Popularity Over Talent.

[Parasondox]

For the last time, I'M NOT A ROBOT 0110101001001010101.

*Sigh* It's that time of year, February, and we must discuss talent and popularity. Well, popularity over talent. Remember the days where talent was the most important thing in life? Nope? Well you are oh so young.

Often times its usually with talent comes popularity but with the rise of reality TV, social media and just the internet, popularity looks to be king. Is that the case?

"I have over 5 millions followers on Twitter/Instagram, same amount on YouTube and have even Lady Gaga following me"

"Yet, you are still as broke as me because we both work at this shitty retail store at minimum wage rate and no overtime"

Silly. Talent is important, talent helps achieve goals, boost confidence and help us excel is life. However, is that being overshadowed today by popularity?

Having so much likes, views, retweets, revines, reblog, reshit, doesn't get you pai... oh wait, advertising pay. Well it doesn't get you paid much. Is 15 mins of fame more important than a life long talented gift? Some would say yes.

Okay this feels all over the place. Let's just sum up. Is popularity overshadowing talent? The most talented actors being over looked by those who have the most online love, for example.

I'll shut up now. I feel weird.

 

[Dizchu]

Spoiler: NSFW

In the past the only way you could be made aware of talent (let alone have it remembered for decades) was by being popular. We remember the Pink Floyds, the Stanley Kubricks even the Beethovens and Da Vincis because they were popular and their popularity endured. Do we remember the countless people who had 15 minutes of fame? Think of all the novelty songs from the past, how are they any better or worse than the crap churned out today?

These days everyone can potentially have 15 minutes of fame, and you know what gets you lots of attention? Appealing to the lowest common denominator, finding a way to exploit that segment of society's short attention span. We'll remember people like Justin Bieber and SoFloAntonio in 20 years the same way we remember people like Aaron Carter and Justin Lee Collins (not fondly, if at all).

You'l actually find that people these days (especially young adults) rely less heavily on the radio, magazines and television to provide them content. People are listening to underground music and watching indie films more and more than ever because the internet allows them to, and the internet also allows them to interact and follow the works and opinions of non-celebrities. People actively engage with Youtube channels with thousands or even hundreds of subscribers rather than millions.

While the extremely popular superstars are attention-grabbing and hard to ignore, people these days have easier access to talented people of moderate or little popularity.

 

[Albino Boo]

In the past the only way you could be made aware of talent (let alone have it remembered for decades) was by being popular. We remember the Pink Floyds, the Stanley Kubricks even the Beethovens and Da Vincis because they were popular and their popularity endured. Do we remember the countless people who had 15 minutes of fame? Think of all the novelty songs from the past, how are they any better or worse than the crap churned out today?

While I dont disagree with your general point, I would say the Da Vinci popularity is based on fame as opposed to actual achievement. Da Vinci's contemporary Michelangelo has left more masterpieces and his career had more successful engineering and architectural commissions. Da Vinci rarely finished anything and even when he did they weren't they ran into problems almost immediately. His painting of the last supper started to deteriorate within months of its completion because of the choice materials used.

 

[CeeBod]

Tesla was undoubtedly more talented than Thomas Eddison, but Eddison was far more successful, Thomas Savery patented a Steam engine design way back in 1698, but James Watt, who took an engine designed by someone else (Thomas Newcomen) and improved it in 1776, is usually the person remembered as the man that brought Steam Engines to the world. Frank Whittle and Hans von Ohain both independently invented the Jet engine (Whittle patented first, but Ohain tested his design first, and the He178 and Me262 were both used in WW2 before the Gloster Meteor was) but both men were very bad at publicity (and had other things to worry about - with a war going on and all!) and so are barely known and rarely remembered today - if there was an Eddison or a Watt equivalent in the field of Jet aviation then that'd be the name we'd all know today.

In 1967, Malcolm Muggeridge wrote "In the past if someone was famous or notorious, it was for something?as a writer or an actor or a criminal; for some talent or distinction or abomination. Today one is famous for being famous. People who come up to one in the street or in public places to claim recognition nearly always say: 'I've seen you on the telly!'"

So it's not exactly a new phenomenon. Achilles probably wasn't the best warrior in the world in the 12th century BCE (even if he did actually exist!) but he did have a bloody good publicist, so we know he was a great warrior even today.

 

[Parasondox]

Tesla was undoubtedly more talented than Thomas Eddison, but Eddison was far more successful, Thomas Savery patented a Steam engine design way back in 1698, but James Watt, who took an engine designed by someone else (Thomas Newcomen) and improved it in 1776, is usually the person remembered as the man that brought Steam Engines to the world. Frank Whittle and Hans von Ohain both independently invented the Jet engine (Whittle patented first, but Ohain tested his design first, and the He178 and Me262 were both used in WW2 before the Gloster Meteor was) but both men were very bad at publicity (and had other things to worry about - with a war going on and all!) and so are barely known and rarely remembered today - if there was an Eddison or a Watt equivalent in the field of Jet aviation then that'd be the name we'd all know today.

In 1967, Malcolm Muggeridge wrote "In the past if someone was famous or notorious, it was for something?as a writer or an actor or a criminal; for some talent or distinction or abomination. Today one is famous for being famous. People who come up to one in the street or in public places to claim recognition nearly always say: 'I've seen you on the telly!'"

So it's not exactly a new phenomenon. Achilles probably wasn't the best warrior in the world in the 12th century BCE (even if he did actually exist!) but he did have a bloody good publicist, so we know he was a great warrior even today.

As soon as I finished reading your post the first thing that came to mind was Apple's Jobs and Wozniak. Someone along the lines of Wozniak was the higher talent, Jobs was too, but it was Jobs or gained the popularity and trust of the people. Not so much the board.

 

[Dizchu]

While I dont disagree with your general point, I would say the Da Vinci popularity is based on fame as opposed to actual achievement. Da Vinci's contemporary Michelangelo has left more masterpieces and his career had more successful engineering and architectural commissions. Da Vinci rarely finished anything and even when he did they weren't they ran into problems almost immediately. His painting of the last supper started to deteriorate within months of its completion because of the choice materials used.

Fair point. A point could also be made for artists' less ambitious works getting more credit than their more accomplished stuff (for example everyone knows the song Creep by Radiohead which actually ended up being a crutch for them).

Also with your point about artists finishing the works of others, I doubt many have listened to Modest Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain as it was originally intended (though I do much prefer the popular Rimsky-Korsakov version).

It's an interesting thing to discuss but we agree on the general point. It doesn't matter which time period you lived in, you could have the combined talent of Bach, Tesla, Einstein and Shakespeare but unless anyone's aware of it, it might as well not exist.

 

[Pyrian]

Talent ~> Recognition ~> Popularity ~> fortune (squiggly arrows because it's only sometimes, lol)

To the individual themself, talent is mostly useful for gaining recognition.

 

[Vanilla ISIS]

Having so much likes, views, retweets, revines, reblog, reshit, doesn't get you pai... oh wait, advertising pay. Well it doesn't get you paid much.

Advertising, crowdfunding, merchandise, sponsorship.
You can make a ton of money that way.

 

[Parasondox]

Mods please lock thread. Thank you.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

Thread locked by request.