Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Hat€monger ?
I've not seen you make a convincing argument that she is yet.
I have no interest in Janet Jackson, I have no interest in Cyndi Lauper either (another female singer who's been around roughly the same amount of time) yet I could name a hell of a lot more Cyndi Lauper songs than Janet Jackson ones.
Does that mean I think Cyndi Lauper is iconic?
Not at all but I'd say she's at a higher level than Janet Jackson is, and that's without taking into account that Janet Jackson gets a pass already for having that surname.
|
Just because you have no interest in Janet Jackson does not make her any less Iconic. You seem to not like popular music overall and that is fine but don't be a snob.
I think I have done a good job in showing important Iconic things associated with her, music and just things she has done overall that have been iconic.
A lot of people always use this argument when it comes to Janet but the funny thing is, all the Jackson's have released solo albums so why is that Janet Jackson is the only one that has been successful outside of Michael?
To argue that her last name is why she is successful is absurd and a cop out because if that were case the other Jackson's would have been just as successful but they have not.
Her last name did probably give her a record deal but it most certainly did not make her an Icon. It most certainly is not the reason why she is one of the biggest selling artists of all time. If anything, it probably was much harder for her
because of her last name and her more famous brother. She had to prove herself and...she did. She became a superstar and an Icon in her own right.
If her last name is why she is an Icon, why isnt La Toya, Jermaine, Rebbie, etc all solo artist Icons?
Silly argument.
Just because you don't listen to her music or don't want to listen to her music outside of rock doesn't mean she is not an Icon.