In Neil Young’s song “Old Man”, there’s a line that goes, “Doesn’t mean that much to me to mean that much you,” the "you" being his fans. To Michael Jackson, on the other hand, his fans meant the world to him. When they screamed, “I LOVE YOU MICHAEL!”, he would say “I love you more” back and mean it whole-heartedly.
These are just two extreme examples, but in general, do you think a singer/songwriter’s attitude to their fans is reflected in their music at all? Or does it not make much of a difference?
BQ: In your favorite sport, how important is fan loyalty?
2009-07-23T07:45:59Z
Carol-- I didn't say the whole song was about his fans. Just that line. Read his bio.
2009-07-23T07:46:49Z
Also, I would never insult him. He is my third favorite artist.
2009-07-23T07:53:57Z
This question got way too out of hand. I thought putting something in all caps would catch people's attention, but apparently not.
2009-07-23T08:04:33Z
My source-- "Shakey: Neil Young's Biography" by Jimmy McDonough
Carol's source-- "Wiki"
Who do you think is more credible?
Shot Gun2009-07-23T10:07:13Z
Favorite Answer
Hey, Matilda, how's it going?
First I'd just like to throw it out there that I really can't stand the song "Old Man", or for that matter, anything on "Harvest" except "Out on the Weekend". I much prefer After the Gold Rush and the so-called ditch trilogy to come.
Anyway, I think what you're saying represents a big difference between Michael Jackson's music and Neil Young's music. Michael Jackson was not only a great musician, he was a great entertainer. He, James Brown, folks like those threw great shows, usually based on mutual excitement by the fans and performer. (Something is really wrong with that sentence, but my head's not clear enough to fix it.)
Neil Young, on the other hand, often recorded, introspective, brooding, even hostile music. Where Michael Jackson's music can be a fantastic group experience, in a lot of ways, Neil Young's is best listened to alone.
So, to actually answer the questions, yes I do think the attitude is reflected in the music.
And to answer the question as if I had not followed directions, Neil Young.
BQ: Personally, I'm not very loyal to any franchise, sport or otherwise.
Not really comparing the two as artists, I think a signer/songwriter's attitude toward their fans comes through more at a live performance. I would rather an artist make good music that speaks to me on different levels, rather than just writing songs specifically aimed at their fans. This allows them to widen their fan base by reaching out to different types of listeners. I think most good artists do love and appreciate their fans, they just show it differently. They have to enjoy the freedom to create the type of music they wish to, without worrying about who they might offend. Neil's song line was not aimed at his fans. Michael's music was not really written that way either. He wrote about what he felt was important and tried to get his message across, even if it was controversial. I think that is why his music appealed to so many different people worldwide.
I don't see the comparison. I am very dumb about Michael Jackson, and I want to be. But what I see, if right about MJ, is: Neil Young wrote these words in lyric for production, and MJ just made a normal P and R statement. I could go on about the difference, but that seems understood here. I won't insult him here, but I have and will again. He is not my kind of people, nor is his music, my kind.
MJ; may be a "reflection", for your answer, I don't know. But, a gut feeling about MJ; From his attitude about life, that he portrays, or should I say reflects, he would only know fanfare and not real life. Neil's music is pure life, and fan reflection would have little to do with it. T. M. T.
Sport, Music, and Life, with out fans you fail to thrive.
Hi Matilda. Kudos on a really interesting question here. I tend to lean more towards Neil Young in this instance. I like to think that there is an appreciation for the fans, basically a complete apathy I think is a shame, but the way I see it that's a realistic and healthy perspective. He's doing what he's doing and people are liking it, but how much can you rationally "love" a stranger (loving "fans" is loving a concept) or try to please an abstract collective . Why should you seek the approval of people who you don't know and more importantly don't really know anything about you (as much as they may presume to know everything). I like it when an artist is appreciative of their fans. I think it should (though I don't see it as necessary beyond looking at it professionally and thus really only arriving at understanding and respect) be acknowledged that the fans are, well your customers, and I think it's really awesome when artists will go the extra mile, but I also think that if you go on and on about how much you "love" your fans, you've either lost perspective or you're more likely being totally disengenuous.
I agree with Carol that you're taking that Neil Young line out of context and misinterpreting it. When a song lyric includes the word "you" it's not always referring to the listener.
I think that a songwriter's attitude is reflected in the music if he or she wants it to be. Other than that, I don't think there's much of a difference. Of course, if I hear about an artist mistreating his or her fans, I'm less likely to enjoy the music in the future, unless it's REALLY, really good music. I don't know if Neil Young resents his fans in some way, but, he falls into the REALLY good music category, so I don't really care about his personality.
BQ: I think that fan loyalty is more important in sports than in music. Though music is a competitive industry, artists aren't directly competing with each other, with a winner each night (unless it's a battle of the bands situation).