Lady GaGa General Discussion

[If you shout...]

Originally Posted by onebloodonelife

Yes, it is absolutely true that Madonna gets a HUGE amount of attention within cultural studies. Actually, to an annoying point, as someone who is deeply invested in cultural studies, and more specifically, popular music studies.

This is agonizingly true. She's like this generation's Marlene Dietrich.

[onebloodonelife]

Originally Posted by Lancemc

I have no idea if this was been posted in here already or not. But just in case.

It's really worth the lengthy read.

It hadn't, I don't think, but looks like it'll be great, thanks for posting. My favorite comment: "Stunned that you have dedicated this much time to analysing something as banal as a talentless singer's music videos." Reminds me of the time I brought home a scholarly book about hip-hop, and my grandpa reacted with: "Huh. I guess you can be an expert on anything these days..."

Originally Posted by If you shout...

This is agonizingly true. She's like this generation's Marlene Dietrich.

I, admittedly, had to look up who Marlene Dietrich was (I'm not big into films, weirdly enough), but after a short amount of reading about her, you're absolutely right. She was the film version of Madonna, even down to the ambiguous sexuality. And, in the '40s and '50s, no less! Of course, making her an analytical favorite in academia.

[If you shout...]

Dietrich was the bomb, and so was a lot of Madonna's stuff (to me, anyway...and like 20 years ago, now), but the academic fixations are grating, grasping, and grotesquely overdone. Half of that stuff is just hero worship by fanboys and -girls hoping to legitimize their obsessions, and while some of it is fucking fantastic, it is, by and large, AWFUL. I am sure that you can empathize, here. I am speaking both of Madonna and Dietrich, not to mention a thousand others. U2, too. Oh, I shudder to think...

[corianderstem]

Originally Posted by onebloodonelife

My favorite comment: "Stunned that you have dedicated this much time to analysing something as banal as a talentless singer's music videos."

Somewhere out there, there's an in-depth analysis of the Bad Romance video and supposed Illuminati references. I don't know if the person doing it was serious or doing it just for a laugh, but that was pretty funny.

Also, it's a huge pet peeve of mine when people throw around the word "talentless." It's one thing to not like someone's music, or voice, or guitar playing.

But save "talentless" for people like William Hung, who have no discernible music talent. Don't use it on someone who a) can sing; b) can play a musical instrument; AND c) writes music.

You might think their music sucks, but that does not make them talentless.

/soapbox spurred by some anonymous random jerk's internet comment

[onebloodonelife]

Originally Posted by If you shout...

Dietrich was the bomb, and so was a lot of Madonna's stuff (to me, anyway...and like 20 years ago, now), but the academic fixations are grating, grasping, and grotesquely overdone. Half of that stuff is just hero worship by fanboys and -girls hoping to legitimize their obsessions, and while some of it is fucking fantastic, it is, by and large, AWFUL. I am sure that you can empathize, here. I am speaking both of Madonna and Dietrich, not to mention a thousand others. U2, too. Oh, I shudder to think...

Oh, without a doubt, yes, I empathize with you. I respect Madonna a great deal and do love a lot of her music, but the academic writing around her work is frustrating. Even bell hooks, who I generally enjoy quite a bit, had one article called "Madonna: Plantation Mistress or Soul Sister?" in which she argued that Madonna was using her "blonde ambition" purely and solely as a way to both appropriate "black" culture, as well as remaining "white" enough for the mainstream. While there's probably some (or, more likely, just a hint) truth to that idea, I just can't believe that it was all a calculated, sinister move on Madonna's part, as hooks implies. I have a very ambivalent relationship to most academic work about popular music, as a good chunk of it is just terrible or average, at best.

Originally Posted by corianderstem

Somewhere out there, there's an in-depth analysis of the Bad Romance video and supposed Illuminati references. I don't know if the person doing it was serious or doing it just for a laugh, but that was pretty funny.

Also, it's a huge pet peeve of mine when people throw around the word "talentless." It's one thing to not like someone's music, or voice, or guitar playing.

But save "talentless" for people like William Hung, who have no discernible music talent. Don't use it on someone who a) can sing; b) can play a musical instrument; AND c) writes music.

You might think their music sucks, but that does not make them talentless.

/soapbox spurred by some anonymous random jerk's internet comment

I'll have to seek that out, if just for the laughs. Honestly, the things some academics (or pseudo-academics) come up with is hilariously misguided.

And, YES, I completely agree. Even Britney, whose music I generally despise, is talented and can sing, even if her voice is now buried behind Autotune and layers upon layers of production. I'll admit that I was not a Gaga fan, until someone whose musical tastes I respect sent me this video (which is no longer on YouTube, those bastards from UMG took it down) of "Poker Face" done acoustically, and she not only fucking rocks it, but throws her leg up on the piano and keeps playing. It's amazing. Clearly, she's talented, even if some don't want to admit it.

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

Thanks for the clarification on Britney - I agree.

I'm still curious as to why people are so sure as to what GaGa's relevance/impact/status will be years from now when she's pretty much brand new?

Why not wait to see what else she does in a year or two before slapping the "irrelevant" and "forgettable" labels on her?

You don't like her songs? Fine! You think she's irritating? Great!

Guess she's having an impact already, if people are rushing to write her off so quickly.

I'm not saying that. As I wrote, she prooved that she's intelligent, that she can write and produce good pop songs and it seems that her graduation skills have something to do with arts.

But she's still pasted and using/wasting the "Madonna formula" (let's call it this way) in a frenetic rhythm. If she runs away from it and then starts to build something of her own, who knows if she won't stay around here for many years and remembered as other icons...

I think that Gaga can win in the future if she starts to follow a new path. Meanwhile she's too pasted to what's been done before (exhaustively), I don't think so.
And I'm definitely not a fan of the "Bad Romance" song and video. Starting on the fact that it's a twin sister of "Poker Face" (rhythm section, chords progression, structure, etc). Then the video: on the last years, I've never seen a bigger amount of ideas, concepts, methods, references in one sole video like "Bad Romance". It lost all the focus, the concept (if it has ever existed besides the trying to be a trendsetter... like Madonna was/has been, once again), cohesion is zero... a big mess for me. The performance of the last MTV Awards mirrors this idea very well... It's excessive, it has loads and loads of visual noise for something so simple. No one asked that and her music doesn't ask that neurotic euphoria of her persona and full ideas.

Plus, she doesn't have a bad voice (I actually like it, and she knows her vocal range and possibilities very well), but I hate the fact that she changes melodies (on new versions for instance) drastically, specially vocal melodies (MTV Awards performance I talked about... and she goes out of key sometimes because of those "show-off borderline improvisations"). It doesn't bring anything good or fresh to the songs. It's just more show off for me. And she didn't need it.

So, I don't think she's talentless (I think it's the exact opposite, she's proved she has talent), but she's wasting it with that "psychotic excessive show off" and with the collage to Madonna's formula.

[corianderstem]

Not sure how many of the performances she throws her leg on the piano, but there are a good number of acoustic performances of hers up on YouTube:

YouTube - Lady Gaga - Poker Face (Piano Version)

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by onebloodonelife

She was not brought up for her musical achievements (or her hits), but for the spectacle that she has become. If she is to be remembered in however many years, in my opinion, it will be for the extravaganza, not her hits or music.

But... what's really outstanding and extravagant about Britney Spears tha hasn't been achived or made before by other female... performers?

[corianderstem]

Originally Posted by Aygo

I'm not saying that.

Ah, okay. I did misunderstand your general gist.

My comment still stands as a more general one to those that criticize her (here and on other sites). Just a general comment about how the basis of some of the criticism puzzles me.

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by onebloodonelife

While there's probably some (or, more likely, just a hint) truth to that idea, I just can't believe that it was all a calculated, sinister move on Madonna's part, as hooks implies. I have a very ambivalent relationship to most academic work about popular music, as a good chunk of it is just terrible or average, at best.

I think that from the beggining she knew that she could provoque certain reaction on the audiences with the right career steps that were the key for it, but I'm not sure she calculated it in the early years. Madonna has definitely become a control freak and these days any of her career moves is calculated. But, for instance, I'm not sure that the "Papa Don't Preach" controversy was predicted.

What she soon learned is that she was playing with one of the pilars, one of the key-issues of the cultural studies: gender. It is not a coincidence too that she was associated to the new movement of feminists, the reason why old feminists and new (post-Madonna wave) feminists dislike her and criticise her approach constantly.
Some artists' work lays on the race issue. Some others on social class issue. Madonna's "glory days" of artistic relevance (that were enough to raise her as one of the biggest cultural icons of our era) lays on the gender issue. That's why she's relevant and important. Not only because of her hits or because of her legacy (and formula to the pop princesses of these days).

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Aygo

But she's still pasted and using/wasting the "Madonna formula"

but I hate the fact that she changes melodies (on new versions for instance) drastically, specially vocal melodies

As usual you have a problem with consistency. Madonna never played solo performances or like you said played around and changed melodies or music parts, etc...

I'm not the biggest fan of Gaga but I have to say I admire the fact that she was self funded and created herself without big label money, that she can go on shows and strip her songs down to just her and piano, and knows how to write... None of these other pop starts that she's been compared to in this thread can do that.

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by BVS

As usual you have a problem with consistency. Madonna never played solo performances or like you said played around and changed melodies or music parts, etc...

I'm not the biggest fan of Gaga but I have to say I admire the fact that she was self funded and created herself without big label money, that she can go on shows and strip her songs down to just her and piano, and knows how to write... None of these other pop starts that she's been compared to in this thread can do that.

I don't care if she strips her songs of not. Do it, but do it well. I don't like the way she does it. Madonna has stripped and rearranged songs as well, but it work because the essence was kept (specially the melodies), as far as I remember.

Oh... And I didn't know that Interscope and Def Jam (**cough cough** Island Records **cough cough** Universal) was an independent little label that could do nothing for her. Plus, she already knew Akon (and his label) and acts like Pussycat Dolls and stuff like that.

Where did my consistency really fail?

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Aygo

I don't care if she strips her songs of not. Do it, but do it well. I don't like the way she does it. Madonna has stripped and rearranged songs as well, but it work because the essence was kept (specially the melodies), as far as I remember.

Oh... And I didn't know that Interscope and Def Jam (**cough cough** Island Records **cough cough** Universal) was an independent little label that could do nothing for her. Plus, she already knew Akon (and his label) and acts like Pussycat Dolls and stuff like that.

Where did my consistency really fail?

You say she's cut from the same fabric of Madonna but then admit to her rearranging her songs, I can't think of anytime especially at this point in Madonna's career where she was rearranging songs, especially on her own. That makes her a much more competant musician than Madonna, didn't she just start playing an instrument a couple of years ago?

And I never said she was on an independent label, but from my understanding she was on a subsidiary label that didn't want to really back her and so much of her rise to notoriety was on her own.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by cobl04

i think she should be in the hof

The Hoff thinks he should be in her... oh!

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by BVS

You say she's cut from the same fabric of Madonna but then admit to her rearranging her songs, I can't think of anytime especially at this point in Madonna's career where she was rearranging songs, especially on her own. That makes her a much more competant musician than Madonna, didn't she just start playing an instrument a couple of years ago?

And I never said she was on an independent label, but from my understanding she was on a subsidiary label that didn't want to really back her and so much of her rise to notoriety was on her own.

Being a more competent musician doesn't mean that the songs are happier, stronger or more powerful, which is the case.
If I can remember, Madonna played drums and guitar in a few bands before going solo in the early 80's. And I think she's been playing electric and acoustic guitar (not very perfect) in concert tours since the Drowned World Tour, I guess (I might be wrong).

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Aygo

Being a more competent musician doesn't mean that the songs are happier, stronger or more powerful, which is the case.

Um, OK

No one said anything about happier, stronger, etc...

I'm just saying I think she comes from a much different cloth then Madonna. Britney and Christina have much more in common with Madonna than Gaga.

[Dalton]

Originally Posted by GirlsAloudFan

I'm afraid you don't quite have your finger on the pulse of the pop music world, Aygo, if you think Britney Spears is "irrelevant." You may not like her for whatever reason, and that's fine, but she's just as popular now as she ever has been. Unless maybe I'm missing what exactly you mean by relevance. If you mean record sales, Circus has sold a shit ton. If you mean radio play, her songs have been unavoidable on the radio this year. Add to that a hugely successful world tour and her still constant presence in the tabloid press...the girl's career is going strong.

And when I woke up this morning I didn't think I'd be defending Britney Spears in a Lady GaGa thread on a U2 forum. But such is life on the interwebs, I suppose.

I think by "relevant", he meant that she doesn't look quite as naughty as she once did. I agree.

[U2isthebest]

Thanks for the article Lance! It was fascinating. And it puts forth a much more complex and well thought out explanation of what I believe Lady Gaga is trying to do with her music and image.

[Aygo]

Originally Posted by Dalton

I think by "relevant", he meant that she doesn't look quite as naughty as she once did. I agree.

As long as "naughty" means "shaking structures" and "forcing the audiences to think about controversial issues using easy and catchy pop songs and characters", yes.

[Dalton]

Originally Posted by Aygo

As long as "naughty" means "shaking structures" and "forcing the audiences to think about controversial issues using easy and catchy pop songs and characters", yes.

I meant that I'd make her sing opera in that Toxic suit.