news Guardian:"Victim? Survivor? After 20 years of Britney Spears, the jury’s still out“

[britney_rocks]

4 minutes ago, Cappycorn87 said:

This is just another critic who does not know Britney and does not seem to care to understand that Britney lives for Britney and her boys, never the public.

The more I read your posts, the more I think you’re Larry

[Spiritbox]

Yeah, we all saw what happened when she attempted to take control of her direction. Sometimes I wonder if her whole "breakdown" was orchestrated/manipulated in order to provide evidence supporting a conservatorship. We know that Sam Lufti was medicating her and trying to induce a coma so they could "heal her brain." I think they mentally damaged her in order to produce a cash cow for life, without people questioning why her life is not in her own hands because, oh, she's crazy, or, oh, she might do *****.

Before her breakdown, Britney had some interesting things to say. Songs like Rebellion and Mona Lisa presented themes she'd touch on in her personal letters. But we also heard songs like Red Hot Lipstick and behind-the-scenes tales of her work with The DFA that show that, when left to her own devices, she may not make the best decisions artistically, and the people she associated with during her "dark era" show that she may not make the best personal decisions either... but what can you expect from a person who never transitioned into the independence of adulthood, who never had real freedom to explore her own creativity, who had a team of immensely talented people behind her that *any* single creative person would struggle to outperform?

Britney does not and likely never will (at least for the foreseeable future) take the initiative to present her creative ideas to the public, unless those ideas fit a bland, vanilla image and don't actually say anything about her perspective or story. Whether or not that's controlled by her conservators, she's not obligated to reveal her soul to us anyway. And from the way we (meaning society, not necessarily her fanbase) treated her during her breakdown and attempts to express how she felt, we don't deserve it. This article ignores the history of the public not giving a damn about Britney as an artist, much less about what she has to say.

[Chris88]

It's a really great Op-ed to be honest. You can see that the writer really took a step back and looked at how Britney evolved in the industry without liking or hating her. Her remarks are spot on and she makes very strong points. In my opinion, as much as Britney seemed controversial at some points in her career, she lost a lot of substance trying to play too safe for the last 10 years. But the victim card is on all of us, we all used it to defend her at some point and the GP loved it. Her legacy is built on what she did between Baby one more time and Toxic, the rest is really fan-oriented and I don't believe it's the best thing an artist as big as she is (was?) should do. 

[icybaby]

if, after Vegas, Spears went back to the studio, got up to speed, found her true voice, took command and hit us one more time. Yes we all r waiting for it. But not sure if it ever gonna happen. I hope she just gonna have more freedom to do that she wants or not.

 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Cappycorn87 said:

This is just another critic who does not know Britney and does not seem to care to understand that Britney lives for Britney and her boys, never the public.

You seem like a perfectly nice person, and you make valid points for the most part. I agree that Britney puts motherhood first and foremost, which is one of her strongest attributes.

Having said that, while I agree that Britney shouldn’t put too much stock into public approval, Britney is a public figure when it comes to her career and public perception is a part of that. Obviously, this critic doesn’t know Britney the private person. But there’s Britney, the public persona and her career, which what the article is mainly discussing. There are valid points made. Which is why this is a good discussion to have especially on a fan forum. It’d be narrow minded to just dismiss it as trash and not try to see where the writer is coming from.

[britney_rocks]

26 minutes ago, Khoazie said:

You seem like a perfectly nice person, and you make valid points for the most part. I agree that Britney puts motherhood first and foremost, which is one of her strongest attributes.

Having said that, while I agree that Britney shouldn’t put too much stock into public approval, Britney is a public figure when it comes to her career and public perception is a part of that. Obviously, this critic doesn’t know Britney the private person. But there’s Britney, the public persona and her career, which what the article is mainly discussing. There are valid points made. Which is why this is a good discussion to have especially on a fan forum. It’d be narrow minded to just dismiss it as trash and not try to see where the writer is coming from.

[WilderWein]

5 hours ago, Soni said:

Yea, I don't like this

Articles like this are overdone now and bring nothing new

 

They really make her out to be a puppet which isnt true

She has written more songs than Rihanna but ofc, they will praise Rihanna and wouldn't even mention the shift of her everything after the Chris Brown incident..
Britney isn't defined by her breakdown, yes it was iconic but nothing that much changed in her music because of it (except 1 album)
The other thing they got wrong is how the media treats her bad (and still continues to do so while they think they are being generous) or that people hated her for no reason..

I swear to god..such a double standard when it comes to her..

This is true too. And yes i forgot, that did annoy me. The britney is manufacted thing.

[Cappycorn87]

1 hour ago, Khoazie said:

You seem like a perfectly nice person, and you make valid points for the most part. I agree that Britney puts motherhood first and foremost, which is one of her strongest attributes.

Having said that, while I agree that Britney shouldn’t put too much stock into public approval, Britney is a public figure when it comes to her career and public perception is a part of that. Obviously, this critic doesn’t know Britney the private person. But there’s Britney, the public persona and her career, which what the article is mainly discussing. There are valid points made. Which is why this is a good discussion to have especially on a fan forum. It’d be narrow minded to just dismiss it as trash and not try to see where the writer is coming from.

That may be but Britney never been one to entertain negativity which what most of these critics can be to her and her projects.  She's not trying to be everything to everybody

She's just being Britney

[Guest]

“Britney Spears launched herself – or, to be fair, was launched – by a song and video made by middle-aged men.”

This part kind of took me aback in the way it’s phrased. Like, the writer isn’t wrong since BOMT was penned by middle-aged men. But so were the songs sung by the Backstreet Boys, and *NSYNC when they were teenagers themselves. The writer could have just pointed out that Britney didn’t write BOMT, but saying “middle-aged men?” I keep thinking if it were an article about Justin Timberlake, would the writer have used the same phrasing? 

[asitalian12587]

7 hours ago, Soni said:

Yea, I don't like this

Articles like this are overdone now and bring nothing new

 

They really make her out to be a puppet which isnt true

She has written more songs than Rihanna but ofc, they will praise Rihanna and wouldn't even mention the shift of her everything after the Chris Brown incident..
Britney isn't defined by her breakdown, yes it was iconic but nothing that much changed in her music because of it (except 1 album)
The other thing they got wrong is how the media treats her bad (and still continues to do so while they think they are being generous) or that people hated her for no reason..

I swear to god..such a double standard when it comes to her..

my thoughts exactly. they completely disregard any of her creativity and hard work, acting like everything was handed to her. even if  you believe she was "manufactured" at the time (which i dont believe for a second based on countless reports for people she worked with saying how involved she is), someone doesnt stick around for this long without a lot of talent, persistence, and determination. this article demeans all of that.

[Stefi Hilton]

love it!!! very eloquent and knowledgeable writer! kudos

[LostInAnImage]

This was a good article, thanks for posting.  

[fnfurter]

3 hours ago, Khoazie said:

You seem like a perfectly nice person, and you make valid points for the most part. I agree that Britney puts motherhood first and foremost, which is one of her strongest attributes.

Having said that, while I agree that Britney shouldn’t put too much stock into public approval, Britney is a public figure when it comes to her career and public perception is a part of that. Obviously, this critic doesn’t know Britney the private person. But there’s Britney, the public persona and her career, which what the article is mainly discussing. There are valid points made. Which is why this is a good discussion to have especially on a fan forum. It’d be narrow minded to just dismiss it as trash and not try to see where the writer is coming from.

I don't know why you bother, you'll just get the same answer repeated over and over again. 

[Dany]

Terribel article, victimizing and makes up as everything was just given to her, while we know she was always able to push her own ideas trough. I can kinda see why Britney doesnt give any effort into her production anymore, why would you work hard, if its not appreciated and a lot of people want to bring you down with such articles saying she was manufactured ?! She's aware of this things and she knows where she stands now, just think how shy and anxious that would make you knowing a lot of people trash you everything you do in front of the whole world..

[Betty1994]

8 hours ago, Soni said:

Yea but people mostly talk about songwritting..
But we know, she has thought of the ideas of her videos,the direction of her music,choreos,tour stuff and many more..

but people mostly twist it for her!
"Those songs are written for Britney so big deal" to "Rihanna chose to get those songs"|
That's why it's a double standard

 

and no, Britney has also tried to make herself look like that
She had songs about growing up, being too overprotected,lonely,dealing with breakup etc
She had done everything from choosing writers/producers to writting/producing her songs when Blackout dropped
She has never had acknowledgment, the only wrong thing she did is that she lipped more (but nobody attacked Janet that much for it for example)
There is a shift tho, the media are much more respectful to her but it's still isn't enough for what she has done..at least they praised her vocals she did on the last album and the writers that worked with her, praised her at least..

Rihanna pays for songwriting camps herself , selects individuals And fights for songs. Britney doesn’t no double standard it’s not comparable. 

[Betty1994]

6 hours ago, thrashette said:

Yeah, we all saw what happened when she attempted to take control of her direction. Sometimes I wonder if her whole "breakdown" was orchestrated/manipulated in order to provide evidence supporting a conservatorship. We know that Sam Lufti was medicating her and trying to induce a coma so they could "heal her brain." I think they mentally damaged her in order to produce a cash cow for life, without people questioning why her life is not in her own hands because, oh, she's crazy, or, oh, she might do *****.

Before her breakdown, Britney had some interesting things to say. Songs like Rebellion and Mona Lisa presented themes she'd touch on in her personal letters. But we also heard songs like Red Hot Lipstick and behind-the-scenes tales of her work with The DFA that show that, when left to her own devices, she may not make the best decisions artistically, and the people she associated with during her "dark era" show that she may not make the best personal decisions either... but what can you expect from a person who never transitioned into the independence of adulthood, who never had real freedom to explore her own creativity, who had a team of immensely talented people behind her that *any* single creative person would struggle to outperform?

Britney does not and likely never will (at least for the foreseeable future) take the initiative to present her creative ideas to the public, unless those ideas fit a bland, vanilla image and don't actually say anything about her perspective or story. Whether or not that's controlled by her conservators, she's not obligated to reveal her soul to us anyway. And from the way we (meaning society, not necessarily her fanbase) treated her during her breakdown and attempts to express how she felt, we don't deserve it. This article ignores the history of the public not giving a damn about Britney as an artist, much less about what she has to say.

WHeres the proof Sam did anything?

britney mixed medications proof of that can be seen with her having random medications BEFORE lutfi that dont go with alcohol, and other *****.  

 

[Chris88]

2 hours ago, Khoazie said:

“Britney Spears launched herself – or, to be fair, was launched – by a song and video made by middle-aged men.”

This part kind of took me aback in the way it’s phrased. Like, the writer isn’t wrong since BOMT was penned by middle-aged men. But so were the songs sung by the Backstreet Boys, and *NSYNC when they were teenagers themselves. The writer could have just pointed out that Britney didn’t write BOMT, but saying “middle-aged men?” I keep thinking if it were an article about Justin Timberlake, would the writer have used the same phrasing? 

I agree with your take on that statement and I feel like that was the only part of the article where I was like "Ok?". She's not wrong to point that out but it fits today's industry, not the one where Britney's career came into the public eye. I do believe that it's essential sometimes for shows that the writing team fits the demographic they're trying to reach but she's comparing 2 totally different eras and it doesn't make sense since whether we like it or not, those middle-aged men are responsible for Britney's biggest hits. 

[joe sp]

remember what they did the last time she tried to speak out

back in her prime maybe because she was young she was more open but now after all she went/going through, she´s just playing safe

[Delicious Pork Chops]

Rami yacoub and max martin weren't even middle aged when they produced the song.

Even nigel **** wasn't middle age. wtf

[Delicious Pork Chops]

17 minutes ago, Chris88 said:

I agree with your take on that statement and I feel like that was the only part of the article where I was like "Ok?". She's not wrong to point that out but it fits today's industry, not the one where Britney's career came into the public eye. I do believe that it's essential sometimes for shows that the writing team fits the demographic they're trying to reach but she's comparing 2 totally different eras and it doesn't make sense since whether we like it or not, those middle-aged men are responsible for Britney's biggest hits. 

they weren't middle aged back then asdfjkl;