If audiences are happy, what’s the problem?
In “Does pop music need a retirement age?” (Opinion, July 16), Renée Graham suggests that, other than the “rare” singer, most legacy performers, along with their aging audiences, “don’t know how to let go.” If one wants to review the artist’s work at a particular concert, fine. That’s the critic’s role. But where is the sense in intimating that a musician has failed an audience, or an audience has somehow failed society, if an allegedly flagging artist can sell out a concert and the audience goes home happy?
This, as with any legal business, is for the marketplace to decide. If a poorly rated car continues to sell well, the model should be continued until the car ceases to be profitable. If an aging minister’s sermons are poorly prepared but services continue to be well attended, then the church remains successful. Likewise, the very idea of a mandatory age of retirement for singers, whether serious or not, would deprive performers and their fans of the opportunity for commercial and entertainment success — merely because, as Graham suggests, the ravages of time might be obvious to some.
