sweet-rasmus wrote: » Moved to the Music forum. Sorry guys!
cordub wrote: » PLEASE PLEASE explain what is the attraction with JEDWARD , why dont i get it??
4Sheets wrote: » 12/1 to win?? think its worth a tenner ..heard worse crap than this become huge eurocrappop hits..altough having a euro hit doesnt equate to eurovision success..everyone in Ireland is sick of them but wait to till the 16-20 yr old in Lativa for e.g see them?? John Paul Henry Daniel Richard Grimes and Edward Peter Anthony Kevin Patrick Grimes How does anyone have this many fore names (5) I have three .. 1)Birth and second name 2)Confirmation...
El Pr0n wrote: » Anyone with half a passing interest in music knows they're not valid in any artistic sense, they're not harming anyone.
Malice wrote: » The problem isn't their artistic validity though, it's the fact that they are being handsomely rewarded for mediocrity. As far as I can tell with the thankfully limited exposure I've had to them, their claim to fame appears to be an interesting haircut and a celebration of the fact that they can't sing or dance to the same level as their competitors on X-Factor. Sadly their mediocrity is being celebrated and turned into a commodity. Marketing then demonstrates to youngsters that this a good thing. A previous generation got to see Michael Jackson. The current generation gets Jedward. Is that not harmful?
El Pr0n wrote: » Michael Jackson had his own songs though, Jedward do covers. Right?
Android 666 wrote: » The previous generation had Milli Vanilli and Black Lace. Every generation has it's share of insufferable dross. I don't think Jedward are really a symbol of civilisation in decline, just that marketing people have found another act to fill the gap between Peppa Pig and A Chemical Romance.
Malice wrote: » All I've ever heard are Jedward covers, I can't conclusively state that covers are all they do as I don't go out of my way to listen to them. Either way I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Heh, I was actually going to mention Mili Vanilli in my last post but I didn't have time. Maybe it's just the advent of the Internet giving anyone with an opinion the opportunity to share it with the world but I honestly think there's a massive rise in the cult of the celebrity and people who are famous for being famous and nothing else. Jedward are but a small part of this. It frustrates me to see the likes of Jedward promoted as something worth spending money on. I'm sure we can all think of more deserving acts who will never grab the attention of Louis Walsh and therefore will never catch the attention of Jedward's target market and make them realise that there is far better music out there worth listening to.
irish-stew wrote: » 10 year old boys and girls, and their mobile phone operators like them. They are a novelty act, aimed at the kids market.
Malice wrote: » Louis Walsh
Malice wrote: » All I've ever heard are Jedward covers, I can't conclusively state that covers are all they do as I don't go out of my way to listen to them. Either way I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
El Pr0n wrote: » That they're completely different things, you can't compare them. Michael Jackson was an artist, and a bloody good one, Jedward are a novelty cover act. I don't know a whole lot about Jedward or MJ, but as far as I can tell, any argument made by comparing the two is ridiculous.
Malice wrote: » Well I'm going to have to completely disagree with your last point. Firstly Michael Jackson and Jedward are both pop acts. Secondly my comparison wasn't about them directly, it was more that a far higher quality of pop act was presented to audiences of previous generations. I realise that I'm far from an authorative source on historical pop acts and also that history doesn't tend to record the novelty or one-hit wonder type acts too well so maybe it's just me being cynical in my old age and the 1980s were in fact full of similar dross (see the aforementioned Mili Vanilli for example ).
El Pr0n wrote: » you wouldn't compare Misfits to Black Flag or GWAR to Mayhem.
El Pr0n wrote: But it's not that big a deal, not the point of the thread :pac:
