Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!chabot@amber.DEC (All God's chillun got guns)
From: chabot@amber.DEC (All God's chillun got guns)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Madonna again
Message-ID: <211@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-Aug-85 16:56:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.211
Posted: Wed Aug 28 16:56:13 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Aug-85 11:28:38 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 17

Doug Alan
> And a bunch more artists will have been told by record companies "Your music 
> is no good, because it's not enough like Madonna's"!

What used to happen anyway, is that the company would say, "We already have
a black group" or "We already have a woman" or something of this sort.  It's
pretty aggravating when you know that the artist turned down is so vastly
different (and in your taste superior too).  But what's more aggravating, to
me, anyway, is the limitation of choices.

Even our modern system of patronage for artists is still limited by the taste
and foresight of the patrons: in our case the taste and foresight are usually
based alone on the $en$itivitie$ of the record companies.

Do you suggest we change the current way, or give it our inputs louder?

L S Chabot   ...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot