Does an Artist need Hit Songs to be Considered Iconic?

[GaGaAst 13,023]

Can we ask Katy perry??. I mean she has few iconic hits but its a fact she ain't iconic from any angle 

[Lee Ng 1,490]

3 hours ago, drinkmytears said:

Cher hasn't had a hit in decades but she's still an icon. 

She had many hits in her golden time, which makes her an icon until today. She is the predecessor of the music industry, you cant take her as an example for 2000s artists 

[MaryJaneHolland 77,348]

Yes

[Easy 5,305]

A hit makes you known by the GP. If you don't have multiple hits it's not really iconic because you can't really represent a certain thing if you are not super well known by the GP. Call me ignorant but as an Asian I don't even consider Rihanna iconic, the only thing my local people know about Rihanna was when she was beaten by Chris Brown. That means having a hit is a factor to be considered iconic but it's not the only factor.

[Robinladen 1,527]

This isn't a real answer to the specific question, but over time your image is perhaps the thing that truly lives on. For example I think a big chunk of the young generation would struggle to name projects of Marilyn Monroe or Elvis Presley while still being very familiar with their name and image. Ofcourse both had many hit projects that pushed them to that iconic status. I just think their names will live on longer than the projects they made. Princess Diana was one of the biggest celebrities ever while not being a singer or actress and still became an icon represting kindness.

Now more specific to your question, I don't think as a singer you can operate in the mainstream and be seen as big without scoring hits. But if you put out valuable work and have a clear image I do think you can become an icon in your own right. I can see Lana Del Rey lasting awhile. Kids in 2080 wearing H&M tshirts with a photo of her wearing a floral crown. Who knows, it could happen.

[jaXXXon 1,538]

8 hours ago, drinkmytears said:

People think Beyoncé is an icon, and she has reached that status, but she hasn't really had a huge global hit since like 2009. 

Cher hasn't had a hit in decades but she's still an icon. 

But up until 2009 she's had MULTIPLE worldwide hits, so your logic is extremely flawed.

The question was if you need a hit to be considered iconic, not that you haven't had a hit in years. Beyonce and Cher have had their share of hits and they're iconic.

[Karl 3,413]

8 hours ago, bobbby said:

I wholeheartedly do not believe Lana Del Rey is iconic. My friend is a huge stan of her and we talked about this a lot. I think some music people will be into her and she'll forever live on in vintage shops etc. but I think she'll be a Tori Amos, Fiona Apple. Not a knock on her, she's just not a superstar (nor am I sure she wants to be). I work for a major media outlet and we NEVER cover her, even if I push for us to.

I think it's similar for Lorde. Lorde, is a critical DARLING and her music is incredible, but the GP at large isn't talking about how great Supercut and The Louvre are. I've had to tell multiple people recently that she even has a new album. 

I think the only people from late 2000s on that will be part of general pop culture in 20 years are: Lady Gaga, Rihanna, Katy Perry (in like a Pat Benatar, Cyndi Lauper way), Justin Bieber, Taylor Swift, and maybe Ariana Grande (Britney and Beyoncé, obviously, but they're from earlier). 

 

Disagree, Lana is more like Amy Winehouse if anything, they both have unique and timeless voices and images, and Amy is considered an icon. I think a lot of artists unfortunately don't get the recognition they deserve until they die. I don't think it comes down to what the "GP" think, if you're basing the "GP" on young teens and stuff who are always looking for the next cool thing. For example the REACT channel on YouTube recently had a Lorde react and most of the elders on it knew Royals, would they know Side to Side?

[komr 414]

Grace Jones is an icon, velvet underground too. 

The are different types of icons, and to become one you have to 

a) build yourself a fanbase

b) influence next generation

[brizoda 3,855]

It's different for a country, rock or jazz musician

But in pop music, an artist/singer/performer has to have memorable hits

[bobbby 939]

46 minutes ago, Karl said:

Disagree, Lana is more like Amy Winehouse if anything, they both have unique and timeless voices and images, and Amy is considered an icon. I think a lot of artists unfortunately don't get the recognition they deserve until they die. I don't think it comes down to what the "GP" think, if you're basing the "GP" on young teens and stuff who are always looking for the next cool thing. For example the REACT channel on YouTube recently had a Lorde react and most of the elders on it knew Royals, would they know Side to Side?

Agee to disagree I guess, but I would say Lana is the farthest thing from iconic. We might just have very different definitions though. She's artsy af and has a passionate fan base, but I don't think calling her an icon is even on or near the table. She could cancel her entire tour and most media outlets wouldn't cover it. 

Again, not an insult I just truly don't think she's an icon. She's not a Cher or a Madonna.

I could care less about teens by GP i more mean adults. I also wouldn't say she's anything near an Amy Winehouse...

[drinkmytears 2,332]

7 hours ago, Lee Ng said:

She had many hits in her golden time, which makes her an icon until today. She is the predecessor of the music industry, you cant take her as an example for 2000s artists 

 

3 hours ago, jaXXXon said:

But up until 2009 she's had MULTIPLE worldwide hits, so your logic is extremely flawed.

The question was if you need a hit to be considered iconic, not that you haven't had a hit in years. Beyonce and Cher have had their share of hits and they're iconic.

Please don't try and educate me on Cher or Beyoncé. I know plenty about both. 

I also understood the point of the OP. I took the conversation into a new direction and brought up a new point that you can continue surviving and being an icon without continuing to get hits

[bumblebee 2,528]

I think the paths towards being considered iconic are not the same for artists of different genres and attitudes. 

For the pop singers, the idea is to keep delivering hits until the time when you already have a sort of legacy to fall upon. What makes a pop singer iconic is, though, the nature of those hits. If you're going to release trendy sh*t to just stay on the radio, people will probably be confused about your work since it's not going to age nicely. The hits have to carry something incredibly yours about them, some easily distinguished feature. And once you reach that time in your career when you have like 14 grand hits, you already can tour with greatest hits LP and slowly build your touring legacy if you're already off the radio. 

For rock / rap and other genre singers, it's about the recognition of the community, the festivals they play and the reception by the fanbase. Those guys have most of their iconic status built through the touring from the first place, from big and small venues, and in order to fill them, they have to produce quality material. I think it's harder to become an iconic rock/rap star than a pop star. 

Indie artists need to develop a strong personal image and then somehow manage to stay true to that image throughout their entire career, and also manage to contribute to the progress of music which they have chosen, so it's even harder.  

[fede ARTPOP 6,737]

13 hours ago, Yo GagaGaga said:

Bjork highest peak on the charts is #84

[fede ARTPOP 6,737]

I think an iconic artist need to make remarkable and iconic moments/performances to be remembered.

[StrawberryBlond 14,865]

Definitely. I thought of Kate Bush as soon as I saw this question. She only ever had one UK #1 and it was her debut, yet she is by far one of our most famous and respected artists and she had even less hits worldwide but is considered one of the women who started the whole "weird" concept. Bjork is indeed another good example of that. Plenty of rock and metal bands haven't had hits but can play stadiums. And of course, who you regard as iconic depends on what music you allow yourself to be open to. If you only listen to one genre and never listen to anything outside that, you will naturally be ignorant to anyone outside the genre and be skeptical of anyone who claims that a certain artist is iconic if they don't make themselves listen to anything outside their comfort zone. And unfortunately, a lot of people are like that, which is why claims of who is iconic and who isn't can be rather highly contested at times. It's all about what musical knowledge you have. I know a lot of people don't listen to everyone like I attempt to, so I accept their views of iconography aren't quite in line with mine. But sometimes, there is a level of objectivity. Some indie fans try to claim artists who have never had an album charting are somehow highly influential. How can you be so iconic if clearly most people don't know your name? Some people really underestimate the size of their niche. And there's some iconic artists whose music videos certainly haven't been in all that high demand. Madonna's most successful video from the pre-Vevo era is Hung Up, which is barely into 130 million views and everything after that falls away, not even close to being certified. Meanwhile, MJ, who was just as big as her at the time, has 14 Vevo-certified videos (and is on the cusp of zooming up to 18 soon), even though he died just after Vevo was invented. Other videos from that pre-Vevo era that have out-earned Madonna's biggest video view achievement are from artists like...Cyndi Lauper, Bon Jovi, Bonnie Tyler, System Of A Down, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey, Justin Timberlake, Beyonce...it really shows that some people, while iconic in general, may have limited interest in other ways. If Madonna's videos were so awesome and controversial and loved by so many, why is there little to no interest in them all these years later like there has been for other artists who come from her era and thereabouts?

15 hours ago, Yo GagaGaga said:

Sub-Question: Do you think Lana Del Rey has any specific "Iconic Songs". asking for a friend 

Video Games, Born To Die and Summertime Sadness. Video Games was her debut and became so widely talked about because of the different sound, her SNL appearance and her big lips. It may not be her most watched video but it's the song most of the public know her for. Born To Die is her most watched video on Vevo, at over 337 million and it's the name of her most successful album, so that's obvious. And Summertime Sadness is overall her most watched video, as her original version of it on her Lana Del Rey channel is nearly 300 million views and the one on her Vevo channel (that most people think is the only one that exists) is over 86 million views, so yeah, together, she's nearing 400 million views with it. Plus, it was the only US top ten she's had, even though it was the remix. The fact those songs are still talked about over 5 years after their release tells you that they are iconic. Most people immediately forget songs from the 2010's after they've been out for a year. If Lana's have been remembered despite not actually being chart hits...well, that tells you all you need to know.