A current thread made me wonder why it is that people find it much easier to champion and speak well of people when they are relatively unknown. Once they take the terrible step into being more widely liked they are suddenly 'grim' or 'rubbish' or 'money grabbing' or 'untrue to their roots' or 'fat' or sexually abnormal or whatever.

The current butt of this seems to be the Unthanks. A while ago the popular one to knock was Kate Rusby and how all her songs sound the same or some other gripe; or Show of Hands not being any good; or Bellowhead doing something wrong.

I listened to the song on the BBC mentioned on the latest thread and personally can't see why it raises so many hackles. My wife came in while I was listening to it and enjoyed it. It's decently sung, I like string quartet backing and the guitarist and keyboards were tasteful. I don't own any Unthanks music and have only really listened to a few things on YouTube etc when people have taken a pop at them here in the past (I liked Sexy Sadie by the way, I thought it was fun)

Is it because they are on the TV and somehow that makes you an instant target? Is the other side of the 'fame' culture that we live in a constant need to pillory and replace decent performers with whatever the next new thing is - until their time comes to be flushed down the same tube. Jedward I'm sure are fantastically talented and will no doubt make a progressive fusion album one day with Pat Metheny, Pavarotti and Stockhausen which will show what they are really all about and to finally silence any critics there may be out there...

There was a programme about Elton John and Bernie Taupin's early days on BBC4 the other day. Early promise and talent; music college and practice; dedication and singleminded pursuit of a goal in the face of adversity from school and parets etc; obscurity; playing in bands and 'paying dues'; selling out and playing the 'wrong music'; taking chances; working in Denmark St and trying to churn out 'hits'; travelling endlessly; ignored first album; nearly canned until going to the US etc etc. I bet there are many who reckon it was probably pretty easy for Elton because.... Most of the things in the first paragraph (and many more) have been applied to him since. But I'd gues he worked enormously hard at what he did - it doesn't fall on a plate.

It's sad that not everyone with talent makes it. It may be seen to be unfair that some people with less (subjectively perceived) talent than others make the most of it and some with more make the least of it (perhaps perspiration rather than inspiration and all that apply). In most biographies of people who have 'made it' there are a good number of surprises - where people go "well I never knew they sang on cruise ships and workin men's clubs for 10 years before I saw them on the telly" - and things that people have given up or chosen to take chances with.

So my question is - why do people so begrudge people the success that in most spheres they have worked so very very hard to achieve?

And secondly - why does it allow so many people (not specifically talking Mudcat here so let's not have an argument on that level) who have not an iota of the talent to somehow feel that the artist has so let them down and owes them so much?

It doesn't seem to be, as Les said in another thread, whether you like them or not; it seems more to be 'what can I say bad about these people' just because they are there.