is this shameless greed message and obsession with material possessions, along with 'Jenny From The Block' and okay 90% of blingin' hip-pop any worse than The Beatles' 'Money' i.e. just simple harmless fun songs designed to appeal to your average working chump? does anyone hear them and think 'hell yeah i want all that as well! i'm gonna become a star like them, or at least work harder here - i got nothing to live for but the bling' - i suppose its always been an issue but never considered as problematic as the violence problem cited in gangsta rap etc.
i can't imagine this kind of thing lyrically really appealing to people, its just 'well we have to talk about something, and money is kinda nice, after all thats the only real reason we seem to be doing this'...excuse my Daily Mailness but won't someone think of the children? oh where will this madness end? and so on...
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:41 (twenty-two years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:49 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:57 (twenty-two years ago)
ie the causal chain is "despite" not "because"
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:00 (twenty-two years ago)
not sure i buy that, i get the impression it has changed her quite a bit - its been good AND bad of course, and i know that track's been discussed to death on here but, apart from the great intro, i thought it was a pretty lame and pointless exercise, but i did like 'Play'
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:06 (twenty-two years ago)
hence yr argument falls
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:14 (twenty-two years ago)
the 'keep it real' philosophy has lost all meaning, and its always been something of a double standard - you can't be 'real' when you're droning on about how many cars you've now got. vast wealth will change the majority of people who acquire it in a short space of time having come from nothing i.e. it fucks them up. J Lo seems quite different to how she was when she was JUST a novice actress (and now she's so huge she'll never be in a film even as good as Blood And Wine or U-Turn again thats for sure) and still on husband #1, in her looks, her attitude, everything. maybe that is an illusion, and in any case its probably unfair to single out J Lo.
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:41 (twenty-two years ago)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:49 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:25 (twenty-two years ago)
or maybe it would be better if you could.
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 23 May 2003 21:12 (twenty-two years ago)
― mei (mei), Saturday, 24 May 2003 05:52 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chip Morningstar (bob), Saturday, 24 May 2003 08:21 (twenty-two years ago)
― Cozen (Cozen), Saturday, 24 May 2003 08:24 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chip Morningstar (bob), Saturday, 24 May 2003 09:22 (twenty-two years ago)
― Chip Morningstar (bob), Saturday, 24 May 2003 09:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― Cozen (Cozen), Saturday, 24 May 2003 11:40 (twenty-two years ago)
― bob snoom, Sunday, 25 May 2003 09:26 (twenty-two years ago)
― Marcello Carlin, Monday, 26 May 2003 12:37 (twenty-two years ago)
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Monday, 26 May 2003 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Monday, 26 May 2003 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)