Why some Gaga lyrics sometimes seem "bad"

[fucbjk 631]

k;d/n/nkd;|n

[Yanko 9,860]

​7 pages in and still here

----------------

​ with everyone quoting me i cou;ldnt resist

[User 352]

​cringing ok

​Oh god, if you see it that way LOL

 I'll take it back.  

Inform about Gaga lyrics before you write LOL

[Daxclamation 7]

Artists don't have to have overly elaborate lyrics all the time, and if they did you would all be calling them pretentious soooo

[Creyk 17,822]

​dont forget dope

​oh I listened to dope the day the album leaked and then decided I never want to hear it again

It's stunningly awful

Besides, IWBWY>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Roar>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dope

[soundwave 193]

I was watching an interview today where Gaga expressed how proud she is of the lyrics in "Poker Face". "I'll die a happy woman knowing I wrote those." I agree, they are some really fantastic lyrics and show her potential when it comes to writing lyrics that are not only relatable pop, but also clever in their approach of a topic. 

[soundwave 193]

​I'll admit that love me love me please retweet trying to convey the retweet symbol looks like 69 is a huge stretch, so it isn't said well, but the rest of these are absolutely fine in the context of the songs they are in quite well.

People hate on Donatella's lyrics, even realizing its supposed to be over the top silly and making fun of itself, but never really explain what's wrong with them. It's one thing to just find a phrase awkward sounding or cringey, but... at least say that rather than write them off as bad (not saying you are personally )

Also, I think those lyrics from Applause reveal so much about Gaga's mental state during the ARTPOP era, and they are actually clever in doing so . I don't see what's wrong with them at all..

Finally, if you are trying to a--lye the depth, effectiveness, or whattever of the lyrics I think its important to consider intent if its available to you  Not every song is written with the intent of having even comprehensible lyrics at the forefront. Some of the best songs ever don't have any deeper meaning at all and are simply used linguistically for their flow to create sounds. One of my favorite producers writes lyrics based on Assonance and Consonance in the Japanese language entirely, then builds a theme around them. Some songs don't even fully translate and contain onomatopoeia-like phrases that are used simply for the sonic component. Japanese is a little bit different though because it is a syllabic language. Individual words and how you pronounce them hold less connotation than the syllables that make up the words and how you stress a syllable that is possibly only 1/8th of a word can have more emotion in it than the word itself often times. 

But I digress, the intent of the song is important to note.

​Who is this producer? Sounds interesting! 

[Quark 7,098]

​7 pages in and still here

----------------

 

Anyway, addressing the OP, I've had a love/hate relationship with Gaga's lyrics since day one. I LOVE songs like Heavy Metal Lover and Mary Jane Holland, but at some point they fall flat, lyrically. One feeling like it lacks any real substance and the other having a tragic bridge that interrupts the flow of the song. 

I know these lyrics have meaning to Gaga. I also know these lyrics have meaning to a select group of fans because they take the time to add context to them. However, we should NOT be surprised when ARTPOP gets a ****ing 61 or whatever on metacritic. There is a difference between being Gaga on The Fame and being Gaga on ARTPOP. At some point, it truly lost its connection to the average listener. 

And I'm saying this out of all honesty. You know why so many fans say her music isn't relatable enough? Because it isn't. For the most part. Her lyrics are not conventionally beautiful or moving. They're vague and clumsy a lot of the time. It makes the average listener uncomfortable. Like, wtf did she just say? At one point, it was done in a very effective way. Most of ARTPOP was not effective. Effectiveness relates to how an audience receives it. 4.5 million copies >>>>> 700k. And sure sales don't mean everything, but they do have a say in the matter. 

​But is all up to Gaga if she wants to sell many records or not. It is obvious when she just doesn't care and produces something that is more abstract or experimental. And there is nothing wrong with something that doesn't connect with a lot of people as long as it's something that Gaga truly likes. Because at the end of the day this is her music/art. And the GP are the ones that need to decide if they like her art or not and not the other way around.

[hmm 979]

I think her lyrics are mostly fine in songs where there's a decent theme; it's where the theme or topic is ****ty (no offence) like in Fashion!, Donatella and Mary Jane Holland that the lyrics sometimes come across "cringey" and "uninspired" to quote previous posts. Sure you can contrive some in-depth a--lysis for any of those songs but ultimately; the theme and title is gonna direct the lyrics to a pretty limited place on a pop album. 

[Emvee 8,435]

​But is all up to Gaga if she wants to sell many records or not. It is obvious when she just doesn't care and produces something that is more abstract or experimental. And there is nothing wrong with something that doesn't connect with a lot of people as long as it's something that Gaga truly likes. Because at the end of the day this is her music/art. And the GP are the ones that need to decide if they like her art or not and not the other way around.

And I get that! That is why I respect Gaga as an artist. I'm not saying she needs to appeal to the audience. I'm merely telling it how it is. Her lyrics did not connect with as many people as they did in the past and the proof is in the sales/streaming figures. 

Don't minconstrue my telling it how it is as devaluing or demeaning what ARTPOP stands for. The album is a legitimate piece of work. But there is a difference between a piece of work that connects with the audience and one that doesn't. They are both artistic, but only one is favored. Only one is universally praised. Only one goes down in history as legendary and influential. 

And if a person doesn't connect with lyrics, their opinion should be respected as much as someone who does. The millions of people who are fans of Gaga, but didn't buy ARTPOP or BTW have valid opinions. 

[Quark 7,098]

And I get that! That is why I respect Gaga as an artist. I'm not saying she needs to appeal to the audience. I'm merely telling it how it is. Her lyrics did not connect with as many people as they did in the past and the proof is in the sales/streaming figures. 

Don't minconstrue my telling it how it is as devaluing or demeaning what ARTPOP stands for. The album is a legitimate piece of work. But there is a difference between a piece of work that connects with the audience and one that doesn't. They are both artistic, but only one is favored. Only one is universally praised. Only one goes down in history as legendary and influential. 

And if a person doesn't connect with lyrics, their opinion should be respected as much as someone who does. The millions of people who are fans of Gaga, but didn't buy ARTPOP or BTW have valid opinions. 

​Well, I understand that some people don't like some of her lyrics and or don't connect with them. But what I am trying to say here is that the amount of connection a song has with people does not necessarily always relate to the quality of the song. A song could be really good even if you don't connect with it.

[Delete 258]

I think if you're not aware of her vision/concept, then her lyrics can be perceived as moronic or bad.  I feel as though she achieves what she wants with her songs. Sometimes she desires to take a more mature, and thought provoking approach, other times she wants to be silly and playful. 

Given the fact that everyone has different taste in music, the perception of good and bad will always vary. For myself, I would choose a "You and I"  type song over a "Donatella" any day. There are some fans/casual listeners that would completely disagree. 

If somewhere were completely content with every sing she puts out I'd be a bit worried. The best advice I can give to those who feel bothered by her "bad lyrics" is too simply keep the songs they do love in their libraries. If your into physicals just skip the track.

We know she's not a bad songwriter, but we also know she's not perfect either. I find it appealing tbh. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

​Who is this producer? Sounds interesting! 

​His name is Yasutaka Nakata. He writes and composes music for several acts with different intentions. He is the genius behind the music of Perfume, MEG, Kyary Pamyu Pamyu, his own group, CAPSULE, Ami Suzuki (some), Coltemonikha, and does a bunch of individual collabs and remixes with a few others. Notably, he has done great remixes with Kylie Minogue  

In some of the groups, he uses sparse Japanese or sparse english and creates techno music using their voice as instruments and uses different levels of processing from heavy auto-tune, to vocoding, to sampling (if thats what its called ). For groups like Perfume, he often actually writes lyrics of varying complexity, but a lot of his inspiration comes from the sounds of the words rather then the voices. The singers usually don't project much emotion into their singing so that the listener can come to their own interpretation. There are some songs that are tie-ins with things and based on real themes with inspiring lyrics and what not, but some of their best songs are essentially nonsense lyrically. I think it's quite refreshing personally. His own group, Capsule is pretty experimental, sometimes only using the singer, Toshiko's voice as an instrument. As in he bends her vocals into making instrument-like sounds.

I'll PM you some of ha work  

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

I think her lyrics are mostly fine in songs where there's a decent theme; it's where the theme or topic is ****ty (no offence) like in Fashion!, Donatella and Mary Jane Holland that the lyrics sometimes come across "cringey" and "uninspired" to quote previous posts. Sure you can contrive some in-depth a--lysis for any of those songs but ultimately; the theme and title is gonna direct the lyrics to a pretty limited place on a pop album. 

​I agree some  the theme is important and its certainly possibly and expected that lyrics meant to fit a theme can be excessively campy or seemingly "uninspired" to some when it comes to Gaga in specific

. I see it like playing a character or a role, not as objective "badness". From a critical standpoint, some might be "bad" (under w.e criteria you use to judge them), but from a playful perspective I don't think she really writes many "bad" lyrics as in majorly ineffective.

"Love it when you call me legs
In the morning buy me eggs" for example

I also dont think the themes of songs like Donatella, Fashion! or MJH are necessarily that special, or particularly inspiring, but they are campy and I enjoy that quite a lot actually.