Not sure how many of you saw her movies or listened to her music, but despite her personal problems I really liked some of her works.

RIP Whitney.

http://music.yahoo.com/news/whitney-houston-superstar-records-films-dies-005927033.html

I like some of her music. She was pretty hot in The Bodyguard. RIP.

Wow... I can't believe she died. RIP

Similar to Amy Winehouse, she pretty much self destructed. I don't understand why we're expected to feel sorry for these people.

It's sad, but as Neko mentioned, these people do it to themselves. And let's also not forget how many other people die every single day and don't get an "honourable" mention around the world. <3

Also, inb4 argument over value of life.

besides, what has Whitney Houston done over the past few years that's worth mentioning? She hasn't had a decent hit in years, her last album went by pretty much unnoticed and frankly, most of the world had no doubt already forgotten about her.

I had no idea who the women was until she died. After hearing a few if her songs, I realized she's one of those idiots who ruins songs by showing off her vocal range. :/

I had no idea who the women was until she died. After hearing a few if her songs, I realized she's one of those idiots who ruins songs by showing off her vocal range. :/

I mean, basically every classical piano concerto was written to show off the composer's virtuosity...

If the song was written to show off the vocal range that's fine. What I find a lot of female singers do is randomly show off their vocal range, which annoys the crap out of me.

Similar to Amy Winehouse, she pretty much self destructed. I don't understand why we're expected to feel sorry for these people.

I sort of agree. People have a low tolerance for things like drug addiction or one's who stay in an abusive relationship, but it's also easy to forget that people who live those kinds of lives are not right in their mind. It may be a bit too sympathetic to some people, but in the medical realm expecting someone who is an alcoholic to make good life decisions is like expecting someone who has schizophrenia to make good decisions: they both suffer from an illness that breaks down the boundaries of the psyche in a way that is detrimental. Also, there is a giant correlation between not only fame and mental illness, but also creative talent and mental illness; it should be of no surprise she died the way she did.

Also, maybe to those who don't know the history of American music she may seem like a showoff and bland, but she is a product of over a hundred years of African-American music. As a vocalist, she is up there with Nina Simone and Pearl Bailey when it comes down to the facts.

EDIT: and of course para would make this thread.

Also, maybe to those who don't know the history of American music she may seem like a showoff and bland, but she is a product of over a hundred years of African-American music. As a vocalist, she is up there with Nina Simone and Pearl Bailey when it comes down to the facts.

I'm just gonna go ahead and disagree with you there.

Many jazz musicians and vocalists I know would most likely say she's more of a byproduct. ^__^

I'm just gonna go ahead and disagree with you there.

Many jazz musicians and vocalists I know would most likely say she's more of a byproduct. ^__^

A byproduct, a product... let's drop the semantics and just realize that she is from a long line of American vocalists.

I have super litte interest in "classical vocalist" because they tend to be incredibly boring anyways. My personal feelings about Whitney Houston, much like with Michael Jackson and Prince, are probably similar to what John Tavener was thinking when he said that Bjork " is more intelligent than most opera singers." She has amazing pipes, she knows it, and she's going to freaking abuse them, because why not?

She has amazing pipes, she knows it, and she's going to freaking abuse them, because why not?
The keyword is underlined up there. =P
To answer your question: because she made perfectly good songs sound like shit by trying to show off like a jackass instead of respecting the music she was singing.
I had no real feelings for her either way, though. Just an annoying, show-offy singer I didn't care about. A lot of good singers are like that, though, so it's not like she was a special case or something. People like to show off, hahah.

I sort of agree. People have a low tolerance for things like drug addiction or one's who stay in an abusive relationship, but it's also easy to forget that people who live those kinds of lives are not right in their mind. It may be a bit too sympathetic to some people, but in the medical realm expecting someone who is an alcoholic to make good life decisions is like expecting someone who has schizophrenia to make good decisions: they both suffer from an illness that breaks down the boundaries of the psyche in a way that is detrimental. Also, there is a giant correlation between not only fame and mental illness, but also creative talent and mental illness; it should be of no surprise she died the way she did.

Schizophrenia and mental illness are not the same as drug addiction and alcoholism in my book. Granted, they often go hand in hand one way or another, but they are still diffferent. You have no say in the matter as to whether or not you develop a mental illness, but you definitely have a choice whether or not to go and snort some cocaine. And ignorance, "I won't get addicted, I'll just do it this once" is not a get out clause, I'm afraid. I'm not saying I have a low tolerance for these things, I don't think I'm in any position to judge. But I would strongly argue them to be two different kettles of fish.

Fame/talent linking with mental illness greatly depends on the psychological disposition of the individual in the first place. Not everyone with the talent to become famous ends up like Amy Winehouse. I would argue that it is more common in the popular music industry due to the whole celebrity culture/media pressure/etc. If there really was such a specific link between fame, talent and mental illness, then it would not be so industry-specific, it would be across the spectrum.

Anyway, bringing it back to topic, I never gave a damn about Whitney, never consciously listened to one of her songs and am not going to start doing either now she is dead. People die.

A byproduct, a product... let's drop the semantics and just realize that she is from a long line of American vocalists.

I have super litte interest in "classical vocalist" because they tend to be incredibly boring anyways. My personal feelings about Whitney Houston, much like with Michael Jackson and Prince, are probably similar to what John Tavener was thinking when he said that Bjork " is more intelligent than most opera singers." She has amazing pipes, she knows it, and she's going to freaking abuse them, because why not?

I'm going make my last post here.

You have a right to your opinion, and that's very fine.

And so do I: The reason I say byproduct, is because she's exactly that. She isn't from a direct line of jazz musicians (let alone jazz vocalists...is what I was referring to, but if you want to hate on opera singers, that's a completely different discussion, and I -- for one -- would like to avoid talked about a mostly European style of singing), she's simply a pop-vocalist. Nina Simone and Pearl Bailey, for one, were of a completely different generation that still honored artistic musicianship over making millions and dollars off selling records. Whitney Houston was of the generation where being a good singer is 'singing' like crazy, 'complex' unmusical and nonsensical fills, all at the expense of destroying her voice. Honestly, what about her singing has moved you so much to express beauty? It's much like pianists who have a solidified technique -- they may excite me and impress me, but they don't move me the way an old Claudio Arrau would, let's say.

You claim to know about American music, and I feel as if you're insulting the people who have the knowledge of American, and world music history overall.

And by the way, I'm not hating on you. :)

I'm going make my last post here.

You have a right to your opinion, and that's very fine.

And so do I: The reason I say byproduct, is because she's exactly that. She isn't from a direct line of jazz musicians (let alone jazz vocalists...is what I was referring to, but if you want to hate on opera singers, that's a completely different discussion, and I -- for one -- would like to avoid talked about a mostly European style of singing), she's simply a pop-vocalist. Nina Simone and Pearl Bailey, for one, were of a completely different generation that still honored artistic musicianship over making millions and dollars off selling records. Whitney Houston was of the generation where being a good singer is 'singing' like crazy, 'complex' unmusical and nonsensical fills, all at the expense of destroying her voice. Honestly, what about her singing has moved you so much to express beauty? It's much like pianists who have a solidified technique -- they may excite me and impress me, but they don't move me the way an old Claudio Arrau would, let's say.

You claim to know about American music, and I feel as if you're insulting the people who have the knowledge of American, and world music history overall.

And by the way, I'm not hating on you. :)

Where Nina Simone was most definitely a singer that took a fine art spin on things, Pearl Bailey was definitely one of the closest things you could get to pop music at the time.


Schizophrenia and mental illness are not the same as drug addiction and alcoholism in my book.

Of course they aren't the same, but to a medical professional they are all mental illnesses. If not a physical addiction, mental addiction to anything is a psychological issue that shows up in people who are not well. Think about it this way: why would a sane person be addicted to something?

Of course they aren't the same, but to a medical professional they are all mental illnesses. If not a physical addiction, mental addiction to anything is a psychological issue that shows up in people who are not well. Think about it this way: why would a sane person be addicted to something?

You seriously have the weirdest outlook on how to view things. You get on people for not being concise about a soft science like art, and become overly generalized in a field that has a background in scientific method.

Addiction is a normal part of obsession, which is where passion comes from. Without passion there isn't creativity, and without creativity you pretty much have nothing. Stop taking what is drug addiction and overgeneralizing it. Just because someone with Schizophrenia has the same symptoms as a user off of cocaine doesn't mean that they are to be treated the same. The source is different, meaning there are different ways to correct or mitigate it.

Addiction is a strange thing. I don't think medical professionals would count smokers as having a mental illness. Yet it is still an addiction. Does even trying a cigarette in the first place mean that you have a mental illness? I would strongly disagree with anyone who said it did.

Same can be applied to drugs. You know something is bad for you, you try it anyway, next thing you're an addict. Are you saying anyone who knowingly does something that is bad for them is mentally ill?

A person losing their sanity during the process of addiction is not the same as someone who becomes addicted because they are "insane" (I hate that word).

Edit: I hadn't seen M's post, but I completely agree with the essence of it.

AND Iiiiiiiiieeeiiiiiiii WILL ALWAYS LOVE Yoooooooo~ IIIIII WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOUUU

well its not like she didn't try to get off the drugs.:\

AND Iiiiiiiiieeeiiiiiiii WILL ALWAYS LOVE Yoooooooo~ IIIIII WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOUUU

<3

well its not like she didn't try to get off the drugs.:\

Thousands of addicts die every day because they couldn't stay off drugs. Nobody mourns them. Why do we mourn this one?