Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pookie
At least she's not as bad as the godawful Yoko Ono.
|
I can't agree with all this Ono and Anderson bashing. I think they're too very innovative and legitimate artists, and if its not hard enough to be a female artist already, they are both associated with two of the most accomplished rock musicians of all time. Laurie Anderson has blended art, music and performance like many could only wish too. Yoko is one of the most important and underated avante-garde musicians out there, she MAY have broken up the Beatles, but in truth McCartney and Lennon's relationship was beyond repair even before she met John. Even if she did, I say it was only a good thing, Abbey Road Let It Be and later Beatles releases are extremely poor compared to works like Sgt Pepper and Revolver. Yoko Ono's experimental music was ahead of it's time, for someone to deconstruct rock music's asthetics a mere half a decade after her husband's band had set them in stone is nothing short of fucking incredible. With this, both Yoko and Anderson were well established and esteemed avante garde artists before they met their future husbands. And Ono in particular, as the earlier as the two, not only was her art radical as a woman, but as a Japanese woman in the west...! Both artists are two of the bravest and most unique performers your ever likely to come across.