Listening to Norah Jones i realize she is refreshingly talented in a buisness built on studio creation. It perplexes me how she has been doing so well however…there is nothing flashy about her or her music, it’s just good. So why is classy Norah selling so well?
She’s inoffensive and mildly exotic, which fits right in with what baby boomers like in their music now, so she sells well. I think her music is dull, generic, tired and uninspired, but I know I’m outnumbered on that issue.
Couldn’t agree more. She’s a less poppy, more jazzy Sarah McLachlan - even using some of the same vocal cliches - another fairly whitebread musician who I think is an utter hack but who has carved a huge niche as a non-offensive but fashionable artist.
Well, I like Norah. Which, may be saying something as I am widely known for hating everything. I think I like her voice more than anything else. She has a gorgeous voice, but…yeah the rest of it is rather basic. If I didn’t like her voice so much I probably wouldn’t like her at all. Her personality…or what I have seen of it…is also inviting. She seems to enjoy being herself and I have not seen her selling herself to any shitty production that will have her. That is a rare thing for someone so popular.
I hate to sound jaded, but I have to wonder if Norah’s success isn’t due in at least some small part to her father (Ravi Shankar). Not that she’s not good, but I suspect she’s gotten somewhat further than other, equally good artists who DON’T have an industry “in.”
Please. I realize that you qualified your statement, LifeOnWry, but this kind of thing really, really bugs me. I wish people could just accept that tastes are different without having to undermine the achievements of anyone who does manage to be successful.
The same type of implication was made against Sofia Coppola, and it was bullshit then. With Jones, it’s even more ludicrous, because she doesn’t have the same name and she doesn’t talk about him. In all of the interviews I’ve read, it seems as if she’s actually going out of her way not to talk about him. The implication is that she has no relationship with her father, and he definitely didn’t give her an “in.”
I have to wonder if people would be saying the same thing if Coppola and Jones were the sons of celebrities, or is it just women who can’t make it on talent alone?
Back to the OP, I didn’t bother to listen to Norah Jones’ music for two reasons: 1) she was already insanely popular, and anything popular can’t be good; and 2) the photo on her first album is insanely hot, and any woman that hot can’t be talented. I finally listened to Come Away With Me and was hooked almost instantly. She’s got a stunning voice and she chooses interesting material. And, she’s all over the place, musically. Plus, I’ve since seen her in live interviews and she’s just charming and comes off as really intelligent, hip, and humble. The woman can do no wrong.
I don’t think it’s that hard to believe that what impressed me from her demo material and her personality, impressed the marketing guys at her record company, and caused them to put a big push behind the first album. It didn’t hurt that there was a big push for young female singer/songwriters at the time, and she has a lot more “crossover” potential with younger and older audiences than a lot of the others.
She’s hot. That can’t hurt.
“Come Away with Me” was a dazzlingly beautiful song that came out at a time when a large part of the music-seeking world was seeking music that had a real tune, sung by a real voice, backed by real and well-played instruments. No matter how many modern groups the youngun’s here mention, their music features none of these things.
But the success of the album is indeed inexplicable. I can’t listen to it without thinking of Neil Young’s line on Four Way Street, introducing “Don’t Let It Bring You Down.”
“It starts off real slow, and then fizzles out altogether.”
I didn’t buy the album, but 8 million others did. I guess that’s what a hit song does for you. Remember, 8 million people bought the Counting Crows’ August and Everything After on the strength of “Mr. Jones” and look how their career turned out.
In popular culture, lightning strikes. There’s no good explanation for it 99% of the time.
But pop songs are supposed to be catchy and hummable. A good one will work, every time. Anyone surprised by the success of “Hey Ya,” go to your room.
For me, it’s the voice, pretty much. It’s very recognizable and interesting, and she picks a range of styles of music.
I hardly think he counts as an “in”, since he wasn’t involved in raising Jones and apparently did nothing to help her career. They didn’t even speak for a decade. I don’t think it’s likely that she got a recording contract because she went in and said, “Hey, I’m the illegitimate daughter of that sitar-playing guy…you know, the one who hung out with the Beatles!” Jones has also obviously had far more mainstream success than Anoushka Shankar, Ravi Shankar’s legitimate, sitar-playing daughter.
When “Come Away With Me” started getting a lot of radio airplay I was dimly aware that Jones’s father was some fairly famous musician, but labored for months under the mistaken notion that she was the daughter of Tom Jones!
“Good”? Oh well. Let’s move on to the how That Stuff leads to success.
It’s pure vanilla, watered down pop. The kind of background music that appeals to the retirees that dominant Grammy voting. So she wins Grammys. That certifies her to be played over and over on the “Phil Collins is so hip and now!”* stations.
*Actual “listener” quote from a recent ad.
I’d rather listen to Norah over Britney any day.
I don’t listen to her, don’t know any of her songs, and except for the fact that I know that she’s a singer, I don’t know who she is.
But some of the early posts in her caught my attention. She’s inoffensive and that’s a bad thing? What do you mean by inoffensive? She doesn’t swear? She doesn’t get graphically sexual? She doesn’t do anything that certain people would find offensive, and therefore, that’s a bad thing in some of your eyes?
I’m really curious, what do you mean by inoffensive?
I think their intended meaning of “inoffensive” was that she is “clean”…no vulgararity in the music, no blatant sexuality…in her interviews she seems very real and down to earth sweet. Although she is a very attractive lady. I don’t think anyone was saying that being inoffensive in itself is negative, but maybe that this quality is marketed as a niche at the expense of the actual music…i just think her music is good and she has a great voice.
Sorry for the hijack…
I bought August only after hearing some of the album other than “Mr. Jones,” which is clearly weak pop. And to this day, I still love that album, even with “Mr. Jones” on it.
And being a fan who occasionally stops by the official message boards, as well as a few other informal spots, I’d say the group is not suffering. That is, I assume your “look how their career turned out” was a dig that they did, indeed, fizzle. Though “Long December” was arguably a bigger hit than “Mr. Jones,” and though it never really caught on (because it was too generically like “Mr. Jones”), “American Girls” made a good attempt last year. “Colorblind” was a definite under-the-radar success, largely driven by inclusion in soundtracks all over.
I don’t think a group that can continue to release material and tour successfully can be pidgeonholed as those “Mr. Jones” guys.
End hijack…
I think her popularity is due to a very special sonic “je ne se quois”. Her own style is so apparent, nothing quite like it. I am drawn to allusions of Natalie Merchant… they both just have “it”, know what I mean?
I have to assume that this was a broadcast from Bizarro World, or some other planet where Phil Collins is currently “now” and was ever “hip”.
It’s not unusual … no, wait, it is unusual, actually. Hadn’t heard anyone think of linking her to Tom Jones before.
I wasn’t going to mention my opinion because it’s kinda nasty, but since others have already mentioned it, I’ll chip in with my 2 cents.
Norah Jones is Britney for grown-ups. You’ll see it every year or so; an artist (usually female) who makes it big on the charts and everyone claims is “different” because, you know, she writes her own songs, and maaaan, what a voice!
(To which, I always think - yeah, well, Aretha Franklin didn’t write her songs. What’s the big deal about that? And yeah, well, voices are a dime a dozen. It’s what you do with it that counts.)
So tell me if you can see the pattern:
Jewel, Alicia Keys, Norah Jones. All pop singers that appeal to adults. All reasonably attractive. All paying lip service to a vaguely unusual style (folk, soul and jazz, respectively). All have some involvement in the creation of their material. All won Grammies. All got loads of critical kudos. All ‘really different to the Britneys out there.’ All bound to disappear in a couple of years.
So the answer to the OP? It’s a formula. Next year, have a look for, I dunno, some supermodel singing reggae-lite, or blues-pop or something.