Zeus On The Loose wrote: The fact that the Spice Girls had a massive impact on pop culture is beyond any doubt and whether it was good or bad is really quite irrelevant and highly subjective.
But you are arguing that The Beatles are more comparable to the Spice Girls simply because of the impact they had on pop culture and whereas The Beatles might inspire somebody to do something creative, The Spice Girls were only ever likely to inspire a girl to marry a footballer or pretend she was twenty-one when she was forty.
The greatest pop acts don't have to be popular; you frequently champion Ms. Stevens and yet she can barely get her singles in the top ten. Annie, far more sexy than the Spice Girls put together and multiplied to the power of infinity, is an underground phenomenon.
Zeus On The Loose wrote: The fact that the Spice Girls had a massive impact on pop culture is beyond any doubt and whether it was good or bad is really quite irrelevant and highly subjective.
But you are arguing that The Beatles are more comparable to the Spice Girls simply because of the impact they had on pop culture and whereas The Beatles might inspire somebody to do something creative, The Spice Girls were only ever likely to inspire a girl to marry a footballer or pretend she was twenty-one when she was forty.
The greatest pop acts don't have to be popular; you frequently champion Ms. Stevens and yet she can barely get her singles in the top ten. Annie, far more sexy than the Spice Girls put together and multiplied to the power of infinity, is an underground phenomenon.
Again, it doesn't matter what the Spice Girls inspired their fans with, it's the fact that they had the biggest pop cultural impact since the Beatles (or at least since Madonna) that makes them comparable. Also, you can't know what they actually inspired their fans with. I'm sure people in their 40's and 50's back when the Beatles happened said they inspire people to grow long hair and look queer and use drugs and slack off work.
You lot are always replying to me as if I'm standing up for the Spice Girls which I am simply not doing because I never liked them and was releaved when they went away. But that doesn't mean I'm unable to acknowledge their impact, despite my not liking them. You lot can't. And therein lies the difference...
In your fantasy pop world where Kylie and Rachel Stevens are the creative queens, "Wannabe" and "Viva Forever" are indeed major achievements...
... by mister Stennard and Rowe.
Err, yeah, the pop world is defined by what the people don't buy and not what the people buy. And people in 30 years will remember Royksopp, Annie and No Time For Tears and not Can't Get You Out Of My Head and It's A Sin
Ironically, if I was a kid/teen in the 60's, I would have probably been a Beatles fan, whereas you dVTB dear, would have hated them and would have been a fan of someone obscure noone remembers today.
Zeus On The Loose wrote: (Elvis, Little Stevens, American harmony bands of the 50's).
I can only assume Little Stevens is a nickname for Rachel Stevens?? (she is only 5'2" or so). As great as Rachel is, she does in fact post-date the Beatles!
Little Richard on the other hand....
She may be pint-sized but her influence in pop culture is difficult to ignore.
like Prince
Still waiting to hear the Adam Freeland, Manhattan Clique and Axwell mixes of Integral.
Zeus On The Loose wrote:Err, yeah, the pop world is defined by what the people don't buy and not what the people buy. And people in 30 years will remember Royksopp, Annie and No Time For Tears and not Can't Get You Out Of My Head and It's A Sin
Ironically, if I was a kid/teen in the 60's, I would have probably been a Beatles fan, whereas you dVTB dear, would have hated them and would have been a fan of someone obscure noone remembers today.
Then why are you a Pet Shop Boys fan? They're totally forgotten, remember?
I don't care, it's you who claims that longevity, sales, being remembered after decades and selling records years after their release means that a band's good. And anyway, PSB are not obscure, they're a mega commercial pop band on a major label that are simply down the dumper because they are not as good as they used to be.
Anyway, aren't Status Quo brilliant? The way they've constantly reinvented themselves and defined the pop landscape. They were even too avant-garde for Radio 1.
Far more important than either The Beatles or Spice Girls; were either of them in Coronation Street? Like f**k they were.
Zeus On The Loose wrote:I don't care, it's you who claims that longevity, sales, being remembered after decades and selling records years after their release means that a band's good. And anyway, PSB are not obscure, they're a mega commercial pop band on a major label that are simply down the dumper because they are not as good as they used to be.
They have been down the dumper for an awful long time...
Zeus On The Loose wrote:
Why was John Lennon's solo career such a flop?
Did Yoko Ono have anything to do with it?
Do I win £5?
No thats a myth and John had a couple of number 1's before he was shot dead and quite a few after thats not bad for a solo career more than lame duck Gary Barlow...where is he working is it Big Mac.
They make a little go along way.. very Minimal but Fundamental.
Zeus On The Loose wrote:No, but Chris was on Neighbours so he must enjoy the same iconic status as The Quo.
Yes, but PSB suffer by comparison because Neil has never managed to write a song about a famous artist despite all the time he's spent hanging around the White Cube.
