Richard Todd ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>..., but traditional record covers have often shown artists looking very
>profound, or inspired, or like incredibly nice people.  No doubt these
>covers were intended to sell records, and some of them were undoubtedly
>more interesting than the records they covered.  So I say again, that it's
>only when sex or glamour are involved that people find any impropriety in
>the situation.

Richard, you miss my point:  my suspicion is that some artists are chosen
for recording contracts largely because of their looks rather than musical
ability.

>...  By the way, speaking of sex and music, does anyone remember the
>name of that female cellist who performed topless in England years ago?

I think you mean Charlotte Moorman - but wasn't she from the USA?

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]