I think so. 

Yep. Everybody can get to the top. Not everyone can stay there

4 minutes ago, Badgalbriel said:

Yep. Everybody can get to the top. Not everyone can stay there

 Not everybody can reach others "tops" either despite being around longer. 

 

Before anyone starts dragging Britney she has cemented her legacy. I'm not refering to her. 

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by WhateverYouWant

Just now, WhateverYouWant said:

 Not everybody can reach others "tops" either despite being around longer. 

What does that even mean? 

I don't think it's that simple. What you do when you're on top matters too.

 

Amy Winehouse or Lauryn Hill have far more claim to legend status than, say, Maroon 5.

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by Virgos Groove

I mean, longevity has always been a key factor for becoming a legend. That alone is not enough, but you definitely need it to reach legend status. 

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by Klein

4 minutes ago, Badgalbriel said:

What does that even mean? 

Artists can have big peaks or influence in a shorter time then someone who can stay successful for a longer period of time. 

 

 

Amy or Lauryn for example 

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by WhateverYouWant

Shocking revelation 

3 minutes ago, Cain said:

Shocking revelation 

With as much "x ended x" commentary that gets made, you'd think it is a revelation, tbh. Until the dust settles, the lights fade, the costumes come off, the budget runs out, or the summer ends. 

Being around for a long time won't mean much if you can't give anything people will remember. 

19 minutes ago, Klein said:

I mean, longevity has always been a key factor for becoming a legend. That alone is not enough, but you definitely need it to reach legend status. 

I don't agree. Some artistes will lingers like for ever but if they didn't make a difference on arts/culture/industry, what is so legendary about that? It's commendable to still be somewhat relevant and commercially viable decades after your debut, yes, but this isn't rare. Legends are one of a kind.

Fads are never considered legends. It's different for Lauryn because she made impact off of only having one solo album. Also she was in a hip hop group before going solo. It takes more than longevity to be considered a legend but at the same time longevity matters for legend status as well.

43 minutes ago, futuresuperstar2023 said:

Fads are never considered legends. It's different for Lauryn because she made impact off of only having one solo album. Also she was in a hip hop group before going solo. It takes more than longevity to be considered a legend but at the same time longevity matters for legend status as well.

Impact on culture is what matters imo. If that's 1-2 albums or 10. How many Elvis songs can you name off the top of your head? Or how many Marilyn movies can you name? It's the impact on the culture and influence that makes a legend 

 

50 years from now nobody will checking stats and saying this person sold this much and was once popular for x amount of time. People will remember people who are worth remembering. Those people will be legends. 

 

Kim Kardashian will probably be more remembered than most of our faves 50 years from now. I don't make the rules but that's reality. 

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by WhateverYouWant

#1's dont make a legend

3 minutes ago, futuresuperstar2023 said:

Fads are never considered legends. It's different for Lauryn because she made impact off of only having one solo album. Also she was in a hip hop group before going solo. It takes more than longevity to be considered a legend but at the same time longevity matters for legend status as well.

Lauryn is a one of a kind artist, she was already iconic before launching her solo career and she had something to say with her debut album. She's the type of artist that knew what we wanted to say, said it, and let the body of work transcend generations. 
 

 

It's a #casebycase thing. If someone only has one album that did well, but that album was an absolute revelation and captured everyone's hearts, they will probably be seen as more of a legend in the history books than someone who consistently stayed on top. Conversely, someone can be disregarded when they're active (maybe they are popular but their music is not "acclaimed") but when they die they become legends because people remember their songs. There are different variants at play. There are 500 different ways to become a legend.

 

Sidenote: A lot of experimental, underground, and hyperpop scenes and artists sample or are inspired by the music of Britney and Kesha. When these two were at their peaks, they were disregarded artistically as just manufactured stars. However, they are now inspiring an entire generation of experimental and "establishment approved" scenes and artists (and also mainstream girls). What was once considered lowbrow becomes highbrow with time. Just look at genres like rock 'n' roll and jazz, which are now acclaimed after being previously looked down upon by the establishment. In this way, I could see a pop artist who is initially seen as manufactured and too "lowly" to be a legend become a legend because of how they inspire future generations.

Edited July 15, 20242 yr by BOOMBAYAH

Mostly true & spilled

It's been so long since I've heard Nicki formulate this many decent sentences in a row and have them make sense too 

1 hour ago, TipToe said:

I don't agree. Some artistes will lingers like for ever but if they didn't make a difference on arts/culture/industry, what is so legendary about that? It's commendable to still be somewhat relevant and commercially viable decades after your debut, yes, but this isn't rare. Legends are one of a kind.

What are you disagreeing with? That's what I said in the second sentence, no? 

 

1 hour ago, Klein said:

I mean, longevity has always been a key factor for becoming a legend. That alone is not enough, but you definitely need it to reach legend status. 

She actually made some good points. 

I'll agree with Onika…on this 

I agree with Nicki honestly. That's how it mostly works

For me, it's worse when they think they're "on top" when they clearly aren't.
 

Being on top is not just hitting #1 and disappearing the next week or going viral on TikTok while that song can't even surpass 500M streams

Fads usually have no longevity after their peaks