Quote:
Originally posted by SweetestDiva
I TOTALLY agree. Beyoncé has IT. Kelly doesn't. I remember there being more shared vocal responsibility on their first album, but Beyoncé was still the clear standout.
I agree with whoever said she's just more marketable. No amount of management and marketing could make Kelly interesting to me.
|
I agree with you and lovelyivy.
Managers have a lot of say in where their artists are going to do appearances. But step back and look at the bigger picture for a minute. If you are looking at Beyonce, Kelly, and Michelle on an individual level, can you really expect them to be on an even playing field?
Beyonce looks better (according to America's standards of beauty), sings better, performs better, acts better, and just in general has far more charisma and appeal.
Kelly and Michelle will forever be in the background if they are grouped with someone like Beyonce who simply outshines them. And it is not something that Matthew or ANYONE can control, much of that is just natural ability/God given talent.
I just can't see someone who is as greedy as Matthew Knowles (allegedly) is deliberately sabotaging or underming the career of 2 of his own acts. Especially because you have to invest a certain amount to get the albums produced and promoted meaning he could potentially lose money.
Are the people who think that Beyonce is being marketed differently saying that Michelle and Kelly have as much talent as she does? Or are y'all saying that Matthew should work double time to promote them?