Taking Tea in the Kasbah



Last week we looked at everyone’s preference for being either stunningly gorgeous yet disgustingly smelly, or looking hideous but possessing an odor that would be delightfully enticing to others. Another landslide victory was found amongst the unattractive, yet great smelling crowd. Clearly, kasbah readers are the conscientious, oft-showering, deodorant-wearing, good-smelling types who don’t like to drive others away with their malodorous ways.

flowers, Cinque Terre, Italy

To smell lovely or look lovely, that is the question…

Birth of Venus, by Sandro Botticelli [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

This one was easy for me in part because I am pretty darn sensitive to bad smells. I love a pretty face as much as the next person, but it would be impossible even for me to be around myself. Also, I imagine I would get incredibly lonely because no one would want to be around me and I couldn’t really blame them. Sad and smelly is not the way I want to go through life no matter how smokin’ hot I was. Therefore, I choose to be the hideous looking one who smells fabulous.

On to the question of the week…

Would you rather be a brilliant singer in a bad band

– OR –

be a mediocre singer in a wildly popular band?

***

Which will it be, clever readers? Does talent rise above all else? Or does fame call to you like a siren? Sit, sip, and share your thoughts. I always love hearing from you.

 

20 thoughts on “Wednesday’s “Would You Rather…?” question: Talent vs. Fame

  1. I would SO go for brilliant singer in a mediocre band.

    In my own wonky way, I have experience feeling like a fraud. It’s a feeling I wouldn’t have now if presented with the opportunities and promotions I had back-in-the-day. But, I lacked confidence, and spent most of my career thinking “they’re going to figure out I’m not worthy” any day now.

    Besides, as the saying goes, “Cream always rises to the top.” If I had a brilliant voice, my chances of survival in a post-mediocrity world, would be unlimited.

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      I am way too familiar with the inner demon I like to call You’re a sham. He likes to get in a jab with regular frequency to make sure I know I’m ‘not legit’. I’ve spent nearly 20 years in my field and I still can hear the annoying little voice of You’re a sham in my head. Yes, the brilliant singer who is certifiably brilliant is looking like a good option. 🙂

  2. I flung this one at the husband, who has spent his entire adult life slogging away at relatively unknown musical projects and he said – without pausing for a breath or a thought or a heartbeat – B. More than once I’ve seen him as the bass playing equivalent of A, so he wins with this one.

      • Thanks Suzanne! Laird’s so far been unable to figure out why the blog isn’t nice to you. I feel really bad about it!

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      I like that you made it a family affair and got the husband’s input on this one. 🙂 I’m glad we have a verifiable expert in the kasbah to answer this question based on his experiences. I imagine being the talented one in a mediocre band would be trying on one’s patience.

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      Moving on is always an option. Here’s to hoping for a more talented bad for you to join! 🙂

  3. I want the Talent. The Brilliant Singer. Because I love to SING.
    Who cares about Fame?
    In fact, I’m still thinking about being someone else, in case I ever happen to get famous…

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      And when you do become famous, Suzanne, I’ll be in the front row clapping and cheering. 🙂

  4. Ah. Sing in the shower and the water stops running. Afraid no band would have me. But back to your core question, talent vs fame…
    Fame, or at least a following, indicates you posses some measure of talent. If no one buys your record, your book, your painting, that could be indicative you don’t have a record/book/painting worth having.

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      All true assumptions, Sherry. But (and there’s always a but, right?), what if your fame is based on a marketing ploy that brainwashes the consumer to purchase the wares you are peddling? Of course, I’m not speaking of any past or present company in the kasbah, but what if that were the case? Would you still choose fame, however fleeting?

      • Valid point, Tami. Funny, my first conscious thought this morning was about my reply, only opposite your observation.
        What if you are mega talented, but rather than shining your light for the world to see, you keep it tucked under a bushel?

        • on ,
          Tami Clayton said:

          You also have a great point – how many talented artists of all types keep their gifts hidden from the world? There are probably as many people as there are reasons and excuses to not share one’s talents with the world. What an even more amazing world this would be if they did.

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      Talent, however it is used or shared, is certainly key to any sustained success. It’s too bad that many talented people never know fame of any kind. Though fame certainly has its price.

  5. I would rather be the mediocre singer inthe wildly popular band because it would be much more fun! Mediocre does NOT mean bad, it just doesn’t mean ‘the best’. Think about it. How many singers in popular bands are really great. Mic Jäger? His singing, no. Bit the band was having so much fun it disn’t matter. 😉

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      A wildly popular band would definitely be loads more fun. It’s funny – I took mediocre to mean not very good, whereas you understood it to mean not the best. Your definition of the word changes the question for me a bit. Subjectivity definitely plays a part in this one, doesn’t it?

  6. It’s funny, when I thought from your prompt this would be about writing, I had no hesitation in choosing ‘talent’… but when it turned out to be about singing in a band, I stopped to think about it. I think this is probably because I’m not so invested in the whole singing/band thing. It doesn’t matter as much to me to be good at it . . . but I think it still matters enough. I’m choosing A.

    • on ,
      Tami Clayton said:

      You bring up a good point – how much does the ultimate goal matter? If being in a band isn’t as important as, say, writing, then maybe being a less talented singer in a wildly popular band is good enough. But then, if you’re going to do something as time consuming as singing in a band, might as well pursue being the best that you can be.

Send me a Letter

Sending your message. Please wait...

Thanks for sending your message! I'll be in touch soon.

Whoops! There was a problem sending your message. Mind giving that another try?

Please complete all the fields in the form before sending.