If you had the balls five years ago to say that Britney Spears was never really that hot to begin with, then — kudos. By now it’s obvious her looks and talent are, and always have been, just north of average. Besides, we know that she has the same embarrassing life as anyone else, just with more money.
That Britney is in the midst of transforming herself into a celebrity mom, being interviewed in prime time by Matt Lauer and now pregnant and nude on the cover of the August Harper’s Bazaar begs the question of just how far we’ve dropped our expectations of superstars. She’s too young to get any props for being a hot mom á la Demi Moore, and the market for celebrity activist moms has already been cornered by Angelina Jolie. All Madonna ever did was bite black folks’ dance moves, but Ms. Spears went ahead and pilfered Shar Jackson’s baby daddy.
When Britney arrived on the scene, she had a bit of teenage mystique. All we knew was that she was an ex-Mouseketeer, a virgin and a “singer.” Now? She’s the inverse of Kelly Clarkson, the hardest working woman in the biz.
With looks just south of average and vocal chops that put Britney’s to shame (but can’t touch the likes of Christina Aguilera), Clarkson’s made the most of not much. She was an open book on the first season of American Idol, but now we only hear from her when she’s releasing a new hit video. Kelly has become the bankable — if not artistically inspiring — pop mainstay and Britney is fodder for Jay Leno.
Idol and its spawn — America’s Got Talent, The One, Rock Star, etc. — have birthed a permanent subculture of entertainers who lack an edge simply because we’ve witnessed them fumbling their way to fame on live TV. How will VH1 make future episodes of Behind the Music about the current generation of stars? We already know all that we need or want to know about these people, and now we’ve even seen them naked.
This article appears in Aug 16-22, 2006.
Don’t be Hatin’…
–B-Rad
Christina may have a better voice, but Brit is a better singer, dancer. Clarkson has a bigger & a better voice than Chritina, but Spears is a better singer.
Ehh Kelly CLarkson must be ugly to you David Swerdlick. You described her looks just south of average. She aint the prettist girl but she aint ugly either. You did give her props for her talent however.I agree with you that Christina Aguilera have the better voice than Kelly.I love them both the same and they both have great voices and are very talented. What good is looks if u dont have the talent to back it up hmm David.Talent is more important than looks. Looks fade over time, but talent doesnt. THe talent stays there while the looks are gone. David Swerdlick you need to look deeper than looks. You cant judge a book by its cover David Swerdlick remember that.
Spears could become hot again. Kelly Clarkson is pretty (and vey HOTT!). She’s certtainly the most talented female singer out there. Although I’m a fan of Christina, she has her annoying moments and isn’t as versatile as clarkson (i.e. not a rocker chick like Kelly).
I’m not understanding the logic of posing pregnant and bare. I believe that is for your family to cherish, not everyone. Playboy / Playgirl magazines have limited access to the featured covers, now is that the next step for Harper’s Bazaar?
David must be blind. Kelly is like the most stunning woman on the planet. And I’d say she sings at least as well as Christina.
Most people can’t debate that Britney was hot in her prime, but in that time she was a really good ENTERTAINER at best. So in Britney’s case, once her dance moves and sex appeal go away you’re left with images of what Britney used to look like and “fill in the blank” music. Now I would pick Kelly Clarkson over Britney because she is noticeably better singer than Britney but neither one of them is good singers. Christina and Jessica have the best voices among all the pop singers out today.
This is why I don’t read the American editions of Harper’s and Vogue. (Vogue Italia is much better.) You guys are totally not getting the REAL point. They always have to have a celebrity on the cover. The editors-in-chief think that having a star will make the issue sell. However in all reality the trend is already been over for a while now. I remember back in the early 90’s and it was a treat to see a celebrity like Madonna on the cover of Vogue plugging “Erotica”. Now all of them do it. It is sad that American Bazaar was at one point the arbiter of taste. Now it has gone to this! YUCK!If I want to read about some trashy celebrity I will pick up “STAR” not a fashion bible.
The media has lost the meaning of “mystique”.Lost on a generation of media manufacturers that only seem to sell one boobsmanship up.The Bazaar cover with ma-in-waiting Spears is a sad commentary on the loss of boundaries for a once respectable magazine.
Kudos to Swerdlick for calling it out!