« The envelope please ... | Main | Fashion statement »

Score one for safe

MccartneyTaking risks: good. Playing it safe: baaaaad. Anyhow, that's become the orthodox verdict on modern artistic endeavor. An artist who takes risks deserves our admiration, in this view, even if those risks don't pan out; an artist who plays it safe is a mere hack.

But is this view correct? Sunday's Super Bowl halftime show with Paul McCartney offers evidence that it is not. An earlier AdFreak post (see below) noted an AP story on the show that carried the headline, "McCartney Puts on Safe Show at Super Bowl," and that reflected the media consensus on the matter. Surely, though, the fact that it was "safe" is less important than the fact that it was good. A one-of-a-kind singer, backed by a highly polished band, performed some good material. Nothing to scoff at there. By contrast, while last year's show may have taken risks, it's hard to see how that compensates for its general awfulness. (People forget how utterly cheesy it was even before the notorious "wardrobe malfunction.") Given a choice between the work of a talented person who's playing it safe and an untalented one who's taking risks, why should we prefer the latter? The umpteenth iteration of Beethoven's Fifth by a good symphony orchestra isn't risky, but it has more artistic authenticity than the risky first performance of a stupid new song by a stupid new band. McCartney's safe-but-satisfying performance ought to (though it won't) knock the silly prestige of risk-taking down a peg.

—Posted by Mark Dolliver

Photo credit: Angelillo/UPI Newspictures/Newscom

February 8, 2005 | Permalink

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I disagree. I actually bothered to watch last year's superbowl half-time (in all it's horiffic train-wreckedness). This year I flipped around and watch a bit of CSI:CI instead of watching Mr. McCartney half-ass his way through 40-year-old material. Just in case i was missing anything, I flipped back to catch him sing the words "Hey Jude" and I shuddered and immediately swung back to CSI.

Posted by: j03 | Feb 8, 2005 12:27:19 PM

I disagree as well. I thought it sucked - plain and simple. Too old, too corny, too boring, sooo not worth my time....next time they should just hire PBS to do the halftime show...that might be more interesting then watching an old-man try and relive his glory days. I mean "Hey Jude"....well thats just insulting. Someone please alert Mr McCartney to the fact that it is 2005.

Posted by: hpm | Feb 8, 2005 2:08:06 PM

Children! Please!

Who cares what year it is or what year the songs were composed? Have you ever heard of Woodie Guthrie? How about Ives or Louis Armstrong? What about Coltrane and Miles? Bob Dylan, perhaps?

What the viewing audience got on Sunday night was the real deal. Live music from a legend who still rocks. No you can't mosh to it, and no Sir Paul isn't an angry dirty punk. He's a rock star and just what the cheese factory needed.

Posted by: David Burn | Feb 8, 2005 8:41:06 PM

p.s. Thanks for enabling comments sans moderation. I'm instantly gratified.

Posted by: David Burn | Feb 8, 2005 8:44:02 PM

Post a comment





The opinions expressed in comments are those of the individual poster. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Adweek or Nielsen Business Media. Comments of a promotional nature or comments that are otherwise inappropriate may be removed.

 
© 2008 Nielsen Business Media, Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.