No.
Well, the article is a persuasive argument for her brilliance. I think only history will reflect her importance, and it’s entirely possible that we will be hearing Bjork-influenced stuff in 10 or 20 years.
Hmmmm.
nitroglycerine, what was it that happened in 92 that suddenly put VU on your influence meter? FYI, they heavily influenced many people including Marc Bolan, the Stooges, and some guy you may have heard of named David Bowie way back in the early 70s. In fact, it was Bowie who said something like “only a thousand people saw VU, but every one of them started a rock band.”
Also, not to be harsh, but in terms of “relevance” and “influence” (your dimensions of “important”, and I agree with that assessment), Michael Jackson has been extremely important. His work from a very early age (like 5) was a big part of motown, R&B and modern soul in general. In fact, his white appeal helped bring a lot of those sounds to mainstream music. An extremely influential (if bizarre) man.
And not to be harsh, as I’m a Bob Marley fan as well, but I’d hardly call him important, either in terms of relevance or influence.
Hmmmm…Sonic Youth is the big one. The Pixies, Jesus and Mary Chain, Flaming Lips, Janes Addiction even The Butthole Surfers…and I’m using 92 as the year when all that kind of stuff broke big, and changed pop culture (at least as far as rock radio goes).
**
Mark Bolan and Bowie were already on there way when VU came out. I doubt the Stooges were influenced very much by VU, and I dare you to find a cite for that. Those two bands were on completly different planes of existence. Iggy might have been influenced by them in his post-Stooges work but not with the Stooges.
Oh. OK. Tell that to the millions of people worldwide who wouldn’t know Michael Jackson from dick, but who can recite all of Marleys lyrics like prayers.
Jon
I absolutely adore Bjork and consider her an amazingly talented individual - but I’d shy-away from calling her a ‘pop’ star.
‘Pop’ is happy throwaway rubbish for kids - it’s made by musicians who are mostly ‘single’ oriented - their albums being anything from 1 to 9 singles with some filler added for good measure 
Pop is the music you record from the radio (or download these days I suppose) and play in your own room as loud as your parents will allow (+2 notches for sport) - it’s the music you then listen to again in your late 20s and early 30s and remember the’good times’ whilst everyone younger than you just laughs at you
Bjork isn’t - and never was - about that sort of thing. Her music isn’t part of any ‘vogue’ or ‘trend’ and so it’s not time-specific either - all Pop music is.
She’s not a single-oriented artist either - her albums are about more than a couple of pop songs and some filler - they are coherent works in their own right.
That said - MJ is supposedly the King of Pop and I don’t consider him 100% Pop either - tho he’s FAR more ‘poppy’ than Bjork and he is quite single-oriented.
Just my 10p
JP
nitroglycerine wrote
Did you know the debut album by the Stooges (also Iggy’s first) was produced by John Cale, and that the Stooges picked him (i.e. not the label)? Although in fairness, Iggy wasn’t happy with some of the production and made changes after.
I mis-attributed the quote above to David Bowie by the way. It was Brian Eno (also heavily influenced by VU; he formed Roxy Music in 71 and they cut their first album in 72), who said that everybody who bought a VU album went out and formed their own band.
Right.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
You’ve got it backwards.
But that still doesn’t mean that the Stooges were musically influenced by VU. Steve Albini has produced plenty of things that have nothing at all in common with Big Black. John Paul Jones produced a Butthole Surfers album. That doesn’t mean they were influenced by Led Zep.
Jon
Muldoon, sorry, but you’re wrong and nitroglycerine is right. I have no doubt there are a great number of people who know Michael Jackson’s work and don’t know Bob Marley, but from the little I know, you’re flat-out wrong in your underestimating of Bob’s undying popularity around the world - the third world especially. I’m sure I don’t seem like an objective observer on the subject, but I had to chime in.
I think it’s too early to call Bjork influential, though I certainly agree that she is well loved by other musicians.
However, Bjork was arguably the first musician to popularise that sound - I don’t want to call it ambient electronica, because that sounds like music for cafes - but that concept of electronic music that still had beats but wasn’t made just for dancing. Sure, she wasn’t the first to do it - Aphex Twin is a notable predeccessor, as is Brian Eno. However, Bjork exposed the music to a wider audience than Aphex Twin, and was more about beats and song structures than the ambience of Eno.
From Bjork we see the rise of groups such as Sigur Ros, Boards of Canada, etc.
So while Bjork may not be the most important musician of her generation, when it is possible to hand out that tag, she has the potential to be in the running.
And I thought the swan dress rocked.
Anything good you can say about Bjork, you can also pretty much say about Yoko Ono. And while a lot of female rockers give polite lip service to Yoko’s influence, 35 years into the game I just don’t hear it on their albums. And 25 years from now, I really doubt we’ll be hearing a Bjork influence either.
Oh, and TheRealJohnPeat, “pop” isn’t really a pejorative term, it’s just shorthand for “anything that isn’t found in the Classical section.” Sinatra and Ella Fitzgerald are pop. Tom Rush and Kirsty McColl are pop. Johnny Cash and Christine Lavin and Manhattan Transfer are all pop. Unpopular performers performing in any kind of mass-market idiom are pop. Tuvan throat singers? Not pop.
Well, it seems that the 'mericans on this board who have piped up so far aren’t big bjork fans, but if I may put in a British perspective- bjork IS very highly thought of in Britain, and I think most music fans wouldn’t quibble if you called her “influential”. MOST influential, well, it’s debatable, but then any statement of that nature always is- and music journalists never seem to be too shy about using hyperbole.
I get the impression that she hasn’t made as big an impact in America as she in Europe, where many of us love her for her experimentalism, her eclecticism of influences and collaborators, her joie de vivre and her whimsy. But then there are others who think she’s a few sandwichs short of a picnic with a voice like fingernails on a blackboard. Who can say who’s right…
In all seriousness, important pop music is an oxymoron. Pop is, by definition, superficial, transient, shallow, simplistic, repetitive, conformist, and creatively limited.
Its sort of like saying what town’s McDonalds is the best.
I’m not sure quite which way to take this: do you mean Bjork is those things, or that she is not, but that pop music is, and thus she isn’t a pop musician? I’m not a Bjork expert - I’ve heard some of her more famous stuff and liked it fine, and I thought she was very good in Dancer in the Dark - but she’s never struck me as any of the things listed above.
You what?
The only think Björk has in common with Sigur Ros is nationality.
I’m not surprised that the people who think Thom Yorke is important also think Björk is important.
Dear Lord I hope not!
No, that’s too easy. Duke Ellington was certainly “pop” back when he was alive and at the peak of his creative powers, but he’s not any of the things you listed; if you were to rank all the important musicians of the 20th Century in order, you really couldn’t avoid sticking him in the top five. Eventually, his recordings will be found in the “classical” section of the store, just like Gershwin’s now are. Today’s dead, pedestaled demi-gods of culture are yesterday’s pop stars, with few exceptions.
I think Bjork is somewhat important, but her influence has been largely negative. She has largely invented this bland genre of sophisticated dinner party music so beloved of Mercury Music Prize judges and middle class people in their 30s who don’t buy CDs any more: dance music without the dancing, artists like Goldfrapp, Morcheeba, Faithless, Roni Size, Martina Topley-Bird. Portishead and Massive Attack get some blame too, but at least they’ve (more or less) split up.
1990s artists who were far more influential, if not necessarily better, include Alanis Morrissette, Puff Daddy, Spice Girls, Oasis, Shania Twain, Mary J Blige, and TLC.
One think you forgot–both are completely unintelligible and prone to glossopoeia. And I think both Björk and at least one member of Sigur Rós believe in elves.
–Lodrain, who likes Björk and tolerates Sigur Rós