I agree fully. I am so glad to read that someone else feels like I do. I wish her musical output like the second number would've made her far more popular, because then, there might've been a lot more very sensitive; high quality music; &, its' influence in our cultures; ever since then.
@@AndrewHeller-jn7dxWas she lip-syncing the first song, do you think? The second was definitely live, but the first looked lip synced maybe. If so she was very good at it!
This host; &, this show could've been bigger; but, this show, came at a time, when people had little long term care, about anything; &, it wasn't that Debbie wasn't capable of much more; but, this material, of the first song that she did, was very low quality; &, the host does a casual tone, well; but, my preference is always for far more in depth; &, far less casual shows. Also, sadly, at this time in history, the costumes; clothes; backup accompanients; dance routines; lyrics; &, hairstyles; were pretty low quality, too. However, given that all this low quality, was the same everywhere; at that time; this was no worse than the standards of most all things then; so, why didn't this last-? Not sure. Time slot-?; channel-?; presentation style-?; or the kinds of things he asked her, packed w/: rude, impolite types of questions; jokes; insinuations; &, innuendos-? I don't know. In fact, the second song, which she both sang; &, played, was touching; movingly: well delivered; heart-felt; beautiful; &, competently, capably rendered; &, rather high quality. Why did she not soar higher; overall-? Perhaps, it was a mindset, in those times, that to be not interested in any sort of vice, was unacceptable to the general populace.
"it wasn't that Debbie wasn't capable of much more; but, this material, of the first song that she was given, was very low quality" Uh, Debbie co-wrote and co-produced the song. She wasn't "given" it. It was hers.
@shyman99 A.: I made a textual correction. &, B.: The first song was low quality; in my opinion; the second song was high quality; in my opinion. 1rst number was Not much different from junk around at that time. 2nd number was far better than things then; &, even, than things now. &, C.: If she had been given it, it would've made her look better; than having written the first clunker. But, all musical writers, from Lennon/McCartney, to: Brian Wilson; Chuck Berry; Bob Dylan; Carol King; Burt Bacharach; Duke Ellington; Bach, Beethoven; Gershwin; Webb; Quincy Jones; Stephen Sondheim; Charlie Parker; or: Jimi Hendrix;...-->>ETC.; and, every other example one can imagine, writes some bad ones; &, some good ones. &, D.: No one is perfect. Some achieve some measures of perfection. Debbie was one such individual. So is Sara McLaughlin; Joni Mitchell; Peggy Lee; &, plenty others. None bat 1000. Some do pretty good; just fine; real well; Ok; allright; not bad; or: whatever else. &, E.: In my gradings, I do NOT judge whole persons, by singular outputs. Some things I like; &, think are good; others, my reaction is the opposite. &, F.: Few of us, are fully exclusively solid, black & white, absolutist, people cases. I assess the mix; &, try to conclude with balance; not extremism. If you cannot, you cannot. &, G. To me, it ,->>seems like: you took this, the wrong way.
@@AndrewHeller-jn7dx - I took it the wrong way? I took it how you originally wrote it. I don't like the song either, so me correcting you wasn't me defending the song or her. You took my correction the wrong way.
![Debbie Gibson • “Lost In Your Eyes” / Interview / “Electric Youth” • 1989 [RITY Archive]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QqTadJ7w4Pw/mqdefault.jpg)
![Debbie Gibson • “Lost In Your Eyes” / Interview / “Electric Youth” • 1989 [RITY Archive]](/img/tr.png)
Debbie still had her New York accent back then. I remember seeing this interview.
Queen of pop
5:41 “One Step Ahead”
10:46 “One Hand, One Heart”
Rick Dees and Debbie Gibson .
The weekly top 40 guy!
By that time, Debbie was no longer making Top 40 hits!
Great! But I'd rather "Sure" as a single instead "One hand. One heart"
Quite a contrast between the first number, one of the cringiest things I've ever seen, and the second, which was really quite beautiful.
I agree fully.
I am so glad to read that someone else feels like I do.
I wish her musical output like the second number would've made her far more popular, because then, there might've been a lot more very sensitive; high quality music; &, its' influence in our cultures; ever since then.
@@AndrewHeller-jn7dxWas she lip-syncing the first song, do you think? The second was definitely live, but the first looked lip synced maybe. If so she was very good at it!
he asked her if she smokes and has sex. wtf?
Una pregunta ella es hermana de los bee gees respondan es muy hermosa 🎉❤
Reply:
Not a sister of The Gibb Brothers' Family.
Yup, she was interesting looking; although, that hairstyle was not her best look; in my opinion.
This host; &, this show could've been bigger; but, this show, came at a time, when people had little long term care, about anything; &, it wasn't that Debbie wasn't capable of much more; but, this material, of the first song that she did, was very low quality; &, the host does a casual tone, well; but, my preference is always for far more in depth; &, far less casual shows.
Also, sadly, at this time in history, the costumes; clothes; backup accompanients; dance routines; lyrics; &, hairstyles; were pretty low quality, too.
However, given that all this low quality, was the same everywhere; at that time; this was no worse than the standards of most all things then; so, why didn't this last-? Not sure. Time slot-?; channel-?; presentation style-?; or the kinds of things he asked her, packed w/: rude, impolite types of questions; jokes; insinuations; &, innuendos-? I don't know.
In fact, the second song, which she both sang; &, played, was touching; movingly: well delivered; heart-felt; beautiful; &, competently, capably rendered; &, rather high quality. Why did she not soar higher; overall-? Perhaps, it was a mindset, in those times, that to be not interested in any sort of vice, was unacceptable to the general populace.
"it wasn't that Debbie wasn't capable of much more; but, this material, of the first song that she was given, was very low quality"
Uh, Debbie co-wrote and co-produced the song. She wasn't "given" it. It was hers.
@shyman99
A.: I made a textual correction.
&,
B.: The first song was low quality; in my opinion; the second song was high quality; in my opinion. 1rst number was Not much different from junk around at that time. 2nd number was far better than things then; &, even, than things now.
&,
C.: If she had been given it, it would've made her look better; than having written the first clunker. But, all musical writers, from Lennon/McCartney, to: Brian Wilson; Chuck Berry; Bob Dylan; Carol King; Burt Bacharach; Duke Ellington; Bach, Beethoven; Gershwin; Webb; Quincy Jones; Stephen Sondheim; Charlie Parker; or: Jimi Hendrix;...-->>ETC.; and, every other example one can imagine, writes some bad ones; &, some good ones.
&,
D.: No one is perfect.
Some achieve some measures of perfection. Debbie was one such individual. So is Sara McLaughlin; Joni Mitchell; Peggy Lee; &, plenty others. None bat 1000. Some do pretty good; just fine; real well; Ok; allright; not bad; or: whatever else.
&,
E.: In my gradings, I do NOT judge whole persons, by singular outputs. Some things I like; &, think are good; others, my reaction is the opposite.
&,
F.: Few of us, are fully exclusively solid, black & white, absolutist, people cases. I assess the mix; &, try to conclude with balance; not extremism. If you cannot, you cannot.
&,
G. To me, it ,->>seems like: you took this, the wrong way.
I agree, the contrast between the awfulness of the first number and the beauty of the second is as stark as it gets.
@@AndrewHeller-jn7dx - I took it the wrong way? I took it how you originally wrote it. I don't like the song either, so me correcting you wasn't me defending the song or her. You took my correction the wrong way.
@@ronrice1931
Thank you so much for your support.
I really appreciate it!!