Lady Gaga Critique

Lady Gaga is a phenomenon I was hoping I could get away with opting out of, sort of like Twitter.

I've read here that people would rather be reading about Lady Gaga than Goldman Sachs. I will do my part. Lady Gaga is a phenomenon I was hoping I could get away with opting out of, sort of like Twitter. It comes up often enough, but never in a way that makes me feel I'm truly missing out.

But PopMatters recently ran a feature about Lady Gaga that inspired me to try to listen to her album The Fame Monster. It doesn't seem like the sort of album you are supposed to listen to by such a deliberate process -- as a recording complete unto itself that you play from start to finish, as though it were a symphony or something. It's not Sgt. Pepper. It's purposely vapid dance music that succeeds by getting you to forget yourself and blend with a crowd. It certainly felt odd to be listening to it by myself in my apartment.

It took some perseverance, but I made it all the way through. (It seems like it is several hours long.) For something that is supposed to be sort of outrageous, it was fairly easy to ignore. Two of the songs sounded like "Strangelove" by Depeche Mode. Another sounded like an amped-up "La Isla Bonita." One song mentions "riding a disco stick," which I assume is sex- or drug-related innuendo? There are lots of dopey chants that seemed especially engineered to be catchy, as though they had neuroscientists doing brain scans to see which stuttering syllables lit up the greatest proportion of the temporal lobe.

Much of the rest of the album was already familiar -- from cars driving by, from going to Phillies games and hearing it between innings, from being in restaurants and stores that play the radio. For me, much of the album was the sound of being in public places. It made me feel sort of exposed while it was playing, as if just having it on meant I was seeking publicity or was simply visible. I felt like Lower Merion School District might have activated the webcam in my laptop.

Lady Gaga seems good at what she does, but I have no interest in listening to her album again. Still, I don't really get what Mark Dery is complaining about in this essay (which is nonetheless an highly enjoyable read, despite his theory baiting). He seems surprised that Lady Gaga is not as legitimately strange as her handlers, apologists, and devotees sometimes make her out to be, as if something genuinely weird could ever achieve repeatable commercial success. He's right; she is not an outsider artist. She is not Gary Wilson (though arguably their music is vaguely similar). Lady Gaga, as Dery demonstrates without really explicitly arguing, sells the promise of outré weirdness without ever being genuinely transgressive or even semiotically coherent. Instead of presenting a series of interlocking propositions of a grand artistic vision, Lady Gaga serves up flat signifiers of superficial ideas -- the frisson of the peculiar, disassociated fragments of subcultures (S&M porn, haute performance art, etc.) that would be entirely unpalatable for mainstream Americans if presented more thoroughly. Her shtick is not meant to add up, because then that would actually scare the people she's trying to woo.

I was confused, though, to learn that Lady Gaga compares herself to glam rock performers from the 1970s, like T.Rex and Bowie. As Dery points out, she doesn't make make rock music, and she is not doing anything unusual for the genre she is working in. (I'd be hard-pressed to differentiate her songs from the other stuff on top 40 radio, or Disney radio for that matter.) Maybe she will move to Berlin and start making tranquilizing mood music.

I suspect most of the media people who praise her are mainly glad that any musician can still become megafamous, which seems to prove the continuing survival of the whole superstar system that justifies the existence of professional pop-music pundits. If there are a few relevant artists that everyone is supposed to care about, big media can assign someone the job of covering that beat. But if the pop music market splits into so many niches that each demands its own microexpert, then big media won't bother trying to cover it all.

That's about all I have on this subject. Of course, the most important commentary on Lady Gaga can be found here.

The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.