no adele thread yet?

To be fair, I don't think the point is that Adele shouldn't do what she wants to do; I think Maura is identifying an easy, semi-nonsensical rhetorical stance (Adele vs Gaga) and pointing out why it's stupid before other writers get a chance to latch onto it.

but thats a weird thing to do? surely you could find enough things to write about that you dont need to make up stances that other critics have

It's been an undercurrent to Adele's whole deal/appeal the whole time, though, this sense of a 'real' female singer inspired by 'real' music! Hell, for a lot of recent UK acts -- Amy Winehouse, Joss Stone, Duffy, etc. You can't handwave something that's been intrinsic.

It's not an undercurrent, it's the absolute cornerstone of her marketing/appeal, as much as it is was with Ocean Colour Scene or whoever.

I don't think "weird" is the right way to look at it; it's more that this is a thought piece pointed towards other critics that is also being presented to "the rest of us". The seeds of this are absolutely floating out there; I was listening to a lot of The Current a couple of weeks ago (indie rock public radio based in Minneapolis) during their pledge drive and their playlist was basically super lol indie (The Decemberists got played a HELL of a lot) mixed in with old Public Enemy and many, many, many promos for a competition to win tickets to see Adele. This was all intermingled with testimonials written by people giving pledges hailing the station for playing "real" music (like The Decemberists). It's a small sample size, I admit, but the sentiment Maura is reacting against is out there.

My only beef is with the autotune criticism, which I feel has become its own tired, overused dismissal tactic.

this is another can of worms that i perhaps shouldn't open given that i'm on deadline, but the way in which adele's body image is also conflated with her "realness" has made me kinda uncomfortable of late too - like, it's gone beyond applauding someone who refuses to ~conform~ to the ~ideal~ and into making the logical leap that because she doesn't diet, it makes her a more worthy (or better?) artist - and then you see quotes from her like "my aim in life is never to get skinny" and it's like, well done, you have replaced one weight-based goal with another. and then you see her bringing up nicole richie as someone she doesn't want to look like (someone who's had v public health issues re: her own weight), which is about as tasteless as you get.

xpost Sure, and I can understand the online journalism pressure to respond quickly, even it seems premature. But I do think Adele deserves some credit for the stance she takes on commercials and arena gigs, which is a distinct issue from whether NPR types think her music is "real".

xpost i don't think she can be blamed for 'replacing one weight-based goal with another' just because of one off-hand comment she made in an interview one time.

Maybe it's a good idea to see her as an opinionated individual rather than a trojan horse for revanchist rockism.

Lex I think your knee's jerking a bit there - that Adele quote is obviously a flippant and jokily defiant comment rather than an actual statement of intent. When you consider how many nasty comments she must get about her weight (coupled with the fact that it probably IS much healthier to be Adele than Nicole Ritchie) I don't really see the problem.

Maybe it's a good idea to see her as an opinionated individual rather than a trojan horse for revanchist rockism.

Hah, or this, alternatively.

Maybe it's a good idea to see her as an opinionated individual

yeah this is the line i see pushed a lot but her opinions aren't particularly earth-shattering and are in fact kinda dumb. this is like la roux (except not as bad), when someone who's perceived to be a counter to ~mainstream pressure~ says bolshy things (that are no better when you think about them) they're held up as this SMART REAL GIRL WHO SPEAKS HER MIND~~ - trading on being outspoken even though what they're saying isn't v interesting

She's not a counter to mainstream anything but what she's reacting against is too all-pervasive and damaging for you to just handwave away as part of some lazy rockism.

you guys are too smart to fall for her marketing schemes. you won't let a 22 year old woman push your buttons. you are to be applauded.

yeah this is the line i see pushed a lot but her opinions aren't particularly earth-shattering and are in fact kinda dumb. this is like la roux (except not as bad), when someone who's perceived to be a counter to ~mainstream pressure~ says bolshy things (that are no better when you think about them) they're held up as this SMART REAL GIRL WHO SPEAKS HER MIND~~ - trading on being outspoken even though what they're saying isn't v interesting

There are very few people who are actually interesting, is the thing, and most of them are not making wildly successful music at the moment.

I mean, right now the currently successful pop star who has come off the most interesting to me in an interview is Katy Perry, and that is solely because of how little conflict she sees between her stage show/songs and her Christianity.

i think it's cool that she's a bigger, um, pop star. makes her more real in my book. big girls with big voices always kind of the exception in pop? but it's refreshing anyway.

and she really is just using her voice to sell songs. that's pretty authentic!

i think it's cool that she's a bigger, um, pop star. makes her more real in my book.

really??????

i mean that attitude right there is what i'm reacting to. who cares what size she is? what bearing does that have on her music?

i mean i've heard the music everywhere but i didn't even know what she looked like until recently. her "image" isn't really a big deal over here from what i can tell.

Ha-ha. Right on Scott.

it doesn't matter as far as the music goes but image is such a huge part of the pop business. so it means a lot really.

"Who cares what size she is? What bearing does it have on her music?" is a bit of a disingenuous line to take though, especially when at least 95% of girls who are allowed to get ANYWHERE in the music industry are only allowed that far because they're conventionally attractive.

It'd be like if there was only one black performer in the charts and for someone to be all "Who cares what colour they are? It's the music that counts" and you would be the first to rail against that.

I think there's a kind of lazy cognitive shorthand going on here on both sides of the debate "she's real because she doesn't use autotune/is a bit heavier than other popstars" vs "she's rockist because she talks about being heavier than other popstars as if this makes her better than Beyonce/Gaga/whoever".

And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Adele's music.

tbh I would love to destroy the image component of music appreciation, but this is largely because:

- as a performer who operates largely in the sphere of classical ensembles, I feel that it is irrelevant to the quality of the musical performances I participate in and that feeling seeps into my attitude towards the music I listen to;

- I rarely watch videos or go to shows that don't feature my friends

ergo, a good amount of the effort put into image is wasted on me (outside of, say, awards shows and SNL appearances, lol forever @ Gaga)

however, I am more than aware that my experience with music is nowhere near most other people's experiences and how foolish it would be to insist that things would be better if everyone processed it the way I do, even though not-that-deep-down I really believe that to be the case

she - adele - doesn't make a big deal about it in her songs though, right? looks and all that? a lot of skinny pop stars do make it a part of their act. that whole xtina don't let anyone tell you you aren't cool and beautiful thing. it's a thing. the madonna self-pity thing. i'm all for it actually. but it might actually make more sense coming from someone who looks like someone you might know.

the no sell out thing is even a headline in countess chocula's webpaperzine. so maybe maura was just slightly ahead of the curve:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/adele-in-q-magazine-fears-glastonbury_n_866633.html

I actually find it hugely depressing that anyone would attack that quote rather than, say, the institutional sexism of the music industry, *especially* some of the bits that peddle so-called "empowerment anthems".

even beyonce has to roll around on the ground and writhe like a snake to sell feminist enlightenment.

lol, that is why I think "Flaws and All" is Beyonce's strongest empowerment anthem

Matt OTM. Adele doesn't even make a big deal about her weight - she's no Beth Ditto - and in the Q feature she comes across as anything but dumb. I don't understand Lex's problem with her. (As a person, I mean - music aside)

It's like the Janelle Monae backlash. "Why is everyone interested in this interesting person? Won't somebody think of the generic R&B hotties?" Musicians shouldn't be punished for the prejudices of their dumbest proponents.

And might not Adele be an interesting alternative to the general showbusiness body-image psychosis that caused Nicole Richie so much trouble as opposed to being Richie's plus-sized persecutor?

as far as "authentic" goes, the u.k. has already set the standard to beat.

http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/apr2009/1/2/susan-boyle-pic-pa-106501596.jpg

lex i rememer reading yr blogpost about this, and how you thought it was rockist that she wanted to be on the cover of a music magazine rather than vogue, which, she's in music? is this really that bad/unusual?

that's not what i wrote

I should hope that's not what you wrote because that makes no sense whatsoever

Boneheaded rockism (like being on the cover of Q is a higher aspiration than being on the cover of Vogue) <- am i misreading this?

It's not quite like the Janelle backlash - for better or worse she was still operating within the same milieu as the rest of R&B. I don't think there are many popstars who are being deprived of press because of Adele, or that they're being dismissed as generic because of her music or anything. I mean, Adele's about as straight-down-the-line and mainstream as they come, musically.

I think there's also a UK/US split - the UK has always preferred more everyman/everywoman pop stars that you don't really get in the States. And then there's a residual UK suspicion of perfectly-formed pantheon of gods and goddesses type pop stars, even when they're really popular here, that Lex has often dismissed as "tall poppy syndrome". In reality I think it's a matter of accessibility vs exclusivity - you also hear it in the differing way British and American pop music approaches the idea of "the club".

(Or maybe the US's everymen and everywomen are elsewhere - hip-hop, country, rather than sort of pop music I'm talking about)

US everymen/everywomen are in record stores or logging on to iTunes/Amazon buying pop music rather than making it

Boneheaded rockism (like being on the cover of Q is a higher aspiration than being on the cover of Vogue) <- am i misreading this?

― just sayin, Wednesday, May 25, 2011 3:38 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

do me a favour and at least post the full fucking link rather than randomly c/ping one sentence. i really don't have the time right now to be dealing with ilx's crew of nitpickers

Adele is surely trying a bit too hard by going "I'd rather play a whole year at the Barfly". No one wants to play even ONE night at the Barfly.

Rolling Stone's treatment of its female cover stars is pretty appalling.

I would also like a link to Lex's blog post but since no one on either side of that argument can be bothered to provide any context I'll just make snap judgments on what's been presented on this thread.

haha sorry heres a link - http://alexmacpherson.tumblr.com/post/5216888381/adele-smokes-and-says-positive-stuff

(great url btw)

okay even in context I don't see how you can fault a musician for saying she would rather be featured by a music magazine than a fashion magazine, or IOW be recognized for her profession rather than her looks

that was an off-the-cuff post in response to that jpg being endlessly blogged and reblogged by the right-on idiots of tumblr all going "fuck yeah adele" as is their wont

i think the more interesting pertinent thing about the scale of Adele's success now isn't to do with a 'triumph in the face of body fascism' or whatever (hardly a problem in the era Adele's songs/ideals supposedly hark back to after all) but the sense that there can be only one person doing this kind of thing so supposedly well (considering Duffy's somewhat surprising nosedive, Rumer being apparently too niche, dormant Winehouse...different as they all are they're all retro tagged in the same way). doesn't seem like anyone is interested in Adele doing anything other than these sorrowful hearbreak anthems (no more than how thematically pigeon-holed many other big bands are perhaps - Coldplay spring to mind as ever, but it's almost always feels wrong).

feels like the industry required a multi million-seller for an older audience (funny given Adele's youth and inexperience) rather than a selection of different singers all covering similar territory all having similar success.

Yeah from a commercial standpoint Adele was a no-brainer, it's still annoying that you see headlines like the one above going 'Adele refuses to sell out', as if she had anything to sell out in the first place.

Adele refuses to sell out by playing slightly-more middle-of-the-road retro soul!