madonna is like the gold standard for pop stars, especially in the US. comparing kylie to her is out of line. when she's sticking with music, she's pretty excellent. otherwise, no. what kylie brings to the international pop scene is something that gets people interested every single time. with each new release, there is buzz. she's a name that people care about. and she hasn't done much lately to make people think they shouldn't.

also, her songs lend themselves extremely well to remixes. i hear her in clubs all the time, no matter what the club is like. people who go out know kylie. and the people who go out matter to the industry. she's a force. (and she does write about half of her songs.)

real artists can't be no talent hacks?

Body Language was a phenomenal pop album.

I like her more than Madonna, Aguilera, and Pink, but I'm not going to make false claims that she's some sort of revolutionary. I mean, c'mon, let's be real here -- she's a pop star. A very good star, one that aligns with my tastes more than the others, hence the attraction. But "groundbreaking within her genre" is almost an oxymoron -- she is, by definition, restricting herself. The fact that you have to qualify "groundbreaking" is a self-defeating argument.

Sure, she's hot, but Alison Goldfrapp tramps around in her skivvies, and no-one holds that against her. Aguilera is much more skanky, which, in my mind, detracts from her talent, in that it's overshadowed by her image.

I think the fairest comparison is Madonna, inasmuch as they're both "assemblers" of talent and product. And, although Confessions on a Dancefloor is the best thing Madonna's done in years, Kylie consistently does better albums -- score one for Kylie.

Pink is overshadowed by all of them, but she ranks second in this foursome* -- IMHO. I just like her the (second) best.

*leaving out Goldfrapp

Synopsis: real artist, but my definition of "artist" includes a lot of what you people would question as artist.

I was thinking about this re: Aguilera today. I was supposing(wd?) when she matures maybe she'll rein in those lungs of hers. She's got talent for sure and could really put it to good use if applied right.

Madonna is a business savvy somewhat tasteful mid talent genius.

Minogue, I can't say I have heard enough to formulate an opinion. She's easy on the eyes for starters.

I wouldn't listen to any of these people.

I'm confused - she's more talented than Madonna, Pink, and Xtina (put together, no less) but she doesn't writer her own songs, is not a great singer, and can't dance very well. What exactly is she so talented at, besides having lovely assets? Sounds to me like the people who write and create her music are the talented ones, and Kylie's just a face/body attached to it.

Don't put too much thought into it - I suspect Northern Soul posted while he was wringing the rat to a Kylie video.

See my post about being a 'facilitator'. That still counts for something, because most of the time, a conjoining of talents still yields no fruit.

im trying to have a real debate here and youre saying im only doing it because i masterbate to pictures of her? real mature.

Yeh. Real mature. And you've made many great points in this, er, "debate".

if youre trying to make a fool of me there are much better ways of doing it than misquoting me.

True. If I was trying to make a fool of you I would've just quoted your original post.

except that she does. i just pulled out the liner notes for everything i own of hers and she has a credit on maybe half of the songs.

i can't make a real criticism on her, since i only heard that one song that got a lot of airplay back in the day. based on that one song mind you, i don't think she was anything special.

then you fooled me. congratulations.

This was my thought exactly.

Actually, I enjoy most of what I've heard by Kylie, but I don't think she's a super talented singer (although I do like her looks, but that has nothing to do with this).

Isn't there a difference between a "performer" and an "artist?" (yeah, okay, unless you consider it "performance art," har har.) I've always categorized Madonna to be a performer-- she gets by on enough talent, though there are clearly people more talented--vocally, physically, intellectually, dance-wise-- than she. Madonna is all about presentation and morphing. She adopts a persona that will affect people at that particular time, positive or negative, and she's a pro at the "bad publicity is good publicity" game. I dunno... she may not be as cute or young as some of the others (Pink, Christina, Britney), but you gotta hand it to her for sticking around this long. And the love she gets from gay men is undying. She's bound to be the next Judy Garland, if she isn't already. Is she a greedy bitch for sticking around this long? Perhaps, but I think she likes the fact that 20 years later, she can still push people's buttons (and she still has a huge influence).

As for Kylie, I don't really know much about her or her music. I do know she had a few hits in the mid 80s, and now she's got this amazing dance presence since her re-emergence in the 90s, esp. in Europe. Would I classify her as better than Madonna? Probably not. They're probably in the same realm, but Madonna does have the history on her. I think there are many more young female performers out there who would cite Madonna as an influence over Kylie.

As for the others out there today, I guess Christina is vocally gifted, but it's just not my type of music. I do think she did herself a huge disservice going the uber-slut route, but looks like she might be reeling it in these days. Britney is a farce. She wishes she were Madonna, but I don't think she's ever going to achieve that kind of status. Pink? Eh, edgy I guess, different from the other bleached-blonde stuff, but overall, I don't think she's very talented.

As for the music itself, it's just unadulterated bubbly pop. It's been around forever. Either you like it or you don't. Sometimes it's good not to be so heavy on the message, and more about the dancing or the escapism of it all.

Obviously I'm aware of the fact that Kylie has never really "gone away" except in North America, but the fact remains that she is not even in the same league of fame and success compared to Madonna. You can cite me population statistics until judgement day, but qualitatively Madonna's influence and popularity as an artist/performer is considerably greater than Kylie. And for this reason alone, in this genre, I would say she is "better".

The point being Madonna's influence has been considerably greater in North America. There was a time that Kylie was a massive pop culture influence in dozens of other countries, rivaling Madonna.

Do we give a shit about Victoria Beckham? No, but we're not the whole world, either.

And, Radcliffe, your projection of why you think some people like popular woman could be off-base, ya know. Maybe we're just all secret fags.

Mod delete thread.

Not until we argue if Lionel Ritchie is better than Usher.

Lionel all the way, for the way he let his Tuskeegee roots show in "Sail On".

...wishful thainkin'...

Look, I get that Kylie Minogue has been popular in other countries, but realistically Madonna has been a worldwide phenomenon for more than 20 years, American Life notwithstanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kylie_Minogue

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna_singles

That's a good song, even non-ironically.

"Black man can't do country!"

Yes he can.

I love "Sail On".

But it ain't so hard to say, would you please just go awayyyy-yayayyy.

Madonna has had more hits. She's better known on a global scale, but Kylie is one of those celebs who was never out of the press in England and Australia. Her name was never absent, even if her songs weren't charting.

You're right that Madonna has had more influence, industry-wise and has had far bigger hits. But Kylie's influence is more like an eternal Lindsay Lohan kind of thing.

You're right that Madonna's been more enduring and more resilient. But Kylie is much better known than Americans and Canadians realize.

I yield to your statistics, however.