alladin's dumbass general manager's job description to limit free speech, ragardless of his puffed-up heavings about upsetting customers. I can only hopoe they get nailed with breach-of-contract. Either way, they'll have to pay out the contract. Good.
The point Mark made is still valid: Good ol' boy, conservative attitudes covered in Neanderthal sludge proliferate, while beliefs to the contrary are considered terroristic threats.
Real American, hunh? My 2 cents. Don't like it? Tough.
[/b][/quote]
I, for one, never said that she didn't have the right to free speech. But the audience has the right not to like it, and the casino owner has the right to be upset that some of his customers got upset.
My assertion that it was a publicity stunt wasn't meant to discount the "content of the message" at all. She said ahead of time that she would do something to piss off the casino owner. She did. She knew some people would like it and some people wouldn't. It will probably cost her a few gigs down the road. It will also probably score her a few gigs. My biggest annoyance was not with the act or the outrage, but that the media obliged her by giving her attention. Must be a slow news day when a washed-up singer in a Vegas show makes headlines.
I really don't buy this. It'd be hard to make the case that back in June, in Newark, she started praising Michael Moore at her shows as part of a well-thought-out scheme to piss off the folks at the Aladdin.
I saw the quote that you're referring to, and assuming the quote is genuine, I believe she had something else in mind.
