4 ms·
> they won because they were literally better than the rest of us at what they do That's just not true. Are you saying Katy Perry, for example, is better than
by ScottWhigham 13y ago
> they won because they were literally better than the rest of us at what they do
That's just not true. Are you saying Katy Perry, for example, is better than the rest of musicians at what she does? It's just not true that "success" follows "better than the rest". It trivializes what success is to frame it in that way. There are many, many more factors that contribute to "they won because..." other than being good/better/best.
- stephengillie 13y agoKaty Perry is not as technically capable as some other musicians. Yet she is more popular than them. Which is she trying to do, make music or be famous?
- ScottWhigham 13y agoSo wait - are you trying to argue on a trivial point (arguing just to argue) or are you saying that my comments are wrong?
- stephengillie 13y agoI'm arguing that you and I believe Katy Perry has different objectives. You believe she's trying to be an excellent musician, and you're irritated that she's much more popular than superior musicians. I believe she's trying to be popular, and music (err...just performing really) is the tool she's using to make other people like her.