Win tickets to the ultimate village fete with welly wanging and more

When Madonna’s 4 Minutes went to No 1 on both sides of the Atlantic this weekend, it marked her 23rd Top Ten single, her 13th No 1 and 25 years of Zeitgeist-bothering since she released Holiday in 1983.
Though she has been referred to habitually as “the Queen of Pop” since the mid-Eighties – when she first displayed her power by making a generation of women consider lace gloves, and ra-ra skirts over Capri pants, as legitimate pub-wear – I will personally spend hours explaining why she is still, fundamentally, underrated.
Pop is a genre of quantum rapaciousness. So fast is the turnover of ideas, so intense the images and so jaded the public’s palate, that one year at the top in pop is equal to three in rock’n’roll, where all one has to do is “be yourself”.
By this calculation, then, Madonna is enjoying her 75th anniversary of global supremacy, having lapped any putative contender for the throne (Cyndi Lauper, Björk, Kylie, Janet Jackson, Whitney Houston) long ago. Just the sheer effort that has gone into Madonna’s hair alone over the past 25 years is breathtaking. Bleach crop, blonde power-bob, Woodstock tousle, Elaine-from- Seinfeld perm for Like A Prayer – across the world there must be a trail of exhausted stylists, whispering “We could go ginger, with. . . a side-parting?” before fainting. Her nearest possible rival in widescreen pop reinvention is David Bowie, and he managed only 17 years (Space Oddity to Absolute Beginners.)
On the one hand, what Madonna has done in terms of being female, and a female artist, is astonishing. Although the benchmark for all achievements in pop music will probably always be the Beatles, in many ways, Madonna’s intentions and impact on Western culture have been bigger.
The Beatles, for instance, didn’t do it on their own. The Beatles didn’t do it in heels. The Beatles didn’t have to overcome 2,000 years of the patriarchy before they left the house every morning. And, even at their most sociopolitically daring, the Beatles never displayed half the balls that Madonna did between 1989 and 1990 – first screwing Pepsi over with Like A Prayer, where their $5 million endorsement deal effectively allied them to a video in which Madonna kissed a black, bleeding Christ in a field full of burning crosses, then releasing her Sex book, in which she admitted, against all the taboos of our culture, to having sex with the pitiable albino rapper Vanilla Ice.
But while Madonna’s socio/sexual/ political/cultural influence is gigantic, and intractably embedded in the literal and mental make-up of every Western woman over the age of 18 – just like Elvis is for the guys – Madonna’s prime purpose is, ultimately, pop music. In any given year, Madonna has worked as bellwether for the pop climate. Her imperial phase (1983-91) came when FM pop (Prince, Michael Jackson, Duran Duran) was at its peak. She went quiet during the years of grunge and Britpop then went on the ascendancy with Ray of Light in 1998, when she caught a new wave of dance-pop ideas from Daft Punk, Massive Attack, All Saints and Air.
This explains why, despite the single debuting at No 1, her new album, Hard Candy, has been received as second-rate. The charts are full of indie-rock, confessional singer-songwriters and diva chanteuses – nothing for Madonna to absorb and release there. Although the album will probably sell well, it is by no means the equal of, say, Confessions on a Dance Floor in 2005, one of the best of her career.
Now in her 75th pop year, Madonna is stopping, and catching her breath a bit. But let’s face it, on past performance, you wouldn’t bet against her kicking everyone’s arses again next year.
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers



2002/02
£59,995
The Midlands
F/1989
£36,000
Hollingworth At Ombersley
2007/57
£35,000
South East England
Great car insurance deals online
90K plus bonus plus options
Confidential
London
To £28k
Barclaycard
Various (outside London)
£
£40,000 - £50,000 + benefits
Lloyds Pharmacy
Coventry
£38k
Barclaycard
Various Locations
Live in One of London's Most Vibrant Areas
From £249,950
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The Beatles were GODS. They brought all music forward and without them, Madonna here wouldn't have even thought about being a pop star. Anyone can set a trend - and The Beatles set more than her anyway. I am deeply offended that you even THINK that plastic barbie doll is a scratch on the Fab Four!
Holly Dowle, Uttoxeter, England
She is good at getting it right when it comes to trends both musically and image-wise. But to compare her favourably to the genius of David Bowie is stupid. It is like comparing Andrew Loyd Webber to Beethoven. He may have sold more records, but there is no doubt who will be remembered in 100 years.
Richard Gjerde, Trondheim, Norway
Judging by some of the comments, the 2,000 years of patriarchy is still alive and well and spitting and whining...
dc, Vancouver, Canada
The second photo is not from Truth or Dare, but from the music video for the song "Vogue."
Shelley, Boston, USA
20 years later and I am still being made to watch Madonna writhing and gyrating everytime I turn on the tele. If she is so good at 'reinventing' herself, why has sex always been part of the equation? Can somebody remind she is 50 -and provided she acts quickly -might still age gracefully.
Molitor Patel, Vienna, Austria
Madonna achieved her fame by clever marketing, forced attempts at being offensive and controversial, and the selective hiring of skilled songwriters. She is far, far more a businesswoman than a musician. You really can't compare her music to the Beatles.
Charles, Waterville, Maine, USA
Well,
A nice job, but Holiday was released in NYC in 1982, which makes is 26 y's ago (well, actually 25 and a half).
I remember her supporting A Cetain Ratio (from Madchster), who didn't know who she was...
Best regards,
MIKKO MONTONEN, Helsinki,
What a crock.
Beyond the absurd Madonna/Beatles comparison (let's see what they're saying about Madonna's music thirty years from now), this whole idea that poor poor pitiful women have been held back from achieving anything by mean old men is even worse.
Women have always done whatever they wanted when they decided they wanted to do it. The only thing that ever held them back was themselves.
gb, Austin, USA
Pretty daft comparison as it just begs the kind of blind responses above, but the sentiment is correct.
I love how no men ever want to give her the production and songwriting credit she clearly has had in her own career. Yes, she collaborates but why would every single producer she has ever worked with constantly defend her involvement when questioned?
People just don't seem to be able to accept that behind the marketing and image - which, of course *she* controls (er, hello Brian Epstein) - she also has the talent to remain popular with her music. There's no way she could have lasted 25 years always at the top if she didn't.
Tony Barton, London, UK
I haven't read the article. The headline was enough for me. I won't say this woman is talentless because it takes some form of talent to be as 'successful' as she has been. But to mention her in the same breath as the Beatles is simply hilarious. She has got by all these years because she understands that sex sells. That's it. She has done nothing else. She can't sing, she can't act, she has appaling fashion sense. But because she is controversial, people are interested in her (goodness knows why!).
Personally, I just wish he would quietly go away.
Paul, Southampton, UK
She has done very well especially considering her meagre talent. Comparisons with the Beatles are preposterous.
Jerry, Seattle, usa
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Next