Are Tina Turner and other legends off-limits to negative criticism?

A week ago I was lucky enough to review the Staples Center stop of Tina Turner's current tour. I'd never seen her before; now I can check off another requirement on the Serious Music Fan Must List. As I watched this 68-year-old bewigged wonder lean over the crowd from her cherry-picker while singing "Nutbush City Limits" I felt as exhilarated as if I'd just strolled up Runyon Canyon on a perfect autumn day -- and I didn't have to worry about running into Robbie Williams on the trail.

Yet to my ears, the show wasn't perfect. In my review, which you can read here, I mentioned that Turner's singing often went off-tune, especially in the concert's first half, and that sometimes her "nice and rough" voice turned into a shriek. It didn't give me pleasure to have to report this; I even briefly considered playing down the show's musical problems and simply celebrating Tina's enduring, spectacular diva-tude.

In the end, I decided that ignoring Turner's flaws would have been disrespectful, a qualifying act not unlike that old male chauvinist saw: "You play pretty good for a girl." She's a real artist, and a musical innovator; she would want me to be honest, I think.

I didn't expect to be roundly shamed for pointing out the bum notes.

I received a mini-flood of negative letters after the review went live at latimes.com. It didn't surprise me that her admirers disagreed with my point of view; as any writer who's lately endured the wrath of the Jonas Brothers contingent knows, fan love often spirals into unwavering, even militant, loyalty. What got me was the ultimate assertion these defenses made, which was that Turner's stature and biography means she shouldn't be judged, period.

"This woman is an inspiration to us all," wrote reader Marlene Leitner. "For you to criticize her in any way is a lack of respect for her talent and professionalism. Wait until you turn 68 (almost 69) and see if you can get out and do half of what she does. Shame on you."

Charlie DiCandilo was more vehement. "YOU REALLY DON'T GET IT, DO YOU," he wrote. "That's all I can say to you......Who do you think go to these shows, DIE-HARD FANS.FANS.FANS....A fan of a super star will go to any and all shows that are available and possible.....A fan loves the artist no matter what.....For you as a columnist to tear apart this show was really out of control."

The entertainment journalist Rona Elliot wrote a lengthy letter to the editor objecting to my review. Elliot expressed a dislike of my approach to criticism in general, calling it "cerebral" and self-serving. She suggested that my assessment of the concert was inaccurate, and she wrote, "At this stage in her life and career, Turner's motivation is clearly to finally complete the circle  and acknowledge all the paths that led her to where she is now. To know her sound over the course of these decades allows you to appreciate that Turner's voice is now richer, calmer and more soulful, if possible; her beauty is transcendent and timeless."

Sue Sisk was another fan who felt my report didn't match her experience (though she saw Turner in Anaheim). "As far as our group was concerned Tina's performance at the Honda Center last night was a concert of a lifetime and she more than exceeded our expectations," she wrote. "We had no idea that she even skipped a beat. Her energy is unstoppable and I can only pray that we can all move like her at 68....stilettos and all."

Most of the letters that poured in stressed Turner's veteran status, and suggested that it was wrong for me to criticize her singing either because of her age or because she is such a venerable presence in pop history.

So, here's my question: is there a point when an artist becomes off-limits to criticism?

I've seen many greats in their mid-to-later years, and each deals with the challenges of age differently. Bobby "Blue" Bland developed an odd yowl that apparently served to clear his throat. Iggy Pop, his half-century-old body fit but frankly strange-looking, plays up his own alien presence with antic moves. Cher does a lot of graceful posing in her elaborate costumes. Willie Nelson (who still sounds pretty good) relies on a razor-sharp band.

For many fans, just being in the presence of an elder artist confers residual magic. The notion that the crowd's adulation elevates the artist applies to most arena or stadium shows, but it's especially felt when "legends" perform. This takes us into the realm of pop music as religious ritual. Who are we to judge the gods and goddesses?

If you don't buy that spiritual line, a more earthbound metaphor may apply -- that of the emeritus ceremonially honored for decades of service. Big pop tours have become multimedia extravaganzas, usually centered around images of the star who's performing. For veterans, this allows for a journey back in time. Career-spanning montages remind concertgoers of the high points in a lifetime of music-making. Such retrospective elements transform a tour into a roving tribute; in such context, any judgment could be interpreted as disrespectful of an entire career.

Then there's the aspect of veterans' performances that reminds fans of themselves. Pop has always been a narcissistic experience; we see ourselves reflected in our idols, and are happy when they change along with us. An astoundingly physical performance by someone like Turner, who can still execute impressive moves after a half-century onstage, inspires everyone but truly heartens those in attendance who can relate to the aches and pains of life after 40 (or 50 or 60).

So how does the critic fit within this swirl of emotion surrounding legendary artists? It's not clear. On the one hand, accuracy is important, both for readers who weren't present and for the historical record. In 100 years, a Tina Turner biographer needs to know how her later performances compared to earlier ones. To state the obvious -- pop may be about spectacle and fan love and cultural context, but it's also about music, and the musical quality of a performance is relevant.

On the other hand, holding to a rigid standard of musical perfection is inappropriate for some artists. In the rock era especially, great pop singers have pushed the limits of what conventionally pleases the ear. The "nice and rough" style Turner herself helped develop, grounded in blues and gospel styles, stresses power and emotional directness; it's even arguable that going off-tune enhances its "unstudied" effect.

Part of a pop critic's task is to develop new methods of judgment that not only go beyond earlier standards but directly challenge them. Bob Dylan's nasal declamations are often invoked to describe how a great rock singer differs from a classical, jazz, or even standard pop vocalist. You could also point to Yoko Ono's screams, Snoop Dogg's drawl, and James Hetfield's grunts.

Finally, there's the matter of pop as not exactly performance art, but a life's performance. Is it enough that Turner is still on that stage, escalating her own viewpoint and experiences into an absorbing spectacle? Does her very survival -- not so much as a woman who's endured abuse and told the tale, but as a singer who worked to redefine pop itself so that it could absorb her unique contributions -- deserve to overshadow whatever glitches might confront her in concert?

It's interesting to note that the other kind of artist who earns the fieriest defenses is the fledgling. New stars -- like the Jonas Brothers, for example, or "Idol" winner David Cook -- seem to inspire a similar sympathy; listeners crave success for them, and are very willing to forgive any missteps. This also may reflect the reality of pop as a form of public biography, more than as music. What are we rooting for, in the end? Our favorite songs or our favorite people -- at least as we imagine them?

--Ann Powers

Photo by Jamie Rector/For The Times

Comments

[Dianne]

I think your review was quite professional and balanced.

It's amorphous, this line between "performer" and "legend". Maybe a lifetime in the biz; maybe just being in our conciousness forever; a rags-to-riches story; incredible talent, amazing legs. Tina has all that. I think when you reach that iconic status, fans do bask in simply being in the same room and feeling that energy. I guess that's a long-winded way of saying yes, there is a point where you can't reasonably expect your readers to let you not completely love a performance by a Tina Turner.

At the same time, I respect your professionalism, and enjoyed your review. Dilemma, huh?

[Carlitos]

These folks sounds like harcore, christian right folks; it's very eerie! I disagree with them. In fact, as a big hard-core fan of Siouxsie Sioux of Siouxsie and the Banshees (a punk/goth/alternative band that started off in the 70's and rolled into the 90's), I noticed in the 2002 concerts that Sioux's voice really went off-pitch during certain songs. And although, I do admire her talents and what she brought out in me during my hectic youth, I admit that her voice (perhaps due to her age and previous smoking habits) needed great improvement. An article in the LA Weekly pointed this out, I believe, and it was true as much as I hated to admit it! And it was perhaps of those critiques that made her have some nasal surgery where in 2004 she came back as the Creatures and gave a GREAT performance and then this year again in her solo performance! So shame on those folks for castigating negative remarks, they only make it worse for pretending what is not there anymore! And who knows, maybe it will help Tina improve on herself and make it even better in the future!

[G. Zambrano]

Critique away.

Sacred cows should be turned into steak and eaten.

As long as you do it respectfully and with honesty, it is all fine.

Fans, short for fanatic, by definition are not rational beings. Screw 'em.

-G.

[DeniseS]

I am 37, and I have been to many concerts, and I was surprised by Tina Turner, it was by far the best concert I have been to in my life. My main problem with Powers' critique is that she is holding Tina Turner to standard of not hitting a couple of notes, of screaming, all the while missing the fact that this is rock and roll.....not some note for note opera concert. I have seen plenty of concerts, where a) people are lip syncing and b)people who sing live, and hit a glitch here and there. Overall, Tina Turner was perfection. Not only was her voice amazing, but the energy of her concert was something that I have never experienced ever. That is why she is a legend, and there are very few people that can match her. I think that Powers missed the mark on her critique by focusing on a couple of small flaws, when the overall performance was GENIUS. I am grateful to have seen Tina Turner...what a gift to the world of rock and roll.

[Tom]

I have absolutely loved Tina Turner for over 40 years, but your review was correct. I watched several clips from her new tour on YouTube and it was obvious that she was not hitting all the notes. Perhaps it is early in the tour and the "snags" have not been worked out with the sound system...or perhaps she is simply not up to the physicality of it all at this stage of her life. She's still great...she's still the Queen...but your critique was right on. I'm sure Tina knows it, too.

[aeiguana]

Sorry, when you give critics like this i ask you have you seen all her concerts?? In my opinion she only gets better and better, her voice is darker and more powerfull. The way she do things on stage is not new for me Tina is Tina and still the best female performer.
There are artist that even sing live on stage and they are much younger than Tina. The things Tina does on stage even Jagger don't dare!!! btw Tina is most critic of all and seen a lot of here performance back so she can change thing they are not good enough in her eyes. The only Tip i have try the same when you have her age and tham remeber youre critics........ ALL THE BEST.....if she wear a sandbag and sing the phonebook it still is simply the best!!!!

[aeiguana]

sorry but mine opinion about the critics and i'm a Tina fan for more than 35 Years are not grounded. I ask you have you see more concerts of her in the past....This is pure Tina only with a darker fuller and more controled voice. Screaming.....that was in the Ike time. Her voice is getting better and beter every time over the years. And she is the most critical of everyone, she looks back tapes from her performence and renew what is not good enough to her. Also all the critics about her age and the short dresses she wear.
With the body legs and voice that she have she can even put on a sandbag and sing the phonebook and she still the best. Tina is SINGING LIVE!!!!! there are enough artist that even sing live on stage and they are half Tina's age, and the way Tina shows her legs is only very sexy....every model on earth want to have such a legs and that all for a woman off that age.....So try what she does when you have her age and than speak again. BTW take some time to look over her concerts from the past to now......She Realy is Simply the best!!!! Tina please go on we love you!!!!

[Charles L. Freeman]

There comes a time and point where most artists rely more on what they did in the past to sell tickets and thus, make a living. For someone like Tina Turner whose trademark was her high-energy dancing and singing, it becomes harder and harder to avoid slipping into a parody of themselves (the Rolling Stones are a prime example of this) as they age. More and more, they have to rely not only on a great band and backup vocalists, but on production "tricks" to cover the fact that they're not what they used to be. On the other hand, a Eric Clapton doesn't have that same problem; all he needs to do is have his band, a couple of singers, great sound & lights and he can give a great show. As can the Eagles or Al Green.

I'm 52 years old and know that physically, I'm not what I once was and can't move like I did 10, 20 years ago. In recent years, I don't bother going out and seeing the artists and bands of my youth anymore because I know that they can't and won't look, sound or move like they did in their glory days. And for the money they want today, I'm not willing to pay to be disappointed.

If people want to go out and see Tina Turner at 68, almost 69 years old, God bless them. And maybe they don't want or even need to think about the fact that more than likely, her decision to do an arena tour at her age is primarily a financial one which, frankly, is the same reason why Streisand gears up every few years to replenish her accounts. But, don't get mad when a critic, who by the very description of their job, takes a critical look/listen to that artist and writes what he or she experienced. You went as a fan, they went because it's their job.

[Anastasia P]

Very thoughtful article, Ann, and an interesting perspective. As a sometime music reviewer myself, I've been there. Unfortunately, rabid fans of an artist can always find something to disqualify all criticism of their favourite (How many times have you heard "What qualifies you....could you get up there....you must have been at a different concert...."). The most response I ever got was when I pointed out that a John Denver concert was somewhat schmaltzy and sentimental. His fans insisted I didn't appreciate the beauties of a mountain sunset and the joys of married love.

[Mark Marcus]

The subject of 1960/70's era rock & rollers still performing in the 1st decade of the 21st century is probably worthy of a book. I've attended quite a few of these "old man rocker" concerts over the last few years, and many still maintain a high standard of performance despite the changes to mortal beings that are inevitable with the passage of time. Among the best of these seniors in their 60's still creative and going strong are the Rolling Stones, The Eagles, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, The Who, Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Willie Nelson, Elvis Costello, Bruce Springsteen, Paul McCartney, Van Morrison and Tom Waits.

[Rory W]

It's what eccentric critic Lester Bangs said in Cameron Crowe's 2000 movie "Almost Famous": "My advice to you. I know you think those guys [from Stillwater] are your friends. You wanna be a true friend to them? Be honest, and unmerciful."

[Christine K]

Can someone please tell me how you get the job of pop music critic when you've never seen Tina Turner perform before 2008? Apprently experience is not a qualification for getting a writing gig at the LA Times. The plethora of obscure regional 90's bands you've seen and the encyclopedic number of African suffragette poets you've read does not qualify a rock and roll writer make. Perhaps an expense account lunch with Cameron Crowe or Steve Jones would be a good start.

Criticizing the notes sung by Tina Turner is a little like questioning the rivets Geary used on Disney hall. You are right, 100 years from now, the world willl be wondering "was Tina better when she was old or young". I'm sure that long after Geary's dead there will be mega-trust funds in his name that provide grants to folks to disect his work. But if you aspire to be quoted one hundred years from now, write "100 Years Of Solitude" not the critique of "100 Years Of Solitude".

[oliver schulz]

i didnt see the show yet i will as soon as it is in europe ...
i saw madonna a couple of days she is hardly singing live ....i doubt that she could sing a whole concert live....
tina turner is 100 % giving herself to the audience
the songs that i heard on youtube from the concerst are great ..
i think u should look at the young ones to compare for example pink she is never on top of the band
all of the young ones using earphones to hear the band or text or whatever...
tina doesnt
for a long time there will be no one who can do what tina turner still does ..
go and have a look
and hear and feel
i think u didn t saw much untill now
regards oliver

[Gary Knight]

If Tina's showing her age, it needs to be noted as part of the record and considered in the review, for obvious reasons. There's a lot of danger in ignoring such things, and it doesn't serve the overall discussion. We can't all play the proud parent after our kid has performed in the school musical. It's a fact of life, we get old and our physical skills diminish.

By the way, Geary didn't put the rivets on the wall because he was old and incapable anymore. Bad analogy.

Don't jump on Ann because she did her job, and Christine K, don't disrespect criticism as an art form. Read Christgau's "Ballad of John & Yoko," and tell me a critic isn't capable of extraordinary art. The best critics rival the best artists, because they are artists themselves.

[Sean K]

People are picking on these precious idols by pointing out that they aren't as good as they used to be? Pfff. Who cares. 90% of the time it's true. I'm sick of people saying that 'the stones' or 'bob dylan' are just as good as they ever were. Even Bob Dylan and the Stones will tell you that ain't true. Roger Daltrey and Pete Townsend both sound like feeble grannies when they sing now. Kiss looks pretty much the same with or without makeup these days (and were never musically any good to begin with) Pink Floyd is nothing more than a 'David Gilmour tries to relive his lost glory' nostalgia event. The only groups or acts that are 'old' that are worth a damn, no one cares about. Iggy and the Stooges are probably as good as they've ever been, and Arthur Lee and his new version of Love were fantastic a couple years ago, but the dinosaur fans were busy fleeing in droves to pay a hundred bucks to see the police, who, as anyone even remotely familiar with recent music history knows, have always been a studio group and totally suck live.

[Keith]

With ticket prices as high as they are, there need to be more critics who are more than just "yes men/women" these days. Kudos to you for telling things how they are, and not bowing down in fear of not getting press passes to the next big show. As long as an artist, no matter how legendary they are, puts themselves out in the public eye, and expect people to pay money for it, they are subject to being criticized.

[Tamara]

Dear Ms. Powers:

I didn't see where the concert review you wrote was one-sided, "self-serving" and "cerebral." You told the truth as you saw it and it was clear that you do like Tina Turner. I am 37 and I have been to my share of concerts. My parents started taking me when I was young. Detroit as you know has a rich musical history; going to Florence Ballard's funeral seemed like a normal thing to do. My mother saw James Brown and a lot of other legends during their prime. She is quick to tell me that she wouldn't see James Brown if he was "next door" in the later years of his life. She said that most of these people were washed up and young people like me would only be getting leftovers. Age-wise she is a peer of Aretha and Tina Turner. Now if someone of that age group who saw these people in their prime said that then who are these people to complain that wrote you these letters? I am sure that many of them are not peers of Tina Turner.

I would like to see Tina in Detroit but I can't afford the ticket but it really does not shock me that she's actually aged and can't do all the things she used to. That doesn't mean her show isn't worth seeing or that your words are cruel. I love Prince but I am not upset that he can't do the splits anymore and if I wrote a review of his show I would write just that. No one is immune to criticism especially not a rock legend.

[Donna Scott]

I saw Tina in concert in Sunrise. FL 8 years ago and I saw her again 2 nights ago in Sunrise. If she didn't hit a few notes, I didn't notice. The performance was so overwhelming that it just did NOT matter. She still has one of the best voices in the business and I have never seen anyone -that is ANYONE - outperorm her. Hands down she is the best performer alive today. I feel qualified to say that because I attend three to four concerts a year. In the past year I]ve seen Anita Baker and Tony Bennett, I had tickets to see Janet Jackson, but her show was cancelled due to illness. I will probably go to another concert before the year ends. In all my years of concert going I have never been so thorougly entertained by another performer. In fact, you may think I'm joking, but her latest perfomance was better than the one I saw 8 years ago.

[Eddie Ceipel]

In response to Donna Scott-I too was at the sunrise concert in Nov.also. It was very good. Tina Turner is a living legend.
However, seeing 3 concerts a year does not make you an expert. I've seen every Big act of the past 20 years at least once. Trust me, Prince and Bruce Springsteen would have Tina Turner carrying their water bottles. Those two are FAR better in concert.
With that being said, her voice sounded great to me that night, but I do think you should judge each concert by what you experience in the moment.
When excellent athletes stop performing well what happens? They are sent into early retirement-should be the same for artists of any kind.
Greatness doesn't last. And when it stops being great, tell the truth!

[edmund]

The show was amazing. She hasn't sounded better in years! Some people need to do their homework!