Originally posted by Darth Sexy
How many times did you or someone you know in high school do something or buy something that they thought would make them more popular? Hmm lets think about that one for a second.
In terms of music? Very few. I don't know what kind of high school or college you attend, but from what I've seen, people generally only buy their type of music.
Now, I can see if we were discussing clothes, or something of the like, seeing as some people actually do that, but this kind of music? Not so much. Even if you were talking about rap music, I could see, but Paris Hilton? Not really.
How do you figure this?
Figure what?
Fine then, define talent.
I don't necessarily have any set definitions for talent, actually. If anything, it's someone who has an ability to do something better than others, or plainly sounds good doing it, and can actually make something of it.
Really, though, it's hard for me to "define" something like that, seeing as: a) it's an opinion, and b) multiple definitions could be said for that word.
No, but one could argue that no Rock N Roll singer is AS talented as Elvis, which I would agree with.
But, that's not what I inferred you as doing from your other post, and isn't what I was arguing anyways.
I wasn't saying you listen to wiggermania, I was stating that's what K-Fed is involved in. Maybe you should reread the statement.
Maybe you should go back, and correctly read what I wrote, instead of thinking you actually have a clue what you're arguing:
Darth Sexy: But I guess my definition of talent(actual talent), is different than yours(wiggermania and tone deaf voice).
Advent: Care to point out these supposed "wiggers" I listen to, and believe to be uber talented?
You said I define "talent" as "Wiggermania". Which is an improper assumption to make, and is untrue, regardless. Now, the part about listening to that type of music was, I'll admit, a misconception of your post on my part, however, I still addressed the point. So, it's your turn to tell me where I've seriously stated that my definitions on musical talent is "Wiggermania", or whatever the hell dumb shit you label it as.
You'll note that if you actually read through the last few posts I've made, I quoted about me being sarcastic. And if you couldn't tell that through my posts, then honestly you're a moron (see: K-Fed beating someone like John Cena in a street fight).
And why bring up gothic nonsense? It's as bad as homosexuality.
Ooh! Another opinion. The point of me bringing up that "gothic nonsense" was from earlier in the thread.
Yes, I "hate" anyone who isn't talented but still makes music because he/she either has the money, or the looks. No it's not jealousy(would be a predictable rebuttal), I just despise bullshit.
Like I could actually take your word on jealousy? Get real. Anyways, again, it's your opinion that so and so isn't talented. You don't sell records in the number Paris did just because you have money, seeing as I don't recall much promotion on her part (on MTV, I'm sure, but certainly nothing like Diddy's or The Re-up, for example).
True but I can refute your post if you decide to tell me Paris Hilton is talented.
No, you really can't, Sexy. If I believed Paris to be talented, what exactly does that mean? Nothing, it doesn't mean I perceive other pop artists like her (for example, Lindsay Lohan or Hilary Duff).
She can? Have you heard the majority of the world sing?
Have you ever watched American Idol, lol?
Better yet have you heard her sing?
Have you heard her sing live (and been there)? If not, then what exactly are you aiming at here? Seeing as the same thing can be applied to you.
However, I will be as she's going on tour, from what I hear (can't wait).
Think ashlee simpson. Or is that talent too?
What the ****?
Ashlee Simpson? Since when is anyone else even relevant to the conversation? What you don't understand is that just because other celebrities may come out with albums or songs, it doesn't mean that they don't have talent or that I believe they have talent. Which is your entire assumption, which is blatantly just stupid.
By the way, Ashlee Simpson had the biggest debut album by a female artist, and went triple platinum. A hell of a lot of people must think she has talent if she went that far. Yes, she had that whole lip syncing ordeal, but get over it. And really, you are an ignorant twit who thinks your definition of talent is correct, and anyone else's is wrong.
What you don't understand is: It's. An. Opinion. Get off your high horse, seeing as no one gives a shit what you think. Likewise with me, however, I've at least acknowledged it. You still rant and rave as if you are the Almighty, Definer of All That is Talent.
What abilities does she have exactly?
Singing ability? Acting ability? Modeling ability? She's got some diversity, actually.
Name something that she got NOT by being a "hilton", but by doing on her own. Oh that's right, nothing.
Oh, right, Sexy. The world just buys her music because "z0mg! It's Paris Hilton! MUST BUY!".
I can agree that it's true she would get much more publicity, however, that doesn't necessarily equate to her being able to record, and sell half a million albums. Just because she's rich, because she's a Hilton does not mean she isn't talented.
Your obviously so blind that you cannot get past the fact she has "Hilton" in her last name. BFD. It doesn't mean she isn't talented.
She has? Where? What is she doing that others can't do? WHAT critics hail her music as "good", or even as "music"? Please show me these "critics".
http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:iw3zefrk5gf6~T1
Really though, the point is: not everyone likes the same type of things, some are turned off by the "Paris Hilton"-esque artist and music, or generally feel that it's shit. Are they correct, though? No. I've read several reviews from famous critics who thinks she sucks ass, but does that mean she does because they think so? Again, no.
The same thing applies in this conversation.
Does a few people liking her music equate to her having talent?
Oh, Buddha. "A few people"? Care to show where you've researched, in depth, the age scale of people who've bought her album? If not, I'd suggest you STFU, and stop generalizing. Furthermore, the fact of the matter is that there are people, who aren't young teens, who like her music.
Yes, boo no talent assclowns.
Originally posted by Advent
That's your opinion, and I'm not going to argue it, seeing as it's clear you have a strong bias against her, and others who you would assume to be similar.
She's a hilton, a celebrity. I can also pay a clown a million dollars to show up at my party, must mean he's successful huh.
1. You don't have a million dollars to even pay with, so what are you going to use as currency?
2. So, because she's a "Hilton, a celebrity" she gets a million bucks to appear? No. Her sister doesn't get shit, and there are quite a few celebrities (Tara Reid, for example) who didn't get more than several thousand.
Again, the point is: if she was such a "walking, talking imbecile" she wouldn't get paid that much just to appear. She's important, and people must like her, and want her to appear, which was the point.
No need, you've yet to show me what she's done for herself that didn't include using her "name".
Originally posted by Advent
I can agree that it's true she would get much more publicity, however, that doesn't necessarily equate to her being able to record, and sell half a million albums. Just because she's rich, because she's a Hilton [b]does not mean she isn't talented.Your obviously so blind that you cannot get past the fact she has "Hilton" in her last name. BFD. It doesn't mean she isn't talented. [/B]