Do musicians' appearances matter more than their sound?

[Mr. Heartbreak]

 thinking that their making some kind of point.  

So here's the part where I play along and pretend you're sincerely asking the question. The quote above is what I am referring to. There is a name for that in the world of psychology: it's called passive-aggressive. Not the first time I have seen you do it, either.

 

Calm down.

That's another good one. There are a couple words for that, too, such as patronizing or condescending.

 

By the way, I think you meant to write "they're," not "their."

 

Seems to be the trend now on message boards: no one can write or post anything, no matter how insubstantial, without someone else coming along and feeling it's important to disagree with it, argue about it, etc.

 

It's a shame, really, because the OP on this posted something pretty interesting, and worthwhile debating. For someone like me - who intentionally made a point, in a couple different ways (not just thinking I was making a point, but actually making it), it's an important topic. MTV came along and tried to tie artists' appearance to their music forever, and it failed over time. Video didn't really kill the radio star.

 

I don't give a damn how great Katy Perry's cans look, or that she's above average in appearance; I think her music is kind of boring and vapid, and no change in appearance will change that. I understand that there are people out there for whom music will always be just wallpaper to decorate their lives, but it's more than that for me. And I don't care how Wilco dresses, and never would care. I thought Jeff looked pretty ridiculous in the Nudie suit, but I think everyone else does too. It did not piss me off. You being smarmy, and assuming that everyone must share your opinion, whilst at the same time discounting others as "thinking that their [sic] making some kind of point...." that pissed me off a little. If you're married, you should really try telling your wife to "calm down" some time, and see how well that works out for ya.

[uncool2pillow]

Good catch on my poor grammar.  Pretty stupid of me.  I'm sorry you are so offended by my flippant nature, but I really think you're (see I know some grammar) overreacting.  Over the years on this board, people have treated me flippantly, and I've done the same.  It's an internet board and if people, say, take joy in pointing out my stupid grammar, my self esteem isn't going tom be too much the worse for wear.  Perspective...

 

I still think it's silly to post a picture of you favorite band in t-shirts and jeans to say "Hey look, image doesn't matter to me."  That is their image.  It's an image that's appealing to me as well.  If I was at a music store and saw CD "A" with a bunch of dudes in jeans and t-shirts, or CD "B" with a dude wearing Kanye West's dumbass sunglasses that look like blinds, I'd pick up CD "A".  That's the image that conveys a kind of music I'm more likely to enjoy.  Just because it isn't a girl with a boob job or someone wearing expensive clothes doesn't make it any less an image.  So I apologize if you're offended, but I find  the whole thing a bit silly.

 

Also, I've been married 19 years this October.  I've told my wife to calm down and she's said the same to me many, many times.  You're right, it doesn't work too well.  But in retrospect, I usually realize minutes or hours later that I did need to calm down.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Well, you're right: anyone wearing anything has an image. My man Zappa once said, "Everybody in this room is wearing a uniform, and don't kid yourself." 

 

But I think there is a huge difference between people who cultivate a pop image for the express purpose of promoting themselves (e.g., Lady Gaga, etc.) and people who just wear what they feel like wearing, not concerned with whether or not it will sell records (Dead, Floyd, et al). I highly doubt Jerry Garcia ever got up in the morning and said, "Wow, I really need to market myself better; perhaps I should switch from black T-shirts to red." 

[smells like flowers]

Certainly musicians' appearance can enhance the experience of a live show.  Not to objectify anyone-- these two have talent in spades.  But damn!

 

Cases in point:

 

[Guest Don Draper]

1238259_234429990045171_1037659602_n.jpg

Am I missing something? These guys' shirts look more or less identical to Ryan Adams' threads below.

 

And Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall were not conceived by a band that did not care about appearances.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Yes, you're missing something.

There's more to projecting an image than the clothes you wear. In the Floyd's case, that had a lot to to do with stagecraft, special effects, and so on...not their shirts or pants.

[Guest Don Draper]

I don't see how wanting to be a snappy dresser makes you inauthentic, or denigrates your work. Lots of people dress up for work. Hell, strippers dress up for work and their job is to not be dressed.

[Albert Tatlock]

The music was great whatever, but whereas other bands attempted a style, and some like The Clash looked cool as something to aspire to, the Derry boys were the only punk/new wave band I can remember who did look exactly like us at school at the time and made no attempt to be anything otherwise. That immediately gleaned a certain affection.

 

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I don't see how wanting to be a snappy dresser makes you inauthentic, or denigrates your work.

I never said it did.

[Sir Stewart]

It's weird that people keep posting pictures of the Dead and Pink Floyd in other bands in plain, unfashionable clothing thinking that their making some kind of point.  If Wilco started dressing like the Black Eyed Peas, a lot of y'all would be pissed.  Appearance matters.  Period.

Good point.

[Oil Can Boyd]

Years ago a friend of mine said to me "you should listen to the Feelies because you look like you could be one of them." 

He wasn't totally wrong ...

[tinnitus photography]

i hope it was before Brenda joined.

[Oil Can Boyd]

i hope it was before Brenda joined.

Ha!   Yes, it was ...

[Lammycat]

The answer to the question is yes and no. Yes if you're a pre-teen or young teen girl, and no if you're anyone else.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

The answer to the question is yes and no. Yes if you're a pre-teen or young teen girl, and no if you're anyone else.

[i'm only sleeping]

The answer to the question is yes and no. Yes if you're a pre-teen or young teen girl, and no if you're anyone else.

^ Agreed. I checked whether the original paper included the age of the participants in the 'experiment' and, incrediby for a peer-reviewed journal of such high prestige, it seems nobody thought that age was of any relevance for the issue being tested and hence ‘age’ was not a factor included in the analyses. Maybe this gives you an opportunity to write a reply and publish in PNAS  .