Freddie Mercury is it just me or is he missed ?

I think the idea that there was a single 'greatest' voice of the 20th century, like all those 'greatest' things is a little silly. fischer-dieskau was doubtless very fine, but what of Hotter, Varnay, Flagstad, Nilsson, Wingassen and so on.... when you look at those sorts of lists (and the many, many more I've missed off) it seems a little absurd that it's possible to single out just one.

Freddie Mercury was not, of course, in any of those kinds of league (and, indeed, comparing pop singers with classical ones is a bit like comparing apples and oranges anyway), but dire is a bit harsh. He was a great entertainer and provided stuff that a lot of people liked. What surprises me about this thread is that people who don't like him are able to get so worked up about it.

regards, Tam

Earwicker,

Go on then, tell us one more time what you think about Queen and Freddy Mercury.

Thanks,
Peter

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
He wasn't one of the greatest voices of any century. Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau was a great voice, like Janet Baker, or Anne Sofie von Otter or Matthias Goerne. Freddie Mercury was a lamentable warbling queen whose sheer awfulness set new standards in kitsch and vulgarity. Truly dire.

At some point, hopefully very soon, you'll consider your point made, i.e., you aren't a Freddie Fan. I personally got the gist of your point in your first post. Continuing to say it over and over again doesn't lend your opinion any more validity.

The people you mention could not have sang the blues or rock and roll for shit, which relegates them to petty warbler status in my book. But that's just my opinion. I'll assume this one statement is sufficient to express it.

As I said:

quote:

I'm just dismayed to hear people so arrogantly assert that something is 'crap' just because they don't like it. The use of emotive and venomous language to describe their level of dislike suggests to me there is more at work than plain not liking i.e intellectual snobbery.

and then Earwicker illustrated my point again :

quote:

Freddie Mercury was a lamentable warbling queen whose sheer awfulness set new standards in kitsch and vulgarity. Truly dire.

Doug

Chaps,

He was crap by any objective standard you like, it isn't merely a matter of subjective preference.

Regards,

Earwicker

Earwicker

quote:

He was crap by any objective standard you like, it isn't merely a matter of subjective preference.

Queen worldwide record sales 300 million (Source: Wikipedia)

Seems they did OK in this objective department!

Doug

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
He was crap by any objective standard you like, it isn't merely a matter of subjective preference.

He had a four-octave vocal range (Wikipedia) and was good enough to perform and record with Spanish diva Montserrat Caballé (to wide critical acclaim, I might add). In her own words, "I will always remember Freddie as a good friend, an honest and courageous man - especially towards the end of his life - a man who was very, very special for thousands of people. And you know, thousands of people cannot be wrong."

One more time Earwicker, please, pretty please?

I so love to read your intelligent opinions.

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by jayd:
And you know, thousands of people cannot be wrong."

They can.

quote:

I so love to read your intelligent opinions.

My pleasure!

I suppose if you happen to like that which is kitsch and nausiating, if you can suffer that which cannot be suffered, then FM's Queen is for you...

jayd - I wasn't commenting on his character, he was no doubt very nice.

EW

Earwicker

Get a clue. Look up in dictionary: ‘banging on’ and ‘tedious’

BTW, I don’t think I said anywhere I liked Queen. I’m pretty indifferent; I don’t have any of their albums, but ‘Don’t stop me now’ is brilliant when you’re in a traffic jam; happy (again, look up in dictionary) for someone to like them, happy for someone not to like them.

Peter

Pete,

This is a forum, it's what it's for.

And I am glad you don't like Queen. In case I'd fogotten to mention it, I detest them!

EW

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:

quote:

Originally posted by jayd:

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
One of the greatest voices of the centuary but which centuary?

Mine. Yours. Ours.

He wasn't one of the greatest voices of any century. Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau was a great voice, like Janet Baker, or Anne Sofie von Otter or Matthias Goerne. Freddie Mercury was a lamentable warbling queen whose sheer awfulness set new standards in kitsch and vulgarity. Truly dire.

EW

if he had been alive in the first centuary of the neanderthal period I think he might have impressed - australopithicus queenensis or some such.

Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, Anne Sofie von Otter - yes I agree. How about Jussi Bjorling and Federica Von Stade?

I agree with you

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
Chaps,

He was crap by any objective standard you like, it isn't merely a matter of subjective preference.

Regards,

Earwicker

What objective criteria did you use?

quote:

What objective criteria did you use?

Objective = He didn't like it.

I've never liked him.
I've got some Queen LPs but found them boring.

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:

Weren't Queen the group that sung at Live Aid - the line "No time for losers" - oh well.

Live Aid and Band Aid were overseen by committee. This would have been cleared for performance – rightly or wrongly. But that’s the problem with the affluent middle classes believing that turning up for a concert and/or flashing a bit of plastic (often ostentatiously and boastfully) somehow cures everything at a stroke. They just don’t get it.

Cheers

Harry