Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Madonna, eat Lady Gaga's Dust

Lauren and Randy pointed to this video, and I can see why.

In the tradition of pop stars who relied upon image, sex and production value over any actual ability to sing or dance and who aren't necessarily traditionally beautiful, Lady Gaga is picking up where Madonna dropped off when I was in high school. No doubt this video would have been "controversial" in the late-80's and early 1990's for, basically, freaking out The Moral Majority.

Today, its just a particularly well-produced video. But, nonetheless, Mom, you can probably skip this one.


If I wasn't a fan before, they had me from 3:43 to the end

Despite the fact its a fairly standard driving disco song, it's clever and sort of tragic and fits in with Gaga's over-the-topishness in a way I can't help but admire. Seriously, whether I love the music or not (and I actually do like this track), I have to salute that this isn't going weird for Lady Gaga, but from what I can tell, this is sort of where her persona lives.

I am reminded of how vague accusations seemed to surface that Madonna had co-opted, processed and (possibly accidentally) made okay for the Pepsi Generation the culture of the gay community to create a persona at times, and its hard to look at Lady Gaga and not get the same, vibe. There's something oddly Hedwig-like about the personality she's creating that I wonder how it sits with John Cameron Mitchell. At minimum, the lush costuming, elaborate make-up, etc... seems lifted from a drag show. And I'd guess I'm not the only one whose reading some of that, as, after all, the lady was accused of packing just this summer (which I think was disproved, but am also fairly certain is a little irrelevant).

But I gotta go with Randy and Lauren on this. I'm digging the video, and on view #4, the song.

3 comments:

Simon MacDonald said...

You know this video is nothing special until you realize SHE'S WEARING A POLAR BEAR RUG! Instant classic.

The League said...

Oh, yes. That's why I marked 3:43 in the timeline.

J.S. said...

Huh.