Do looks matter?

I don't think image is a completely phoney concept though, since it has been well demonstrated that we continuously make judgements about people based on their appearances in every aspect of our lives. Sure, image can become contrived, which is why I said I might ask her to tone down her appearance some, but wouldn't expect her to change completely.

I think you're forgetting that any band is an entity, and that this entity is the cumulative of those in the band (and maybe a little bit of extra magic). If one member of the band has a strong influence over the image/sound/whatever of the band as a whole, then other members may feel this is detrimental to the band's success and health. Further, the audience might feel this way, even if the band are kewl with it.

I'm all about being open-minded and I'm all about changing the world. But if you want to make music your business, it is perhaps a little unwise to completely disregard the pervasiveness of these facts.

Would you rather have the goth girl as a full goth, and no gigs, or the goth girl toned down in appearance and lots of gigs? If it came down to that, I'd ask her to tone it down a bit.

IMHO, image should never be the primary focus of any band. But it shouldn't be ignored completely either.

Yes. Emphatically...and rather unfortunately...yes.

Cat

I would say looks matter that's just the way it is but you need to be a decent band first. If the music sux then the look is irrelevant, but if the band is tight there's nothing wrong with having someone that looks like you describe and I wouldn't tell her to do anything except be herself.

That may be the one thing people remember of the band and although you'd like them to remember you for the music as long as they remember you I think it'll be alright.

As a new band starting out I personally wouldn't worry to much about it and just go with the flow.

Another great post from Scrybe, accurately nailing how the world really works, as opposed to how we might like it to. :)

I don't think image is a completely phoney concept though, since it has been well demonstrated that we continuously make judgements about people based on their appearances in every aspect of our lives.

IMHO, image should never be the primary focus of any band. But it shouldn't be ignored completely either.

+1

We are visual creatures. It's a simple fact that we use our eyes to make value judgements in every aspect of our lives. The point in the earlier post about the lighting was right on the money - and particularly interesting (can I say "illuminating"... :wink: ) because it came from an audio engineer.

The 'musicians rather than entertainers' who NoteBoat mentions will still get judged on the way they look - because we all do. An orchestra may not dress up like a metal band but they are expected to look well dressed and sophisticated, and they have a dress code that's as controlled - if not more so - than any pop band.

Even a musician who makes a living entirely in a private teaching space will initially be judged by the way they look. That doesn't mean beautiful versus ugly it means things like: Do they look friendly or disinterested? Do they look a bit too young or too old? Do they look disorganised, or like they've got their act together? Do they seem to fit my idea of the sort of person I'd be comfortable learning from?

I have a friend who teaches banjo. He's big and bearded and scruffy in an appealing way. My first impression is that he's exactly the sort of person that I'd like to learn banjo from. He just looks the part. He's not got movie star looks, but he still scores a perfect 10 on that crucial first impression. From that first moment on he can either build on that or subtract from it. As it happens he's a great musician too, so he's going to score plenty of students. As they progress they may then find that he's got other strengths and weaknesses though. His enthusiasm is motivating, but he's pretty disorganised, and his teaching can be a touch on the slack and random side... But it will still take time to change that powerful first visual impression.

On the other hand, another friend who teaches guitar looks a bit too young, and doesn't have the same immediate visual appeal. He has to work to overcome that. But as the lessons unfold he turns out to be thorough, well prepared, and knowledgeable. A good teacher all round too. He just doesn't look it at first sight. :mrgreen:

I also once had a teacher who looked very sexy... oops.. :oops: Let me re-phrase that... I once studied under... nope, that's not it...um.... I was once the student of a teacher who looked very sexy - and it was actually a disadvantage because it was distracting and even somewhat uncomfortable.

NONE of this means that you should be phoney about the image you present, or that you should be forced to conform to somebody else's ideas. But as Cat says too - for better or worse - the way you look and generally present yourself does matter.

I'd certainly not rule out the Goth girl on the basis of the way she looked, unless it clashed with some other consideration. For instance, such a look could be a big bonus and a fun addition, or it could look contrived and out of place depending on how well she could carry it off, and where we played.

Cheers,

Chris

If looks mattered at all, I'd be so far down the pecking order I'd be behind the chickens.

It's all down, IMO, to personality, skill, and suitability - if you've got two of those three, you'll fit in.

I'm working on the first, working REALLY hard on the second, and I'm trying to substitute adaptability for suitability - so what if you've got purple hair? Can you play? What can you play? Can you play what WE play?

Those are the questions you've got to ask yourself before you audition....

:D :D :D

Vic

If looks mattered at all, I'd be so far down the pecking order I'd be behind the chickens.

That's not what I heard. They told me that you had:

"Majestic Bearing" (Vogue)

and were "Hairifically Talented" (Pick magazine)

Aparently I was trying out some photo editing software a couple of years ago, and the results were still on the hard drive... and they do say that the camera never lies... :wink:

Cheers

Chris

So far, I've kept my comments as general as possible, but let's take a closer look at the thought experiment offered by the OP in a little more detail...

We're asked whether a goth could get accepted into a blues band without changing their image. And we're discussing the importance of image, and whether we invest it with an importance that isn't justified.

But we're talking about a goth joining a blues band. The goth image itself is very contrived. Someone dressing as a full goth would, for example, wear white make up, heavy eyeliner, and black nail varnish. They might have piercings other than the "standard" ear piercings. They might wear New Rock boots and some bondage or bondage-influenced clothing. Their guitar would likely be a warlock style, and their amp and pedal collection leaning towards metal tones rather than blues tones.

Even if they could play the notes of a great blues, many would feel they lack the right guitar tone for great blues. Even supposing the tone is great (either because they have a wider selection of gear than I stated above, or because the band think this metal tone works for blues), their image, being so heavily contrived would still be a disadvantage for them. This isn't to say no blues artist has ever had a contrived image, a many have. But the image of our goth guitarist is one she chose, and one that is clearly very anti-blues, since the blues ethos is that it is a roots music form. Further, since the goth "movement" is often quite insular and cliquey, many blues fans would be wary of accepting a player who subscribes to an image which very clearly says "I'm different to you".

Many artists have played with image constraints. But those who have pushed these constraints too far often find they lose their audience (or a significant part of it) as a result.

The best way to deal with image is take what you are and realize it defines "cool"

I'm the guy in the hat . . .

The best way to deal with image is take what you are and realize it defines "cool"

Beautiful :D There are those who follow style, and those who set the standard for others to follow!

Are there posters available?

Cos looks also sell truckloads of memorabilia. All those music mags with pics of the guitar heroes, the autographed photos, T-shirts with the image on, band posters, and even ‘look-alike' replicas of the hero's guitar.

One of my early influences was Vic Lewis. The GN Vic Lewis. So naturally I have a Vic Lewis room in the house with a wall of pictures of him, printed sheets of his song lyrics, a white Tel just like his (OK I had to fake the signature, but it looks cool...), and a little stage with Vic and the band on it. OK, you can't get Vic figures yet, but I've painted up an Action Man that looks a lot like him, (especially after a couple of pints...) and they look great. And I've got another wall with a big map on that has pins stuck in it for all the places he's been, with a special colour for places he's played at, and a real big pin for where he is now.... :shock:

Well, I hope you know that I'm kidding, but that's not uncommon fan behaviour. I was once on the receiving end of a version of it, when I was young and slightly spunky (rather than senile and battered like now). A teenage girl who I knew proudly showed me her room and it had the map and the pins (I was in the USA and had been been traveling coast to coast) and a wall with loads of handwritten names of all the places that I'd been passing through on the trip. It was kind of flattering but just a wee bit freaky too.... I think I backed out of the room reasonably quickly.... but doubtless nowhere near as fast as Vic would exit if I wasn't joking above. :wink:

The software that put Vic in those outfits came with my digital camera, so at the time I got it I did a few of my family, and all the members of a friend's family, and even a couple of pics of GN members. They only take a few seconds each to do, but the family and friends who got the treatment all seemed to be intrigued and amused to see how they'd look with a completely different image.

Now, I'm off to the shops to get... what was it?... purple hair dye, a few kilos of goth bling and an axe with skulls or dragons on it. Sounds like fun... although maybe I'll change my mind and get a hat instead.....

Cheers,

Chris

Personally for me, I want to see the musicians fit the part. When I see someone up on stage I want to be entertained, therefore they are entertainers, and should play the part that's on stage.

If I go to see a country band (even the new era country stuff) I don't want some pink haired guy up there with a guitar that looks like it came from the fiery depths of hell. For me, it's not just the music, it's the whole package, looks are VERY important to me. If I wanted to just listen to music I would buy their CD's and not go to a concert.

Most memorable concert to me, Garth Brooks, was it the music, not really, it was the performance. If you hate Garth Brooks or country music, I can almost guarantee that you would walk away from his concert energized.

I pretty much agree with Joe kind of anyway...I mean once you get on stage it's more than the music you are now an entertainer and music is part of the package but not the whole package.

But I think there's been a bit of over analyzing going on here. I think everyone is using a visual image of their favorite big name band and trying to decide whether or not the look fits. Sure at that level image can be a very important part of the equation but we are talking about your neighborhood blues bar band that's just starting out.

I think worrying about the looks of any particular person is a little over the top at this point. I'd worry more about their ability to play the music the way you want them to, their committment to the band and if they mesh well with the other players. The last three are much more important in my opinion than what kind of guitar she uses and the color of her hair.

I don't know about looks being in a blue band something but to me neither Madonna nor Barbara Streisand looked sensational.

But, they are both legends in the world of Pop and Country Music respectively.

Point - Make good music. 8)

Since I'm in it for the music and have no desire or hope of ever making a penny from it. It wouldn't matter to me. If she could play or for that matter if she just wanted to play she could play music with me. We have one rule in my group, we practice on Mondays at 6:30 pm, show up ready to play.

but to me neither Madonna nor Barbara Streisand looked sensational.

I have to disagree on that one, I think Madonnas image MADE her a legend in the pop world. If she didn't have the image she did, I think you could classify her in the same place as Tiffany during that time period.

Barbra Steisand...well, that's another story, I think she just hit a chord within the Adult Contemporary genre, she's a mega star for sure, but I just don't know why, never really liked her music.

I don't know about looks being in a blue band something but to me neither Madonna nor Barbara Streisand looked sensational.

But, they are both legends in the world of Pop and Country Music respectively.

Streisand is a country artist? too much Green Day or maybe just the Dookie, kid. standards, show tunes, romantic pop of the 60s - 70s.

but these are interesting, polar opposite examples. as others have said or implied, Madonna is an image genius. she is all about being an exaggerated cartoon persona. you may not like her face, but she is proof that appearance and image sells -- cause it ain't on vocal strength. Streisand has powered her career on her voice, and like that or not, she has an acknowledged vocal talent within her genres. she is not a natural performer, and her performing insecurities have been reported numerous times over the years.

then there is Celine Dion, who has a vocal talent (to some), and believes she is a charismatic performer, but actually creeps out many people with her strange awkwardness.

flipping the camera back onto the audience, being a fan of any one (or more) of the above is probably very telling in terms of appreciation for pure music versus pure performance ... and points in between.