…but this is just manipulative pandering, and I resent it. Sadly, this sort of thing is widespread in the classical music world now. What it implies to me is that the musicianship is likely to be less than the best.
And I realize this use of "girl" is often resented, but this is not the way to present yourself if you want respect.
“And I realize this use of “girl” is often resented”
The word “girl”? Or “pretty girl[s]”?
the word “girl”.
There’s something kind of fresh and sweet about the phrase “pretty girl” that doesn’t apply to that picture.
AMDG
Very good point.
When the video for the 1995 version of Jane Austen’s Persuasion came out, there was a picture on the front of the box of a girl with about that same expression on her face, and a man behind her kissing her neck. Not only is there no scene like this anywhere in the movie–there is only one really chaste kiss at the end–the man and woman in the picture weren’t even in the movie. I can’t even figure out who the characters were supposed to be. They’ve changed the picture now.
AMDG
I dislike that kind of marketing too. I think I mentioned somewhere that I avoided Hilary Hahn’s recordings because she was pretty, and I assumed — wrongly, as it turns out — that her prettiness was emphasized because her musicianship wasn’t great. They say that one shouldn’t blame a musician/actor/writer for the way their work is marketed, but when the marketing includes photographs of the person in question, I think one can blame them, at least a little.
On the other hand, sometimes I don’t mind these sexy photos so much. I am trying not to think of Anna Netrebko.
There’s a line somewhere between “well, it can’t hurt to catch the customer’s eye with your pretty (or handsome) face” and low-cut dress, strap off shoulder, lips parted…. I just noticed this is a 2000 recording–perhaps she’s given up this sort of thing now. And of course it is possible that the marketeers pushed her into it.
Oh, and by the way, I am certainly not implying that I’m not susceptible–it definitely gets my attention, and that’s a big part of why it annoys me.
Yes, simply being pretty isn’t a fault in itself, and prettiness can be presented modestly. The less modest it is, the more annoying.
It’s all manipulative pandering, in my opinion, though that’s a pretty extreme example.
Others:
http://www.bondmusic.net/
http://www.ahntrio.com/v2/ahntrio.html
http://www.enfrentearte.com/hotel-ronda/uploaded_images/Diana_Krall-704019.jpg
I’ve been reading a recent biography of Monk, and it’s startling to read about how little control he had over the packaging and marketing of his own music, including the cover art, by the time was signed with Columbia. That’s not to say that these fair ladies have no control over their media images, I would like to think they can exert SOME control (e.g., “you are NOT taking my picture in this outfit”), but they may be somewhat limited in what they feel like they can say/do. It may even be in their contract to do that type of marketing.
Yes, it’s quite horrid. I mean, the manipulation, no the woman. Her pose is horrid. Save it for the marital bed, I say.
I am certainly not implying that I’m not susceptible–it definitely gets my attention, and that’s a big part of why it annoys me.
Exactly. Who wants to be manipulated so blatantly? It’s an insult to one’s intelligence as much as anything else.
I think the lassie is pretty, in her essence, but “pretty” is not the adjective I thought of when I saw the picture. “Slutty” was closer to the mark.
I was aware of Bond and of course Diana Krall, but not the Ahn trio. They aren’t so bad–I mean, they’re obviously making much of their looks, but at least in a tasteful way. And the standard is different in jazz and pop, so Krall doesn’t strike me as quite so bad (although, in passing, I think she’s somewhat over-rated). But Bond–they’re pretty much laughable.
When I read over this prior to posting it, I saw I had left the “n” out of “Bond” in the first sentence.
Light On Dark Water 
Leave a comment