Lady Gaga

RoyFairbank wrote:   You know a previous poster just revealed she's a fake blonde (I think)? That just kills it for me man.

I don't really understand - whether it's Fish or KISS, whoever - how and why costumes come to play any role in appreciating music anyway.  Um, music is meant to be listened to, right?  Don't like the outfits?  Just look away and listen, shouldn't be hard. How does it concern anyone if the costumes help the artist get more fans than he/she deserves for the music?

WalterDigsTunes wrote: Peter wrote: Gaga?    GAH!   This is WAAAAAY cooler, kiddiwinks.  V   Would you prefer the original studio version:   ninahagenafricanreggae   or live?   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7fFb6GKbxY Bravo! Say "NO!" to new music and "YES!" to pre-1989 heroes!

Thanks for watching & responding!

I don't mind Gaga at all - I just find the actual synth music kind of boring. If that were amped up a bit I would probably listen to her quite frequently.

Peter wrote: WalterDigsTunes wrote: Peter wrote: Gaga?    GAH!   This is WAAAAAY cooler, kiddiwinks.  V   Would you prefer the original studio version:   ninahagenafricanreggae   or live?   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7fFb6GKbxY Bravo! Say "NO!" to new music and "YES!" to pre-1989 heroes! Thanks for watching & responding!   Now dig this, Walter:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CST7XOxw4Dk&feature=related   Dunno -- just thought of crazy, uber-talented  former East-German opera fraulein Nina H, tonight. Ever hear her band Spliff (sans Nina)? Cool stuff!

As a long-time fan of both Ms Hagen (and Spliff ~ Schwarz auf Weiss is one of my fave 80s albums) I don't think she's in the same league as Lady Gaga when it comes to being a Pop Diva. However, as an icon and an example of "interesting" female performers I would place them both in the same loose category as Toyah and Lena Lovich (and to some extent Diamanda Galas and Siouxie Sioux) - all have carved a niche in a masculine dominated world of popular music that is uniquely theirs.

Radio GaGa
Radio GaGa
Lady oh Gaga
Lady oh Gaga

Ahem

rogerthat wrote: I don't really understand - whether it's Fish or KISS, whoever - how and why costumes come to play any role in appreciating music anyway.  Um, music is meant to be listened to, right?  Don't like the outfits?  Just look away and listen, shouldn't be hard. How does it concern anyone if the costumes help the artist get more fans than he/she deserves for the music?

We may not understand it, but unfortunatly in the Pop world the "looks" of the arstists is more important than their talent. Who cares if they can't sing and there's about no music in the song, as long as they are Pretty, handsome, and Hot, so they can put their pictures in the CD cover and have them dance on the promotional video.

rogerthat wrote: Dellinger wrote: We may not understand it, but unfortunatly in the Pop world the "looks" of the arstists is more important than their talent. Who cares if they can't sing and there's about no music in the song, as long as they are Pretty, handsome, and Hot, so they can put their pictures in the CD cover and have them dance on the promotional video. I do know that people place more importance to looks in pop.  But it's not just pop, whether it's metal or prog, you will find a lot of people a bit too concerned about how the artists look and dress up.  It's especially ridiculous for a prog fan to be bothered about it because prog is not about image, whereas imagery, for better or worse, is a big deal in metal.

The big point is that in Prog imagery reinforces a progressive presentation, in pop it reinforces a regressive presentation.

You can repeat this quote endlessly onward

rogerthat wrote: RoyFairbank wrote: The big point is that in Prog imagery reinforces a progressive presentation, in pop it reinforces a regressive presentation. You can repeat this quote endlessly onward What pray is this crucial role that imagery plays in Red album,  enlighten us.

Wrong. There doesn't have to be imagery. I didn't say that. But when there is, it is to reinforce a progressive form of music. Obviously, a Pink Floyd concert is about the music, despite the complex imagery. Pop uses imagery entirely differently in relation to music.

Semi-obvious

edit: that is, in relation to music that has no substance to it. The lasers themselves have the same technology.


Edited by RoyFairbank - May 08 2010 at 22:03

rogerthat wrote: RoyFairbank wrote: Wrong. There doesn't have to be imagery. I didn't say that. But when there is, is to reinforce a progressive form of music. Obviously, a Pink Floyd concert is about the music, despite the complex imagery. Pop uses imagery entirely differently in relation to music. Semi-obvious These are just your perceptions and opinions, you know.  There are prog fans who don't like Gabriel or Fish's costumes either and I think a few posters have made a good case above for why Lady Gaga's image is not so completely unrelated to the music as you suggest.  Taking your arguments seriously requires assuming that everybody who listens to pop is empty in the top rack and that is quite a ridiculous assumption to say the least.

Its not about the music. Its a about the surrounding problems, the social problems. Lady Gaga - it has nothing to do with her as an individual or even her music as such - she is part of an exploitative set up which takes advantage of the masses and shovels sub-par cultural substitutes down their throats very lucratively. She is in the pop music business and a part of all the profit making and garbage production, in fact one of its "faces." That's a problem. Prog was strangled by this machine, but even Prog isn't the solution. What is needed- a new culture on serious, humanitarian foundations. Pop isn't either. Time to tear the whole capitalist edifice down. A few generations from now all that is made today, even the music this site covers, will be seen as false and backward. At the moment however, we can choose between the product of a cultural upswing in the 1960s and 70s, or the product of a declining era. That's prog vs. pop to me.