Her dress didn't bother me because hermusic and vocals are so unique and amazing. Yeah she had a bunch of hot Icelandic girls with her but its still all about the music.I love Bjork, her music is unique and utterly fascinating, and she was always quite theatrical, which is fine if you also have the talent to back it up, which she does, but when it gets to this stage then for me it's actually a major distraction, and she looks like she probably needs to quit the music business and join a circus. I know she currently tours with a troop of scantily clad sexy girl blonde/brunette backing singers, so ironically it won't matter what she wears as nobody is going to be looking at her.
Does what a band wears/looks like matter?
- Thread starter Tarn
- Start date
Slip'nn2Darkness
Sub Sonic Soul Shaker
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Posts
- 7,627
- Reaction score
- 28
Bjork last night - is this good dress or bad?
I think that's cool as hell. Thats what your paying for sometimes.. A little stage show and Bjork style is something you would expect to see some outrageous costumes..
Don't let the Hollywood critiques near her though.. Especially Joan Rivers..
Vehicle
Aging Metalhead
It probably shouldn't, but in the early years of MTV, 'visual art' aspect of music was just as important as the music. It was a brand new medium.
Not music video, mind you, because that had been going for decades.
But the idea of creating music with videos specifically in mind made a person's visual aesthetics a priority. It also made it possible for people with not so much talent to be popular and sell records.
A perfect example: Big Hair Bands. I've nothing against this genre, but let's face it. Cinderella, Ratt, Crue, Warrant, Poison, Night Ranger, Quiet Riot, Dokken, White Lion, Winger, Stryper, etc, etc, etc., all played simple music, just enough to get by as a band.
Oh, there were a few gunslingers to come along, but by and large, musically, hair bands contributed nothing to the progress, the evolution of music. They contributed a look and that's about it. I'm not dumping on them. They capitalized on a trend and got rich from it. And they put out some pretty decent songs, but the songwriting, for the most part, was 'let's get a six pack and party'. They didn't really do much exploring.
Of course, the grandaddy of them all was KISS, who took all the little pieces of Alice Cooper, The Dolls, Stones, Bowie, etc, etc, and multiplied it by 10.
There's no doubt KISS was born with the intention of being seen, and then heard. I doubt many people back then said "Hey, you have to come hear this band, KISS."
The difference is, KISS did this with the hoping that 150 people would come see them on Saturday night, and then pass the word on.
Hair bands of the 80s did their thing knowing millions of kids would see them on Saturday night, from 12am to 2am on Headbangers Ball.
During that same time period, though, there was 80s techno pop. That was an evolution, the offspring of bands like The Cars (one of my personal favorites). Their look was also well crafted, but their music was also new and creative.
And don't let the Kurt Cobains of the world fool you with their anti-establishment, up yours we don't care what you think about us pose. Their look and attitude were just as carefully crafted as their music, regardless of what they want you to believe. That is their way of selling records.
To answer the original question, I don't think it's as important now as it used to be, but it's still a factor. There are always going to be young, impressionable kids just discovering music, and part of that is gonna be "Hey, don't they look cool?"
Not music video, mind you, because that had been going for decades.
But the idea of creating music with videos specifically in mind made a person's visual aesthetics a priority. It also made it possible for people with not so much talent to be popular and sell records.
A perfect example: Big Hair Bands. I've nothing against this genre, but let's face it. Cinderella, Ratt, Crue, Warrant, Poison, Night Ranger, Quiet Riot, Dokken, White Lion, Winger, Stryper, etc, etc, etc., all played simple music, just enough to get by as a band.
Oh, there were a few gunslingers to come along, but by and large, musically, hair bands contributed nothing to the progress, the evolution of music. They contributed a look and that's about it. I'm not dumping on them. They capitalized on a trend and got rich from it. And they put out some pretty decent songs, but the songwriting, for the most part, was 'let's get a six pack and party'. They didn't really do much exploring.
Of course, the grandaddy of them all was KISS, who took all the little pieces of Alice Cooper, The Dolls, Stones, Bowie, etc, etc, and multiplied it by 10.
There's no doubt KISS was born with the intention of being seen, and then heard. I doubt many people back then said "Hey, you have to come hear this band, KISS."
The difference is, KISS did this with the hoping that 150 people would come see them on Saturday night, and then pass the word on.
Hair bands of the 80s did their thing knowing millions of kids would see them on Saturday night, from 12am to 2am on Headbangers Ball.
During that same time period, though, there was 80s techno pop. That was an evolution, the offspring of bands like The Cars (one of my personal favorites). Their look was also well crafted, but their music was also new and creative.
And don't let the Kurt Cobains of the world fool you with their anti-establishment, up yours we don't care what you think about us pose. Their look and attitude were just as carefully crafted as their music, regardless of what they want you to believe. That is their way of selling records.
To answer the original question, I don't think it's as important now as it used to be, but it's still a factor. There are always going to be young, impressionable kids just discovering music, and part of that is gonna be "Hey, don't they look cool?"
Wolf
Senior Member
Wouldn't stop me from going but most fans probably don't want to see John Kay singing BTBW in a green golf shirt and slacks and he knows it because he's always in black or some thing close.
METALPRIEST
Senior Member
All the bands you mentioned there vehicle had many strong moments musically speaking.
Stryper? Helluva band and killer musicians....Cinderella, Night Ranger and Winger too.
Not all of it was "safe"...just sayin'.
But I do see your point as far as the look. It seemed alot of people were playing it safe by going for the popular image (whatever that was) of the time, and this included pop and prog artists as well.
Who remembers YES wearing zipper clothes, hairspray and dumbin' their music down??
I do!!
Stryper? Helluva band and killer musicians....Cinderella, Night Ranger and Winger too.
Not all of it was "safe"...just sayin'.
But I do see your point as far as the look. It seemed alot of people were playing it safe by going for the popular image (whatever that was) of the time, and this included pop and prog artists as well.
Who remembers YES wearing zipper clothes, hairspray and dumbin' their music down??
I do!!
The 80s? Yeah, I remember that era of Yes quite well. It was the only time I saw them live. Great shows but nothing compared to classic era Yes.
I used to be real big on image of musicians but hey, Paul DiAnno had short hair, Jim Morrison had shortish hair, Priest kicked the most ass when they looked more like hippies than metal gods etc. Now I say if it sounds heavy it is. If it looks heavy chances are they are trying too hard with the image to compensate for musical shortcommings.
Just kidding. But these days I could care less what a band looks like. It is the sound I am after.
I used to be real big on image of musicians but hey, Paul DiAnno had short hair, Jim Morrison had shortish hair, Priest kicked the most ass when they looked more like hippies than metal gods etc. Now I say if it sounds heavy it is. If it looks heavy chances are they are trying too hard with the image to compensate for musical shortcommings.
Just kidding. But these days I could care less what a band looks like. It is the sound I am after.
Big Ears
Music Lover
Bruce Dickinson was accused in an interview of having the wrong image by getting his hair cut. He said he didn't care. In the seventies, Graham Bonnet and Rob Halford had short hair whether you liked it or not. I was one of the sheep that had long hair, but I look back and think good for them!
Mr. Shadow
"Classic" Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2009
- Posts
- 2,576
- Reaction score
- 9
Gotta look good for radio!!! 
Titokinz
Earthbound misfit
Yeah, it affects the amount of groupies they get.
Oh wait....no it doesn't.
Groupies just wanna screw someone famous.
So, no.
Oh wait....no it doesn't.
Groupies just wanna screw someone famous.
So, no.
