Re: Madonna...Not Really All That Talented ?
Echoing some of the comments I've read here, I'm wondering how you all feel about Madonna, and her talent, (or lack thereof...)
In the raw talent department, she's a mediocrity at best, especially when compared to gay icons of yore, like Barbra Streistand and most especially Judy Garland. For years I dismissed Garland as the archetypal 'child star come to a bad end', and indeed she was, but she was also prodigeously talented: a great actress, terrific dancer, and on top of that . . . that voice. In her ability to put over a song, her only female equivalent was Billie Holiday. In fact, I wouldn't hesitate to call her the female Sinatra. Nobody would ever say any of the above about Madonna.
But then like Floria Tosca, Judy Garland was an
artist; Madonna, conversely is a business person with a keen knack for self-promotion (which is an art unto itself, albeit a degraded one). If Sinatra is Garland's male equivalent, Madonna's are . . . Mick Jagger and David Bowie: self marketers
sine qua non. However, unlike them, she hasn't written any songs of the calibre of, say, 'Wild Horses' or 'Heroes' (to name a few of many).
Which brings me to considering that at least part of Madonna's problem as a vocalist resides in the material available to her. Returning to Judy Garland, not only does she lack the pipes, neither does she have the likes of Irving Berlin or Harold Arlen lining up to write songs for her -- popular music composers of that caliber just don't exist anymore. Neither Billy Holiday nor Fred Astaire had 'great' voices, but each had that uncanny ability to 'put over a song', and thus are rightly remembered as great vocalists of The Great American Songbook.
Perhaps Madonna should consider recording an album of 'standards' from the Great American Songbook, just to see if she has that ability to 'put over a song'. But then to do that, a vocalist also has to be a good actor, and we all know about her talents in that department. Recall again that Sinatra, Garland, and Astaire all turned in some great movie performances where they didn't sing a note.
Which reminds me of yet another gay icon of yore: Maria Callas. La Divina's instrument wasn't as beautiful as many of her contemporaries -- her perfomances are so riviting because she was a great singing actress. You really believe her 'Tosca' is capable of stabbing Scarpia; her 'Medea' of murdering her children (a role which she performed non-vocally for Pasolini in his 1970 movie of the original Euripides.)
So in the final analysis, I suspect Madonna will be remembered as one of those people who are 'famous for being famous'. As there really isn't much there, I suspect her reputation will last no longer than her career.
