6.01.2011

GaGa: Meat dress for dinner

I'm sick to death of seeing Lady GaGa all over the place. On magazine covers, on TV, on the Internet, everywhere you turn. You can't get away from her. Why has she struck such a chord with the American people? I mean, I have seen Facebook profiles of women well into their middle ages listing Gaga as a music favorite.

I saw her first video on MTV when it first came out (please don't ask what I was doing watching MTV, I assure you it was a 'WTF' pause in an otherwise boring channel surf). I thought it was campy and not really all that original. As her popularity increased I became convinced that her whole schtick was a combination of Marilyn Manson and Madonna. Both of whom have courted their fare share of controversy. Both of whom have also trotted out a penchant for deliberate controversy. Not necessarily to make up for any lack of talent, whether I particularly care for their work or not. But Lady GaGa, as a musical artist, hasn't enough talent to take 3rd place in a karaoke contest at a small town dive bar. It's entirely possible that she would agree, although not going quite so far with the analogy.

She has described herself as a "performance artist" and of course that's what she is. I'll even concede that she is a very good one. But the thing is: your average Joe Blow hasn't a clue what a "performance artist" even is. I don't mean that as an insult to anyone. I'm only saying that "art", to the majority, isn't nearly as important as what's on TV (precious little "art" to be found there), or who won the ball game last night or just hanging out shooting the bull with friends. That's all fine and good, nothing wrong with it. But these same people are the ones who have elevated Lady GaGa to the exalted position she is currently enjoying.

Which brings me to the other tool the Lady uses to increase her fan base: her fans. Or I should say her devotion to her fans. I have rarely ever seen a performer use so much PR time thanking and praising fans. No matter how outrageous she gets (meat dress, anyone?), no matter how hard she tries to be controversial (and maybe piss off a few squares in the process) she will always be embraced by her admirers because she has gone out of her way to make them feel like they are an integral part of who she is and the success she has enjoyed. And they are, I'm sure. That's the way it should be done, in my opinion. You have to become a part of your own fan base without kissing their asses. GaGa has come dangerously close but so far I don't think she's pandered to them.

She just doesn't, in my opinion, give them much substance to work with. Not that I would know. My exposure to her act has been about as limited as I can make it be. That's not why I started writing this, anyway. I am not really concerned with the quality of her music, and as I have already stated I do think she's a brilliant performance artist. I just get sick of seeing her picture everywhere and I guess it miffs me a little to know that I predicted a short, sweet future for her when I first saw that video. Now she's on the cover of this week's Rolling Stone (again). Such hype, such overexposure, surely can't be good for her. The American public, fan or no, is extremely fickle and you have to wonder just how long it will be before those loyal GaGa-heads jump ship for the next fly-by-night. Or maybe she'll actually succeed in taking things too far, so far that she'll lose a significant chunk of her supporters? The question isn't IF it will happen, but WHEN it will happen.

I wish her luck, I really do. I hope she saves her money and invests it wisely so she can live high on the hog for the rest of her post-15 Minutes life. She'll never be forgotten, I guess that's saying something. But Milli Vanilli will never be forgotten, either.

Which is not a fair comparison, I know. Maybe what I mean is that performance artists don't fare too well in the "where are they now" category. This is only natural. It's the PERFORMANCE that takes center stage for a performance artist (duh), while the artist creating it inevitably is forgotten. And the performance comes to an end when there is no one left who cares about watching it. Like a movie or a rock opera it can't last TOO long, else it's impact is consumed by the inevitable, essential boredom that is only natural when something goes on for too long. So maybe, for the sake of her art, Lady GaGa would do well to close down shop before she wears out her welcome.

All of this, admittedly, coming from the pen of a man who has given up hope for popular music several years ago, who won't be one bit offended if his readers tell him he's full of crap, that he isn't qualified to write about the topic. That's very likely true. But I did. I wrote about it. I wrote it because I was bored and noticed Lady GaGa on the cover of Rolling Stone and couldn't help but think how sick and tired I am of seeing her picture plastered everywhere. So that's really all I have to say. Cut me some slack, o ye gods of superstardom and forgive my apathy.

I'm discouraged at how I can see only absurdity in this phenomenon that so many people think is so "cool". I see her decked out in some weird half-naked batman outfit on Letterman and the first thing that comes to my mind is not "How outrageous", but "how ridiculous". And I think this transition I've undergone is a confirming sign that tells me I am starting to show my age. I am becoming less and less able to give a damn about the new and exciting. I'd rather listen for things I never heard before in the music that has shaped my taste for the last 40 years. You'd be surprised at how much there is. Either I've never noticed it or I've forgotten it. That's much more satisfying, to me, than pick and choose out of a new stable of bands, most of which are playing out a formula that was made popular by the music I've been listening to for years. I've already heard it, boys. Good luck to ya, because most folks out there HAVEN'T.

(note: I have, throughout this essay, spelled the subject's name thusly: "Lady GaGa". As I wrote the part about being so out of touch with pop culture I realized that my use of two capitals in her surname was possibly, maybe even likely, incorrect. Upon further investigation my suspicions were confirmed. Why did I think it was GaGa instead of Gaga? Hell if I know. But I wasn't about to go back and correct it, because hey, who really cares, right? Besides, I think GaGa is much better. If she'd exploded onto the glam scene in the early seventies you can be sure it would have been GaGa. My apologies to the regal Lady and her loyal posse of fans.)

No comments: