MJJ梦舞诗话;4095725 said:what‘s this?can you explain?
mj_frenzy;4096254 said:Janet really needs to rejuvenate her music & not just recycle the same R’n’B grooves & sounds. The lead single (‘No Sleep’ does not bring something new after eight years (probably due to lack of confidence/inspiration).
To be more specific, ‘No Sleep’ sounds like an outtake from her latest album (‘Discipline’ and is very similar to one of the songs of that album (‘Can’t B Good’. These two tracks really seem to have been recorded during the exact same period.
I expect the songs from her new album to have at least those aggressive elements (musically & lyrically) that appeared on some of her previous songs (for example, ‘What About’, ‘Trust a Try’, ‘This Time’ which can really work well when it comes to her music.
respect77;4096289 said:Janet is almost 50 years old. 50 years old artists generally do not innovate. Look at Prince. At his peak he's been very innovative and creative, but he is not really any more. In popular music I think the creative peak of an artist is in his/her 20s-30s. Old artists can opt for two ways: 1) they do what Madonna does, trying to keep up with today's trends, but that looks awkward from a ~50-years-old artist. Also an artist like Madonna or Janet naturally has her own old fanbase which is also made of people who are of a different generation than today's teenagers. And those people may want to hear the music they fell in love with from that artist. 2) they can go back and bring back a taste of the old music their core fan base tends to like. That's what Janet opted for. That No Sleeep is a mellow, slow tempo song does not mean that all of the album will be like that. I am sure there are some up tempo songs on it as well. When That's The Way Love Goes came out that too was criticized for being a bad choice for a lead single. Then look what happened.
mj_frenzy;4096442 said:But, judging by her lead single (‘No Sleep’), I am afraid that Janet’s comeback will not break new ground in music after eight years. .
Finally, I think Prince is a completely different artist who cannot be confined to norms or generalizations because he is in a league of his own.
When was the last time a 50-year-old artist broke new grounds?
Why would Prince be above criticism? The fact is that his new music is not as good or innovative as his music in the 80s was and his fans would be the first to admit that. And that was exactly my point. That even a very creative artist like Prince runs out of ideas by the age of 50-60. 50-60 year old artists generally are not the innovators and trend setters in this industry. So I don't think it's fair to expect something groundbreaking from Janet - whether creatively or commercially. If she can make her fans happy and if she can have a moderately successful album then I think she can be happy and satisfied.
“I think a great artist should be able to create any style, any form, anything from rock to pop to gospel to spiritual, just wonderful music where everybody can sing it…” – Michael Jackson
mj_frenzy;4096617 said:Metrics (as a way of measuring success or even breaking new ground in music) have been changing all the time. This applies also to older artists, so I think the first question does not make sense.
I am afraid that Janet’s comeback will not break new ground in music after eight years.
Also, to claim that Prince must have run out of ideas (due to his age) really sounds like a rather prejudiced & unfair point of view. Creativity & age are not always inversely proportional & claiming the opposite sounds like a rather narrow way of thinking.
Didn`t make Madonna her fans happy?
Finally, I think Prince is a completely different artist who cannot be confined to norms or generalizations because he is in a league of his own.
Also, to claim that Prince must have run out of ideas (due to his age) really sounds like a rather prejudiced & unfair point of view. Creativity & age are not always inversely proportional & claiming the opposite sounds like a rather narrow way of thinking.
And yes, we can also admit that Janet has never been as big as Madonna - especially internationally.
sigh
I personally do not remember Janet being blackballed by U.S. media.
Later in February 2004
The NFL, upset that their Super Bowl was overshadowed by a halftime performance, respond immediately. “We were extremely disappointed by elements of the MTV-produced halftime show," NFL executive vice president Joe Browne said at the time. "They were totally inconsistent with assurances our office was given about the content of the show. It's unlikely that MTV will produce another Super Bowl halftime." CBS and MTV’s parent company Viacom, angered that an unannounced addition to the Super Bowl performance has now cost them all future halftime shows, hits back at Jackson by essentially blacklisting her, keeping her music videos off their properties MTV, VH1, and radio stations under their umbrella. The blacklist spreads to include non-Viacom media entities as well.
March 22nd, 2004Damita Jo, Jackson’s eighth album, arrives roughly five weeks after her Super Bowl performance. Thanks to the radio and music television blacklist, the LP underperforms compared to Janet’s previous releases. However, and perhaps propelled by all the controversy, Damita Jo still sells enough first week copies to debut at Number Two on the Billboard 200. Despite the backlash, the album eventually goes platinum several times over.
January 2014
A decade removed from Nipplegate, former FCC chairman Michael Powell admits that the committee acted "unfairly" toward Janet Jackson following the incident. He tells ESPN that the FCC overreacted. "I personally thought that was really unfair. It all turned into being about her," Powell said. "In reality, if you slow the thing down, it's Justin ripping off her breastplace." The comments are a complete turnaround from Powell’s own words 10 years earlier, when he called Nipplegate "a new low from primetime TV."
respect77;4096653 said:Let's see.
You said:
Then I asked you to name an artist about her age that did break new ground in popular music. So how does that question suddenly not make any sense when you were the one who brought up "breaking grounds"? Please define what you mean by "breaking grounds" then.
Prejudice? No, it's an observation. There does seem to be a correlation between age and creativity in popular music. Most pop/rock stars achieve their creative peaks, most influential works in their 20-30s, not 50-60s. That's just a general tendency which is difficult to dispute. Or if you want to dispute it then please give examples rather than just dismissing my opinion as prejudiced and narrow-minded with no counter argument given. Maybe you will be able to find one or two artists who created their most important, most groundbreaking works at their 50-60s in popular music as opposed to their 20-30s, but I am sure that still will be the rare exception rather than the rule.
respect77;4096729 said:Who talked about radio friendly music or commercial success? The point I was replying to was that Janet's new music is not groundbreaking enough. It is not groundbreaking but does it have to be? And once again I ask: what was the last time a 50-year-old artist put out groundbreaking music?
Prince may not aspire to put out radio friendly music any more, but that's besides the point. It does not mean that we cannot say anything about the quality of his music and whether it is better or worse, more innovative or not than the music he did at his peak. I know that music is subjective but you will have a hard time finding people even among hard core Prince fans who will say Rock and Roll Affair or Breakfast Can Wait are up there with his classics. If anything his fans on Prince.org bash him all the time for not putting out anything good for more than 10 years (that's the opinion a lot of them have at least). My point was that artists rarely produce groundbreaking music in their 50-60s. That is true of even such a creative force as Prince. That was the whole point, not the radio-friendliness or commerciality of Prince's music. They just either want to cater to their old fan base (a path Janet seemed have chosen) or try to appeal to younger generations by following current trends (eg. Madonna). Or they may just not care, like Prince, but not caring that does not mean Prince's new music is groundbreaking. It is not.
I just don't think Janet has anything to prove any more. If she wants to do the kind of music that she did in the 90s and if she wants to be in her comfort zone why is that wrong? She's not going to produce her most groundbreaking work now and she's probably not going to compete with current acts on the charts, but who does of her generation? Madonna has a different approach and Prince has a different approach, but fact is that neither of these approaches resulted in groundbreaking new music.
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/nipple-ripples-10-years-of-fallout-from-janet-jacksons-halftime-show-20140130
mj_frenzy;4096753 said:Breaking new ground in music means to do something that the public has never heard or seen before (or even to create a totally new artistic field).
If artists (before Janet) achieved that (or not) in their 50’s, it is of little importance because there is no correlation necessarily between what those artists achieved & Janet will achieve.
Also, when observations (originated from previous works) are used to predict & condemn future (artistic) attempts then these observations are automatically turned into prejudices. Artistic rebirths (irrespective of the age) happen all the time & will continue to happen. Also, to limit creativity/inspiration to certain ages does not make sense & is rather unacceptable when it comes to music.
I like it too! :happy:Song could have come straight out of the 90's. I like it, fair play Janet!