Talk:Blue-eyed soul

Archives (Index)

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Joe Cocker

It seems like the article should at least mention Joe Cocker as one of the prominent blue-eyed soul singers of the 60's (or 70's). --Westwind273 (talk) 00:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Re: SunDawn

Simply reading the talk page, Daryl Hall's rationale, or the definition of the word 'racist' from Britannica's dictionary (-> https://www.britannica.com/topic/racism) gets a person to the conclusion that "blue-eyed soul" is, in fact, a racist and pejorative term. It's not even under the surface.

You asking how "blue-eyed soul" is racist is like someone asking why is water wet or the sky blue. It's such a ridiculous, child-like tactic to play dumb and feign ignorance in this way.

I wont get in an edit war even though several people on this wiki page have expressed their disapproval of 1.) Even having this wiki page exist as it inherently stokes racial tension&segregation (which is, you know...a bad thing) and 2.) There's no shortage of douchebags that will revert any edit they don't like, they'll do this like you did by not going to the talk page first, not having an actual discussion with fellow editors, unilaterally enforcing their will onto the page. It's a futile battle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.140.224 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Amy Winehouse

Belongs here, no? 2600:387:C:6E1A:0:0:0:4 (talk) 02:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia so obsessed with this term?

Isn't it just a bit ridiculous how many articles link here? There are currently more than a thousand articles linking to this page. It seems as if some race-obsessed person has added this terminology and a link to this article from every single article about any white person singing soul whom the term might apply to, from Joe Cocker to Dusty Springfield to Timi Yuro. Like Wikipedia's deranged obsession with "portmanteau words", and the many other odd obsessions of a small minority of Wikipedians, Wikipedia would be a better resource if this kind of obsessive linking to some obscure hobby-horse bit of terminology was curtailed. Johnny Reverse (talk) 11:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Never mind all that, here's a mess

The second sentence, the one a reader would expect to enrich and expand beyond the opening definition, reads:

"The slang, coined in the mid-1960s, was invoked by music magazines in the 1960s such as Life who used it for the Righteous Brothers (album Soul and Inspiration for Verve Records), Barry McGuire, Sonny & Cher; other times it meant style and mannerisms associated with soul music sung by white musicians."

1. Opening with "the slang" is a terrible idea. I'm not sure why that is even mentioned. It could be in the first sentence ("...is a slang term for...") - except it is not slang. Regardless of whether it is in some slang dictionary or not.

2. Life is not a music magazine.

3. There is no need to insert the title of a Righteous Brothers album.

4. The unfinished list of three acts abruptly changes to another unrelated half-sentence beginning with the awkward phrase "other times"

5. That final part, besides missing articles that would usually be used in English, is terribly unclear - are they associated with soul music, such music sung by white, or with the white musicians?

Deletion would be a pretty good fix for this, as on the whole, it actually says nothing informative.

Huw Powell (talk) 03:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Totally agree. The wording has gone through many changes, but it would be better to revert to an earlier wording of the second sentence, which more simply read: "The term was coined in the mid-1960s, to describe white artists who performed soul and R&B that was similar to the music of the Motown and Stax record labels." Explanations can be given in the main text. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:32, 12 November 2022 (UTC)