Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Amaya wrote:

Photoshop and makeup are a wonderful thing.

Chrysaor686 wrote:The problem I have with GaGa's 'creativity' is that it is completely unbridled. She forces her brain to vomit onto her 'canvas', and the masses are showered with the end result. She has absolutely no artistic restraint, no motive (other than to catch as many people's attention as possible), and no real end result in mind. Thus, I lose all respect for her as an artist.

Anyone is capable of creating the first thing that comes to mind. That is not the purpose of art. There is no defining premise behind any of her 'work', no desired result, and no attempt to shape any of it into something worthwhile or cohesive. Her very existance is like a slap in the face to those of us who are actually attempting to create something meaningful.

This is not creativity, it is chaos. There is a marked difference between the two.

Interesting that there's no point behind it all. Glad to see you've done your research and aren't just making a gut reaction to something that makes you uncomfortable

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Interesting that there's no point behind it all. Glad to see you've done your research and aren't just making a gut reaction to something that makes you uncomfortable

Similar to the gut reaction that makes you attracted to her?

AvatarForm wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Interesting that there's no point behind it all. Glad to see you've done your research and aren't just making a gut reaction to something that makes you uncomfortable

Similar to the gut reaction that makes you attracted to her?

I figured it was worth responding with the same caliber of argument as has been used so far in this thread. I have more, but you haven't earned hearing it yet. Pose a real question and I might answer it.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

AvatarForm wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Interesting that there's no point behind it all. Glad to see you've done your research and aren't just making a gut reaction to something that makes you uncomfortable

Similar to the gut reaction that makes you attracted to her?

I figured it was worth responding with the same caliber of argument as has been used so far in this thread. I have more, but you haven't earned hearing it yet. Pose a real question and I might answer it.

I disagree.

The real question has been posed to yourself much earlier in the thread, asking you to explain why you enjoy GaGa and believe her to be an 'original' artist, etc. So far, your answers and arguement have not satified, nor convinced the opposition.

I would now argue that you have not earned the right to continue without adding merit or substance to your side of the debate.

Hence, the REAL question remains unanswered.

Amaya wrote:

Wow. With that photopshop and makeup job, she looks remarkably similar to the 64 year old Cher.



No, but honestly: she has a perfectly nice body, and plastic surgery and makeup have made it so that her face isn't actually ugly. She's a typical butterface. Everything's nice but her face. The reality is that most Dakkanauts have been with or settled for worse. But she's not super-hot, by any means.

AvatarForm wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote: I'll avoid the autotune accusation.

Facts are not insults nor accusations.

She has a nose like Gonzo the Great and her 'music' would be even worse if not for the assistance that modern technology provides.

AvatarForm wrote:

sebster wrote:

AvatarForm wrote:She has a nose like Gonzo the Great and her 'music' would be even worse if not for the assistance that modern technology provides.

Lady Gaga can certainly sing. There's a whole argument to be had about whether her approach to music actually drowns out her talent (and the contrast of her last couple of tracks being so bland musically and so weird in the videos certainly lend support to the argument) but I don't think it's very accurate to say she can't sing.

Please provide evidence. Everything so far indicates the contrary to your belief.

Autotune and other gimicks are not singing...

AvatarForm wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Shadowbrand wrote:Lady Gaga doesn't have a nice ass.

The Viking of Dakkadakka hath spoken!

Are you blind?

Are you confused?

Or do you have low standards?

Chrysaor686 wrote:The problem I have with GaGa's 'creativity' is that it is completely unbridled. She forces her brain to vomit onto her 'canvas', and the masses are showered with the end result. She has absolutely no artistic restraint, no motive (other than to catch as many people's attention as possible), and no real end result in mind. Thus, I lose all respect for her as an artist.

Anyone is capable of creating the first thing that comes to mind. That is not the purpose of art. There is no defining premise behind any of her 'work', no desired result, and no attempt to shape any of it into something worthwhile or cohesive. Her very existance is like a slap in the face to those of us who are actually attempting to create something meaningful.

This is not creativity, it is chaos. There is a marked difference between the two.

AvatarForm wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Absolute dog toffee. The song sounds more Madonna than Madonna as well!

Gaga copies Madonna and other 'artists' more than she is original.

cheesecat wrote:I also love how all the pictures are of her behind because not even Amaya wants to see her ape-like face.

warpcrafter wrote:

Pfft!!! Sounds like Madonna meets Nine Inch Nails. By the way, Cannerus, your avatar makes me feel like a pedo.

DickBandit wrote:I heard she is in fact a man.
Is this true?

Such wonderful arguments. The vast majority of this thread has been either accusations with a small pool of evidence (this sounds like this being the most common) or over the top hate. Mixed in with that are "This is my opinion posts" which I much, much prefer, entertaining accusations and a few good arguments.

The real question has been posed to yourself much earlier in the thread, asking you to explain why you enjoy GaGa and believe her to be an 'original' artist, etc. So far, your answers and arguement have not satified, nor convinced the opposition.

Has a single person actually asked me this? And since when do I need to justify liking an artist to you again? That's kinda screwed up. I just wanted to post the news that a new video was about and see some reactions, then added another song later. I've posted my story several times and if you're interested I'd tell you, though at this point I could say "because Jesus Christ, Mohammed and Zeus provably appeared to me and said to become a fanatic fanboy and that it would turn the world in to a paradise" and you would still poo-poo it so you get nothin' homeslice If you'd like to know, ask nicely and I'll assume you're not just going to needlessly tear my words to shreds with one-off accusations. It's actually fairly apparent that you've done no research whatsoever.

Hey, you don't need to justify your personal taste to anyone. Everyone likes what they like. Especially if it happens to connect with them while you're in your passionate, emotional adolescence. You feel everything more intensely in those years, and most of us really bond with and love the music that touches us in that period.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote: Pose a real question and I might answer it.

Hey, as a more fun alternative to arguing with him, any interest in checking out those Peter Gabriel videos I linked to and letting me know what you think? I think the guy made some really amazing, creative music.

Mannahnin wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Wow. With that photopshop and makeup job, she looks remarkably similar to the 64 year old Cher.



No, but honestly: she has a perfectly nice body, and plastic surgery and makeup have made it so that her face isn't actually ugly. She's a typical butterface. Everything's nice but her face. The reality is that most Dakkanauts have been with or settled for worse. But she's not super-hot, by any means.

I've found with celebs it's very easy to find pictures that look like one another simply because they get so many pictures taken and do different photoshoots. I don't expect anyone to think she's super hot, but I also don't see why she's getting held to a standard where she has to be absolutely perfect. Just as an example, the somewhat recent thread about women we find attractive but aren't technically attractive had it's fair share of critique on women some considered... not so hot, but it managed not to be over the top. Gaga elicits big reactions one way or the other, much like Twilight and not so long ago Harry Potter

And I've been meaning too, just hadn't had time where I could sit down and really soak it in, which I like to do with music I'm not familiar with. My roommate is rather loud constantly and will play music, watch tv and leave the bathroom fan on all at once while blabbing non stop, which makes for a bad environment to enjoy music I might get around to it tonight, but should be able to tomorrow for sure.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:homeslice.

What does this mean in Texas?

It certainly isnt recognisable English.

I hope it is not a racial slur or direct insult, because that would be reportable.

AvatarForm wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:homeslice.

What does this mean in Texas?

It certainly isnt recognisable English.

I hope it is not a racial slur or direct insult, because that would be reportable.

You win the thread

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+does+homeslice+mean

/facepalm

This blog is hilarious. The angry fan rants make it even better. Also, some pics are NSFW.

http://ladygagaisunoriginal.tumblr.com/page/1

Moar Peter Gabriel commentary please.

I was listening to his double live concert CD Plays Live in the car yesterday and today, and it's just stupidly good. His voice was phenomenal, too. It's still great (witness the more recent live performance in those links I posted), but thirty years ago it was amazing.

Man, Kate Bush is weird.

Really, really, weird.

Yes, I find it exciting.

Kate is both weird and awesome. Which makes her an excellent reference point for Gaga, who is also weird, and not untalented, but not as creative or talented as Bush, though much more commercially successful than I think Bush has ever been.

Kate and PG's duet "Don't Give Up" is an all-time great song of perseverence through hard times and sorrow. Though the official video for it is comically terrible.

Mannahnin wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dcHcH2FjVA

This track would be better if those guys would stop playing ping pong in the background But srsly, while it doesn't suffer completely from the static-ness I've complained about in other tracks, it failed to hook me at any point in particular. Just kinda did the same thing, then did the same thing louder with back-up singers til the outro when the orchestra clearly snorted a few lines of coke. While I wasn't exactly following the lyrics as much as the melody, I don't know what that burst at the end was for and it could have been any musical device and been just as ineffective for me. It probably doesn't help that I consider classical the most boring genre ever.

Mannahnin wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoVVxom8GpY&feature=related

Prolly hate me for this, but I get a Police-ish vibe initially (not playing the "copy" game here, just giving a parallel), but at least a Police song would have picked up at some point. Musically, what's the point of this song? The only answer I can come up with is "to wallow." I'm not questioning his ability, but I'm just not hearing much of anything happening. I understand the absence of something happening can be it's own strong point, but not when... nothing happens.

I'd strongly suggest Dream Theater's Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence to give you a much, much more dynamic version of what the first track was doing (granted at 42 minutes it's a bit time consuming). I'd strongly suggest the Score version (it's live with full orchestra, but that album is worth it on many levels) but I can't find it, so 6doit it is:

The Rhythm of the Heat:
It's not classical. PG has an orchestra backing him in this performance, but it's not classical music in any sense.

This is a song about Carl Jung's experiences in Africa; the rhythms of tribal drums, and the ways the observer connects with and is moved by the tribal people and their rituals. The climax at the end is when the observer drops his detachment and participates: "Self-conscious, uncertain / showered by the dust / the spirit enters into me / and I submit to trust." He then releases the trappings of modernity ("smash the radio / no outside voices here / smash the watch / can't tear the day to shreds / smash the camera / cannot steal away the spirits"), and the drums then build into the crescendo of a ritual dance.
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/petergabriel/therhythmoftheheat.html

Maybe the studio version will work better for you, with clearer sound and lyrics?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzENrTOtybw


Mercy Street:
I love The Police, but I'm not seeing any similarities there. Maybe I've listened to too much of each.

Nothing happens? Does the song not describe the life and mood and thoughts of Anne Sexton? Does it not give insight into her mind, even if you have no idea who she is? Her mental illness, her observing the world, and "the dreams made real" by others, while she is unable to make her own real? Her reliance on her poetry (words) to support herself, even as she pulled them out of darkness (her depression)? Are the melodies not beautiful? Is PG's voice not lovely, and expressive? Are the lyrics not poetic and well-crafted? IMO the lyrics themselves would make an outstanding poem, even without the melody of the music and the mood it creates.
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/petergabriel/mercystreet.html

Here, maybe try this one, about a rather disturbed individual:
No Self Control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8fj36BSd-M&feature=related

I'll check out the Dream Theatre thing. If you want to talk scores, PG did the score for The Last Temptation of Christ, and it's one of the most amazing, spiritual and sexiest things I've ever heard.

Track 3, Of These, Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHOTGt0amOQ&feature=related

Okay, listened to the Dream Theater thing.

If you think that's anything like what PG was doing in TRotH, you're not actually listening.

Enjoy.

Using "epic sounding" music to communicate feelings and a story; I honestly don't see the big difference aside from some genre elements. The big point I was trying to make was how what's going on musically changes every minute or so, whereas PG seems to pick one main sound for a song and it just sort of goes on til the song ends. That's perfectly fine if that sound is ideal to you, but not so much if you appreciate a bit of complexity. The latter stuff you posted I enjoyed a bit more as I'd call it less boring, though I honestly think a more energetic person covering the songs could make them sound more appealing to me.

I think you're making some inaccurate generalizations, and I would guess that maybe lyrics aren't as important to you as they are to me.

I found the DT stuff kind of juvenile and shallow, though I could see where one could make a comparison that both records have a distinct theatricality/are going for a staged effect. I guess I could see where one could view the DT track as more complex, but again; they're not really aiming for similar goals in those two tracks. Complexity would be inappropriate to TRotH's tribal tale. PG's certainly got other, much more complex tracks.

I can guess where you're coming from on the energy level/cover sound, too. I've often (especially when I was younger) appreciated an more recent cover version of an old song; in part because that often means it's been given an updated, newer sound, and in part because doing that often means making it faster and harder.

As a couple of examples, take Fleetwood Mac's Gold Dust Woman, vs. Hole's cover of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6hkY4VvQAA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w76dv8k-ZT4


Or Dolly Parton's Jolene as compared to the White Stripes cover of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1plvBR02wDs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m5KrPXL4wI&feature=related

Although Jack actually slows it down while making it rawer and harder.

I dug around on youtube a bit trying to find the version of TRotH from PG's "Plays Live" concert album, which is my favorite version and I think would probably blow your hair back. Lots of energy in that performance, as well as very clean vocals and sound. But couldn't find it. :( If you get a chance to dig up that CD or DL some tracks from it, I think it might be worth your time.

Mannahnin wrote:I think you're making some inaccurate generalizations, and I would guess that maybe lyrics aren't as important to you as they are to me.

I figured that out when he said he liked Lady Gaga on the first page.

Mannahnin wrote:I think you're making some inaccurate generalizations, and I would guess that maybe lyrics aren't as important to you as they are to me.

A strong lyric is only as good as it's delivery.

I found the DT stuff kind of juvenile and shallow, though I could see where one could make a comparison that both records have a distinct theatricality/are going for a staged effect. I guess I could see where one could view the DT track as more complex, but again; they're not really aiming for similar goals in those two tracks. Complexity would be inappropriate to TRotH's tribal tale. PG's certainly got other, much more complex tracks.

I'm not talking about outright complexity so much as something different happening. Simplicity as a theme is very different from simplicity in execution. I've also never heard someone call DT shallow or juvenile... An extreme example of a track that is dynamic would be this (offensive on several levels so just the link): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_Gyh1r-ut0 Every several measures you're hearing something different going on as it constantly ping pongs you to a different place while also retaining a strong message. I'm not saying all songs have to have that sort of dynamic element, but I enjoy it much more than songs that stay flat musically the entire time and rely on lyrical strength to be their only effective method of delivery. Contrary to the general bias, I know what I'm describing here

As far as covers go, I've seen it go both ways. The Alien Ant Farm version of Smooth Criminal is amazing, but I did some research on that song Fraz posted in the other thread (I'm gonna be a wheel someday) and listened to several covers and none of them captured that same element of infectious boogy the first had, only replaced it with some other genre that didn't seem to work out so well and mellowed it out overall. A cover needs to especially establish it's own authenticity for it to be worth it to me. Covers really are their own separate conversation for me, and I think it would make for an interesting thread all on it's own.

A strong lyric is only as good as it's delivery.

More or less. Bad lyrics, for me, are rarely going to be made up for even with excellent delivery. But ideally you want both. Which PG usually brings in spades. Not every vocalist needs to sing Christina Aguilera-style. Though PG (especially when he was younger, in the 70s and 80s) certainly could deliver some sonically-amazing vocals.

Covers: I hear what you're saying. Sure. Many covers suck. Compare the Billy Idol version of L.A. Woman to the Doors' original. I'm just saying that you appear to want a more updated/faster/up-tempo sound, which would make updated covers in some cases logically more appealing to you than some originals.

As for DT... I'd rather not get into a deep discussion of them. I know that they're technically-talented musicians, but it felt like a waste of my time. Showy but meaningless.

Mannahnin wrote:Sure. Many covers suck. Compare the Billy Idol version of L.A. Woman to the Doors' original. I'm just saying that you appear to want a more updated/faster/up-tempo sound, which would make updated covers in some cases logically more appealing to you than some originals.

As for DT... I'd rather not get into a deep discussion of them. I know that they're technically-talented musicians, but it felt like a waste of my time. Showy but meaningless.

I don't mind down-tempo if it changes from time to time. A good example: http://new.music.yahoo.com/tracy-bonham/tracks/give-us-something-to-feel--1813532 The verse and pre-chorus each change melodies once halfway through and the chorus carries a different mood and instrumentation even though it has the same back end. There's also a bridge that consists of a single note held out for a few measures that transitions in a nicely composed outro with only strings. It manages to create a significant difference between each part while staying cohesive.The static element is the only real complaint I have.

Chrysaor686 wrote:This is not creativity, it is chaos. There is a marked difference between the two.

CHAOS IS OUR MASTER!




But semi seriously:

I don't really care for her music, mostly because I don't like the style of it. She has a fair bit of Talent (if she is the one writing her songs) and you do honestly have to respect her for that.

Alas, she killed Kermit. Over and over and over. And then wore his heads all over her body. And for that....

There is no forgiveness.