Imitation And Limitation

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

During yesterday's DUFFY DUST-UP, there was a bit of talk about whether it matters if someone is riding on the market coat-tails of someone else. datura800 and girlboymusic both said things to the effect of "well that's just how the industry works, it's hardly a surprise". And I can see their point - when boy bands and girl groups are big, pop fans look for the elements that make each boy band interesting, rather than dismiss them a priori as a market response.

I'd like to take the debate wider and ask - when do you and don't you mind imitation and bandwagon jumping? Are the originals always the best? Does it make a difference when the trend (as with the Winehouse one) also has a relationship to much older music? What are some of the most blatant rip-offs you've enjoyed?

Comments

[datura800.livejournal.com]

OMGZ I'M NAMECHECKED IN A POPTIMISTS POST. Hahahah.

I should clarify what I meant - that when a huge artist hits the record labels start to look for more of the same kind of thing. In terms of what we were talking about I don't think that either Adele of Duffy are Amy Winehouse 'imitations', which is why I was defending them. Yet I'm under no illusions as to how they'll be marketed. If they were just poor Amy rip-offs then of course I'd be critical. But even then, if they were releasing brilliant songs then I wouldn't ultimately care what their origins were.

It's all too easy to forget that Radiohead's first album was dismissed as a poor imitation of Nirvana, that Kylie has long been seen by many as a lesser imitation of Madonna, that Tori Amos to this day is compared to Kate Bush. It's easy to get hung up on these things and lose sight of the work they produce themselves, and that's a shame.

[edgeofwhatever.livejournal.com]

HAHAHA ME TOO I FEEL SO COOL.