Why is Pete Waterman talking about Sabrina Carpenter’s G-string?

by

In many cases, you might hold a firm belief or viewpoint regarding certain matters. If fortune favors you, you might reside in an environment that allows for the expression of such opinions. In some instances, you might feel quite eager or even compelled to voice your thoughts on the subject.

Even though one has the ability to perform an action, it doesn’t necessarily mean they ought to do it. That’s a lesson Pete Waterman might want to keep in mind.

Known as a renowned British music producer and composer, Waterman has faced significant backlash due to some rather insensitive remarks he made regarding contemporary pop music, particularly in reference to Sabrina Carpenter.

Pete Waterman has an interesting, and sad, take on Sabrina Carpenter

40 years ago, I was totally into the music scene dominated by Pete Waterman, whose views on modern pop were highly influential. Together with his writing/producing partners Mike Stock and Matt Aitken, they churned out countless chart-topping hits during the latter part of the 1980s in the UK. They even managed a few number-one hits in the USA. The SAW boys, as we fondly called them, penned and produced Rick Astley’s “Never Gonna Give You Up,” which ruled the charts on both sides of the Atlantic.

Critics, numerous in number, often viewed SAW’s music as shallow pop tunes. Utilizing drum machines and synthesized basslines, their songs frequently sported generic dance rhythms and melodramatic lyrics that were, at times, overtly sentimental. The music was so poorly received that the trendsetting readers of Melody Maker magazine placed “No more SAW records” as the seventh item in their list of desires for the 90s. This wish came after hopes for “The Further Rise of the Green Party” and before “The Ending of Apartheid.

Finishing at number eight on that same list was “The Execution of Pete Waterman.”

Regardless of whether you’re familiar with Pete Waterman or his associates, I believe it’s clear that he has significantly contributed to pop music, particularly in the U.K. After SAW disbanded, Waterman and Stock carried on writing and producing songs. Compared to Aitken, Waterman’s post-SAW career has been more extensive. Although their impact may not be as powerful today as it was in the late ’80s, Waterman continues to have a voice in the music industry.

Last month, I was quite intrigued when a 78-year-old icon weighed in on contemporary music, offering some sharp critiques. He specifically called out Karen Carpenter, alleging that her performances were offensive. He argued that artists like her, who engage in sexually suggestive acts, are squandering the respect they’ve spent decades building up. In essence, his viewpoint can be boiled down to: “If you desire respect, don’t appear on stage in a G-string.

I have no hesitation in believing that several individuals share Waterman’s viewpoint. Moreover, I recognize his freedom to express it. However, on this specific matter, I believe it would have been wiser for him to remain silent.

This idea isn’t a recent one from the SAW team. Back in the day, Mike Stock criticized contemporary pop music for subtly drifting towards explicit content, likening it to a gradual descent into pornography. His criticism primarily targeted artists like Nicole Scherzinger and Britney Spears.

Looking back even earlier, we could consider Madonna or Carly Simon’s “Playing Possum” album cover. This iconic Norman Seeff photograph captures Simon in a kneeling position, in profile, wearing a brief negligee and knee-high boots. The use of sexually suggestive poses by female artists is a longstanding aspect of contemporary pop music, dating back to before we were familiar with Samantha Fox.

(In case you didn’t know, Fox was a 16-year-old model who posed topless and had some chart-topping songs produced by the SAW team in the late ’80s. This raises questions about Waterman and Stock’s claims about pornography, as I also find it hypocritical.)

It appears that Waterman’s recent statements imply that contemporary female recording artists, particularly Carpenter, are venturing into territories that weren’t explored as much by their predecessors decades ago. However, it seems more likely that a white male music executive who has not been in touch with modern musical trends for over a century is making accusations against a new pop star to remain relevant, rather than because there’s a real issue at hand.

It’s possible that I could be mistaken. It seems to me that instead of choosing not to share an opinion on the topic – a choice that should be remembered as always being available – he opted to challenge Carpenter.

Just for clarity, she can handle her own defense; she skillfully responded to the criticism by emphasizing that if someone doesn’t appreciate her music or performances, they are free not to purchase her albums or attend her concerts. It’s quite straightforward, isn’t it?

The carpenter, being a young and thriving artist at present, is experiencing a wave of success. It’s uncertain how long she will maintain this position. However, I have no doubt that she will make mistakes during her journey. An artist who doesn’t push boundaries and challenge the norms often ends up being quite ordinary. She is currently achieving great things without any guidance from Pete Waterman or myself. A simple observation: artists who censor themselves out of fear of criticism or disapproval from older generations often fade away.

I find Waterman’s criticism of a young woman’s behavior irrelevant since it seems to have no effect on Carpenter. However, there’s one aspect of this recent tale that truly irks me, and that’s the viewpoint expressed by Mike Stock. He deemed Carpenter’s overly sexualized song lyrics as being “lacking effort.

Lazy? For real?

I’m unstoppable now – No need for discussion about it – I declare that nothing can halt me now – I intend to disrupt it, to carry my affection elsewhere, indeed, indeed.

The SAW boys composed this chorus for Samantha Fox’s popular song “Nothing’s Going to Halt Me in My Tracks Now.” Incidentally, the title phrase, “Nothing’s going to halt me in my tracks now,” is repeated 17 times throughout the 222-second track.

It seems you two are reunited, and if that’s the case – When he gives you a kiss, you’ll undoubtedly taste a hint of me. If eternal love is what you seek, and I believe it is – Keep in mind, you’ll also share in my flavor.

The catchy tune that Carpenter, Julia Michaels, and Amy Allen (who received the first-ever Songwriter of the Year award at the Grammys) penned for Carpenter’s chart-topping song “Taste” is…

1. Both songs are about breakups, and I’ll openly acknowledge that Carpenter’s song has a more explicit and vulgar tone. However, as a work of literature, with its intense focus on tactile sensations and biting sarcasm, I greatly prefer it over the repetitive, outdated clichés from the past four decades.

2. Both songs are breakup tunes, but Carpenter’s has a stronger explicit and vulgar edge that I can’t deny. As a piece of literature, it stands out due to its vivid sensory details and biting sarcasm, making it far superior in my eyes to the tired, overused sentiments from four decades ago.

3. Both songs are breakup ballads, but Carpenter’s has more explicit and vulgar undertones that I can’t help but notice. As a piece of literature, it shines due to its intense focus on tactile sensations and biting sarcasm, making it far superior in my opinion compared to the worn-out clichés from four decades ago.

4. Both songs are about breakups, and while Carpenter’s has a more explicit and vulgar tone, I find its literary merit to be much greater due to its sharp focus on tactile sensations and cutting-edge spite. This makes it far superior in my eyes compared to the redundant, outdated platitudes from four decades ago.

5. Both songs are breakup tracks, but Carpenter’s has a more explicit and vulgar vibe that I can’t ignore. As literature, its tactile focus and sharp sarcasm make it far superior in my opinion to the tired, repetitive sentiments from four decades ago.

6. Both songs are about breakups, and while Carpenter’s has a more explicit and vulgar tone, I greatly prefer its focus on tactile sensations and biting sarcasm over the outdated clichés that have been around for the past four decades.

7. Both songs are breakup tunes, but Carpenter’s stands out with its explicit and vulgar tone as well as its intense focus on tactile sensations and sharp sarcasm. This makes it far superior in my eyes compared to the redundant platitudes that have been around for four decades.

8. Both songs are breakup tracks, but Carpenter’s has a more explicit and vulgar vibe that I can’t help but notice. As literature, its tactile focus and sharp sarcasm make it far superior in my opinion to the outdated clichés that have been around for four decades.

9. Both songs are about breakups, and while Carpenter’s has a more explicit and vulgar tone, I find its literary merit to be much greater due to its sharp focus on tactile sensations and cutting-edge spite. This makes it far superior in my eyes compared to the worn-out clichés from four decades ago.

10. Both songs are breakup ballads, but Carpenter’s stands out with its explicit and vulgar tone as well as its intense focus on tactile sensations and sharp sarcasm. This makes it far superior in my eyes compared to the repetitive, overused sentiments from four decades ago.

Instead of putting in effort, they just recycled the old song when they needed to create a new hit after Rick Astley’s emotional ballad “Never Gonna Give You Up”. They called it “Together Forever” this time.

It appears to me that Waterman and Stock might be overly passionate about the condition of contemporary popular music. It’s possible they’ve had a bit too much caffeine.

Read More

2025-02-24 17:00