And this is a problem I see in this thread. There's more to performing than just singing and dancing.
The excuses of those who stan for people who can't sing, dance, or do neither. Since there's more to it than that then that means Rihanna is a performer then?
The excuses of those who stan for people who can't sing, dance, or do neither. Since there's more to it than that then that means Rihanna is a performer then?
Of course Rihanna is a performer. BEING a performer requires the act of performing, which Rihanna does. Whether or not she does it with skill is a completely different issue.
The excuses of those who stan for people who can't sing, dance, or do neither. Since there's more to it than that then that means Rihanna is a performer then?
Ignoring the fact that Stevie can obviously sing, is this not a good performance?
If singing and dancing are everything, why do artists use visuals in their shows? What's the point of showmanship? Why have stage presence? Why have stage command? Who needs to learn from their experiences on stage since all you need to do is show up and sing and dance to be considered a great performer?
I need you to understand there's more to performing than just singing and dancing. Look at the Stevie Wonder video I posted. Is that not a good performance sing he's not singing, dancing, or using props/visuals? Being able to perform is your ability to project your audio artistry into visual artistry.
Entertaining is the product of performing. Either you're entertained by the performance or you're not.
& when Madonna is jumping from prop to prop and humping things & hanging herself of crosses she is performing. I just think she isn't performing well. If she was then her visuals would not be the centerpiece, the artist would be considering that they are the person you would be coming to see. That is not the case with Madonna. Like I keep saying, she substitutes, not complements.
There were also PLENTY of people who couldn't "actually sing." Not everybody was an Aretha Franklin. MY point is that you should stop putting on airs and realize that there has never been some homogenous level of "talent" within the music industry. I know there's a term for this false nostalgia and idolization of the past, but it escapes me.
Most of the LEGENDS and ICONS of yesterday and today were able to back up their **** one way or another. No one is saying everyone has to sing like Aretha or Whoever. Just be able to do what you're supposed to do. If you're a singer you should at least be able to to do that. If you're a dancer you should at least be able to do that. IMO, Madonna CANNOT. If you don't like it, take it up with god.
& when Madonna is jumping from prop to prop and humping things & hanging herself of crosses she is performing. I just think she isn't performing well. If she was then her visuals would not be the centerpiece, the artist would be considering that they are the person you would be coming to see. That is not the case with Madonna. Like I keep saying, she substitutes, not complements.
YES! Madonna uses a cross during a performance of "Live To Tell", a song dealing with religion. Although "Vogue" is about dancing, the name "Vogue" is synonymous with fashion, thus Madonna uses the fashion of different periods in time to corroborate with the song. She also does different dances from different periods of time when doing "Vogue". These props and visuals used compliment her performing. And when you go see Madonna you go to see the production. Just like when you go to see Beyonce, you're going for vocals and showmanship.