Have you seen Amy Winehouse?
I think the thing is, she’s not supposed to look anything: unlike the majority of young female popular singers, she isn’t manufactured. The awful tattoos, the weird makeup, the dreadful beehive, the self-destructive behaviour - they’re all hers, and her style is a product of London youth subculture, not some marketeer’s ideas about what might have mass appeal.
I personally think she’s a great singer and an excellent songwriter (she writes most of her own stuff), and the reason she sings like with a voice that emulates soul/Motown/early R&B, is that she loves that kind of music. When she’s not completely off her face, she’s also an extremely charismatic, soulful, eccentric and competent performer. It was her live performance at the Brit Awards in 2006 (or was it 2007?) that first made me realise how talented she actually is.
(I also find her bizarrely attractive, but I guess I have a kink about that self-destructive thing. Sadly, I also think she would smell a little, and these days she looks a bit corpse-like.)
“Kind of obscure” 
In North America she is not so well known, it’s true, but she’s daily mainstream news in the UK. She gets the kind of coverage there that Britney is currenlty getting here. Oh, look, Entertainmentwise (UK) posted only a few hours ago that Winehouse’s jailed hubby wants a divorce! :: frenzy! frenzy! :: :rolleyes: Hell, she made the news in Austria when her condo application got rejected in London. :rolleyes:
She’s definitely less famous in North America, but in no way is even remotely obscure.
And I’m not s much making fun of her. I find her situation quite a bit more frightening than the Britney trainwreck. Winehouse went from a curvy, vampy diva (before and after pic) on the cover of Rolling Stone, to looking like a bag of antlers, missing a tooth, walking in the streets alone at night in the freezing cold, crying and wearing just jeans and a bra. I find her situation to be quite alarming.
Yeah, you couldn’t get away from that “Rehab” song for a few months last year, and her Back to Black album broke the Billboard Top Ten (and stayed there for months), selling over one million copies. Interestingly enough, the Back to Black album is the highest charting American debut by a British female artist.
She’s no Britney Spears, but she’s definitely wiggled her way into our own pop culture, too.
Actually, I have to clarify my earlier comment that I found her tunes “meh.” From a songwriting point of vew, I agree, they are quite excellent. And her vocals had some good emotive heft (not as sultry as Fiona Apple, but there’s a fierce undercurrent that works for her). I did not like the arrangements on the clips I heard. The tunes were good, her voice was good, but I didn’t like the sound. It just left me feeling “meh.” YMMV, I just didn’t like the overall sound of it.
Her vocals (pre-meltdown) are supposed to be phenomenal. And from what I understand, it was generally expected that she would be the mould-breaking, trend-setting “next big thing,” slated to be as big as Alanis Morissette was in the early 90s. (And I really didn’t like Morrissette’s sound either at first.)
Now that it’s clear that Winehouse is pretty much imploding, expectations are not nearly so grand. A lot of people can be wicked addicts and still get their act together to put on a great show and be the big star. Winehouse looks is starting to prove that “there’s no such ting as bad press” is a fallacy. She looks like she’s dying in front of everybody.
Well, that’s the thing. There are plenty of musicians with Gold Records who have behaved at least as badly, if I have the story right. I don’t recall ever hearing about them on the morning news, though (By the way, that’s what I meant by "why we’re making fun of her). She kind of sounds like she’s a Joan Osborne-type, but not as successful, and I wasn’t aware that was the same classification of celebrity as Brittney Spears.
“Back to Black” was one of my favorite new albums last year (US release). I really dig the retro sound, and to chime in with a few other posts, there are not many other female singers that I like either.
In my mind, far too many performers go either the big band or “songbook” route when they are thinking retro. And there is nothing wrong with either when done well, but those fields have been mined pretty heavily and can be pretty dreadful when done by the wrong person (I’m looking at you, Rod Stewart). I’ll admit its one of my favorite genres, but I think that many vocalists are better suited for that 1960s pop/rock school. And between the Brill Building, Motown, Phil Spector and Bacharach/David there is plenty of material to work with.
I did check out Amy’s first album, “Frank” and I was not impressed and I have also seen some live clips on You Tube that were trainwrecks so I will be interested to see if she has anything else worth listening to in her.
As for her personal problems - that’s just Rock and Roll. If I were to be offended by the substance abuse problems of musicians, I’d have to throw out half of my collection.
She looks great in the right-hand pic and absolutely frightening in the left-hand one. On the RS cover she looks really good except for that hair (edit) and the tattoos that make her look like a skank. She looked better without them. My opinion of course. And I am sorry but that is the ugliest hairstyle that’s come around in years.
I hope she gets the medical help she needs. Bi-polar disorder is a terrible disease to live with, for the person who has it and for everyone around her.
I’m not making fun of her either. The thread was to ask what’s so great about her that she’s revered as this immense talent and is up for a slew of Grammys, when I find her to be “meh” in the talent department.
I wouldn’t say she has the celebrity status as Spears, who is a global superstar (fame wise anyway), but she is getting about as much press in the UK right now.
The biggest difference is that she is still just starting to really be noticed in North America. The other big difference is that what brought her into the media spotlight has been raw talent. Winehouse eschewed industry conventions and kick started a new sound with a totally fresh look (part Elvira Mistres of the Dark, part Motown legend, part Hairspray). So although she is getting Spears-like press coverage for trainwreckedness, on a “fame scale” I’d put her more in the spot of Alanis Morissette when she was on the cusp of getting her multiple Grammy awards. New, cutting-edge, redefining pop music with a unique influence… but not blowing eveyone out of the water quite yet.
Winehouse earned her press early on, whereas Spears was more a carefully engineered product based on a prescribed industry formula. IMHO, the Spears implosion is generating a media frenzy because it’s become an extension of the media canival ride that was originally designed to keep Spears (the product) in the spotlight. Now Spears (the messed up kid) can’t get off the ride long enough to get her shit together. There is a certain point where Spears crossed the line from “pop star” to “famous for being famous”.
If Winehouse can pull herself together, I think she could be an international star ranking somewhere around the Gwen Stefani level or Jagged Little Pill era Morissette. But frankly, I don’t know if she’ll live long enough.
I actually thought that when she had her curvy body the crazy beehive worked for her as a kooky retro-quirk. (Heh, here’s a picutre of Winehouse compared to “Oh… My … God! Chandler Bing!” Janice from Friends). But once the beehive started looking all ratty and gnarly… ugh! It’s like something’s living in there!
And her tattoos, just seem to draw attention to her bone rack look.
Seriously? What the hell… ? That’s all kinds of fucked up.
I don’t really like her, either, but NPR loves her. I feel like I hear as much Winehouse news on the (music-only, no talk) NPR station here as the Brits do.
Partially i think its as much about the potential she has to be even better than she was pre-meltdown that is the big thing for me.
I was definitely a grudging convert to her talent, but once you’ve listened to her at her best its pretty hard to miss. Trouble is the chances of anyone hearing her best these days are terribly small.
Part of me thinks she’s going a bit Michael Jackson - where the presence of just one truly stabilising influence in her life (that she trusts) would be enough to sort her out. It’s very sad really.
As a side note, I recently learnt that the “victim” her husband hit (and then tried to bribe to drop charges, which is why he’s now in prison) was the arsehole Landlord of my (ex) local pub. Pretty much all my mates reacted to that news by saying “about time someone smacked him.” Strange but true.
Related to the OP, although not replying to it, may I ask what ‘What’s the deal with…’ actually means? Unless I’m missing something, it doesn’t mean anything. Would it be too much trouble for the questioner to actually ask what it is they want to know?
Means about the same thing as “… - Discuss”, I reckon.
“Amy Winehouse - Discuss”
Nice analysis, jjimm; +1.
Musos like her because she has clearly done her homework - she knows her music history - and yet has presented it as fresh. Kinda like when the Stray Cats broke open in London in the early 80’s - Setzer is such a monster performer and their look was full-on retro, but there was someting new and vibrant.
Her music is good - the songs are well-written.
Her voice is wonderful - that husky delivery. Similar to Fiona Apple - whom I really enjoy and respect - and they both have real danger about them. But Winehouse is more clearly in the pop category, whereas Fiona is more singer/songwriter - and Winehouse’s danger feels more standard “Bad Girl” whereas Apple’s danger is more “whack job” - don’t get me wrong, Winehouse’s recent behavior is clearly wacky, but Apple…man, she scares me.
I think with all of Winehouse’s behavior, I get a sense of authenticity - she is having substance abuse problems, is being told by friends and family that she should go to rehab and so she wrote a song about it. It doesn’t feel manufactured - this is really happening to her. Coupled with her delivery, it kicks things up a notch. To me, this is like Janis Joplin - knowing that she was treated very poorly in a number of relationships, coupled with her delivery (best ever, IMHO) really makes it feel like “hey, she is living this”…
Not really, it’s actually standard procedure (edit: for anyone with a drug conviction). In order to get a work visa, which is required for her to perform at the Grammy award ceremony (there are visa categories for “visiting artists”), she has been asked to pass a drug test first. Kate Moss had to do the same last year. You can be (and people usually are) denied entry to the U.S. if you’ve been convicted of any crime. Winehouse pretty much facing a “denial of entry” to the U.S.
Winehouse was arrested (edit: and convicted) for posession in Norway, had a widely publicized drug overdose, and this past December was banned from “normal jail visits” to see her husband after he tested positive for drugs shortly after she went to see him. (Normal jail visits are when you’re in a big cafeteria type space, now she can only visit him from behind a glass panel.) She was also arrested in relation to her husband’s witness-tampering case. In this case her arrest is a formality which means that the police can question her more thoroughly and she may not actually face any charges. But it’s the drug conviction that’s the big hindrance.
Basically she has to apply for a “waiver of inadmissibility”. I don’t know about the UK, but for Canadians if you are denied entry as a result of a narcotics offense you have to undergo a drug test and get a doctor’s note saying you’re clean. Then you apply for the waiver. For the typical (Canadian) person it can take 6 to 9 months to be processed, but there’s probably a fast-tracking thing for people who have enough money to pay whatever emergency porcessing fees there may be.
Uh, after and before pic. She appears to have deliberately trashed her sex appeal. Unless you think drugs did her makeup, tats and hair.
Ianzin: “what’s the deal with” means “what’s going on with?” or “what’s the story with” or “can you explain” whatever the subject is. So instead of titling this “What’s going on with Amy Winehouse? Where did she come from and why does everyone think she’s so talented? Can you explain the story of her popularity; and who thinks she has talent, because I’m not seeing it?” I just said “What’s the deal with Amy Winehouse?”
And the rest of the question went into the OP.
Oh, right, after and before. Actually, until the drugs made her scrawny and start losing her teeth, she still didn’t look so bad. When the beehive was well-kept and tidy and her physique was healthy, she still looked good, in a Bif Naked kind of way. Although for some reason the evenness of Bif’s tats don’t look as nasty has the harsh ones Winehouse has.
The first time I heard one of her songs it was on an alternative rock station and I couldn’t understand for the life of me why they were playing a Shirley Bassey song! Miss Amy sounds so like they could be vocal clones… It’s a damned shame that she’s as fucked up as she is because otherwise she could be huge–and I don’t give a rat’s ass about the messed up hair or the tats or the overdone makeup; I’m just concerned that there’s too much bad stuff going on in that chick’s head to make it likely she’ll survive much longer and that’s a damned shame. I don’t usually like female vocalists but I can listen to her stuff–her lyrics are good and the woman has a set of pipes on her.