Have you ever noticed how artists are sometimes judged on their looks more than their music? I think that....?

Question

....thats wrong and a lot of talent gets left out that way. I don't think people like Paris Hilton, Jesse McCartney, and Jasmine Trias would have gotten as far as they did if it weren't for their looks. What do you think?

Answer 1

Of course. Sex sells. I don't like to call them artists, though. They're more like pretty karaoke singers. Ha, ha, ha....

Answer 2

Totally agree. But remember most people don't care about music, they care about pop-culture. Those people you mentioned really have very little to basically no talent, but that isn't the point. They are "attractive" and they have fun lives for people with no lives to become interested in, so that they have something to be interested in. As for the talent being pushed out of the way. A truly talented person breaks through both barriers, and becomes more successful than just the recent pop star or just someone who has some musical ability. You know who those people are, because their music out lasts the band and sometimes even the lives of the band members. The people of pop culture will make their few million and their 15 minutes of fame. The talented musician will at times break through some of the barriers and make a few million and their 15 minutes of fame. But the musician who is truly talented will break all of the molds, making more money than all of the others combined, and will have a fame out last most people's lives.

Answer 3

Yeah derek..its quite an obvious trait among artists..but i guess tht it is the same about how we perceive people generally. Cute, adorable, pretty n beautiful people gets the most attention. Im not saying its right but its very much how the world works. The lesser charming people just hv to work harder to get noticed...and they do sooner or later. But if u noticed these 'beautiful' people seldom stay long in the music industry if they dont hv a good voice to back thm up..but average looking excellent singers who work their butts off stays round much longer.

Answer 4

The advent of MTV started the whole "visual" thing. Before there were music videos, artists were judged entirely on their art. It was possible to listen to several albums before ever seeing a photograph of the artist included in an album jacket! It's nice that music videos can give one a taste of live performance, but it's sad that so many talentless idiots have sold millions of CDs because they look good on screen.

Answer 5

Yeah, I think it's because the new artists are so famous you see them everywhere. They're always at public events like movie premieres and award ceremonies. They're also always on TV, magazines, and the Internet. I guess if people are going to look at strangers all the time, they might as well be pretty.

Answer 6

Yah thats true because a lot of artists like lindsay lohan and Ashlee simpson cant sing to save their lives

Answer 7

I agree. Remember Milli Vanilli? They were the ultimate example of this...a couple of pretty boys who couldn't carry a tune lip-synching to good singers who apparently weren't good-looking enough to suit the record company executives. It's sad, in my opinion.

Answer 8

ur kidding right?!??! they suck, i dont judge, im open to most music, its just the whole pop culture scene. just look what they did to Panic! at the Disco and AFI, everyone knows miss murder or i write sins not tragedies, but they never listen to the whole album, if u go up to one of those ppl that say they like that kind of music, ask them what album the song came from, they dont kno, because most (not all) mainstream pop culture crap gets overrated ad starts to suck after that happens X(

Answer 9

Skrillex (he interior reason mainstream, so lookup for dubstep artists) Dubstep is song that no person is used to and no person has heard till now, this is how Skrillex have been given mainstream

Answer 10

i agree

listen to some Neil Young without looking at his face and you'll love him