Jay.P 2,336 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I do think it was intended to be in the imagery and visuals. How was she supposed to put art into the music anyway? Do you hear that? It's poison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrinceGaga 7,585 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 The paintings at the Louvre really encompass what ARTPOP is about though. A pop artist in artwork. Her as Mona Lisa was another moment where she showed what ARTPOP meant. That was actually when I finally understood what the whole concept was about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego 44,165 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I do think it was intended to be in the imagery and visuals. How was she supposed to put art into the music anyway? She was suppose to sing about Mona Lisa and Salvador Dali, don't you know? FreePalestine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay.P 2,336 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 She was suppose to sing about Mona Lisa and Salvador Dali, don't you know? they would call her pretentious, which they did anyway Do you hear that? It's poison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lego 44,165 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 they would call her pretentious, which they did anyway I know. That was sarcasm. I wonder what these people, who say "there was no art in music", think she should sing about to be really artsy? FreePalestine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBNLM 1,640 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Yes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jeans 3,815 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 No lol. ARTPOP had nothing to do with art. It was just as bad as any other generic album.I've had enough of the ARTPOP hate, ARTPOP the album wasn't generic, you know whats Generic and its getting praise? motherf*cking 1989just because you flops and basics didn't get the concept of ARTPOP doesn't mean the album or the ideas she had were bad.The album it self was pop and the way she presented it was putting "Art" visual art into Pop, "a reverse warholian experience" you guys can make fun of the era i don't care, but do not call ARTPOP generic when no pop girl came out with pieces like "Venus" "Mary Jane Holland" "Swine" "Gypsy" . Destiny is for losers. It’s just a stupid excuse to wait for things to happen instead of making them happen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay.P 2,336 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I know. That was sarcasm. I wonder what these people, who say "there was no art in music", think she should sing about to be really artsy? I know I was agreeing with you Do you hear that? It's poison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alii 2,039 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I've had enough of the ARTPOP hate, ARTPOP the album wasn't generic, you know whats Generic and its getting praise? motherf*cking 1989just because you flops and basics didn't get the concept of ARTPOP doesn't mean the album or the ideas she had were bad.The album it self was pop and the way she presented it was putting "Art" visual art into Pop, "a reverse warholian experience" you guys can make fun of the era i don't care, but do not call ARTPOP generic when no pop girl came out with pieces like "Venus" "Mary Jane Holland" "Swine" "Gypsy" .You called me flop and basic and then said that MJH and Swine were good. Like wtf. I wish I could forget how these two songs sounded. MJH was overproduced, Swine was disgusting. Gypsy was good but it was like TEOG 2.0 Venus and DWUW are the only two songs that are comparable with Gaga's real songs. The rest are mostly on Money Honey's level. I'm not a fan of 1989, but at least Taylor didn't call it art. I'm pretty sure she knows it is basic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester 6,306 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 ARTPOP is the deepest concept Gaga has ever come up with. It has to do with her as an artist and a celebrity, and her artistry since The Fame. You just have to dig and you'll get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear 7,515 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Definitely in some of her outfits and imagery. The work with Bob Wilson was probably the highlight of this for me.I would have preferred a little more art and coherence in the album itself though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
androiduser 7,438 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 She definitely did but more with The Fame Monster than with ARTPOP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
2007 5,291 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Definitely yes, and anybody who can't see it is..., the music was doing the Pop and she was doing the art Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow 1,582 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 No, not really. She referenced someone else's art here and there wore some artsy outfits (which also are obviously other ppl's art) but that's as far as it goes. I was highly disappointed. The concept sounded so interesting..before release. I was sooooo hyped. :/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
holy scheisse 22,271 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 mona lisa outfit is my favorite outfit ever so Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.