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]