High Snobiety:
Several years ago I came across an interesting statistic: nearly half of all musicians that created a chart hit in the half-century in between 1955 and 2005 never did so again – 47.5 percent, to be exact.
This Hollywood Walk of Shame includes the likes of Los Del Rio (Macarena), A-ha (Take On Me), Nena (99 Luftballoons), Chumbawumba (Tubthumping) and, more recently, Psy (Gangnam Style,) not to mention countless other has-beens.
So what is it about pop stardom that makes it so difficult to sustain?
Is it because pop music is so ephemeral and music tastes change so rapidly?
good things are hard to do.
I love 99 LuftBallons
Nah, that can’t be it.
Yes, it can.
The Rolling Stones had 8 number one hits in – what – 200 years. David Bowie had 5. Frank Zappa had 0. Neil Young had 0. And rarely do these hits rank among the best songs from these people (FZs biggest hit was, what, Valley Girl? Funny piece and a delightful daughter, but barely representative.)
Maybe a number one hit is simply no criteria at all? And maybe is putting foreign artists (like a-ha or Nena) that had multiple hits in their respective home countries / continents into a “shame” list rather attention whoring? Let’s see how many more times High Snobiety will be awarded a link here…
To be clear, the story wasn’t about “number one hit songs”. It was about artists appearing on the charts at all.
Some artists have a hit and then that’s enough to promote an entire career. Look at Oh, Superman by Laurie Anderson. A one hit wonder if you ignore the fantastic collection of albums she has released over the decades.
Joni Mitchell, Big Yellow Taxi, hardly stands for decades of recordings, Shawn.
I could probably list many that fall into this category.