|
Post by Richard on Nov 9, 2008 9:28:57 GMT
From The Telegraph... I suspect the Telegraph is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. Richard
|
|
|
Post by postscript on Nov 9, 2008 16:39:27 GMT
What ever, The wider publicity does not do her any harm. I think we need to be careful however in any comments we make. On the one hand as I suspect most of those on HWI would support Hayley to the hilt, not because she's 'our girl' but because we believe her to be right, there is a danger of seeming to get between her and 'the hand that feeds her'. At the same time, Decca needs to be very careful. It has a unique 'possession', untrammelled goods. It would be ludicrous for it not to heed that there is a possible undercurrent that is moving in Hayley's direction.
The BBC cannot even apologise properly. It is elementary common sense at primary school level in media lessons that in making an apology you agree the statement with the person to whom you are apologising and fully understand the nature and purpose of your apology and to whom you need to apologise. The BBC fouls all this up and further extends awareness of its complete lack of public good manners over overpaid Jonathon Ross's foolhardy childishness.
Barack.Obama is sweeping in more that a change in world politics. Look at his family. His children are naturally well-mannered. His presentation in public awareness is cultured and well-mannered. Look at the hole the BBC has landed itself in. No longer the obvious bastion of culture and common decency but the place where it all hangs out, like an ill-dressed schoolboy not getting his shirt-tail into the back of his trousers.
I think there are two ways the Telegraph article can be interpreted. Hayley MAY have talked to Mandrake quietly 'off the record' and implied she could do with some support. She has the stature and the wit to know how and be able to do that. Mandrake may have perceived the public mood is on 'a turn' as I have just indicated and looked to do two things. One, be part of that turn and appear to be in the vanguard by showing how another major international commercial entity is pushing to still lower standards; it wants to lead the new push for values by citing how the pressures of commerce manipulate even successful artists and it takes character to stand up and be counted. In so doing it is testing the waters to see if such a sea-change is there.
Incidentally, for those who have not read the paper, there is a lovely full figure picture of her in our much favoured green dress. Regardless, that a broadsheet (even if it does have a tabloid edition, if it does?) wants to make noises in this matter I cannot see it will do Hayley any harm. People either like her music or they don't. If someone takes the attitude 'Miss Goody-two-shoes', they are still going to buy her or not buy her according to voice, not the dress she is wearing and maybe the time now is that to stand out in the crowd is not to run with the crowd but go 'retro'. Standing for old values may be the new image. I think we are in for a culture shift and that shift is in Hayley's direction.
Peter S.
|
|
|
Post by milewalker on Nov 9, 2008 18:44:26 GMT
Hi Peter,
I agree with part of what you say, subject to the following:
Your point about "Miss Goody Two-Shoes" is probably correct only to the extent that the music she sings stays exactly where it is, and the demographic who buys her music stays exactly where it is. I would only point out that both things are subject to evolutionary change over the course of time.
I think that it is fair to say that Universal would like her to sell more records (what record company wouldnt?) - and may feel that her current demographic doesnt allow her room to grow very much - the question then would become how can she appeal to a broader audience. The marketing paradigm in this case however might be less Britney Spears, and more Katherine Jenkins.
Like Richard, I suspect the article means less than it implies. I have no doubt that there are some people within Universal who would like to see Hayley change her image. At the same time, I think a case can be made that Hayley errs at times on the side of caution. You can find quotes from Hayley in recent interview which seem to state that she is aware of both things.
Jon
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Nov 9, 2008 19:00:54 GMT
Hi Peter,
I couldn't agree more. Hayley has her own unique identity, and as you say, you either like what she does or you don't. Personally, every time I hear something new from Hayley, it convinces me that whatever she sings and whatever she wears, I will still want to support her. The shivers that run down my spine whenever I hear her sing guarantee that. That being said, I think that Hayley knows exactly what she wants to do. She doesn't need to use sex to sell herself, she has that voice and a natural beauty that I think would be demeaned if she tried to turn herself into Madonna. We really don't need sex with everything, As you say Peter, the public, At at least some of them, are starting to cotton on to the fact there are higher things than that. Hayley's spirituality and immense emotional impact are her strengths, and she should not in my opinion, be expected to turn herself into something she is not. and does not want to become.
Note that once again Hayley has said that she is interested in the long run. I think she would like to still be performing when she is Dame Malvina's age. If her record company can't accept that, and are after the quick profits then dump her in a few years time, it is time to change her record company.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by stuartj on Nov 9, 2008 22:49:35 GMT
From The Telegraph... I suspect the Telegraph is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. Richard Indeed. I'd like to see (or have heard) the overall context. Sounds like it's been a slow news day and they have beaten this one up. There will have been discussions about her appearance and no doubt some silly ideas from some quarters. But I don't think Hayley's dress is that conservative anyway. I've heard it said that she shows quite a lot of skin, but mangages to do it without seeming tacky or tarty. Kathy Jenkins can go just a tad too far in my opinion. But look at Natasha Marsh, All Angels, Elizabeth Marverlly, Lesley Garret, etc, and the crossover boys. Evening wear is the norm for this genre. I don't know what else she could do. And if someone is going to push the margins of the crossover dress code and innovate, I don't think it should be Hayley. Not even Charlotte Church (whose comfort zone might be wider than some of the others named) dressed in a raunchy way during her crossover days.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Nov 18, 2008 16:55:04 GMT
From The Press (NZ)... I've finally thought of a decent title for this thread. Richard
|
|
|
Post by gra7890 on Nov 18, 2008 17:28:18 GMT
Hi Everyone, There will always be a few who think the opposite but I think in the present climate most are going to go with Hayley on this Graham
|
|
|
Post by stevemacdonald on Nov 18, 2008 18:57:41 GMT
Count me among the few who actually feels her record company is onto something.
Basically, what they are saying is that Hayley needs to appear less dowdy and more deliberately exciting. Her voice is supremely interesting and would reach many more people if they didn't prejudge her as boring because of the same old dresses she wears again and again.
Image matters if you're going to thrive as an artist, especially in these times. Tarting it up doesn't mean pandering to the undeveloped tastes of the masses; it says get with the times and relate to more people.
I think Hayley was at her image best when she wore jeans onstage. They looked great on her and allowed for plenty of tasteful self-expression. That's the look that truly suits her, but it lost out to these dresses and gowns that are in-your-face old-fashioned.
There is nothing to be lost by giving her wardrobe a long-overdue makeover. The inner Hayley will always be at the center of it all, so no worries.
|
|
|
Post by grant on Nov 18, 2008 19:03:32 GMT
Hi Richard
TeHe! I love that!
Best wishes Grant
|
|
|
Post by milewalker on Nov 18, 2008 19:37:49 GMT
Count me among the few who actually feels her record company is onto something. Basically, what they are saying is that Hayley needs to appear less dowdy and more deliberately exciting. Her voice is supremely interesting and would reach many more people if they didn't prejudge her as boring because of the same old dresses she wears again and again. Image matters if you're going to thrive as an artist, especially in these times. Tarting it up doesn't mean pandering to the undeveloped tastes of the masses; it says get with the times and relate to more people. I think Hayley was at her image best when she wore jeans onstage. They looked great on her and allowed for plenty of tasteful self-expression. That's the look that truly suits her, but it lost out to these dresses and gowns that are in-your-face old-fashioned. There is nothing to be lost by giving her wardrobe a long-overdue makeover. The inner Hayley will always be at the center of it all, so no worries. I am, of course, inclined to agree with Steve. The problem is a very simple marketing issue - if I am singing in the shower, and nobody hears me, does it really matter how well I sing? Any 21 year old singer who has a fanbase old enough in some cases to be her grandfather is quite likely on a career treadmill in my opinion. It doesnt grow, and while you might be able to run in place for a while, sooner or later you will also run out of energy. I should note that I am not saying that Hayley should "tart up" her image - at least not in the way that that phrase suggests. She needs younger fans - and in fact, the specific area she could use them is younger women. She doesnt need to liberalize her image so much as humanize it. 50 year olds may find her accessible - unfortunately, those people closer to her age who may actually enjoy her singing are not likely to give her a chance in any kind of meaningful numbers unless she finds a way to make it easier for them to identify with her. Jon
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,689
|
Post by Dave on Nov 18, 2008 19:45:59 GMT
I think Hayley was at her image best when she wore jeans onstage. A bit like this? Oh for the "good old days", eh? Like November, 2008 when she last appeared on Titchmarsh? The gowns Hayley wears at most UK concerts and functions are par for the course for female classical and crossover singers in the UK; it would be extraordinary (and not too popular with the audiences) if she dressed as in Titchmarsh when singing at the Royal Albert Hall or in St James's Church. And I for one do not think they are in the slightest "dowdy" as you have suggested. If you are suggesting that Hayley should change her singing style and genre altogether, I think that's a different issue. I'm inclined to agree with the 86% of Kiwis in the poll, are you currently subcontracted to Decca? Dave
|
|
|
Post by milewalker on Nov 18, 2008 20:03:03 GMT
Hi Dave, Now that you mention it the two things do run together - it would make no sense at all for Decca to be making the kind of request they are (if indeed they are) without an undercurrent of her also evolving musically.....which while not mentioned in this article has been addressed by Hayley a couple of times in recent interviews. I at least am not under contract with Decca. I simply feel objectively that she is running into a headwind. Her work ethic has been a constant source of amazement to me - and there have been comments here that she works too hard. I agree with that. Unfortunately, at present, she has a very finite fanbase spread in pockets internationallly. Without a growth in that fanbase in some way she has no choice but to work like that to simply maintain her current position. Jon
|
|
|
Post by roger on Nov 18, 2008 20:36:55 GMT
Further to Dave's observation about Hayley's dress code, I would add that I have seen her performing in a school, a pony centre, in churches and cathedrals, conventional concert venues large and small and in the Royal Albert Hall. From what I have seen, she always dresses in a way that is appropriate to the venue. Any 21 year old singer who has a fanbase old enough in some cases to be her grandfather is quite likely on a career treadmill in my opinion. Yes Jon, some of her fanbase are old enough to be her grandfather. And many are not. You may be surprised to know that the average age of all forum members is currently 37.6. Assuming we represent a typical cross-section of her greater fanbase in terms of age, I suspect the need for her to attract younger fans may be less than you imagined? Oh, and just for the record, I'm with the 86 per cent of Kiwis too. Roger
|
|
|
Post by I-H-F on Nov 18, 2008 20:48:55 GMT
Count me among the few who actually feels her record company is onto something. Basically, what they are saying is that Hayley needs to appear less dowdy and more deliberately exciting. Her voice is supremely interesting and would reach many more people if they didn't prejudge her as boring because of the same old dresses she wears again and again. Image matters if you're going to thrive as an artist, especially in these times. Tarting it up doesn't mean pandering to the undeveloped tastes of the masses; it says get with the times and relate to more people. I think Hayley was at her image best when she wore jeans onstage. They looked great on her and allowed for plenty of tasteful self-expression. That's the look that truly suits her, but it lost out to these dresses and gowns that are in-your-face old-fashioned. There is nothing to be lost by giving her wardrobe a long-overdue makeover. The inner Hayley will always be at the center of it all, so no worries. I can understand Hayley's record company wanting to shift more of her CD's, but I think it should be up to Hayley if she wants to change her image or not. What appealed to me most when I first came across Hayley was her extraordinary voice, not her dress-sense. It doesn't matter to me what she wears. I don't see a problem with Hayley wearing long dresses (or jeans) onstage. OK, maybe I'm a little biased here, because I think Hayley looks fantastic in anything she chooses to wear, onstage or off. But, she obviously wears what she is comfortable in. Would changing her dress-sense really make much of a difference to her fanbase? I think most people either like someone's music or they don't, regardless of how they dress.
|
|
|
Post by I-H-F on Nov 18, 2008 21:01:03 GMT
Further to Dave's observation about Hayley's dress code, I would add that I have seen her performing in a school, a pony centre, in churches and cathedrals, conventional concert venues large and small and in the Royal Albert Hall. From what I have seen, she always dresses in a way that is appropriate to the venue. Any 21 year old singer who has a fanbase old enough in some cases to be her grandfather is quite likely on a career treadmill in my opinion. Yes Jon, some of her fanbase are old enough to be her grandfather. And many are not. You may be surprised to know that the average age of all forum members is currently 37.6. Assuming we represent a typical cross-section of her greater fanbase in terms of age, I suspect the need for her to attract younger fans may be less than you imagined? Oh, and just for the record, I'm with the 86 per cent of Kiwis too. Roger Yes, there are people of all ages on this forum - from teenagers to... well, lets just say, mature adults The average age of the forum members is 37.6 years old, as Roger stated. However, is that really an accurate calcuation of the average age of all Hayley fans throughout the world? Who's to say the average age of all her fans isn't lower than this? I started listening to Hayley in my 20's, and I have seen many people at her concerts that are younger than the average age of the forum.
|
|