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]