26166
Post by: IG_urban
I tried avoiding writing about Lady Gaga for a really long time. Wasn't interested. She's just a disposable pop singer with no observable talent, like most disposable pop singers.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-its-time-to-stop-paying-attention-to-lady-gaga/
I weep for the future.
...that is all.
30317
Post by: BrockRitcey
And she is richer than probably anyone on Dakka. Her music may not have merit artistically but she does sell her product.
21853
Post by: mattyrm
You cant stop what you never did in the first place mate, i give less than a gak about that skinny wonky nosed slapper. 
26166
Post by: IG_urban
mattyrm wrote:You cant stop what you never did in the first place mate, i give less than a gak about that skinny wonky nosed slapper.
neither did I...
pretty sure the point is to read the article. as it speaks the truth.
33002
Post by: Gorgeous Gary Golden
I don't get the hate for her. At least she has one or two decent songs, that's *alot* more than I can say for other big name artists of the moment.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Gorgeous Gary Golden wrote:I don't get the hate for her. At least she has one or two decent songs, that's *alot* more than I can say for other big name artists of the moment.
I'm the kind of guy who actually didn't mind hearing that Bad Romance one in the background for a while (If I didn't really pay attention to the words), then I saw the actual music video. Leather, Asian haircuts and synchornised bondage...stuff. This monster is as tasteless as Ke$ha and nearly as cheap.
10345
Post by: LunaHound
Im impressed she can really sing , that speaks alot for pop star now days
29619
Post by: Jihadnik
Hehehe, you know, I didn't really care one way or the other about the issue in hand, but that was a pretty funny article there, good reading...If she didn't scare me so much I'd bad mouth her more...
5636
Post by: warpcrafter
People just don't understand Gaga. Her entire identity represents the jaded, cynical outlook of modern society. She's a pop star for the sake of getting famous, and she's open and honest about it, and for that people hate her. In that respect, all the knowitalls on DakkaDakka should worship her.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Perhaps the haters don't subscribe to that view of society.
4003
Post by: Nurglitch
I really like "Telephone". Also, she's a talented designer.
8044
Post by: Arctik_Firangi
I'm not a fan of her work, but she is definitely a talented musician multitalented artist. There will always be scene kids who think the only acceptable genre of music is their preference. Lady Gaga gives confused young gay men and transvestites direction in life. If there's anything a young gay man needs, it's a good director.  The author wrote:Representatives of PETA were furious at her attempt to sexualize the murder of animals, parents with young children were outraged at her risky behavior and diehard fans of both meat and naked chicks were heartbroken at her flagrant disregard for both appetites and erections.
And that's when I realized that I needed to say something.
Argument starts with PETA and ends with a punchline. He uses the exact same format of joke three more times throughout the article. Talk about unoriginal. 
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Arctik_Firangi wrote:Argument starts with PETA and ends with a punchline. He uses the exact same format of joke three more times throughout the article. Talk about unoriginal.
aww did that article hurt your feelings? Automatically Appended Next Post: I dislike the said or un-said worship of any one person. that being said, I also live by this quote,
"Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to."
— Jim Jarmusch
THAT being said. Her outright admission to embodying pop culture for the sake of becoming popular goes against everything I know as an artist, and I cannot respect her for it. Automatically Appended Next Post: Nurglitch wrote:Also, she's a talented designer.
I don't want to know what you wear....
8044
Post by: Arctik_Firangi
IG_urban wrote:Arctik_Firangi wrote:Argument starts with PETA and ends with a punchline. He uses the exact same format of joke three more times throughout the article. Talk about unoriginal.
aww did that article hurt your feelings?
Not in the slightest. My point was that the author has stepped in a warm puddle of his own irony. If he subscribes to PETA's moral compass he's an idiot in my opinion but I'm not going to start on that topic. Automatically Appended Next Post: I dislike the said or un-said worship of any one person. that being said, I also live by this quote, "Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to."
— Jim Jarmusch
THAT being said. Her outright admission to embodying pop culture for the sake of becoming popular goes against everything I know as an artist, and I cannot respect her for it.
*golf clap* I do not personally like her music at all and I find her other displays to be pretty morally objectionable. It would appear, however, that she is just as good at promotion as songwriting. She is still an artist, and you don't have to respect her for it.
29619
Post by: Jihadnik
Yeah, like that dude that did that Jesus statue in a giant tank of horse urine...still an artist, but you don't have to respect him for it! 
16387
Post by: Manchu
I find her "style" to be morally neutral of itself. It's the vacuity that offends me.
26760
Post by: Gailbraithe
That was a very stupid article.
Let's start with this:
She's Not An Artist -- Former roommates have said that there was "nothing that would tip you off that she had this Warhol-esque, 'new art' extremism," she was just a regular chick....There was a moment where she decided "This act won't sell. Let's come up with one that does." Her whole authentic, artistic character was decided by committee in a marketing meeting. Maybe she's smarter than everyone else who is struggling to break into the music industry. She saw how completely slowed pop culture was and decided to embrace it. She found out what was going to attract attention and exploited it to turn into a star, in a celebrity-by-numbers sort of way. As a businesswoman, she is incredibly shrewd--the amount of magazine covers, awards and nominations she's gotten in the past year alone is staggering. But she's not an artist, she's a product.
Andy Warhol isn't remembered because he was such a brilliant artist. His art is pretty simplistic. Any of us, who paint miniatures, could match Warhol in terms of quality of technique. He's remembered because of his brilliant ability to see that there was no difference between commercial art and fine art, and to meld the two together along with a branded identity to create a fully-functioning commerical fine artist. He didn't even make his own art, he had interns churning it out in a loft he literally called "The Factory."
Andy Warhol wasn't an artist, he was a product. That's the point.
So far this article is 0 for 1, having proven that Lady Gaga is a mediocre artist who has achieved mega stardom by ruthlessly exploiting the foibles and fickle faddishness of hipsters. Just like Andy Warhol.
She's Not A Fashion Icon -- Lady Gaga's look varies from day to day, concert to concert, magazine cover to magazine cover; so it's tough to pinpoint what, exactly, her place in the fashion world is. Her costumes, always surprising and Avant Garde,...Her insane looks are inspiring actual fashion designers in real life who are creating outfits meant to mirror her style....I know as much about fashion as I do about getting mustard stains out of white T-shirts which, as you can probably guess, is very little....I know nothing about fashion, is my point...
You can't claim that Gaga is always surprising an avant garde, and that she's inspiring actual fashion designers, and then claim Gaga isn't a fashion icon. That does not compute. But it does prove he knows nothing about fashion, I have to give him that.
She's Not Original -- They look at her and say, "Well, at least there's no one else out there just like her,"...She is exactly one part Madonna and one part Marilyn Manson....
Even if we grant this premise (and I don't see the Marilyn Manson) she's not Madonna or Marilyn Manson, she's some unique fusion of the two. The author goes on quite a bit about how Gaga gets all this attention, but that isn't proof of a lack of originality. Anyways, originality is either impossible (Madonna borrowed from Rita Hayworth, Marilyn Monroe, etc. Manson borrowed from David Bowie (who i think is the bigger influence on Gaga), Alice Cooper, etc.) if you want to be anal about it.
I'm not a fan of Lady Gaga, but this author only managed to illustrate what a force to be reckoned with she is, and how brilliantly she has manipulated her way to the top of the pop culture food chain in such a short time. Pretty amazing for a chick who isn't much of a singer or all that great looking.
And personally, I do like the way she totally mocks the existence of crap merchants like Brittney Spears and her infinite clones. Automatically Appended Next Post: Jihadnik wrote:Yeah, like that dude that did that Jesus statue in a giant tank of horse urine...still an artist, but you don't have to respect him for it!
Piss Christ is a 1987 photograph by photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine.
Part of a larger series of works, the vast majority of people who cite this artwork only vaguely (and incorrectly) remember the controversy. Few have ever actually seen the work, a photograph (no tank of urine was ever displayed), which is quite beautiful, and thus few understand its artistic purpose -- which is to explore the ability of the artist, like Christ, to transcend the base and material nature of the world and redeem it through the imposition of an artistic view. The artist, a gay Spaniard living with AIDS at a time when the Catholic church in Spain was particularly intolerant, also sought to raise awareness of AIDs and gay rights issues through his work.
Don't be a philistine. Anyone who can't recognize the artistic merit of Serrano's work has no place discussing art. Stick to dogs playing poker on velvet, the art world doesn't want or need your opinions.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
She's quite unique and unusual, definitely has a style and appearance of her own and has some fun, catchy songs. I don't get the hate either, simply turn the wireless off if you don't like it and don't buy her music. I don't see her on TV much, but that's because I watch the BBC not MTV or whatever.
20022
Post by: Norwulf
Lady GaGa is a shapeshifting she-beast from the depths of outer space. That is all.
10920
Post by: Goliath
4 out of the 9 singles that she has released have been UK number ones.
Surely that fact alone means that she has merit as a commercial artist.
You may not think that she has merit as a singer/fashion icon/performer/celebrity, but the 50 million singles that she has sold beg to differ.
Admittedly her music style may not agree with everyone, but many people do enjoy it.
15594
Post by: Albatross
Well, fascism was popular in the 1930s - it doesn't mean it was a good thing.
That said, people who whine about things like Twilight, Avatar or Lady Gaga are far more irritating than the things they are complaining about.
When did people become such whiny little pussies?
Just don't watch/listen to/worry about it and you'll be fine.
22783
Post by: Soladrin
Anyone who paid attention to her in the first place is a dumbass.
14152
Post by: CT GAMER
Musical tastes are like a**holes: Everyone has one and nobody thinks their own stinks.
Gaga isn't my cup of tea, but I'm not gonna climb up on a high horse to proclaim how superior I am for not liking her. We get it people, you think you are "cool"...
 
9217
Post by: KingCracker
Albatross wrote:Well, fascism was popular in the 1930s - it doesn't mean it was a good thing.
That said, people who whine about things like Twilight, Avatar or Lady Gaga are far more irritating than the things they are complaining about.
When did people become such whiny little pussies?
Just don't watch/listen to/worry about it and you'll be fine.
I have the same ideology, the problem is, THATS a dying thing these days
6051
Post by: avantgarde
I remember when I was 12 and thought hating on popular bands was the height of edginess and non-sheepitude.
20585
Post by: 1-UP
What I've heard (which admittedly isn't much, I'm more of an NPR guy than music stations) I've liked. I've probably heard more people crabbing about her than actual air-time of her music though. Wonder why people think it's a new thing. Has there ever been a period of time folks weren't railing on a mega-successful pop star as being a sell-out/lousy/exploitative/morally poisonous individual?
Good for her for making a fortune at a young age. Wish I was smart/daring/ambitious/clever/lucky enough to do it.
EDIT: Isn't Cracked a humor magazine like MAD? Why in the world would anybody take it seriously?
15447
Post by: rubiksnoob
Norwulf wrote:Lady GaGa is a shapeshifting she-beast from the depths of outer space. That is all.
Too true.
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
I think LG is more a testament to how slowed the pop music industry is in general than any actual talent.
If she were "shape-shifting" I'd think she wouldn't be so damned ugly...
Oh, and She's a MAN,Man!
33002
Post by: Gorgeous Gary Golden
1-UP wrote:Isn't Cracked a humor magazine like MAD? Why in the world would anybody take it seriously?
Yeah, a good deal of their articles have this very *Bro* feeling of dumb about them.
6646
Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin
Would.
9598
Post by: Quintinus
This is ironic 'cause I haven't thought about Lady Gaga for days, and then you bring her up.
Good job broham.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:
Would.
Seconded, with this caveat.
Would not. She looks like some sort of Khorne Champion that just rampaged through Sesame Street.
As to the article, I smiled a couple of times but it's really just unnecessary. I'll take Gaga over the hip-hop nightmare that popular music has been for the last decade or so. However, calling her a Shrieking Shemale Star-Goblin was quite funny.
19548
Post by: cpt_fishcakes
That was a black day for the Muppet's
To me she just comes across as a toned down pop version of Marlyn Manson, same deal just repackaged for a wider audience.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
If this article was going for humor they could have done a better job. If they were being remotely serious they could have done a much better job. Her whole authentic, artistic character was decided by committee in a marketing meeting.
Not really. She had the image before she got signed. Technically it was a product of her and New York DJ Lady Starlight's collaboration, with varying amounts of Rob Fusari thrown in. Check out these awesome stories: Gaga copies Roisin Murphy! Gaga copies Lina Morgana, some suicidal chick! No wait, Lady Gaga really copied Grace Jones! Just kidding, she really copies Madonna! So yeah. bs. I know nothing about fashion, is my point, which is why I'm uniquely qualified to talk about Lady Gaga's wardrobe choices, because she doesn't either.
Interesting considering that many of her outfits are made by top designers (the ones who get to make up what "fashion" is for that 5 seconds  ). He doesn't really have a leg to stand on here. The third point is the exact same thing as the first one. She never claims to be original. She does what she wants. She talks about playing more traditional music and being what people expected of her then trying new things and loving them more. It's really not uncommon for people to change musical style over the years. But whatever. Haters gonna hate  Side note: I've never seen an artist unite a fan base like she has. That in itself is pretty remarkable. This came to mind as well Emperors Faithful wrote:
I'm the kind of guy who actually didn't mind hearing that Bad Romance one in the background for a while (If I didn't really pay attention to the words), then I saw the actual music video. Leather, Asian haircuts and synchornised bondage...stuff. This monster is as tasteless as Ke$ha and nearly as cheap.
Wrong video completely and try watching more than one before you compare her to Ke$ha.
18364
Post by: Little lord Fauntleroy
Now, I am in no way a Gaga fan, but; Cannerus, congratulations, you just earned my respect.
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
I swear I died inside a little. I hate lady gaga.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:Now, I am in no way a Gaga fan, but; Cannerus, congratulations, you just earned my respect.
Ha! How was that exactly?
18364
Post by: Little lord Fauntleroy
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:Now, I am in no way a Gaga fan, but; Cannerus, congratulations, you just earned my respect.
Ha! How was that exactly?
Simple-It was a well reasoned argument that was devoid of the usual e-rage I see (*braces himself for hate comments*), and combined with the fact you've always been an open and genrally cool guy in the past I just feel like now I really do respect you in a way that I don't many other people.
As a side note, you're avatar reminds me of my Uncle.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Awesome! You sir deserve some sort of reward for having impeccable taste in persons. And who doesn't love it when "Uncle Cannerus" comes to visit
30949
Post by: AbaddonFidelis
I guess a bunch of people have already said it but I'm going to say it again anyway.... who pays attention to lady gaga anyway?
7743
Post by: Chrysaor686
If you're ever genuinely offended by an article on Cracked, or you try and point out the flaws in the writer's logic, you fail to see the point of the website in it's entirety. If you can't even laugh at yourself, then you're a spineless hypocrite.
On the other hand, genuine rage towards popular media is always worse than the catalyst. If you think this article is anything more than a great laugh, then chances are that you're fueling something much worse than the source of your hatred.
25983
Post by: Jackal
Dont go out of my way to listen to her music, but it doesent bother me.
Rather have her music flooding the radio while im at work than gakky rap, emo and other gak.
Now, can we please turn all hate this way:
http://www.cracked.com/funny-4433-ke24ha/?wa_user1=1&wa_user2=topic&wa_user3=topic&wa_user4=topics
6646
Post by: Morathi's Darkest Sin
After my poor attempt at humour, I will stress I have no issue with Gaga. My wife has the Fame Monster album and I like a few of the songs, in the same way although not a massive fan, I've liked a few Madonna songs over the years.
She does remind me of Manson though, as in, regardless of his actual musical talent (I am actaully a fan saying that) he certainly knew use the fanbase to get where he wanted to be.
On a side note, I seem to remember her saying in an interview she drew inspiration for her costumes from everywhere including the net.
With that in mind something has been bugging me, in Alejandro with her heavy Catholic theme, there is a sci-fi costume you see her in, only see her top half I think, but it looks like a parody of a Sister of Battle suit, she even has a hairstyle that looks like a SoB, its blinkin odd, but I do wonder if she saw a SoB pic.
edit - missed a bit of text, blinkin head'ache.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Chrysaor686 wrote:If you're ever genuinely offended by an article on Cracked, or you try and point out the flaws in the writer's logic, you fail to see the point of the website in it's entirety. If you can't even laugh at yourself, then you're a spineless hypocrite.
On the other hand, genuine rage towards popular media is always worse than the catalyst. If you think this article is anything more than a great laugh, then chances are that you're fueling something much worse than the source of your hatred.
Nice rule #1 evasion there I honestly didn't think it was funny or "well-written" regardless. Something Awful > Cracked if there is there usual standard.
@Mor: Yeah, a lot of the fans are still weirded out by Alejandro and Telephone to a lesser extent. That one outfit is pretty grimdark, though she has a few other grimdark outfits as well.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
AbaddonFidelis wrote:I guess a bunch of people have already said it but I'm going to say it again anyway.... who pays attention to lady gaga anyway?
obliviously you, and quite a few people with the same sentiments as you....as they are posting in this thread.
I guess my issue is the mindless fandom effect you get with ultrapop stars.... The same thing happens. You can go back 30 years and it's still there. My issue is with that die-hard, creepy, almost zombie like fandom of a group, or one group of people....that fades into nothingness, or gets transplanted, in a very short period of time. A large percent of this fanbase is just jumping on the bandwagon, which brings me to the even more disturbing underlying ( IMHO) cause. Lack of one's own self. So much of the American (and international) culture is so lost, they just follow the heard for fear of being ostracized. It disturbs me. And it just so happens that Lady Gaga is at the epicenter of one of these forms of zombie mentality at the moment.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
@IG_Urban: I believe your statement is uninformed bs. The fans are one of the big things that keep me sucked in. There are tons of talented people with lots of creativity who need an excuse to let it out and feel like it's okay. They want a chance to do whatever and not be looked down on or have to feel weird pressure from outside sources. I'm not saying you have to have a pop star tell you it's okay to do something, but it doesn't hurt to have someone actual preaching something positive and encouraging self-esteem.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Emperors Faithful wrote:
I'm the kind of guy who actually didn't mind hearing that Bad Romance one in the background for a while (If I didn't really pay attention to the words), then I saw the actual music video. Leather, Asian haircuts and synchornised bondage...stuff. This monster is as tasteless as Ke$ha and nearly as cheap.
Wrong video completely and try watching more than one before you compare her to Ke$ha.
Well, does it matter what video it was? It was definitely a Gaga video. Also I'll rephrase "This monster is as bad as Ke$ha for entirely different reasons". As far as I recall, Ke$ha is also popular, all my female cousins adore her. Doesn't mean she's any good.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Emperors Faithful wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Emperors Faithful wrote:
I'm the kind of guy who actually didn't mind hearing that Bad Romance one in the background for a while (If I didn't really pay attention to the words), then I saw the actual music video. Leather, Asian haircuts and synchornised bondage...stuff. This monster is as tasteless as Ke$ha and nearly as cheap.
Wrong video completely and try watching more than one before you compare her to Ke$ha.
Well, does it matter what video it was? It was definitely a Gaga video. Also I'll rephrase "This monster is as bad as Ke$ha for entirely different reasons". As far as I recall, Ke$ha is also popular, all my female cousins adore her. Doesn't mean she's any good.
And what music do you like?
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:@IG_Urban: I believe your statement is uninformed bs.
I believe it's an opinion, just as what you are saying is yours. Don't get defensive because you idolize her.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
ShumaGorath wrote:Emperors Faithful wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Emperors Faithful wrote:
I'm the kind of guy who actually didn't mind hearing that Bad Romance one in the background for a while (If I didn't really pay attention to the words), then I saw the actual music video. Leather, Asian haircuts and synchornised bondage...stuff. This monster is as tasteless as Ke$ha and nearly as cheap.
Wrong video completely and try watching more than one before you compare her to Ke$ha.
Well, does it matter what video it was? It was definitely a Gaga video. Also I'll rephrase "This monster is as bad as Ke$ha for entirely different reasons". As far as I recall, Ke$ha is also popular, all my female cousins adore her. Doesn't mean she's any good.
And what music do you like?
Er...um, uh. Heh. 
Foo Fighters
Breaking Benjamin
Dido
Sixpence none the Richer
Christmas Carols
Vocals of any sort really
Adagio for Strings ect.
Moonlight Sonatra (and other Piano favourites)
...Nickelback
Okay Okay! I DO have a Lady Gaga song, I'm sorry! 
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
Yes.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
Emperors Faithful finds this post amusing. And EF also begins to wonder if Shuma is a closet Gaga/ Ke$ha fan.
242
Post by: Bookwrack
IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
But a well informed one, based upon your statements here. If you don't want people to call you a wannabe counter-culture poseur, don't act like one.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
IG_urban wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:@IG_Urban: I believe your statement is uninformed bs.
I believe it's an opinion, just as what you are saying is yours. Don't get defensive because you idolize her.
Nice assumption. If I idolize anyone it's the fans. They're generally good people and don't deserve random uninformed crap said about them. I'll leave it at that. Emperors Faithful wrote:
Emperors Faithful finds this post amusing. And EF also begins to wonder if Shuma is a closet Gaga/Ke$ha fan.
Nah, he just gets my back on random things like this We both get annoyed by nerd rage.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Emperors Faithful wrote:IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
Emperors Faithful finds this post amusing. And EF also begins to wonder if Shuma is a closet Gaga/ Ke$ha fan.
Its not my kind of music. I listen to a variety, but very little empty pop beats. I hate counterculture whine threads. This threads just as bad as the 3d movie or new videogame threads that are up right now. If you don't like lady gaga, apple, and starbucks thats cool, but If your only reasons is because you don't like things that are popular then you're every bit as shallow as the things you profess to "hate". Don't try and dress up your opinions though. Thats mostly what this thread is. Hatred of the popular for the sake that it is popular.
30949
Post by: AbaddonFidelis
IG_urban wrote:AbaddonFidelis wrote:I guess a bunch of people have already said it but I'm going to say it again anyway.... who pays attention to lady gaga anyway?
obliviously you, and quite a few people with the same sentiments as you....as they are posting in this thread.
I guess my issue is the mindless fandom effect you get with ultrapop stars.... The same thing happens. You can go back 30 years and it's still there. My issue is with that die-hard, creepy, almost zombie like fandom of a group, or one group of people....that fades into nothingness, or gets transplanted, in a very short period of time. A large percent of this fanbase is just jumping on the bandwagon, which brings me to the even more disturbing underlying ( IMHO) cause. Lack of one's own self. So much of the American (and international) culture is so lost, they just follow the heard for fear of being ostracized. It disturbs me. And it just so happens that Lady Gaga is at the epicenter of one of these forms of zombie mentality at the moment.
groan. I guess you love gaga too since you're posting on this thread too.
anyway yes you're very clever you've realized that pop-culture is vacuous nonsense. here have a cookie.
AF
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
Yes.
Yes.
Bookwrack wrote:IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
But a well informed one, based upon your statements here. If you don't want people to call you a wannabe counter-culture poseur, don't act like one.
I never expressed my opinion on the matter in any way. I don't quite understand how stating my opinion on something is being a poseur.
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:IG_urban wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:@IG_Urban: I believe your statement is uninformed bs.
I believe it's an opinion, just as what you are saying is yours. Don't get defensive because you idolize her.
Nice assumption. If I idolize anyone it's the fans. They're generally good people and don't deserve random uninformed crap said about them. I'll leave it at that.
ok.
241
Post by: Ahtman
ShumaGorath wrote:Its not my kind of music. I listen to a variety, but very little empty pop beats. I hate counterculture whine threads. This threads just as bad as the 3d movie or new videogame threads that are up right now. If you don't like lady gaga, apple, and starbucks thats cool, but If your only reasons is because you don't like things that are popular then you're every bit as shallow as the things you profess to "hate". Don't try and dress up your opinions though. Thats mostly what this thread is. Hatred of the popular for the sake that it is popular.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:Emperors Faithful wrote:IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:ITT IG Urban feels it's his job to hate something he has no interest in because it's popular and it's fun for him to feel like he's in the counterculture crowd.
that's just like, your opinion, man.
Emperors Faithful finds this post amusing. And EF also begins to wonder if Shuma is a closet Gaga/ Ke$ha fan.
Its not my kind of music. I listen to a variety, but very little empty pop beats. I hate counterculture whine threads. This threads just as bad as the 3d movie or new videogame threads that are up right now. If you don't like lady gaga, apple, and starbucks thats cool, but If your only reasons is because you don't like things that are popular then you're every bit as shallow as the things you profess to "hate". Don't try and dress up your opinions though. Thats mostly what this thread is. Hatred of the popular for the sake that it is popular.
Not liking things because they are popular has nothing to do with it. I love Harry Potter, I can't wait for the second to last movie coming out. I love many things that are popular...like Food Network... mmm....Food Network....I can't speak for other people sharing my sentiments, though.
My opinion on Lady Gaga remains unchanged.
32644
Post by: Mr Mystery
So stop paying attention to someone extremely successful and entertaining, and start paying attention to some jumped up little eogtist on the Interwebs who is trying to tell me what to listen to and appreciate. Oh, the irony is palpable.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Mr Mystery wrote:
So stop paying attention to someone extremely successful and entertaining, and start paying attention to some jumped up little eogtist on the Interwebs who is trying to tell me what to listen to and appreciate. Oh, the irony is palpable.
I think it's more a long the lines of the article author's opinion. If you don't like it, then don't. If you do, then do. There a hundreds of millions of places to go, things to read, and vids to watch on the internet.
32644
Post by: Mr Mystery
No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
11892
Post by: Shadowbrand
I don't see much point to whine about Gaga or Bieber, in a few years some new pop-idol will be calling the shots anyways.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs?
That is exactly why.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
Absolutes in HIS opinion? Yes. I posted the article because I thought it had some funny parts, and I can resonate with it.
You don't really have to pay attention to him at all? Why do you feel that you need to?
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
IG_urban wrote:Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
Absolutes in HIS opinion? Yes. I posted the article because I thought it had some funny parts, and I can resonate with it.
You don't really have to pay attention to him at all? Why do you feel that you need to?
Why shouldn't he? You posted it on the forum that he posts on and participates in.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:IG_urban wrote:Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
Absolutes in HIS opinion? Yes. I posted the article because I thought it had some funny parts, and I can resonate with it.
You don't really have to pay attention to him at all? Why do you feel that you need to?
Why shouldn't he? You posted it on the forum that he posts on and participates in.
I suppose if we wants to, he can. But just because it's posted on a forum that he is a member of, does not mean he has to pay attention to it. That's silly.
32644
Post by: Mr Mystery
And yet it was someone trying to tell me something. Should I simply have lived in ignorance or investigated?
And regard his failure. Here we are, discussing the divine Lady GaGa regardless of his pulpit style preaching.
Ironyman! Ironyman! Does what and Irony Can!
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:IG_urban wrote:Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
Absolutes in HIS opinion? Yes. I posted the article because I thought it had some funny parts, and I can resonate with it.
You don't really have to pay attention to him at all? Why do you feel that you need to?
Why shouldn't he? You posted it on the forum that he posts on and participates in.
I suppose if we wants to, he can. But just because it's posted on a forum that he is a member of, does not mean he has to pay attention to it. That's silly.
You didn't have to post it. What a person does or doesn't have to do is irrelevant given that we do not have a duty to act a certain way so long as we dont violate the forum rules here. He is every bit as welcome to think this thread and its article is stupid as you are to post it in the first place.
27872
Post by: Samus_aran115
Eh, she's okay. I'd never see a concert or anything, nor would I even listen to her music in private, but I'm not going to badmouth her. She seems like a talented girl...Just silly.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:IG_urban wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:IG_urban wrote:Mr Mystery wrote:No no no.
He was talking in absolutes, not opinion. So tell me, why should I pay attention to him, at all? Because he's on the Interwebs? Because he claims to speak for the majority?
Absolutes in HIS opinion? Yes. I posted the article because I thought it had some funny parts, and I can resonate with it.
You don't really have to pay attention to him at all? Why do you feel that you need to?
Why shouldn't he? You posted it on the forum that he posts on and participates in.
I suppose if we wants to, he can. But just because it's posted on a forum that he is a member of, does not mean he has to pay attention to it. That's silly.
You didn't have to post it. What a person does or doesn't have to do is irrelevant given that we do not have a duty to act a certain way so long as we dont violate the forum rules here. He is every bit as welcome to think this thread and its article is stupid as you are to post it in the first place.
I never insinuated that he had no right to make a comment. Automatically Appended Next Post: Mr Mystery wrote:And yet it was someone trying to tell me something. Should I simply have lived in ignorance or investigated?
And regard his failure. Here we are, discussing the divine Lady GaGa regardless of his pulpit style preaching.
Ironyman! Ironyman! Does what and Irony Can!
I think that without much searching, you can find hundreds of thousands of articles that follow a similar formula. If somebody feels strongly about something, they generally present they're opinion as fact, just look at Shuma.
I agree it's very ironic.
I also welcome your opinion.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
I think that without much searching, you can find hundreds of thousands of articles that follow a similar formula. If somebody feels strongly about something, they generally present they're opinion as fact, just look at Shuma.
Your mistake here is in not realizing that i present facts as opinions, not the other way 'round!
32644
Post by: Mr Mystery
And also, how is the author any different to his subject of vitriol?
He has posted up a 'controversial' opinion, in the hope of gaining attention. Just as Lady Gaga uses blatant publicity stunts to garner attention. Except of course, one of them is smart enough to do it to make lots and lots of money....
26166
Post by: IG_urban
ShumaGorath wrote:I think that without much searching, you can find hundreds of thousands of articles that follow a similar formula. If somebody feels strongly about something, they generally present they're opinion as fact, just look at Shuma.
Your mistake here is in not realizing that i present facts as opinions, not the other way 'round!
Sure. Automatically Appended Next Post: Mr Mystery wrote:And also, how is the author any different to his subject of vitriol?
He's not really. Except for the fact that he's writing words and doesn't have flames coming out of chrome nipples....
...but when you get down to it, it's the same mentality, I still think the article was humorous.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And there lies the bottom line. Lady Gaga is doing essentially what the author of my OP article is doing, just on a larger scale. So, inherently, she is expressing her opinion in a radical way. I just dislike her methods. As some dislike the author's.
5212
Post by: Gitzbitah
Ironically, by posting in this thread you are paying attention to Lady Gaga- which is what she wants. Even more ironically, the original poster has only furthered her goals while attempting to disrupt her schemes.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
you are a little late to the party.
7743
Post by: Chrysaor686
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Nice rule #1 evasion there I honestly didn't think it was funny or well-written regardless. Something Awful > Cracked if there is there usual standard.
I wasn't attempting to be particularly offensive, even if I might've come across that way. Setting standards for what subjects you can and can't laugh at is inherently hypocritical. Not being able to take a joke directed at your demographic displays a certain lack of fortitude.
As for Something Awful being better than Cracked, I'd have to disagree, though I'm not arguing that either one is better than the other. They might both be humor-based websites, but they are on completely different ends of the spectrum. I tend to enjoy Cracked more, as Something Awful doesn't have that same informative, self-aware, fearless, and referential brand of humor that I enjoy so much. If it did, then they might be worth comparing. Something Awful is much more random in nature, and it doesn't really serve to teach you anything as Cracked tends to.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/magazine/article389697.ece
While we're on the subject.
The Sunday Times wrote:Lady Gaga is the first major star of the digital age. Since her rise, she has remained almost continually on tour. Hence, she is a moving target who has escaped serious scrutiny. She is often pictured tottering down the street in some outlandish get-up and fright wig. Most of what she has said about herself has not been independently corroborated… “Music is a lie”, “Art is a lie”, “Gaga is a lie”, and “I profusely lie” have been among Gaga’s pronouncements, but her fans swallow her line whole…
She constantly touts her symbiotic bond with her fans, the “little monsters”, who she inspires to “love themselves” as if they are damaged goods in need of her therapeutic repair. “You’re a superstar, no matter who you are!” She earnestly tells them from the stage, while their cash ends up in her pockets. She told a magazine with messianic fervour: “I love my fans more than any artist who has ever lived.” She claims to have changed the lives of the disabled, thrilled by her jewelled parody crutches in the Paparazzi video.
Although she presents herself as the clarion voice of all the freaks and misfits of life, there is little evidence that she ever was one. Her upbringing was comfortable and eventually affluent, and she attended the same upscale Manhattan private school as Paris and Nicky Hilton. There is a monumental disconnect between Gaga’s melodramatic self-portrayal as a lonely, rebellious, marginalised artist and the powerful corporate apparatus that bankrolled her makeover and has steamrollered her songs into heavy rotation on radio stations everywhere.
For two years, I have spent an irritating amount of time trying to avoid Gaga’s catchy but depthless hits Lady Gaga is a manufactured personality, and a recent one at that. Photos of Stefani Germanotta just a few years ago show a bubbly brunette with a glowing complexion. The Gaga of world fame, however, with her heavy wigs and giant sunglasses (rudely worn during interviews) looks either simperingly doll-like or ghoulish, without a trace of spontaneity. Every public appearance, even absurdly at airports where most celebrities want to pass incognito, has been lavishly scripted in advance with a flamboyant outfit and bizarre hairdo assembled by an invisible company of elves.
Furthermore, despite showing acres of pallid flesh in the fetish-bondage garb of urban prostitution, Gaga isn’t sexy at all – she’s like a gangly marionette or plasticised android. How could a figure so calculated and artificial, so clinical and strangely antiseptic, so stripped of genuine eroticism have become the icon of her generation? Can it be that Gaga represents the exhausted end of the sexual revolution? In Gaga’s manic miming of persona after persona, over-conceptualised and claustrophobic, we may have reached the limit of an era…
Gaga has borrowed so heavily from Madonna (as in her latest video-Alejandro) that it must be asked, at what point does homage become theft? However, the main point is that the young Madonna was on fire. She was indeed the imperious Marlene Dietrich’s true heir. For Gaga, sex is mainly decor and surface; she’s like a laminated piece of ersatz rococo furniture. Alarmingly, Generation Gaga can’t tell the difference. Is it the death of sex? Perhaps the symbolic status that sex had for a century has gone kaput; that blazing trajectory is over…
Gaga seems comet-like, a stimulating burst of novelty, even though she is a ruthless recycler of other people’s work. She is the diva of déjà vu. Gaga has glibly appropriated from performers like Cher, Jane Fonda as Barbarella, Gwen Stefani and Pink, as well as from fashion muses like Isabella Blow and Daphne Guinness. Drag queens, whom Gaga professes to admire, are usually far sexier in many of her over-the-top outfits than she is.
Peeping dourly through all that tat is Gaga’s limited range of facial expressions. Her videos repeatedly thrust that blank, lugubrious face at the camera and us; it’s creepy and coercive. Marlene and Madonna gave the impression, true or false, of being pansexual. Gaga, for all her writhing and posturing, is asexual. Going off to the gym in broad daylight, as Gaga recently did, dressed in a black bustier, fishnet stockings and stiletto heels isn’t sexy – it’s sexually dysfunctional.
Compare Gaga’s insipid songs, with their nursery-rhyme nonsense syllables, to the title and hypnotic refrain of the first Madonna song and video to bring her attention on MTV, Burning Up, with its elemental fire imagery and its then-shocking offer of fellatio. In place of Madonna’s valiant life force, what we find in Gaga is a disturbing trend towards mutilation and death…
Gaga is in way over her head with her avant-garde pretensions… She wants to have it both ways – to be hip and avant-garde and yet popular and universal, a practitioner of gung-ho “show biz”. Most of her worshippers seem to have had little or no contact with such powerful performers as Tina Turner or Janis Joplin, with their huge personalities and deep wells of passion.
Generation Gaga doesn’t identify with powerful vocal styles because their own voices have atrophied: they communicate mutely via a constant stream of atomised, telegraphic text messages. Gaga’s flat affect doesn’t bother them because they’re not attuned to facial expressions.
Gaga's fans are marooned in a global technocracy of fancy gadgets but emotional poverty. Borderlines have been blurred between public and private: reality TV shows multiply, cell phone conversations blare everywhere; secrets are heedlessly blabbed on Facebook and Twitter. Hence, Gaga gratuitously natters on about her vagina…
Just to point out that not all criticism of her comes from dudes on the internet trying to rail against the "establishment, man!" I disagree with a few of the premises in the article, but for the most part I thought it was an interesting read.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
That's a terrible article :/ I could go point by point and give context or opposing quotes to what the apparently very bitter guy is droning on about. Literally everything he sites as reference is taken completely the wrong way, and I can say that objectively. If we're going for that sort of thing, let's not forget the grandfather of them all...
Lady Gaga, Illuminati Puppet!
15594
Post by: Albatross
It's by Camille Paglia, a woman. I thought it was thought-provoking. Certainly more eloquently argued than the usual jabs. I would be interested to find out which parts you would rebut, and how.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:That's a terrible article :/ I could go point by point and give context or opposing quotes to what the apparently very bitter guy is droning on about. Literally everything he sites as reference is taken completely the wrong way, and I can say that objectively. If we're going for that sort of thing, let's not forget the grandfather of them all...
Lady Gaga, Illuminati Puppet!
The link you provided is to an extremist, underground crazy-talk site and the story I referenced is from a pretty well-known source if it's based in the UK and I heard about it in the States.
We all get that you like Lady Gaga, I'm just pointing out that there is more intelligent criticism of her out there than simply hipsters hating on her because she's popular.
Albatross wrote:It's by Camille Paglia, a woman. I thought it was thought-provoking. Certainly more eloquently argued than the usual jabs. I would be interested to find out which parts you would rebut, and how.
Seconded.
What did she get so wrong in the article?
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Monster Rain wrote:We all get that you like Lady Gaga, I'm just pointing out that there is more intelligent criticism of her out there than simply hipsters hating on her because she's popular.
glad it's not just me.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
IG_urban wrote:Monster Rain wrote:We all get that you like Lady Gaga, I'm just pointing out that there is more intelligent criticism of her out there than simply hipsters hating on her because she's popular.
glad it's not just me.
I don't even dislike her that much. There's a few reasons why that's so.
1: She reminds me of Marilyn Manson, who I happen to still love after all these years. Antichrist Superstar is, in my opinion, a perfect rock album.
2: God help me, some of those Gaga songs are catchy.
3: Sort of a offshoot of 1, maybe, but she pisses people off and I enjoy controversy.
All that being said, I do happen to think that article I posted makes some good points and it's worth thinking about what makes someone like Gaga a celebrity and why.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
If I must The Sunday Times wrote:Lady Gaga is the first major star of the digital age. Since her rise, she has remained almost continually on tour. Hence, she is a moving target who has escaped serious scrutiny. She is often pictured tottering down the street in some outlandish get-up and fright wig. Most of what she has said about herself has not been independently corroborated… “Music is a lie”, “Art is a lie”, “Gaga is a lie”, and “I profusely lie” have been among Gaga’s pronouncements, but her fans swallow her line whole…
I have no clue how being on tour raises you above scrutiny for starters. How about the full quotes? “Everyone wonders who Lady Gaga is. Who is the person behind the make-up and the glasses?” The Sydney Morning Herald quoted her as saying during a sit-down chat with Fairfax in New York.
“I’m a performance artist and this is what I do. Art is a lie and every day I kill to make it true,” she added.
Next ones a summary but Google it to find the whole interview if you really want to: Lady GaGa lies "profusely" about herself in interviews - in a bid to protect her personal relationships.
Sounds a bit different in context, eh? She also has never said Music was a lie or that Gaga was. She constantly touts her symbiotic bond with her fans, the “little monsters”, who she inspires to “love themselves” as if they are damaged goods in need of her therapeutic repair. “You’re a superstar, no matter who you are!” She earnestly tells them from the stage, while their cash ends up in her pockets. She told a magazine with messianic fervour: “I love my fans more than any artist who has ever lived.” She claims to have changed the lives of the disabled, thrilled by her jewelled parody crutches in the Paparazzi video.
So she's some arrogant person touting her ability to help the disabled? Whatev: http://popdash.com/news/281/lady-gaga-%27i-want-to-change-lives%27?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+popdash+%28PopDash.com%29 Very different story there and everywhere else you'll look. Here's a quote she gives at every concert: "Don't you ever let a soul in the world tell you that you can't be exactly who you are." Following that quote she says "if someone asks you if you love Lady Gaga, tell them you love yourself." That's at every show. She encourages the fans to talk to the people around them and leave with new friends. The theme is ultimately not about her, it's about everyone and unity, though she sprinkles the fame whore elements in there and even makes jokes about them on stage. A good example is that she stops everything at some point and asks "do you think I'm sexy?" and the crowd goes nuts. She then goes on to say "I think you're sexy" and the crowd goes nuts again. She then goes back to "but the important thing is, do you think I'm sexy?" and everyone goes nuts again. She usually cracks a joke after about how she likes to abuse that part of the show. The crutches in the paparazzi video are paired with an outfit from an old George Michael video. She was in a wheelchair moments before from being thrown off a balcony. It's a montage scene of her recovering, but in typical Gaga flair. This woman is a slow, I'm sorry. Although she presents herself as the clarion voice of all the freaks and misfits of life, there is little evidence that she ever was one. Her upbringing was comfortable and eventually affluent, and she attended the same upscale Manhattan private school as Paris and Nicky Hilton. There is a monumental disconnect between Gaga’s melodramatic self-portrayal as a lonely, rebellious, marginalised artist and the powerful corporate apparatus that bankrolled her makeover and has steamrollered her songs into heavy rotation on radio stations everywhere.
Just because your parents are rich doesn't mean you're fulfilled. She was teased in school (for many of the same things people do now) and got in trouble for various things since it was a Catholic school. Her makeover was out of her pocket, working with friends and a small producer at times. That happened before she ever got signed. For two years, I have spent an irritating amount of time trying to avoid Gaga’s catchy but depthless hits Lady Gaga is a manufactured personality, and a recent one at that. Photos of Stefani Germanotta just a few years ago show a bubbly brunette with a glowing complexion. The Gaga of world fame, however, with her heavy wigs and giant sunglasses (rudely worn during interviews) looks either simperingly doll-like or ghoulish, without a trace of spontaneity. Every public appearance, even absurdly at airports where most celebrities want to pass incognito, has been lavishly scripted in advance with a flamboyant outfit and bizarre hairdo assembled by an invisible company of elves.
Hateful drivel. Rudely worn during interviews indeed, whatwhat! Furthermore, despite showing acres of pallid flesh in the fetish-bondage garb of urban prostitution, Gaga isn’t sexy at all – she’s like a gangly marionette or plasticised android. How could a figure so calculated and artificial, so clinical and strangely antiseptic, so stripped of genuine eroticism have become the icon of her generation? Can it be that Gaga represents the exhausted end of the sexual revolution? In Gaga’s manic miming of persona after persona, over-conceptualised and claustrophobic, we may have reached the limit of an era…
Somebody's jealous. I know a large number of guys and otherwise straight women who'd jump at the chance. Edit: There's a certain element of her not trying to be traditionally sexy as well. She dressed up as a dude for a recent photo shoot as well as having stuffed a dildo in her pants in another. When you do different things with your appearance besides the norm, you're either trying to stay hidden or trying to get noticed and reinvent what's sexy. Guess which applies. Gaga has borrowed so heavily from Madonna (as in her latest video-Alejandro) that it must be asked, at what point does homage become theft? However, the main point is that the young Madonna was on fire. She was indeed the imperious Marlene Dietrich’s true heir. For Gaga, sex is mainly decor and surface; she’s like a laminated piece of ersatz rococo furniture. Alarmingly, Generation Gaga can’t tell the difference. Is it the death of sex? Perhaps the symbolic status that sex had for a century has gone kaput; that blazing trajectory is over…
Care to supply any proof with the accusation? They made spanish-sounding songs? If anything her song is closer to Ace of Base, but I guess the Madonna comparison requires even less research to come up with (consistent theme here). Gaga seems comet-like, a stimulating burst of novelty, even though she is a ruthless recycler of other people’s work. She is the diva of déjà vu. Gaga has glibly appropriated from performers like Cher, Jane Fonda as Barbarella, Gwen Stefani and Pink, as well as from fashion muses like Isabella Blow and Daphne Guinness. Drag queens, whom Gaga professes to admire, are usually far sexier in many of her over-the-top outfits than she is.
And they've "copied" her to. Again, lots of times other people design her outfits (namely fashion designers). More hateful, unfounded drivel at the end. Peeping dourly through all that tat is Gaga’s limited range of facial expressions. Her videos repeatedly thrust that blank, lugubrious face at the camera and us; it’s creepy and coercive. Marlene and Madonna gave the impression, true or false, of being pansexual. Gaga, for all her writhing and posturing, is asexual. Going off to the gym in broad daylight, as Gaga recently did, dressed in a black bustier, fishnet stockings and stiletto heels isn’t sexy – it’s sexually dysfunctional.
Eh? The Fame era gave us a tan Gaga that smiled all the time, was loud and wore hairbows. The Fame Monster era has given us a darker gaga, one that's pale and always with a monotonous expression at events. Again, what's the deal with this woman attacking Gaga being sexy or not? Seriously, people say she's ugly on one end then they go on about how much of a slut she's trying to be. Which one is it? I promise if a girl wants to slut out there are much easier ways to do so than creating elaborate outfits. Edit: For anyone interested the next era has been dubbed the Kingdom era and she seems to be dressing more old-school rock than anything else for her day to day outfits. Compare Gaga’s insipid songs, with their nursery-rhyme nonsense syllables, to the title and hypnotic refrain of the first Madonna song and video to bring her attention on MTV, Burning Up, with its elemental fire imagery and its then-shocking offer of fellatio. In place of Madonna’s valiant life force, what we find in Gaga is a disturbing trend towards mutilation and death…
No idea what this video has to do with Gaga. To be fair, Madonna's video and lyrics are a lot more straight forward and can be taken purely at face value. Gaga is in way over her head with her avant-garde pretensions… She wants to have it both ways – to be hip and avant-garde and yet popular and universal, a practitioner of gung-ho “show biz”. Most of her worshippers seem to have had little or no contact with such powerful performers as Tina Turner or Janis Joplin, with their huge personalities and deep wells of passion.
She calls herself an artist in general. There's fashion, performance, songs, etc. It's a whole package and that's not a bad thing. I'm quite familiar with Tina Turner and to a lesser extent Janis Joplin. Interesting how Tina's big hit is actually a CCR song... Generation Gaga doesn’t identify with powerful vocal styles because their own voices have atrophied: they communicate mutely via a constant stream of atomised, telegraphic text messages. Gaga’s flat affect doesn’t bother them because they’re not attuned to facial expressions.
Gaga's fans are marooned in a global technocracy of fancy gadgets but emotional poverty. Borderlines have been blurred between public and private: reality TV shows multiply, cell phone conversations blare everywhere; secrets are heedlessly blabbed on Facebook and Twitter. Hence, Gaga gratuitously natters on about her vagina…
Translation: I hate progress. Things aren't how they used to be. Waaaaaaaah. Is there even one sentence of value in this entire article? I know I'm biased, but how could anyone not see how much unfounded bs this whole thing really is?
25220
Post by: WarOne
She does seem to be slowly descending down into an obscene but colorful nightmare of insanity and unusual wardrobes.
But I have to agree that a few of her songs are good and the music videos very well done I may say.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
I'm not trying to argue that she's god or something. I'm just saying that that particular article wasn't remotely convincing or good. There is intelligent criticism out there, but none of it has been near this thread.
25220
Post by: WarOne
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I'm not trying to argue that she's god or something. I'm just saying that that particular article wasn't remotely convincing or good. There is intelligent criticism out there, but none of it has been near this thread.
Alright. Would you like to introduce some criticisms to her style that are intelligent?
32205
Post by: Warboss Imbad Ironskull
I'd like to point out an irony. The title of this topic is "Why it's time to stop paying attention to Lady Gaga" yet by creating this topic it's just drawing more attention to her.
Personally I consider myself a pretty ecclecitc person and there are a few songs that she does that I like. Her music videos are wierd but then again I don't really watch music videos. Her style is wierd but I have no room to judge as I have holes in my ears large enough I can put my index finger through them. While she may be a wierd person (or just very smart at advertising) at least she isn't doing things other singers are (R-Kellys child pornography charges, the joke that is now Brittany Spears and all her exploits etc.)
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I'm not trying to argue that she's god or something. I'm just saying that that particular article wasn't remotely convincing or good. There is intelligent criticism out there, but none of it has been near this thread.
Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it's not intelligent.
Okay, so the Cracked article was a little lowbrow, but Paglia's article was pretty well reasoned. You disagree with her conclusions, which is fine, but you can't say that she's unintelligent for stating them.
241
Post by: Ahtman
Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:I'd like to point out an irony. The title of this topic is "Why it's time to stop paying attention to Lady Gaga" yet by creating this topic it's just drawing more attention to her.
Besides being at least the fourth to point that out, it isn't ironic either.
25220
Post by: WarOne
Ahtman wrote:Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:I'd like to point out an irony. The title of this topic is "Why it's time to stop paying attention to Lady Gaga" yet by creating this topic it's just drawing more attention to her.
Besides being at least the fourth to point that out, it isn't ironic either.
I'd like to point out that this irony has become redundant.
This is the second time that this has been pointed out, making that redundant and ironic.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
WarOne wrote:
Alright. Would you like to introduce some criticisms to her style that are intelligent?
Sure, in addition to giving a point by point rebuttal of stupid crap I'll go further out of my way to provide what anyone asks for http://www.theprophetblog.net/rob-fusari-on-pre-fame-lady-gaga-she-used-to-be-anti-club-beats-and-performance-art An actual question, posted with actual evidence. Shocking. I know it's on a blog, but there are a billion other websites with the same story and that one had it condensed nicely. I wish I could find the links I'm looking for, but here are some examples. If people really want them I can dig and fish them out: Someone did an article about her (from one of the major music magazines I believe) that was an excellent critique from the musical side. It stayed away from the "she sucks, durr hurr!" and focused on actual complaints, like how her hit songs aren't melodic. This started a big argument on the Gaga boards I go to but I managed to actually persuade the masses that her big hits really aren't melodic, and it's not a huge slam, but it is a fact. There are some good articles questioning her recent interview where she said she did cocaine occasionally. She would later talk more about that statement and say she meant maybe once or twice a year, but she got blasted by a lot of the fans on it too simply from the side of her having younger fans and encouraging heavy drug usage in any capacity. I'm kind of losing steam looking for these. If I stumble across any others and anyone here still cares I'll post them. @Monster Rain: Just because it's written doesn't mean it's intelligent either. There's nothing in there but opinion and hate, thereby I dub it unintelligent. And you may not know but Manson was on one of her remixes.
8044
Post by: Arctik_Firangi
'Grats on 2500 points, unbearable one.
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:There is intelligent criticism out there, but none of it has been near this thread.
I put it to you that you made this comment in haste and that you are completely incorrect.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
@Monster Rain: Just because it's written doesn't mean it's intelligent either. There's nothing in there but opinion and hate, thereby I dub it unintelligent. And you may not know but Manson was on one of her remixes.
Well, I wasn't saying that. I was saying that the article was intelligently written. Unfortunately I can't say the same for that blog that you linked to.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Someone want to quote me some intelligent criticism that has occurred here? -_-
Edit: Yay, 2500 posts! Same heading though.
25220
Post by: WarOne
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Someone want to quote me some intelligent criticism that has occurred here? -_-
Edit: Yay, 2500 posts! Same heading though.
I would like to criticize the shameful posting of your 2500th post.
It's wrong, and the system is broken.
Please vote Conservative for the next election cycle and we'll call it even.
16387
Post by: Manchu
I tried to defend Lady Gaga on Dakka a while back, when the Bad Romance video came out. Since Telephone and Alejandro, however, I can see the other side much more clearly. Theres just nothing to say about it. Actually, res ipsa loquitor. If I step in a pile of dog gak, I don't need an essay prepared to defend being displeased. As for her message, Cannerus, you've heard it far more convincingly before (with no price tag or ego machine): 
8044
Post by: Arctik_Firangi
You said that there is nothing in here but 'opinions and hate, thereby I dub it unintelligent'. Let's go back to basics. Do you know what intelligence is?
You're dismissing the valid opinions and criticism of everybody in preference to your own, but then again you were very pleased indeed when fauntleroy agreed with you. I do agree with what you've been actually saying - when you've actually been making intelligent statements - but you're also being unneccesarily offensive about it in summary. You're not coming across as any better than anyone else.
For example, you flamed Chrysaor's quick analysis of the article's quality and authority whilst completely missing his point. The internet is full of necks with beards who write slightly humourous articles on their 'blogs. They struggle to grasp the complexities of good comedy in the vain hope that One Day They Will Truly Write, but will never get anywhere, as they are too personally entertained by the inane reactions (i.e. this thread) they observe and actually think they're producing a worthwhile product.
Then again, they're not really getting paid for it. It is just a laugh.
If anyone derived enjoyment from the article in question, good on them. I didn't because I thought it was trite, unoriginal and lacking in fact wherever it didn't just consist of outright error. Still, the OP just wanted to share something he found funny. This thread has gotten far too serious. Everyone should know 'haters gonna hate' and all of that by now. There's no point in trying to correct people on the internet who have already established an opinion that is just as valid as yours. If you think that your opinion is more valid then you're just plain wrong.
Facts are different to opinions. If you enjoy researching Gaga - and we already know you're a fan - then by all means post your research. Just don't make sweeping criticisms of all of us because an article that could have been composed by a teenager got under your skin.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
I don't feel like I'm being offensive, but I'm also not the one who would be offended either I'm sorry if I came across that way. I was originally talking about the Sunday Times article being unintelligent based on have no basis of any kind, but I sort of sucked everyone under that umbrella without realizing it. Again I meant no offense to anyone, I was probably looking for the word objective in my latter usage more than anything. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and all that jazz and mine is no more valid than anyone else's. I do get annoyed when people screw up facts or draw conclusions from things that were never an issue to begin with when it's something I find personally important, though I also realize it has little to no effect on the average person's life.
@Manchu: I hear ya, but Mr. Rogers didn't just accept an award on international national television in a meat dress.
25220
Post by: WarOne
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
@Manchu: I hear ya, but Mr. Rogers didn't just accept an award on international national television in a meat dress.
But he kept on wearing a sweater decades after it left the fashion world, never to come back again like things always do.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Tell that to some of the old men who used to come into Dillards or the ones who meet for coffee at 5 am at McDonalds.
25220
Post by: WarOne
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Tell that to some of the old men who used to come into Dillards or the ones who meet for coffee at 5 am at McDonalds.
Oh, they're apart of the resistance movement against change. One day they'll herald the end of the end of civilization by snapping it straight back into attention with their belts of fiery welts (+2) and their grim resolve to have a Bob Hope channel on every channel known to man.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
When civilization finally collapses they'll sustain themselves on an infinite supply of Werther's Originals whose wrappers have come partially undone in their pant pocket.
241
Post by: Ahtman
WarOne wrote:Ahtman wrote:Warboss Imbad Ironskull wrote:I'd like to point out an irony. The title of this topic is "Why it's time to stop paying attention to Lady Gaga" yet by creating this topic it's just drawing more attention to her.
Besides being at least the fourth to point that out, it isn't ironic either.
I'd like to point out that this irony has become redundant.
The fact that it isn't ironic was not connected to to the fact that I had to point out that it had been said before. People posting without reading threads isn't irony.
WarOne wrote:This is the second time that this has been pointed out, making that redundant and ironic.
That also does not contain any irony.
5470
Post by: sebster
I have to admit I'm a little bemused that forum that spends so much time declaring it's love for metal would hold a lot of hatred towards Lagy Gaga. Metal is theatrical and ridiculous, and therein lies a lot of the fun. Gaga is no different.
IG_urban wrote:I guess my issue is the mindless fandom effect you get with ultrapop stars.... The same thing happens. You can go back 30 years and it's still there. My issue is with that die-hard, creepy, almost zombie like fandom of a group, or one group of people....that fades into nothingness, or gets transplanted, in a very short period of time. A large percent of this fanbase is just jumping on the bandwagon, which brings me to the even more disturbing underlying (IMHO) cause. Lack of one's own self. So much of the American (and international) culture is so lost, they just follow the heard for fear of being ostracized. It disturbs me. And it just so happens that Lady Gaga is at the epicenter of one of these forms of zombie mentality at the moment.
Or possibly kids are joining in to a fashion because they find it fun? Which is something a whole of teens will tend to do for a while?
Monster Rain wrote:Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it's not intelligent.
Okay, so the Cracked article was a little lowbrow, but Paglia's article was pretty well reasoned. You disagree with her conclusions, which is fine, but you can't say that she's unintelligent for stating them.
Sure we can It was an unintelligent article.
It was an unintelligent article because it took a very frivolous thing in Lady Gaga, and treated it with great seriousness. It was unintelligent because in trying to criticise Lady Gaga it did nothing but demostrate that Paglia fails to understand Lady Gaga - the ridiculous nature of his celebrity carry-on (including wearing sunglasses in an interview - how rude!) is the point. That she does not meet the standards of beauty set up by most popstars is the point. It was unintelligent because she then goes on to champion Madonna as an artist full of meaning, and not just a singer chasing contraversy as a way of gaining fame and trying to appear relevant. Madonna chased contraversy just like Gaga does, the only difference is that Madonna pretended there was a greater issue behind her claims to fame, Gaga seems a little more honest to me in that she doesn't co-opt issues in chasing her celebrity.
But this is Camille Paglia we're talking about here. She's pretty much made a career of being a very smart lady who says incredibly stupid things.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
sebster wrote:She's pretty much made a career of being a very smart lady who says incredibly stupid things.
Ha. Now that's ironic!
26760
Post by: Gailbraithe
It's hard to take Camille Paglia's criticism seriously. I'm a big fan of Paglia -- I have a lot of feminist friends who annoy me, and dropping a Paglia quote is a fun way to rile them up -- but anyone who has read her knows she is completely insane when it comes to Madonna. Completely insane.
That the mainstream media is constantly referring to Gaga as the new Madonna, with the implication that the old Madonna is no longer relevant (and really, she hasn't been for at least a decade), must be like nails on a chalkboard to Paglia, and -- given that she's a loudmothed loose cannon on her good days -- one can only expect Paglia to be strongly prejudiced against Gaga and come out swinging. But I think both Paglia and the mainstream media are missing a real point about Gaga.
Gaga isn't the new Madonna, because Madonna was a sex symbol and quite consciously so. That was what made Madonna relevant in the aftermath of the sexual revolution and feminism -- she was a transformative figure who asserted through her music and persona that women could own their own sexuality, that they could be sex objects that owned themselves, rather than being sex objects on entirely male terms. This is why Paglia is obsessed with Madonna, because Madonna personifies the rediscovery of women's dionysian sexual power over men in the aftermath of feminism.
Madonna is the Alpha of a moment in culture and art that reached its nadir with the invention of Brittney Spears -- Spears is the fake, hollow and vapid Madonna, stripping the femme fatale of its subversion, the sex object re-reimagined back as the object of male desire, owned and controlled by men. Most of the criticism of being fake and artificial leveled against Gaga is just a stale rehash of that leveled against Spears, but in Gaga's case it's misplaced.
Gaga is the Omega of what Madonna started. That's why I find her interesting. Gaga is the death of the pop sex object, she has climbed inside improbably (which is why Paglia keeps hysterically returning to the obvious fact: Stefani Germanotta isn't particularly sexy, she's kind of plain, and her outfits and affections only accentuate her weirdness), and is forcing us to reappraise the concept.
What Madonna gave birth to, Lady Gaga has come to kill.
5470
Post by: sebster
Orkeosaurus wrote:Ha. Now that's ironic!
Alright, that was a good one.
5394
Post by: reds8n
Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:
On a side note, I seem to remember her saying in an interview she drew inspiration for her costumes from everywhere including the net.
With that in mind something has been bugging me, in Alejandro with her heavy Catholic theme, there is a sci-fi costume you see her in, only see her top half I think, but it looks like a parody of a Sister of Battle suit, she even has a hairstyle that looks like a SoB, its blinkin odd, but I do wonder if she saw a SoB pic.
Yeah, I thought elements of that videos were very 40k, there was some discussion on Dan Abnett's website and Facebook about this very issue.
Shame the song sounded like an old Ace of Base b-side from the late 80s, but...
I like the pseudo Crowley stuff she's done http://www.akirathedon.com/2009/10/lady-gaga-does-crowley/
.. and, just to join in some more..My mate told me that I just don't understand irony.
Which was ironic because we were at a bus stop at the time.
15594
Post by: Albatross
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:If I must
The Sunday Times wrote:Lady Gaga is the first major star of the digital age. Since her rise, she has remained almost continually on tour. Hence, she is a moving target who has escaped serious scrutiny. She is often pictured tottering down the street in some outlandish get-up and fright wig. Most of what she has said about herself has not been independently corroborated… “Music is a lie”, “Art is a lie”, “Gaga is a lie”, and “I profusely lie” have been among Gaga’s pronouncements, but her fans swallow her line whole…
I have no clue how being on tour raises you above scrutiny for starters.
Less time at home means a lower chance of intrusion into one's private life. When she's on tour she's 'on'. She's not Stefani Germanotta. That said, I happened to glance at a newspaper article which listed every boyfriend she ever had the other day, so there's still digging going on, even if she's not being papped coming out of her apartment in a track-suit.
How about the full quotes?
“Everyone wonders who Lady Gaga is. Who is the person behind the make-up and the glasses?” The Sydney Morning Herald quoted her as saying during a sit-down chat with Fairfax in New York.
“I’m a performance artist and this is what I do. Art is a lie and every day I kill to make it true,” she added.
Ugh. That is so pretentious. And totally meaningless. Art is the synthesis of meaning through the creation of cultural texts, and I have a sneaking suspicion Ms. Germanotta doesn't know anything about it.
Although she presents herself as the clarion voice of all the freaks and misfits of life, there is little evidence that she ever was one. Her upbringing was comfortable and eventually affluent, and she attended the same upscale Manhattan private school as Paris and Nicky Hilton. There is a monumental disconnect between Gaga’s melodramatic self-portrayal as a lonely, rebellious, marginalised artist and the powerful corporate apparatus that bankrolled her makeover and has steamrollered her songs into heavy rotation on radio stations everywhere.
Just because your parents are rich doesn't mean you're fulfilled. She was teased in school (for many of the same things people do now) and got in trouble for various things since it was a Catholic school. Her makeover was out of her pocket, working with friends and a small producer at times. That happened before she ever got signed.
Do you deny that she has a massive corporate juggernaut bankrolling her? And that she was a record industry hack before she was a pop-star? She wasn't exactly plucked from obscurity, was she?
For two years, I have spent an irritating amount of time trying to avoid Gaga’s catchy but depthless hits Lady Gaga is a manufactured personality, and a recent one at that. Photos of Stefani Germanotta just a few years ago show a bubbly brunette with a glowing complexion. The Gaga of world fame, however, with her heavy wigs and giant sunglasses (rudely worn during interviews) looks either simperingly doll-like or ghoulish, without a trace of spontaneity. Every public appearance, even absurdly at airports where most celebrities want to pass incognito, has been lavishly scripted in advance with a flamboyant outfit and bizarre hairdo assembled by an invisible company of elves.
Hateful drivel. Rudely worn during interviews indeed, whatwhat!
Do you deny that her persona is heavily 'managed'? Of course, it all depends on your belief in how music should 'be'. The whole idea of 'spontanaiety', 'honesty' and 'real-ness' are old hat - they have always been myths. But I think Paglia's point is reasonable, if a matter of taste.
Furthermore, despite showing acres of pallid flesh in the fetish-bondage garb of urban prostitution, Gaga isn’t sexy at all – she’s like a gangly marionette or plasticised android. How could a figure so calculated and artificial, so clinical and strangely antiseptic, so stripped of genuine eroticism have become the icon of her generation? Can it be that Gaga represents the exhausted end of the sexual revolution? In Gaga’s manic miming of persona after persona, over-conceptualised and claustrophobic, we may have reached the limit of an era…
Somebody's jealous. I know a large number of guys and otherwise straight women who'd jump at the chance.
Uh, I think you're missing the point.
Edit: There's a certain element of her not trying to be traditionally sexy as well. She dressed up as a dude for a recent photo shoot as well as having stuffed a dildo in her pants in another. When you do different things with your appearance besides the norm, you're either trying to stay hidden or trying to get noticed and reinvent what's sexy. Guess which applies.
I happen to think she couches her 'shock' in pseudo-intellectual psychobabble to disguise what is, basically, a shallow (but ultimately succesful) attempt to make a splash.
Care to supply any proof with the accusation? They made spanish-sounding songs? If anything her song is closer to Ace of Base, but I guess the Madonna comparison requires even less research to come up with (consistent theme here).
'La Isla Bonita'. Ugh, I can't believe I typed that!
Gaga seems comet-like, a stimulating burst of novelty, even though she is a ruthless recycler of other people’s work. She is the diva of déjà vu. Gaga has glibly appropriated from performers like Cher, Jane Fonda as Barbarella, Gwen Stefani and Pink, as well as from fashion muses like Isabella Blow and Daphne Guinness. Drag queens, whom Gaga professes to admire, are usually far sexier in many of her over-the-top outfits than she is.
And they've "copied" her to. Again, lots of times other people design her outfits (namely fashion designers). More hateful, unfounded drivel at the end.
Yeah, the 'drag-queen' jab was a little uncalled-for. And originality is over-rated, as we've aready discussed.
Compare Gaga’s insipid songs, with their nursery-rhyme nonsense syllables, to the title and hypnotic refrain of the first Madonna song and video to bring her attention on MTV, Burning Up, with its elemental fire imagery and its then-shocking offer of fellatio. In place of Madonna’s valiant life force, what we find in Gaga is a disturbing trend towards mutilation and death…
No idea what this video has to do with Gaga. To be fair, Madonna's video and lyrics are a lot more straight forward and can be taken purely at face value.
See below. She's implying that Gaga's videos are all flash, no substance - which is fine, but seeking a deeper meaning in them could prove to be an ultimately hollow experience, as:
Gaga is in way over her head with her avant-garde pretensions… She wants to have it both ways – to be hip and avant-garde and yet popular and universal, a practitioner of gung-ho “show biz”. Most of her worshippers seem to have had little or no contact with such powerful performers as Tina Turner or Janis Joplin, with their huge personalities and deep wells of passion.
She calls herself an artist in general. There's fashion, performance, songs, etc. It's a whole package and that's not a bad thing. I'm quite familiar with Tina Turner and to a lesser extent Janis Joplin. Interesting how Tina's big hit is actually a CCR song...
Nah man, 'River Deep, Mountain High' OWNS you.
Generation Gaga doesn’t identify with powerful vocal styles because their own voices have atrophied: they communicate mutely via a constant stream of atomised, telegraphic text messages. Gaga’s flat affect doesn’t bother them because they’re not attuned to facial expressions.
Gaga's fans are marooned in a global technocracy of fancy gadgets but emotional poverty. Borderlines have been blurred between public and private: reality TV shows multiply, cell phone conversations blare everywhere; secrets are heedlessly blabbed on Facebook and Twitter. Hence, Gaga gratuitously natters on about her vagina…
Translation: I hate progress. Things aren't how they used to be. Waaaaaaaah.
To be fair: 'I hate this woman. She's saying mean things about my beloved Gaga. Waaaaaaaaah.'
Kisses!
17202
Post by: jwoolf
I read this thread and thought about responding, but it raised the hell out of my blood pressure.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Albatross wrote:
Less time at home means a lower chance of intrusion into one's private life. When she's on tour she's 'on'. She's not Stefani Germanotta. That said, I happened to glance at a newspaper article which listed every boyfriend she ever had the other day, so there's still digging going on, even if she's not being papped coming out of her apartment in a track-suit.
We have pics of that stuff already. It should say something too that she's so willing to stay on tour constantly. Ugh. That is so pretentious. And totally meaningless. Art is the synthesis of meaning through the creation of cultural texts, and I have a sneaking suspicion Ms. Germanotta doesn't know anything about it.
Art is very much a lie though. It's intangible, it's unreal. That picture of a dog isn't really a dog; it makes you feel like you're seeing a dog. That song about a smoky bar and feeling alone isn't actually taking you to a smoky bar, it just inspires similar feelings. I was just saying quoting the full thing in order to provide what I would at least call a more proper context. Do you deny that she has a massive corporate juggernaut bankrolling her? And that she was a record industry hack before she was a pop-star? She wasn't exactly plucked from obscurity, was she?
She worked her way up. To tell anyone that their path was simply handed to them is disrespectful, especially when we weren't there. I will counter with the fact that she's gone over budget on her tour several times and paid the difference out of pocket to make the show "her way." She's also getting a bit of rep for being stubborn about doing artistic stuff how she likes it. Do you deny that her persona is heavily 'managed'? Of course, it all depends on your belief in how music should 'be'. The whole idea of 'spontanaiety', 'honesty' and 'real-ness' are old hat - they have always been myths. But I think Paglia's point is reasonable, if a matter of taste.
It is managed, but the major influences in it are hand-picked counsel (the Haud of Gaga) and designers who are her personal friends. The fact that she set-up her own version of Warhol's Factory is what sucked me in initially because I thought it was an interesting approach. I happen to think she couches her 'shock' in pseudo-intellectual psychobabble to disguise what is, basically, a shallow (but ultimately succesful) attempt to make a splash.
Fair enough. I believe we have enough context now to prove otherwise but doing really shocking things tends to make people think you're an attention whore. To be fair: 'I hate this woman. She's saying mean things about my beloved Gaga. Waaaaaaaaah.'
Me, a fanatic? I'm fiercely loyal to whatever I attach myself too, which is mainly friends now but also includes the odd popstar who doesn't even know I exist. You know Alby-poo, if someone was saying mean things about you I'd do the same There's a reason I chose Chaos. @jwoolf: Simply put and for curiosities sake alone, for or opposed? I can probably guess already though...
241
Post by: Ahtman
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Albatross wrote:Ugh. That is so pretentious. And totally meaningless. Art is the synthesis of meaning through the creation of cultural texts, and I have a sneaking suspicion Ms. Germanotta doesn't know anything about it.
Art is very much a lie though. It's intangible, it's unreal. That picture of a dog isn't really a dog; it makes you feel like you're seeing a dog. That song about a smoky bar and feeling alone isn't actually taking you to a smoky bar, it just inspires similar feelings. I was just saying quoting the full thing in order to provide what I would at least call a more proper context.
And now we are back to pretentious and totally meaningless.
Art is tangible and real; it doesn't just exist in your imagination. Understanding concepts like 'symbol' and 'signified' doesn't mean that people don't actually put time and energy into them. The picture of the dog isn't the same thing as a dog, but it is still a picture. You can touch, carry it around, see the brush strokes, ect. You aren't the only one hearing your lord and saviors music being played: those are real sound waves being carried through the air and picked up by your ears.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
I understand that and I'll do my best to keep this from going metaphysical (aka pointlessly subjective). When you paint a toy soldier, he doesn't become an ultra marine. When you roll dice, people aren't really fighting. You do, however, have a perception that the little dude is a battle-hardened warrior, possibly tearing through his enemies or falling nobly in defense of his cause. There's nothing wrong with either view in my book. If I hear this song, I'm hearing something deep, submersive ( wth is the proper spelling of this word? Google is failing me), with lots of history and buried meaning. If a lot of other people hear it they might describe it as annoying beats, boring melodies and shallow lyrics. Which is wrong and which is right? Is it really a collection of feelings and emotions or is it just some programmed beats layered on by some vocal tracks? A song is the same thing to everyone that hears it, but everyone gets their own vibe or interpretation from it. Some people hear metal and start to rock out while others cringe and say it's not hard to write or that anyone could do it. I'm not arguing whether it exists or not, I'm arguing that any meaning or emotional draw it has is purely subjective, and the original quote was saying that the effort she puts into stuff is her attempt to make it so that everyone can hear what she's trying to put into it. I can understand that frustration.
241
Post by: Ahtman
I know your trying to be deep and all that junk, but it isn't. Being subjective doesn't makes something a lie, it makes it subjective. The idea that what is being represented isn't the same thing as what it represents is not even close to a new idea. Trying to understanding the complex nature of how we assign meanings to to things is as humans is good, calling it a lie is simplistic and myopic.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
In Googling what the hell that was I came across:
If Britney Spears (anyone really) sings a song someone else wrote that's about a relationship she never had, that's not a lie? If George Clooney is in a movie dressed like a cowboy sheriff and claims to love the town that he never lived in, that's not a lie? The whole point IMO is that it is and it takes artistry to apply it and to sell it for lack of a better term. People often claim that things are unrealistic as a form of criticizing an already fictional movie. They want to believe it, or at the very least for it to have context. To argue otherwise would be like hearing Ann Coulter reading the lyrics to I Kissed a Girl and saying that it seemed even remotely natural
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:In Googling what the hell that was I came across:
If Britney Spears (anyone really) sings a song someone else wrote that's about a relationship she never had, that's not a lie? If George Clooney is in a movie dressed like a cowboy sheriff and claims to love the town that he never lived in, that's not a lie? The whole point IMO is that it is and it takes artistry to apply it and to sell it for lack of a better term. People often claim that things are unrealistic as a form of criticizing an already fictional movie. They want to believe it, or at the very least for it to have context. To argue otherwise would be like hearing Ann Coulter reading the lyrics to I Kissed a Girl and saying that it seemed even remotely natural
I kind of like the idea of Ann Coulter kissing girls.
14152
Post by: CT GAMER
WarOne wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
@Manchu: I hear ya, but Mr. Rogers didn't just accept an award on international national television in a meat dress.
But he kept on wearing a sweater decades after it left the fashion world, never to come back again like things always do.
Actually that style of sweater came back into fashion with Grunge... Automatically Appended Next Post: Albatross wrote:
I happen to think she couches her 'shock' in pseudo-intellectual psychobabble to disguise what is, basically, a shallow (but ultimately succesful) attempt to make a splash.
I think you just described much of what gets posted here in this forum...
221
Post by: Frazzled
CT GAMER wrote:WarOne wrote:Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
@Manchu: I hear ya, but Mr. Rogers didn't just accept an award on international national television in a meat dress.
But he kept on wearing a sweater decades after it left the fashion world, never to come back again like things always do.
Actually that style of sweater came back into fashion with Grunge...
Wait are you talking about Mr. Rogers or Killkrazy?
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
Albatross wrote:Do you deny that she has a massive corporate juggernaut bankrolling her? And that she was a record industry hack before she was a pop-star? She wasn't exactly plucked from obscurity, was she?
This is all I can think about when I see GaGa. It reminds me of looking at a Coke label.
GaGa is a brand and a successful one. I wonder how long her career will last.
Does she actually design all of her own stuff? Does anyone know? I admit that I know very little about this lady.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
At the very least she bitches severely if it doesn't meet her standards, at the very best she has a majority chunk in everything she does. There are reports of her refusing to work with someone on the basis that she doesn't like how she thinks something will turn out or arguing with the record label people about overspending on her tour (she redesigned the show completely 2 times on the same tour in the middle of it). She also tends to do a lot of different things with the people that she does actually work with, in excessive amounts. Beyond that her main creative group, the Haus, is made up of people she picked to work with. So in my mind there's evidence that she's responsible for herself and her image, but I'm also the biased one
5470
Post by: sebster
Wrexasaur wrote:This is all I can think about when I see GaGa. It reminds me of looking at a Coke label.
GaGa is a brand and a successful one. I wonder how long her career will last.
Does she actually design all of her own stuff? Does anyone know? I admit that I know very little about this lady.
Yes, Gaga is a brand, albeit one she puts a pretty tight control over (and why would the studio feth with what she's doing, she's selling loads of records for them). Thing is, that's pop music these days, brand management is huge, people have to be seen with the right people in the right clothes all the time. And it likely includes lots of bands you like to think of as authentic.
So screw it, if it's all going to be closely controlled and managed, why not embrace that and wear a meat dress?
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Beyond that her main creative group, the Haus, is made up of people she picked to work with. So in my mind there's evidence that she's responsible for herself and her image, but I'm also the biased one
She is her image, I get that. It isn't unlikely that she has a very solid stake in her creativity but expecting as much as I have heard, from one person, as suggested by conversations I have had with several people, seems odd to me. That is one person, achievements such as the GaGa brand don't come from one person, they don't even come from 100 people. Call that what you will but I say it in recognition that Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta (born March 28, 1986), has been a part of a very successful enterprise. Not the most successful, blablabla.
I would really be interested in finding out what is actually involved in maintaining that brand, how many people make that snap happen. I don't hate Coke btw, I just prefer not to drink soda in general. Water is a blessing, blablabla.
She has worn a meat dress, I have to have a bit of respect for that alone. Is GaGa a she? Funny, like a joke staring at itself. It isn't a she, it is a brand.
5470
Post by: sebster
Wrexasaur wrote:She has worn a meat dress, I have to have a bit of respect for that alone. Is GaGa a she? Funny, like a joke staring at itself. It isn't a she, it is a brand.
And the thing is, we're going to have a bunch of brands like this with us at any given time, so isn't it better we get people wearing meat dresses than Madonna or Aguilera style 'here's some pre-packaged outrage for you so get shocked and titilated then buy my record' or Britney style 'I'm just a precious, wholesome girl now watch me grind on this dancer then buy my record'?
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
I prefer, "I have a telephone on my head so buy my record".
5470
Post by: sebster
Wrexasaur wrote:I prefer, "I have a telephone on my head so buy my record".
I'm interested, but what's his music like? I'm really only into euro acid funk, that keeps it authentic, but you know, still maintains pop sensibilities.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
Oh noz, copiez!!!11  
221
Post by: Frazzled
Her eyes remind me of a goat.
her music on the other hand, reminds me of the 6th circle of Hell.
23223
Post by: Monster Rain
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
I'm sorry, but that hat needs to be removed. With a lead pipe.
8800
Post by: Cannerus_The_Unbearable
How do you think they got it to stay on in the first place?
8044
Post by: Arctik_Firangi
Here I was under the impression that these bizarre things simply grew out from beneath her hairnet and had to be surgically removed afterwards. If people are putting them there on purpose I'm going to have to seriously re-evaluate my impression of her supposed 'talent'.
26166
Post by: IG_urban
Frazzled wrote:Her eyes remind me of a goat.
her music on the other hand, reminds me of the 6th circle of Hell.
<3
I think she is slowly evolving (devolving?) into Shelley Duvall.
|
|
