HOW TO: Read this posting and think about your answers to each of the questions asked, as they relate to an overall discussion topic at the bottom. Answer in comment form, then come back to reply to the rest of us and discuss some more. Discussion will be live through Saturday evening.
*N Sync and other boy bands like them are nostalgic for me and at least half of this group, as Justin, who was out of high school by the time this era came into play, pointed out earlier. More than that, though, their music was a mainstay on popular radio statio stations across the country and even around the world for a good five solid years or more.
- What about boy bands made them so appealing to popular music audiences of their time?
- Was *N Sync a leader of their time, or just following the trend?
- After having listened objectively, do they have any redeeming musical qualities? Why or why not?
It's not about liking them or disliking them, so much as determining whether they were good at what they did or whether they contributed anything to the world around them during their careers.
I found an interesting article that ran on MSNBC.com in 2004 about the decline of pop bands like *N Sync that's very befitting this week and I think you all should read it. Like David's earlier post, it traces the history of the genre and brings some interesting discussion points to mind.
After Milli Vanilli got caught lip synching, after *N Sync and the Backstreet Boys hit the news with stories about being controlled by their managers, and even more after reality shows like "Making the Band" and "American Idol" hit center stage in pop culture, critics said pop music lost its innocence.
- What do you think was meant by that statement?
- Do you think the world is better or worse off knowing that these groups were a manufactured product?
- Do you think this "loss of innocence" help or hurt the genre?
- "What goes around comes around" (a la JT himself) - but does it really? Will boy bands ever make a comeback, and if they do, what will the next boy band generation be like?
The article goes on to say that Justin Timberlake is the only one that came out of that whole scene that's ever really done anything musically successful. That begs the question -
- Did any of these guys have real talent? If so, why haven't more of these artists become popular?
After all that- a closing topic to encompass all these topics:
What was *N Sync's mark on popular culture and is there any redeeming value to their music or their musical career itself?
Discuss your thoughts on the overall topic, and give your thoughts on some of the other questions posed in this post via comment form. Come back to view comments and discuss back and forth until Saturday at 11:59 p.m.
Ok I'll start.
ReplyDeleteYes, I do think *N Sync's music has its redeeming qualities. If you're going on technical musical ability, certainly you can't argue that these guys can't sing or that their technical musical ability does not exist. I'd like to see their critics try it, many of which cannot.
Second, being the only one in this group who has both been to Bonnaroo and seen *N Sync live, I understand the difference in what they were trying to do. While "good" bands can venture off set lists and ad lib with the audience for a real one of a kind performance, an *N Sync show is more like a Broadway play. Each tour date is the exact same show (I know, I saw the same one twice), but for the fans of this kind of music, they were the kinds of shows you wanted to see more than once. So yes, for what they were, I think they did it very well.
When I think "pop" I don't think popular. I mean, look at today's popular music - it's mostly crap bands and bad r&b and hip hop, not the bubblegum boy bands of yesterday. That being said, I'd like to point out that boy bands, in their struggle to survive, actually did change and adapt. If you listen to it, the Backstreet Boys went adult contemporary there in the end, while *N Sync grew and changed with pop music. Although Justin liked the first album the best, "No Strings Attached" and "Celebrity" are much more relevant to today's popular sound.
I remember hearing about boy bands and the whole *N Sync and the Backstreet Boys pretty much being puppets for their management, but it never hurt my opinion of them. I still don't consider it "fake" (with the exception of the Milli Vanilli lip synch) because *N Sync came together on their own, unlike bands like O-Town. I do think it would have been interesting to see how they would have done without overbearing managers. I always liked to think they would have been as popular as they were, but the truth is that without proper marketing and whatnot, Justin would still be that kid from Tennessee.
That being said, I think *N Sync represents an era in music (not just for me but for music in general) and will be a part of that history when people in the future look back. I think they did what they were doing exceptionally well, no matter who likes it and who doesn't, and I think Justin's popularity since only proves that those guys do have talent and the potential to have a great career if only they make the right decisions and career moves. (Poor, poor JC and his electronica-pop album "Schizophrenia." He had a great voice, but would have been better off going adult contemporary in my opinion.)
My theory is that N'sync did whatever they had to in order to sell records. This is probably what that statement meant by pop losing its innocence. It used to be here is what I have to offer, like it or hate it. It quickly became, gosh, I really hope you like it. Now I think the entire pop industry is completely guessing at what the listeners want to hear and that is why the industry is filled with 'crapy bands.'
ReplyDeleteThe guys obviously had talent, but their advisors felt that they could best target teenage girls and in order to do that, they needed to bait them with their voices, hook them with their dance moves, and then reel them in with their looks. This is why Justin thinks of them as entertainers and not singers or whatever term he used. That is what society wanted from them, a good show, some eye candy, and while you're add it, throw in some talented voices.
I think some boy bands will come around again as there are still many teenage girls and guys like me out there who enjoy this genre. They will probably need to find that innocence that the last boy band era lacked in order to be successful however.
I agree with Thomas
ReplyDeleteLeave it to Thomas to post something pretty on the mark and quite intelligent. That's the kind of thing I was looking for this week! :) I agree that pop bands are all about what people would like these days and sacrifice a little artistic integrity. I think today's boy bands are going to have to be more than just singing and dancing, and will go the way of playing instruments like the Jonas Brothers. I mean they've been doing it on 'American Idol' and I'm pretty sure those guys know what's big in pop. Anyway I guess bands like the Jonas Brothers (who I really don't think I've actually heard) aren't new (remember Hanson?, I just think they will try and use instruments to show authenticity. Although like David mentioned earlier, the Monkees weren't very good at their instruments... hmm. I'll have to think about this more.
ReplyDeleteI think the NSYNC guys had talent. I also think that if that if the industry had not brought this group of guys together you may have never heard of Joey Fatone, or Lance Bass. They themselves were probably not good enough to sustain their own vocal careers. As shown by the lack of cd's coming out from these guys, other than Justin. I think that before any guy gets in a boy band, he should assume it is a short term gig. With the exception of New Kids on the Block, but I think it is kind of creepy that these 40 year old women are going to these concerts and throwing their bras up on stage. Yikes! Even they were all nobodies until just recently. I am not sure where I am going with this except to say, that I do think there will always be boy bands as long as the market realizes that the teenage kids have such a huge influence on the music industry.
ReplyDeleteDavid didn't post last night because he got caught up playing Beatles Rock Band (which you guys should play when you're in next weekend). Look for his late comment today...
ReplyDeleteI feel that there are two different types of 'talent' at play when it comes to this discussion. There's the talent that the majority of these guys had, which is the ability to sing extremely well, and harmonize, which is obviously something that's not easy to do. However, all you need to do is watch one of the later season episodes of American Idol to realize that this type of talent is (while not extremely common), far more widespread than the other type.
ReplyDeleteThe other type of talent is possessed by the likes of Michael Jackson and Justin Timberlake. While Jackson certainly was a once in several generations type of talent, Timberlake also stood far above the crowd in terms of vocal ability, and with his general gift to entertain.
If every generation of boy band can produce someone like MJ or JT, then the thought of another few years of pre-fabricated boy-band goo is much easier to handle.
As for my opinion of the music of Nsync, I think that they were basically just a front for the careers of Justin and JC. With the exception of the cover of Sailing from the self-titled first album, and a couple of songs from Celebrity (Girlfriend and Gone,) the songs are nothing but mass produced, sugary goo. While this has it's place in music, and definitely has many followers when this type of thing is in the upward trending phase, I feel like the most important conversation that can be had when it comes to the group involves the market impact they had, and the real talent that was spawned after the dissolution of the group. After all, I'm not necessarily sure that it was the music itself that was the real reason for the millions of girls that bought their albums, went to their concerts, and had posters of them on their walls.
ReplyDelete