McQuacken:

I only heard of Amy Winehouse in the past couple of months, after the hype had built up... i am just now hearing the actual music, and I guess I am missing something.

I have to agree 100%. If there is something about Ms Winehouse that you don't get, then I don't, either. I think what's happened is that the public, as usual, has latched onto "troubled artists" as if the only real art can come from druggies, drunks, weirdos and nutballs. In other words, the art is unimportant, it's the cult of personality that prevails.

The fact is that good, worthwhile art can, in fact, come from all sorts of people.

There MUST be some well-adjusted, professional (as in, "having a professional demeanor") artists out there, who work hard, don't make asses of themselves, don't take drugs or otherwise break the law, and don't bounce in and out of rehab. Why aren't we promoting them instead?

Which leads to another question: Why would a record label -- which ostensibly must invest capital in developing an artist, recording and producing his/her/their music, and marketing and distributing it -- be so stupid as to make that investment in such unstable people? Are they so hard up for musicians that they can't find anyone else? I doubt that. Why then do they persist in making such inherently-risky investments? It defies logic that they would do so.

I'm trying to think of a rational reason why people worship losers and wingnuts ... but it's just not coming to me. I'm also trying to think of a rational reason why someone who is supposed to be in rehab, would proudly and defiantly sing about refusing to go to rehab. That's not coming to me either.

... I dunno, maybe I'm just too sensible a thinker ...