« Class war vs economic policy | Main | New cultures & the post-bureaucratic age »

April 26, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Hugo

"Similarly, there’s evidence that good-looking people are genuinely more productive than ugly ones - perhaps because teachers give them more attention in school and so develop their talents."

It could also have something to do with sexual selection: peacocks with bigger feathers than average, for example, tend to be healthier than average.

ortega

What about the constrast effect between her and the rest of contestants?
Simply put: there are a group of people that do not know how to sing and one that sings badly. Of course, what you perceive is not how well she is singing, but the fact that she sings.
Put M. Boyle in company of the standard singing amateurs of any provincial theatre and you will get just the inverse effect.

kinglear

Did I not read Farah was unwell?

RE

Hmmm... limited power of the web?

I think it's called the Long Tail, instead of the Big Head, for a reason.

So you're right, but not really.

Tony Maher

Chris,

It wuz Video wot killed the radio star.

Ella Fitzgerald was remarkably ugly and her's is one of the great signature voices of 20 century music.

Don't look - listen

Craig McGill

Agree on the TV point - to be a star she needed that first initial boost of PR/publicity, in this case the TV show.

gordon

Another implication, which you don't consider, is that there are very large numbers of people out there with talent equal or superior to those in the "star" roles in entertainment and business. How many other people are there who can sing as well or better than the current crop of Top 20 artists? How many people are there who can run a bank as well or better than the current sorry crew?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad