How the internet is altering your mind

[AndyM]

The only argument I can think of at present that doesn’t have a viable counterargument is Camille Paglia’s case against the artistic credibility of Lady Gaga from yesterday’s Sunday Times. And very entertaining it is too.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/pub ... 389697.ece

Bah humbug - Paglia is a superannuated old hack whose writing was refreshing in the early 90s for puncturing various over-inflated academic and cultural balloons, but is still trying to trot out the same old stuff AND claim it has analytical weight. Julie Burchill at her worst trying to be Germaine Greer at hers.

Or maybe I just like Lady Gaga too much.

[uiwangmike]

Having come across Julie Burchill's writing for the first time in the Independent this summer, I assume she must have been more interesting in the past than she is now. However, I do like the somewhat catty comment she made on Camille Paglia some years ago: "The 'g' is silent, the only thing about her that is."

[Des]

I once sat through an hour of Camille banging on about vaginas.

[Hugh Weldon]

Given the choice, I think I'd hold on to my Paglia books and sacrifice the slim collection of Burchilliana. Sexual Personae is definitely an achievement in terms of its adventures into the dark heart of Romanticism I think. That recent Sunday Times piece on Lady Gaga looked pretty tasty as well, though I'm too mean to add a quid to Murdoch's coffers for the privelege of reading the whole thing.

[howard male]

Yes, I recall Vamps and Tramps as well as Sex, Art and American Culture being real feasts of high energy, high protein thinking and prose. In fact I confess I forked out the whole price of the print edition of the Sunday Times – thus giving stinky Murdock a whole three pounds rather than just one - just to have the luxury of reading this piece in print, on paper - and it was well worth it.

So, yes Andy - I suspect that it is your inexplicable (given your general good taste in music) liking of Lady Gaga that has distorted your perspective on Paglia. Get a grip, man!

[AndyM]

So, yes Andy - I suspect that it is your inexplicable (given your general good taste in music) liking of Lady Gaga that has distorted your perspective on Paglia. Get a grip, man!

La Gaga is the defining pop star of right now. And 'Poker Face', 'Bad Romance' and 'Just Dance' are unstoppable missiles of pop wonderment. Scoff away, but history will prove me right.

[Gordon Neill]

AndyM said:

La Gaga is the defining pop star of right now. And 'Poker Face', 'Bad Romance' and 'Just Dance' are unstoppable missiles of pop wonderment. Scoff away, but history will prove me right.

At last! I've had some words at the ready for months. Not sure if they'll still work after being in storage for so long, just got to blow the dust off them......here's hoping.....here we go.......I agree with Andy!

[AndyM]

I feel suitably humbled.

[howard male]

Gaga is a sexless, soulless, derivative automaton who produces the kind of disco pop I remember hearing on trips to Europe in the 70s and 80s. Back then I’d think to myself; we Brits might know nothing about food or clothes but at least we have enough musical taste not to embrace this kind of kitsch plastic pop. And now we’ve done exactly that, and it's a little sad.

History I’m sure will prove you right, Andy. But that doesn’t make it right! 'The defining pop star of right now,' sure - but what exactly is she defining?

[AndyM]

Gaga is a sexless, soulless, derivative automaton who produces the kind of disco pop I remember hearing on trips to Europe in the 70s and 80s. Back then I’d think to myself; we Brits might know nothing about food or clothes but at least we have enough musical taste not to embrace this kind of kitsch plastic pop. And now we’ve done exactly that, and it's a little sad.

History I’m sure will prove you right, Andy. But that doesn’t make it right! 'The defining pop star of right now,' sure - but what exactly is she defining?

We're not going to persuade each other over this, but a few brief responses:

(a) kitsch plastic pop has always been part of the musical landscape, some of us love it when it's well done and Gaga does it better than anyone

(b) soulless ? Have you heard her singing 'straight' without all the electro trimmings ? Great voice.

(c) derivative ? Draws on a tradition, though a tradition you don't care for.

(d) sexless ? Matter of perception/taste, but she is deeply interested in the meanings of sexuality, which is one reason she fascinates.

(e) What does she define ? That we live in a world of surfaces like it or not), that new media increasingly define our interactions (ditto), that authenticity is an option not an obligation, that heterosexual machismo (inside music and beyond) needs putting in its place, and that Madonna needs to hang up her leotard.

[Des]

I haven't heard much Gaga but I agree with Andy's overall argument regarding pop music. I must admit I find some of what is termed 'plastic pop' far more interesting and enjoyable than some old muso banging on about guitar solos although I'm guilty of the latter.

[howard male]

I didn’t imagine for one moment tht you would convince me but that doesn’t mean I wasn’t interested in the defence, Andy – and you’ve put up a good one.

But…

I too have plenty of time for some kitsch and plastic pop if it is genuinely inventive, melodically original, and offers something new along with its influences. Gaga writes melodies as two-dimensional as playground chants.

She is sexless in that she exudes awkward cartoon theatricality rather than sexuality. And this isn’t a question of taste given that I realise Madonna exudes sexuality even though I’ve always found her extremely unsexy. Great pop stars need to be sexy to someone!

OK, so she defines our world of surfaces – didn’t Warhol do that 40 years ago, and countless other since? I think you now know my tastes well enough to know I am interested in very little music defined by “heterosexual machismo” so that argument goes out the window.

And as for “that new media increasingly define our interactions” – are you talking about that t-t-t-t-telephone song? I hope there’s more to it than that!

Gaga is the clearest example of the emperor’s new clothes syndrome to ever occur in pop music, especially given that she seems to change her emperor’s new clothes every five minutes. 2D playground melodies, a four to the flour beat, and a bottomless dressing-up trunk, does not a great pop star make.

Let me try to wake you from your trance with these words from Paglia which made me laugh.

“Another leading performer whom Gaga has claimed as an influence is David Bowie. Welcoming Gaga to her TV show in Los Angelese last year, Ellen DeGeneres went off on a servile, stammering encomium in which she implied that Gaga had surpassed Bowie – an idiocy that should have been instantly punished by a lightening bolt from Zeus. Bowie was one of the great avant-garde artists of the 20th-century.”

[AndyM]

Deuce !

I think I shall stay 'entranced' for now, but yes, the idea that Gaga has surpassed Bowie is gabbering blether, but then careers and reputations are forever speeding up in our current climate.