no, that is not true, they have to be talented for me to really like them.

I mean I don't like Anna Nicole Smith for instance. Yes, I was in awe when she died because she was really beautiful but I got over it, because she was talentless.

I actually liked Amy before she went all kookoo cherry. She is just an amazing singer.

AND there is another reason why I like Amy and it's because we have almost the same ugly jew face. Like, I can relate. I mean I know what it's like to have such a weird face shape. I don't know if she has any body issues or anything but she doesn't look like the typical beauty, in fact she is not beautiful at all, and the fact that someone ugly can be so fabulous, well it's inspiring to me.

I guess Courtney represented the same years ago. But Amy is different, she's not trying to be something that she is not, unlike Courtney who the only thing she ever wanted all along was to be Marilyn Monroe or Grace Kelly or whatever.

So what was all that crap about Marilyn Monroe's "star" qualities? That's not a talent. What's with the pathetic Madonna worship?

who says that's not a talent?? It's not like everyone has that.

I think Marilyn Monroe and Madonna are both on a league of their own. They are like precious gems that only come once every 100 years.

I mean seriously, how can you explain it?? they may be irrelevant to you because you are all pretentions indie gay but millions and millions of people love them both, and Marilyn is still a relevant presence causing headlines years after her death, and what is their appeal?? they weren't the most talented women by any standards, nor the most beautiful(well Marilyn was incredibly beautiful, Madonna is ugly) but they've somehow captivated the whole world, they just have SOMETHING that is incredibly rare that nobody else has. They are stars. And they were meant to achieve that, I mean it was their destiny to achieve greatness in every way.

Popular culture is pretty bland, most genuinely interesting stuff is too much for the masses to take. I'm not elitist, I wish this wasn't the case, but the truth is, you take a mediocre pop song and slap a gimmick on it, and that's all the originality and substance most people want, need, and can deal with.

That's not to deprecate Madonna as a pop-maker, but what she does is about hard work and audacity far more than talent. I like some of her music, although most of the time it's the producer that's really got the talent. Ray of Light would be nothing without William Orbit, for example. But your bullshit about them being "precious gems" is just nuts. You don't seem to be able to appreciate without idolising, worshipping the person and demanding that they are talented just for getting out of bed in the morning. They're talented the way modern artists are - they do what most people only think/joke about doing - but that does imply that their "talent" is little more than the arrogance to think you deserve the credit for something anyone could have done.

"Causing headlines", to me, isn't a sign that you're relevant. It's a sign that the rags have decided to ram you down the public throat. They make out that these people have "star quality" and an enduring presence, but it's primarily because people have been so bombarded with their image that they just accept their presence as inevitable. Marilyn wasn't an icon, she was made one. I blame Andy Warhol, if it wasn't for him she'd probably be no more famous than Rita Hayworth or Bette Midler; not to say she wouldn't be known as an actress, but she wouldn't be a "star".

And dude, seriously, Madonna isn't ugly. I'm pretty sure most of her career has come off her image and her looks.