Strike a Pose: Most Chameleon-Like Pop Stars Ever

Dylan in this convo is funny cause a huge part of his deal is obv that he’s ~elusive~ ~mercurial~ and all this but the idea that he had major switch ups in sound & appearance is, I guess you had to be there. In 2022 it sounds like he went from folk to folk-rock and put on sunglasses

Don't forget the face paint and hat!

I could see an argument that Earnest Folky > Thin Wild Troubadour > Country Crooner > Married Man/Unmarried Man > Rolling Thunder Carnival Barker > Apocalyptic Preacher is chameleonic (at least in presentation), but at each stop along the way he was actually bending the material to Dylan not the other way around.

Let me try again.

I’m counting quickly, but Brenda Lee had 27 Top 40 hits, which is many more than the Ronettes. Is Brenda Lee more famous? I’m guessing that’s also more than Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin combined Same question.

Whoever directs the next Marvel film, that film will probably be seen by more people worldwide than all the films Jean-Luc Godard directed in his entire career. Will that make Next Marvel Director more famous than JLG?

There are different ways to measure fame.

Slim Whitman sold more records in Europe than Elvis and The Beatles combined. Or so went the infomercial that ran on UHF stations over and over when I was a kid.

This is like that thread where we tried to parse exactly how famous KISS is, and got into existential territory (what do album sales really mean?, etc.)

The Isleys have a cross-generational, cross-racial appeal and anyone could recognize them for ANY ONE of MULTIPLE feats: "Shout" and "Twist and Shout" in the early days of rock and roll, being part of the Motown empire, the funk hits, the disco hits, the Soul Train appearances, the quiet storm hits, the MTV presence with R. Kelly.

Lou Reed did one thing of interest to nerds and had one solo song and the rest of his career depends on whether the words "Lester Bangs" or "John Cale" mean anything to you

This is like that thread where we tried to parse exactly how famous KISS is

Now there's a band that started out with nothing much beyond the desire to be "famous" who succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.

They’re like chameleons – with makeup and without makeup!

They actually should get an honorable mention for deciding to ditch their most distinctive feature and be literally unrecognizable, such that a crossfade was needed on MTV from old look to new look.

I think the guy on the far right in the DMR photo is Seb Shelton who had been in Secret Affair as a Glory Boy/Mod Revivalist so that's quite a change. Not sure what the style thing was like with the Bureau who a lot of DMR split off to become.
& DMR did seem to have a new look every few months including the leather jacketed docker look and the early sports/jogger thing which I think the general public took several more years to pick up

just accept that the Isley Brothers are famous!

I'm pretty sure I've never said they aren't; I've been trying to argue that I don't think they're as famous as Neil Young or Lou Reed. Fame is relative. Compared to me, Doctor & the Medics are famous, and Samantha Fox is really, really famous.

To the other tenacious Isleys advocate, I think you started out sort of agreeing with me on the Isleys, and used their billing behind Stereolab at a music festival as evidence. Or maybe that was a joke, I don't know--you used some internet acronym that means nothing to me. Anyway, if you weren't kidding, and the Isleys are more famous than Lou Reed but less famous than Stereolab, does that make Stereolab more famous than Lou Reed?

What I'm arguing, not very successfully apparently, is that there is a deeper and more lasting kind of fame, and that yes, influence is part of it. "Lou Reed did one thing of interest to nerds and had one solo song and the rest of his career depends on whether the words "Lester Bangs" or "John Cale" mean anything to you"--that's a terrific description of the Velvet Underground's place in history. A few years ago, I started collecting cover versions of the Beatles, Neil Young, and the Velvet Underground. I think I've got about 15 tribute albums for the VU and about 25 for Neil Young. I've got another, I don't know, two or three hundred cover versions of each (including the Isleys covering Neil Young--"Ohio," I think). I'm sure there's a tribute album or two to the Isley Brothers, and also sure there's not anywhere near as many as 15 or 25. That, to me, is part of a more lasting fame.

Can we please go back to making fun of how vague this thread is?

that state of affairs speaks to the politics of who gets canonized more than anything else but the bigger issue is that this thread is impossibly vague

I was saying the Isleys headlined over Stereolab at a Pitchfork festival so I doubt their fame is limited to black people

xpost

To the other tenacious Isleys advocate, I think you started out sort of agreeing with me on the Isleys, and used their billing behind Stereolab at a music festival as evidence. Or maybe that was a joke, I don't know--you used some internet acronym that means nothing to me.

Whiney's argument was that the Isley Brothers are in fact more famous among white rock dorks than I think they are — as evidence, he mentioned that they headlined over Stereolab at the Pitchfork festival. I was not aware that they'd performed there, and it sounds like it was probably awesome.

I think you're using a very Jann Wenner-esque framework to decide who's "famous" and who's not. Let's try a little test: Regardless of his chameleonic qualities (which I think are negligible) famous do you think Bad Bunny is? How famous do you think Romeo Santos is, with or without his former band Aventura?

A few years ago, I started collecting cover versions of the Beatles, Neil Young, and the Velvet Underground. I think I've got about 15 tribute albums for the VU and about 25 for Neil Young. I've got another, I don't know, two or three hundred cover versions of each (including the Isleys covering Neil Young--"Ohio," I think). I'm sure there's a tribute album or two to the Isley Brothers, and also sure there's not anywhere near as many as 15 or 25. That, to me, is part of a more lasting fame.

Hey, Lou Reed was sampled by Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch, who, coincidentally, have have more hit singles than Lou Reed

I don't understand why "extreme fame" was brought up as a criterion in the first place. I understand that no-one cares if a nobody with no audience changes their image, but in a way it would be more risky for a mid-level performer, perhaps with a cozy genre niche, to take a left turn in terms of music and image (Dirty Mind is the first thing I think of).

I was thinking about this thread the other day and came up with a few ideas and then realized none of them were pop stars (Miles Davis, Brian Eno, PJ Harvey)

are you aware of confirmation bias?

Fair point, as is the point about sampling. But there's also the point I was trying to make, which was that--I believe, anyway--Neil Young and Lou Reed (especially as part of the Velvet Underground) are more influential than the Isley Brothers, and I was using tribute albums as an example. (Trying to stay clear of the fact that tribute albums are generally a bad idea.)

You've brought up other artists you want me to comment on, but the analogies I've thrown out--Brenda Lee vs. the Ronettes/Janis Joplin/Jimi Hendrix, Jean-Luc Godard vs. Next Marvel Director--those just glide by, and no one responds to them.

As I said above, I'm now sorry for ever having brought up fame in the first place. It was, in my mind, part of what made the drastic changes by Bowie and others I mentioned so interesting--that a lot of people were paying attention, that they made news--but I wish I hadn't mentioned it.

Dylan in this convo is funny cause a huge part of his deal is obv that he’s ~elusive~ ~mercurial~ and all this but the idea that he had major switch ups in sound & appearance is, I guess you had to be there. In 2022 it sounds like he went from folk to folk-rock and put on sunglasses

― Wiggum Dorma (wins), Wednesday, October 19, 2022 1:44 PM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Don't forget the face paint and hat!

― Halfway there but for you, Wednesday, October 19, 2022

And this!

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/6b/6f/55/6b6f555c8fda42af7c17f556431fafc7--bob-dylan-twist.jpg

But there's also the point I was trying to make, which was that--I believe, anyway--Neil Young and Lou Reed (especially as part of the Velvet Underground) are more influential than the Isley Brothers

clemenza...I can't.

Beyonce just scored a #1 song with Beyonce. The Isleys kicked ass at Pitchfork three years ago (I was there). They're foundational R&B who've adapted to every trend in the last 70 years. They don't need tribute albums: the tributes are around us on Black radio stations.

and she scored one with the Isleys too!

They're not as influential as Neil Young or Lou Reed. I'm not convincing you, and you're not convincing me.

It's fair to conclude from your posts that you don't listen to much R&B, funk, or hip-hop, right?

Did the Beyonce song hit #1 because of the Isley Brothers--did she piggyback on their fame, or might that have something to do with the fact it was a Beyonce song?

Less so since Pazz & Jop went under--I hardly keep up with anything since that happened--but before that, not true at all. Checked my albums, and I've got five by the Isleys (including compilations covering the early years, Motown, and two for their '70s stuff).

Well, the song first appeared on The Heat is On. They re-made with her. I don't doubt her propulsion helped, but it doesn't matter: Beyonce wanted to work with them.

I asked the question about your listening because, again, the Isleys were shaped by and shaped so much of what developed in the next 70 years of R&B music. I'm sort of boggling my eyes that the number of tribute albums Neil Young inspired is your metric of influence.

You've brought up other artists you want me to comment on

I just remembered: the Isleys were already coming up as victims of white radio and MTV racism in 1983.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZGiVzIr8Qg

I like the Isleys a lot, but I feel like they had a lot of peers who took their accomplishments further. Even in the '70s I don't think they were on par with Al Green, Parliament/Funkadelic and many others.

You know, you should take a look at the eight Isley Brothers threads on ILM. The main one has 100 posts, the other seven (including a poll) combine for about 50. I know all of you would be busily posting on them if you had the time, but you're too busy listening to your Isley Brothers albums.

(The first two Lou Reed threads I checked had a combined 1,600 posts. The Neil Young thread that's always active has ~4,500.)

"I'm sort of boggling my eyes that the number of tribute albums Neil Young inspired is your metric of influence." I brought that up as one thing! It's not my metric of influence--it's one thing among many.

tbf discussion on ILM is probably not a metric for fame

I would say that "this is someone people talk about a lot" is a metric of fame.

are you aware of confirmation bias?

Fair point, as is the point about sampling.

nerds are more interested in guys who can't sing than long running r&b acts, glad that's settled

I changed my mind and decided Miles Davis is the one and only best answer to this

My "you" was probably just a general you, since I evidently disagree with everyone here.

Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Lou Reed--we nerds love people who can't sing.

Just in terms of musical shifts, yeah, I would say Miles Davis is as good an answer as any.

chamillionaire

Jason Derülo

"I asked the question about your listening because..."

Actually, I think I know exactly why you asked it.

I asked it because if you still did the question about the Isleys' influence would've answered itself

No, not at all. That they've now shared a #1 hit with Beyonce does not, for me, leap-frog them in influence over Neil Young or Lou Reed. One of last year's biggest documentaries was Todd Hayne's VU film. Does that count for anything?

Was Parliament/Funkadelic more chameleonic than the Isley Brothers? I'm sure George Clinton took more psychedelics than the Isleys combined.

The Isley Brothers certainly changed more, but I think Parliament/Funkadelic's blend of funk and rock was much more expansive and innovative than the Isley's.

Or Isleys'

But we're not making evaluative claims on this thread, no?

I am confident in my evaluation of George Clinton's consumption of psychedelics.

genuinely regret ever bringing up the isleys. jesus h. corbett.

I'm having popcorn and I'm waiting for more metrics to be thrown in. HoF induction date anyone ?