this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
158 points (89.9% liked)

The Onion

4548 readers
764 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think musically they were more interesting. However, perhaps George Michael when in wham! counts. However, the extreme fandom is probably unrelated to the music and more the hype and shared experience.

[–] alilbee@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but music is also one of those subjective things. Hell, I'll even be open and say I never really enjoyed Michael Jackson's music. Even being old enough to know who George Michael is puts our spot in the zeitgeist near the edge, I have to imagine. These big pop stars are also an image of success, celebrity, and youth. That all creates a big stan culture.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 5 months ago

You don't have to enjoy an artist to be able to appreciate their talent. There are lots of talented artists, I don't enjoy. There are lots that are less talented that I enjoy.

Those poor kids probably don't get any of the jokes from arrested development. Wait, they don't even know what arrested development is. Omg, we are old.

I agree. I think its the image of success and being in the zeitgeist that promotes it more than the music or talent itself. It maybe just happened that previously, you were more likely to make it big if you were super talented. Now it's better if daddy gets you a record deal like Taylor, rather than daddy forces you to perform and abuses you like the Jacksons.