advertisement


Is lady gaga really a musical genius?

Gaga is a woman of talent, a bona fide genuine popstar of the old pe-Cowell variety, and in these dark and desperate days we need gals of her stamp more than we have ever done. I would say that being a fan is actually a humanitarian duty as much as anything else.

I think her most interesting quality is that almost uniquely among the current crop of women performers, she doesn't sell herself as a sex object even though most of her stuff is about sex (you don't pull the guys by draping yourself in steak & kidney, I find).

She is incredibly hard working, doesn't have a home or much of a private life, lives permanently on tour and does not appear to be especially interested in money, except in that she can reinvest it in her stage show and her five panto walkdown outfit a day habit.

She is just a black hole for attention though - which goes with the territory. And why not?

palp

mature student at the University of South Carolina
 
Tony L said:
You'd discount Hendrix from that list? I'm never less than amazed by his playing, no rock guitarist before or since has even come close IMO, in fact I can't for the life of me understand why most of them bother. He was a real one-off.
Click to expand...

tony.

you've clearly forgotten about vinnie vincent.

btw--the problem with hendrix is that the singing and lyrics aren't quite up to the level of the guitar playing.

vuk.
 
which was exactly my point about the star-spangled banner.

He was an instrumentalist, whose career / journey was cut short just as he was developing, or seemed to be, a vocabulary etc on his instrument that completely transcended all the pale imitations of buddy guy (amongst others), like clapton, that were defining 'rock guitar' playing (and still do to a large extent).

I'd go further: although one can't discount drugs/lifestyle in affecting consistency, in the 'conventional' terms I mention above, Hendrix could sound pretty ordinary.
 
vuk said:
btw--the problem with hendrix is that the singing and lyrics aren't quite up to the level of the guitar playing.
Click to expand...

He could communicate via the medium of fart and tapdance for all I care; his guitar playing is just sublime.

Which is the point of Hendrix, really.

Bit like dissing Michaelangelo for being shite at playwriting.
 
Michael L said:
He could communicate via the medium of fart and tapdance for all I care; his guitar playing is just sublime.

Which is the point of Hendrix, really.

Bit like dissing Michaelangelo for being shite at playwriting.
Click to expand...


"dissing"?--i didn't realize you were also black. either way, your point would only make sense if michaelangelo insisted on staging permanent plays on the ceiling. with hendrix, i have to listen to his second-rate songs whilst he's playing.


vuk.
 
palpnorte said:
(you don't pull the guys by draping yourself in steak & kidney, I find).
Click to expand...

Hmm, at the moment, that does appeal to my more esurient side :)

I say Three Cheers for Lady Gaga, she doesn't have to be a musical genius.. anyone who can sprinkle a little glamour into the moribund music scene is fine by me. If she occasionally makes you think "WTF?" it helps to relieve the tedium and dullness of reality.
 
gassor said:

Genius (plural geniuses[1][2]) is something or someone embodying exceptional intellectual ability, creativity, or originality, typically to a degree that is associated with the achievement of unprecedented insight.
(Wiki)

So does the above remind you of David Bowie - I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of Ray Charles though.
 
I watched the Graham Norton Show last night. Not something I normally do. He had Lady Gaga, as well as the delicious Gwyneth Paltrow as guests. I was impressed by the normality of Gaga in conversation. She was witty, self deprecating, funny and clever.
She is clearly a multi-talented woman who knows how to succeed. I also happen to like some of her stuff infinitely more than most of the current autotuned crap out there.
I wouldn't buy her music, and she isn't a genius, but she's clever and talented enough to be (I confidently assume) richer than any of us.

Mull
 
vuk said:
"dissing"?--i didn't realize you were also black. either way, your point would only make sense if michaelangelo insisted on staging permanent plays on the ceiling. with hendrix, i have to listen to his second-rate songs whilst he's playing.


vuk.
Click to expand...

FFS have you been been drinking? Stupid on all counts bar one perhaps.
 
Greg said:
Yes, she was light hearted, funny and clever for sure. Not what I expected.
Click to expand...

Me neither, but it proved that what she does (at least as a pop singer) is entertain by creating an illusional persona. That is what entertainers have done since the dawn of time.
Her songs, although they are already beginning to show a sort of sameness, are sufficiently different in overall sound and 'feel', to get noticed by old farts like me. I like her.
 
it's very interesting that certain forum members who seem to recognize the serious problems of corporate control of food are perfectly happy with corporate control of pop music and will bend over backwards to defend gaga inc.

could she pull this off without $250,000 photo shoots and equally expensive entourage in the other necessities of presentation? could she pull it off unplugged? more importantly, she has a massive audience of "little monsters" and the chance to express some ideas to them. her country is involved in more than one illegal, futile war. her country has bailed out a parasitic finance industry that continues to suck blood. her country refuses to shut down its little concentration camp in guantanamo bay. her country assassinates an unarmed enemy combatant because a trial would have problematic.

the options are ripe and clearly the image has to be anti-establishment. gaga's choice is to tell her little monsters that the fashion and "attitude" they adopt is the most important thing--f*ck human rights and justice, it's more cool to just piss off our parents by being obnoxious and provocative. that's her product and it works => mick parry + mescalito: if it makes money, you can not complain. this is what most of you seem to be backing.



vuk.
 
vuk said:
it's very interesting that certain forum members who seem to recognize the serious problems of corporate control of food are perfectly happy with corporate control of pop music and will bend over backwards to defend gaga inc.
Click to expand...

The thing I don't understand is why you have picked this particular example. Whilst I'm no expert on the subject it is clear that Gaga is self-made - she plays an instrument (rather well), and appears to have been singing and playing for many, many years before finally getting a record deal, i.e. she took the traditional route. This is not some random pretty girl dragged off the street, made to sing a cover version through autotune, and moulded into a sellable package by some corporate Svengali figure in the style of so much chart pop these days. Here's some very early footage I found on YouTube:


The thing I find even more surprising is that you watched Eurovision. There is no finer example of dreary corporate design-by-committee manufactured pop muzak than this on the face of the earth - even X-Factor can be more unpredictable. There is not enough irony in the world to make such an event an entertaining watch IMO. One knows what it is in advance, and it never surprises, i.e. even the crapness / banality factor is a calculated and manufactured constant.

Tony.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting thread, especially on the definition of genius. In my view and a few others there was only one genius in music and his name was Beethoven, all the rest are/were merely talented to one degree or another. However within any highly talented persons creative output can be a work of genius that sets him/her apart from the merely talented.
Errol
 
Errol said:
Interesting thread, especially on the definition of genius. In my view and a few others there was only one genius in music and his name was Beethoven, all the rest are/were merely talented to one degree or another. However within any highly talented persons creative output can be a work of genius that sets him/her apart from the merely talented.
Errol
Click to expand...

Most of the classical music buffs I know would put Bach at the top of the pile in terms of musical genius (and influence on subsequent composers).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top