Poll: Do musicians have to beautiful?

[A-Heart-Of-Gold]

I have been thinking about this for a while. Most artists and singers who have record deals are beautiful, gorgeous, cute... whatever you want to call it.

So is it possible if you look like nothing special?

Is it possible to create a career when you don't look like Taylor Swift or one of Girls Aloud and will it make it harder for you to do that?

Or is it nothing to do with looks in the Music business and more to do with the fact that you can sing or not?

 

[konor77]

it certainly helps especially in the case of women

 

[twcblaze]

I'd say yes, but then there's lady gaga.

 

[El Poncho]

Susan Boyle.

She became pretty big and she looks like an -enter text here-

 

[Monkfish Acc.]

Not to me. I plan to listen, not look.

It does to most producers, though. You have to look good on camera.
Kind of stupid, but whatever, so is everything else ever.

EDIT: You know, I'm not sure why people go on about how horrific Susan Boyle looks.
She's not that ugly. She's plain, if anything.
I can look out my window and see three people of equal attractiveness at any time.

Of course, I live in Ireland, so. Aposiopesis.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

It's becoming more and more important, especially in terms of the "mainstream" pop and rock and r&b. But on the outskirts, such as metals, blues, and others it doesn't matter as much because the more... shall I say refined?... tastes of the consumers desire the music regardless of what the entertainer looks like.

it certainly helps especially in the case of women

That's about as accurate as it gets as well.

 

[Queen Michael]

I don't get the poll. Doesn't "No" and "It doesn't matter to me" mean the same thing, "I don't care about the artist's looks"? My answer, by the way, is no, I don't care.

 

[Scout Tactical]

Susan Boyle.

She became pretty big and she looks like an -enter text here-

That was her thing, though. She gained widespread appeal explicitly BECAUSE she looked ugly and had a beautiful voice. If she was pretty and had a beautiful voice, she'd be normal Britain's Got Talent fodder who would have been forgotten immediately.

 

[Rakkana]

I think Amy Whinehouse is proof you don't have to be. Not saying I like her music but she seemed to do ok for an ugly disgusting crackwhore.

I don't know a single person who likes her. I don't understand why anybody would. And I promise it has nothing to do with her looks.

 

[mikecoulter]

Have you heard of Lemmy? No, they certainly do not need to be beautiful!

 

[BenzSmoke]

Do they need to be beautiful? No, look at Susan Boyle [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OcQ9A-5noM&feature=search].

 

[02y211]

Indeed, generally women have to be beautiful to succeed in most of the popular art forms. I don't really care, I mean I like beautiful women, but if they have no talent at what they do I don't become a fan. For some reason however pretty much all my favourite bands/artists are male.

 

[the Dept of Science]

I do often look at people like Katy Perry and think that if they were average looking they would be laughed of a kareoke.

 

[SUPA FRANKY]

To be a GOOD artist, you don't have to be...

...But to be a POPULAR artist, it sure as hell helps.

 

[Julianking93]

Not in my opinion.

I don't really care what a singer/musician looks like, just how their music sounds.

However, in the eyes of record producers, looks can be everything. Just take a look at Lady Gaga. Or really any mainstream music ever.

 

[Jumping_Over_Fences]

No they don't!

Rolling Stones

Aerosmith

Journey

I could go on, but I think I've proved my point.