Gaga Finally Honored with Daftpop Post

I often hide one or many of my facial features, as I am not a natural beauty... but who's to know?
I often hide one or more of my facial features in photos

Before I got the chance to write a similar article, Guy Trebay, part-time nuanced pop culture watchdog, part-time announcer of bogus trends for the NYT, scrawled a style piece on Lady Gaga. I don’t know how, but Trebay gets away with a prose uncharacteristic of the Gray Lady’s distinguished pages: his witty, slightly bitchy words are more fitting for one of Carrie Bradshaw’s facile confessionals than they are for the monolith of American journalism. But whatevs. Maybe the Style section makes special exceptions for stylin writers–Trebay probably has impeccably crafted Italian leather shoes and indubitably carries a dapper murse. Anyway, Trebay’s thesis was: her music might be forgettable, but her whole package is anything but.

But Guy was just fulfilling his role, he had to admire Lady Gaga’s ostentatious clothing before 2009 ended along with her reign. However, she had other notable admirers (and detractors–just as significantly). Sasha Frere Jones bought her hype and admired her Rilke references. Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps called her a lady of the night, whore, slut, etc.  But dudes, dudes, calm down. We’re just so excited because we haven’t seen anything Madonna-esque in a while.

The last white pop star that really made the waves was Britney Spears. Then we had a few years of alleged virginity and highly sexualized 16-year-olds on the charts and TRL. Every once in a while those “artists” got a Swede on their production team and we drooled. But then those stars went crazy, or got married, or became otherwise useless to us. The real winners of the aughts/naughties/last ten years were Rihanna and Beyonce. And for some reason, I think it’s significant that Gaga is white, and that everyone thinks she’s so avant-garde n’ shit. Granted, Beyonce is not considered in the same pop-game as Gaga, as she is admired by critics for her reserved professionalism. She’s not a flashy new star–she is remarkable for her old school classiness, and more of a Diana Ross than a Madonna. Rihanna, on the other hand, visually has it DOWN. She’s not as future-friendly as Gaga, but her new look of leather and steel suits her, and I think Rated R‘s cover art is every bit as visually engaging as a Gaga bubble frock. The only problem is her music–she still hasn’t created an aggressive enough genre for herself. (Hint to Rihanna: dub step is waiting for you to mainstream it.) I still have a suspicion that we are more likely to accept an aesthetic as revelatory and an artist as a true auteur if they are white. Everyone thinks Rihanna is a tool–that she’s a talent who’s just not being handled correctly, etc. Most people blamed her production team for the failures of her recent album. When she gets in the hands of REAL writers (like the-dream, et al), we say, that’s when she really shines. It’s as though Lady Gaga is given a voice and an agency that these other stars are not, and it could be because of her skin color (it also could be because she writes her own music, but let me be a pessimist for a minute). People conceptualize race in entertainment as such: black people dance for us; white people make us think.

Anyway, I meant to talk about Lady Gaga’s EP The Fame Monster. Undeniably, Lady Gaga is an auteur, and she would have us know she isn’t handled by anyone. [Incessant reminders that she’s a free bitch, baby, did the trick.]

The Fame just kinda sucks. We can all agree. Her pounding, drunken club hits were timely, but hardly made for interesting dance music: we’re not talking Basement Jaxx here, we’re talking disco’s version of row-row-row your boat.

But ferreal now, The Fame Monster is awesome. [Listen to it streaming via myspace here.] It kicks off with her best single, “Bad Romance,” a perfectly subversive, triumphant anthem for forbidden love. “Alejandro,” is a tuneful ode to Abba’s “Fernando.” It begins with Lady Gaga denying her many Latin admirers, then launches into an Ace of Base bump, complete with the glossy, Doctor Who-esque organ flourish of the eternal 1994 hit “The Sign.” Just pretend she doesn’t say one of the dudes is “hot like Mexico,” and you will be left with the idea that she really knows what she’s talking about.

Then we have the inspiration for the title of the EP: “Monster.” The monster is a guy with whom she may have had sex with previously, but she “doesn’t quite recall.” Then, like a phantom from the subtextural depths of an H.P. Lovecraft story, his horrifically competent skills in the bedroom rise from her subconscious. They make out on a subway train. (This makes the subway sound exotic and exciting, but of course, it only is for those of us who do not trudge defeatedly onto it every day.) He then tears off her clothes, and also eats her heart and brain. This will probably be her next single–it has plenty of heavy machinery pumps and fuckable thumping. I guess that’s the idea.

I could go on, but I’m sure you understand what this EP is about. It’s musically more interesting and less schticky than her singles off The Fame. And it also gives us a glimpse of what could be an interesting future. Lady Gaga has consolidated her strengths, which include vividly conjuring a real object out of her love in the club. Most Usher hits feature faceless R&B biddies with a booty like ooh-ohh-ohh (sorry, the-dream), but Gaga’s boys are criminals, or monsters, or disco sticks–they have some interesting attributes, defined ontological properties, and foreign accents, even.

All that’s left to see is how her next LP works out. More 90s Euro obviousness? The radio is full of that now. She needs to stop talking about how much Bowie inspires her and write the next oddball dance hit a la “Let’s Dance.” Maybe she could even write a song as weird as “The Secret Nights of Arabia.” I think her capable of it. However, Gaga needs to turn down the punchy fuzz she favors so much production-wise, and let other textures enter the dance floor. She needs to keep wearing bubble outfits, though.


One thought on “Gaga Finally Honored with Daftpop Post

  1. First off, admittedly I’m not feeling the whole Lady Gaga phenom, so I’ll leave that one where I found it. However, you’re point about taking white artists seriously as the avant-garde is worth a whole lot of unpacking. Personally, my ambivalence towards her aside, I can’t imagine calling Lady GaGa avant-anything with a straight face. She might be bold or even unique in or landscape, but at this point she’s pretty clearly treading well worn territory (flirting with being a Madonna copy, and the pretty tired trope of Bowie=patron saint of self important plastic popstars). Her whole ‘package’ is just an empty gesture of rule breaking and envelope pushing. I’d be hard pressed to find a single idea (musical, conceptual, performance based or otherwise) that she’s introduced to the world. New ideas aren’t a prerequisite for enjoyable or even culturally important pop music but (last time I checked) pretty essential to innovation. This is where I’d be more willing to side with Rihanna and for sure Beyonce as far as innovation goes. Beyonce may carry herself like a classy pop diva, but her singles are all over the place, many of which sound like absolutely no one else. She (and/or her production team as the case may be) innovates like Motown or the best of the Hollywood Studio System did by taking measured steps forward and the occasional risks w/o ever alienating the fans. Or take it like this, artists like Beyonce or Kanye represent the gold standard for which the vanguard should be trying to push past, the curve to be ahead of, etc. And by this metric I think Lady Gaga starts to look and sound more carnivalesque than innovative. But back to white people. I wonder if we (by which I mean the NYTimes of whoever else is lionizing LadyGa) are just stuck on the old notions of the avant-garde, still fighting yesterday’s war. And I think that white people being “edgy” is still lazy shorthand for the avant-garde because “white people” is still lazy shorthand for “normative.” Anyway, the whole notion of artistic progress can get sticky considering how fractured the mainstream is now, how tenuous genres are and how quickly our culture is traveling. That all being said, I don’t think Lady Gaga is pissing people off because she’s disrupting their notions of reality. Maybe she’s just kinda annoying? We’ll see where she goes after this.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s