No, halo, I think you're missing my point. Several of them, in fact.
Think of Cher's "Believe". That was also a song by an artist on the decline which shot to #1. The difference? It's an extremely well-written song, and the production and performance are top-notch. Yes, there's the novelty Cher-bot aspect to it, but that's one aspect of many.
Then there's Britney. I also think the song is marginal at best. Not just on paper, but Britney's performance of same. But
it's number one. They took a marginal performance of a marginal song by an artist on the decline, and
got it to go number one. That's the amazing thing right there. Remember, Britney and her ilk don't make art. They make product. Their job is to crank out things that people will consume. And what they cranked out this time was marginal, at best - but they got it to sell a ton.
Some one was astute enough to put the "it's Britney bitch" at the beginning. Whoever had that idea better have gotten a bonus. (I'm sure her fans think it was her idea.) Something for fans to latch onto, a rallying cry, and even something for haters to scoff at. But it was something to hang the song on. The rest is a standard pop-dance-strut with a 3-2-3 chorus that's become fairly popular with in these pop-dance-struts. No biggie.
People seem to think this happens all the time. That substandard crap gets sent to the top of the charts, and that the record labels can manipulate the public into buying whatever it wants. Not even close. If it could, why bother signing "talent"? They could have Fred in accounting sing the songs.
Easiest proof of this? Kevin Federline. This shoulda been a slam dunk. He had name recognition before he ever walked into a recording studio. He was linked with a then-on-top-of-her-game pop starlet, and got her to guest on the album.
So what went wrong? "Lack of talent", say most. No. Not that I think K-Fed IS talented. But talent doesn't matter. I recorded myself singing a pop hit some years ago, and it sounds pretty good...even though my voice is marginal at best. Why? My friend's a producer. He manipulated my voice so it sounded really good. And this was back in 1998, in a home studio! These guys have the best in the business - both people and equipment - at their disposal. They can make anybody sound good.
So what happened to K-Fed? Two things. First, he chose rap. Big mistake. Rap is a genre where studio trickery can only mask your deficiencies so far. Plus, it's a genre where credibility is half the game, and getting your gig by being married to Britney Spears puts you in a major hole from the get-go. Secondly, whatever his faults, I don't think Federline is the puppet that Britney is. He co-wrote most of those crappy raps and boring beats. It may be shit (in fact, it is), but it's HIS shit. Had he done the puppet routine - told the record label "Pick pop songs for me, I'll sing them, and do whatever you want to promote them" - he'd probably be at least platinum by now. He'd probably still be married to Britney.
Britney, on the other hand, may be the ultimate puppet. I say that based on the few clips of that "reality" TV show she was on. It appears they told her, "Just be yourself"...and she couldn't.
When I say "statues rarely get erected for the right people", I don't mean that Tori et al should get statues first. I meant for this battle in particular. Britney showed up, sang the song disinterestedly a few times, and put on a half-baked show for it. The people behind the scenes went into overdrive, pushing this, nudging that, and the song is now #1. And right there, on iTunes, the song is credited to "Britney Spears". The behind-the-scenes people, though? Just another day at the office.
Side note. I remember Britney fans gave me (and others) grief for talking about her when she was down. I was told I should have sympathy for when somebody falls, as the pressures of fame are great. Strange that these same folks are now pushing her further up the mountain.
Lex
