Lady Gaga is the greatest artist of the 21st Century (so far)

[Doug C]

 

And, for the record (in case some of you are keeping a record of stuff like this), I believe in bi-sexuals like I believe in leprechauns.

 

Most leprechauns are bisexual.

[Atticus]

If she's the greatest artist of the 21st C (so far), I'm glad the century has barely begun. She's un-orginal in thinking she's original. Sounds like other artists, dresses like other artists, likes to try and stir up talk by being so "shocking" in antics/words, etc. She's a talented singer, musician, and entertainer but beyond that she's more hype than substance, imo.

 

you're more hype than substance.

[Lammycat]

That's simply not true, Neil.

[Atticus]

I thought we were anonymous here.

 

and I agree with your assertion. you are all substance, my man. I was making a joke on the online.

[Lammycat]

I just made the name "Neil" up. I have no idea what your real name is or who you even are, really.

[ih8music]

He's clearly a Bill.

[Lammycat]

I bet Lady Gaga isn't even her real name, either. Poser.

[Ghost of Electricity]

I bet Lady Gaga isn't even her real name, either. Poser.

 

yeah just like Bob Dylan. Loser.

[IRememberDBoon]

wait a minute!!

 

of course men can sleep with other men and women but if you wake up in the morning and look over and want to give some guy a kiss on his hairy cheek when youre sober then i think thats beautiful and terrific but guess what?.........youre a gay man and you should be proud and happy

[gogo]

There are a lot of bisexuals out there who will be so thrilled that you've cleared that up for them!

[kidsmoke]

To get back to the subject of whether LG is the 21st century's "greatest artist"....two thoughts:

 

1.) We have very different ideas about what that expression, "greatest artist", means. I believe great art should be involved.

 

and

 

2.) I don't think "Lady Gaga" and "greatest artist" can be used together in the same sentence unless there's a "not" in the sentence. That's the only way it's grammatically correct.

 

As for bisexuality, I think we can safely take these folks' word for who and what they are. Who would know better?

[Guest Jules]

2.) I don't think "Lady Gaga" and "greatest artist" can be used together in the same sentence unless there's a "not" in the sentence. That's the only way it's grammatically correct.

 

I don't think grammar has anything to do with it.

[Magnetized]

 

 

I don't think grammar has anything to do with it.

I think she was making a joke.

[kidsmoke]

I was. Perhaps a future in stand-up comedy is not in my future.

 

But still, "Lady Gaga" and "greatest artist" in the same sentence? Even my Grammar says that's ridiculous. (My Gramper agrees.)

[augurus]

She's got the world's attention and she provokes serious debate.

Man, I could say the same about Charlie Sheen, Mel Gibson, Billy Corgan, Piers Morgan, and many more.

 

They've led profitable careers and raises many questions that are just so provocatively vague. Man, if only I could be more vague than actually say something, then I could surely provoke serious debate. Because no one else wants to write vague anthems about sexual identity aside from Lady Gaga.

[Ghost of Electricity]

To get back to the subject of whether LG is the 21st century's "greatest artist"....two thoughts:

 

1.) We have very different ideas about what that expression, "greatest artist", means. I believe great art should be involved.

 

 

Let me say that I'm not a great fan of hers. Again, I don't even know a single Lady Gaga song. But (also again) I don't think that's the point. Her art isn't music or even fashion. The 21st century is the era of zeros and ones, when visual art has become no longer tangible, and audio art (which never was) has been, through the power or the download, devalued like a third-world currency. It's also the viral age, where a single tweet can reach millioms or peolpe in a matter of minutes. Her "art" isn't art in the traditional sense, but is redefining it based on the unique circumstances of the 21st century.

 

even within the confines of this thread she's managed to provoke debate, in this case on the nature of sexuality. A couple of days ago I was listening to a discussion on BBC radio about legal/philosophical issues being discussed as a result of her Asian tour. Granted these issues were well hashed out in the 80's in the US with Madonna and others who have been previously mentioned, but, in 21st centiry fashion she's upping it to a global scale and taking the same debate to corners of the world it hasn't yet touched, but arguably should touch.

 

To me, this is somewhat analagous to something like Picasso's "Guernica."

 

Man, I could say the same about Charlie Sheen, Mel Gibson, Billy Corgan, Piers Morgan, and many more.

 

 

 

I can't.

[augurus]

Let me say that I'm not a great fan of hers. Again, I don't even know a single Lady Gaga song. But (also again) I don't think that's the point. Her art isn't music or even fashion. The 21st century is the era of zeros and ones, when visual art has become no longer tangible, and audio art (which never was) has been, through the power or the download, devalued like a third-world currency. It's also the viral age, where a single tweet can reach millioms or peolpe in a matter of minutes. Her "art" isn't art in the traditional sense, but is redefining it based on the unique circumstances of the 21st century.

 

even within the confines of this thread she's managed to provoke debate, in this case on the nature of sexuality. A couple of days ago I was listening to a discussion on BBC radio about legal/philosophical issues being discussed as a result of her Asian tour. Granted these issues were well hashed out in the 80's in the US with Madonna and others who have been previously mentioned, but, in 21st centiry fashion she's upping it to a global scale and taking the same debate to corners of the world it hasn't yet touched, but arguably should touch.

 

To me, this is somewhat analagous to something like Picasso's "Guernica."

 

 

 

I can't.

 

They all produced giant publicity stunts that shocked a large percentage of the public. They all have very firm views of the world. They all seem to have the current attention of the world, and they all play to their own tune regardless of critics. How much more vague could this get? There are other musicians as well as stars that have "the world's attention and provoke serious debate." There's Nicki Minaj, Kanye West, Radiohead, U2, and etc.

 

I'm going to be very clear this time.

Your reasoning, it is weak.

 

EDIT: Also, I think you're trying to bait, haha.

[Ghost of Electricity]

Your view of the world is skewed. noone outside the states or maybe other English speaking countries knows/ gives a rat's ass about who Charlie Sheen is. Radiohead and U2 reach a decidedly broader base than Charlie Sheen, and mave have people's attention and may have clear views on the world, but largely preach to the choir, so to speak, which provokes no debate whatsoever.

 

Nine inch Nails did the whole shock rock thing, but played to crowds of people who wanted and/or expected to be shocked. Again, not the same thing.

 

It's funny that in these days of Christian/Muslim animosity the fundamentalists from both groups can find a common ground in their derision of Lady Gaga, which provokes further thought.

 

Also, I don't consider Lady Gaga's medium to be music, but the media itself, whereas with U2 and Radiohead (or Bob Geldof or whoever) the medium is undoubtedly music. U2 has played with the media thing, but it was before the whole digital revolution (if i remember correctly) and was a theme of an album/tour, not the medium itself.

 

As for the vagueness thing, I started this thread after hearing a BBC radio discussion about the Lady Gaga's banned show in Indonesia. The issues I have mentioned (such as an individuals right to freedom of expression conflicting with another individual's or group's right to religious beliefs) were issues discussed by participants coming from all walks of life and all corners of the globe, including third world countries. The discussion moved away from Lady Gaga the person/musician/celebrity/ provacateuse into the social-political realm of where to draw the line between these two freedoms. This is less of an issue in the states than it is in places like Saudia Arabia and Iran, and more of an issue for women and homo/bisexuals than it is for straight men in those (and most) countries. Specific enough?

 

And if i am trying to bait a little, it is only because this idea occured to me, i fear there's something in it, and I want someone to talk some sense into me. I'd listen to Radiohead before Lady Gaga any day of the week.

 

All do respect, but I still she's playing a different ballgame than any of the folk you've mentioned.

[ih8music]

What you describe isn't an "artist" in my opinion. It's a media whore.

 

Sorry... a World Famous, Provocative Media Whore. The best evah!

[Moss]

Let's not confuse marketing with artistry, unless you consider marketing an art, which is kind of fair now that I think about it. A hideous art but maybe an art nonetheless. So never mind, ignore my first sentence.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

http://music.yahoo.com/news/lady-gaga-angers-thai-fans-fake-rolex-073744013.html

 

If that's art, she can kiss my ass.

[kidsmoke]

I do enjoy watching Weird Al Yankovic's "Perform This Way".

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss_BmTGv43M&ob=av2n

[Winston Legthigh]

the chorus of bad romance alone makes her superstar status worthwhile

 

the rest of the song is pretty lame, but that chorus. man.

 

I didn't really care for her music until I saw this kid:

 

[ih8music]

this kid sounds better than gaga

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5ftgv3BHd0

[froggie]

She makes me cringe.

 

agreed!