Is Rihanna a Real Artist?

She is a "pop" star. She pops up in public view and receives all the hyped praise, then demonstrated the same shallow level of talent as the other run of the mill "celebrities"! Most who are praised with great accolades are just the flavor of the day, unless they can invent crisis to get their names in front of the public. Some don't even survive their abuse or the lifestyle the choose and choose and choose!!!

I don't think we can compare apples and oranges. The Vaccines and Rihanna fall into two different genres. One is more expected to write and play their own music and the other genre is more known for having other people write the lyrics the person sings. In any case, it's the full package that makes Rihanna an artist. Random People all over the world can sing. Random people can try their hand at lyricism. It's that "it" factor that makes her stand out amongst all those other people that solidifies her as an artist in her own way.

She should write her own music.

Great voice, no imagination. She would rather be a pawn to the music industry, make her millions and ride off into the sunset smoking a big fatty as she departs.

Artists create. Entertainers like Rihana deliver what artists create. Rihanna's talent lies in her ability to perform...and I think she does it pretty well. .

And just because you write that doesn't automatically make you an artist. There's a lot of uninspired crap being bought up by the tasteless masses that doesn't have a single shred of art in it.

her income proves it........

MacDonalds is the wealthiest food vendor on Earth.

Hopefully you can connect the dots and see the analogy there...

Just stating a fact. Wealth proclaims your accomplishment as a artist, rewarded by your admirers for reaching the accomplishment.

Wealth of an artist means nothing, many a talented artist has died penniless. Some found fame after death such as Van Gogh.

I think you should ask Rihana. She'd agree with you that many a talented artist has died penniless, most due to their own fault or unfortunate circumstances, but she's alive with wealth and happy with the wealth she attained by being accepted as a artist in her own right. Just ask her..........

Or...just debating here...wealth proclaims the gullibility, tastlessness or downright stupidity (as in the case of MacDonalds) of the consuming public. ; )

BTW, I actually like Rihanna and think that she, far more than too many of today's "artists" is actually worthy of her fame and fortune.

I don't know if she's worthy of her fame and fortune. But, if she's making money and the public is willing to put her on a pedestal for doing it, then she can be considered a accomplished artist, at least in the music business. She wouldn't be doing, it if there wasn't a reward of some type to be gained. Nobody does.

There are lots of artists who create purely for the enjoyment of the creative process. As a matter of fact, the best artists all fall into that category. No true artists gives a care about fame or fortune...although some artists are rewarded with it.

Everything and I mean everything you said in that post above is categorically false and misinformed.

Never seen an emerging artist turn down fame and fortune. The two go hand and hand, otherwise we wouldn't know if a artist existed. Believe me artists want you to know they exist, because it's the drive behind their needing to perform.

Thinking about it, I played in bands for over 25 years and playing for fun was fun, but playing for money and prestige on the bandstand really made all the effort worthwhile, as thats the final goal for every musician, to be recognised for their skill and being paid for it. At least that was the goal in every band I played in and I know of no musician whom I played with that thought any different. We were out there to make a name for ourselves and make money and we did in our area. Name me any artist who plays for nothing, other than a freebie now and then? Even I did that.....

I see what you're saying about wanting to be a star...rich and famous. But read about any great writer and you will see the same thing over and over again: total disregard for public opinion, total love of the creative moment, total love of their craft, they'd still create if no one on the planet knew about it. Do they enjoy the money? Yes. Do they enjoy the fame? Sometimes at first but usually fame is NOT a perk, it's a price.

Buddy, you're gonna take this the wrong way but it's true nonetheless. If the only reason you were on stage was money and the validation of others, then you were just another tail-chasing wannabe rocker. You're definitely no artist...which explains your completely out-of-the-know point of view.

I played because I liked to play, but I wasn't going to practice all the time, have to travel, teardown, setup, just so a bar owner could profit off free music, nor would any band. Making music can be fun, but it is a business too, why artists cut records and bands play at local taverns, to gain a popularity and make money. People make a artist an artist, thats where fame and fortune come from, like it or not. I don't know of any music artist, who has turned down the fame and fortune, it comes with being a music artist and a major reason why so many even try to be..

By the way, I had to have been a artist, at least in the eyes of some, otherwise they wouldn't have been paid me to perform. You talk from a layman's experience. I talk from years of performing experience, so don't tell me what I do know, from what you don't know................

there are many who can sing and not write

She's paid to sell sex. I don't consider that art.

Just a lyric reciter.

Millie Vanilli made millions and never sang a note while performing live.

Did they write their own lyrics or simply recite the words of others?

The words of others. They had no artisitc talent to speak of. Kind of like OBama reading off his teleprompter repeating a speech someone else wrote for him.

They got up on stage and danced while their mouths were pretending to sing you mean? Should have promoted themselves as a lip-syncing group. Would have been far more honest!

As a professional musician and a music teacher, the reason there is so little noteworthy music (pun intended) in the last 30 years of pop music is because of the rise of the phenomenon we call "singer-songwriter". The chances of finding a great poet are small. The chances of finding a great composer are small. The chances of finding a great performer are small. The chances of finding a really great poet-composer-performer (3 in 1) are one in a trillion!

Of course, pop music survives in spite of it because nowadays it's more about marketing than music, since the most successful pop music is that which sells the most. If you want to keep selling, you produce more. Therefore pop music is somewhat disposable, and that's fine.

Now I couldn't pick Rihanna out of two people and I don't know her music. But if she does a good job of singing other people's stuff, to me that's a point in her favor.

Give me a lyric by a great poet like Ira Gerschwin set to music by a great composer like George Gerschwin and performed by an outstanding song stylist like Nat King Cole and THERE you've really got something!

shes a real artist just not the best one.

Because Art last for ever (ie. Beethoven, Chopin, Mozart) Rihanna, Gaga, Britney are just performers and will not last. I mean if they don't do something stupid every 15 min we wouldn't remember them next week let alone for ever.

She is supposed to entertain and keep people hooked on her.Don't get me wrong,she actually does have a good voice(without auto-tune) but her job is to entertain.

She was discovered by Jay Z, Beyonce's husband. He groomed, packaged and publicized her just like Beyonce. A pretty face who can shake her booty and dress like a stripper but can't sing herself out of a paperbag. People who bought her records and tickets are victims of hypes or wannabe Rihanna. Sad.

However, there are major differences between her and Beyonce. Beyonce is uber talented and has worked her entire life to get to this point. Rihanna comes across as a chick who just got lucky and could really care less. She doesnt seem passionate about music or performing.

Because I never heard of her. My life is too busy to keep up with who and what is the latest in pop culture.

She's primarily an entertainer.

her fans are the ones who decide that. I personally don't care for her or her music but she has her following and is entitled to their respect. Fran Sinatra did't write his own music nor did Luther Vandross or many others. That is not a good measure of artistry.

She does the art of entertaining, so yes, she is a real artist.

As much as I don't like to admit it, she is some kind of an artist. She must have some small input into how she sings/dances no matter how small. She's not a singer song writer but if u gave the same songs and moves to another 'artist' it wouldn't be the same. So yeah there is some kind of art to how she performs other people's work.

Lunacat said it best! She's an entertainer. That's as far as it goes.

...just not a very good one.

No artist is any more their all puppets

All she does is dress half naked and sing. Anyone can do that. There are hardly any real artists these days.

She's a singer and entertainer, but artist no.

She's a really good siner and perfomer. Is that not enough?