⛈ RAIN ON ME OUT NOW ⛈

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

opinion

Interesting article about the history of pop stars

Katie14

This is a really interesting read. Do you agree? Who do you think is the next set of entertainers and artists? Or did they not come out yet?

I don't entirely agree with this article. For one thing, I think Gaga's popularity is closer to Katy Perry's than Luaper's was to Madonna. Though I wasn't alive during the Madonna/Lauper era so I don't really know.

I also think that Gaga is very different from any artist that has ever come before. She doesn't fit any type of category. She is sort of a combination of Madonna, Elton John and other famous piano singer song writers, Queen and other very theatrical singers, ect. I feel like she is so much more and changed the game completely. You can't compare her career trajectory with anyone in the past because Gaga is so different and more diversely talented than anyone in the past. (Or maybe I feel this way just because I know so much about her)

The Entertainer and the Artist: The Future of Lady Gaga

A lot has been written about how Lady Gaga is the new Madonna. On the surface, this comparison works: both women are ambitious, talented, Italian-Catholics who cut their teeth in New York and used striking and controversial imagery to carve out a pop career. Both Madonna and Lady Gaga have sung about religion (“Like a Prayer” for Madonna; “Judas” for Lady Gaga), s-x (“Justify My Love“; “Lovegame“) and fame (“Drowned World/Substitute For Love“; “Paparazzi”). And both are beloved gay icons.

With so many similarities between the two, one would be forgiven for assuming that Lady Gaga will follow Madonna’s career trajectory. But in actuality, Lady Gaga is going to follow Cyndi Lauper’s career arc. And what’s more, this has happened before.

Let’s start at the beginning…

When Madonna first burst onto the scene in the early ’80s, she was initially written off as a flash-in-the-pan. While her videos were s-xy and fun, the common consensus was that she’d have a few hits about s-x and dancing, and then fade into obscurity. Indeed, as Madonna writhed around in a wedding dress at the first MTV Video Music Awards in 1984, the safe bet at the time was on her chart rival, Cyndi Lauper.

Like Madonna, Lauper made great music videos. But while Madonna used s-x to sell her songs, Lauper was noted for her great singing voice. Despite her eccentric clothing and outrageous hairstyles (including her red hair in the “Time After Time” video), Lauper’s vocal abilities helped her stand out from the pack in MTV’s early days.

But another more important difference distinguished Madonna and Cyndi Lauper beyond their voices; Madonna, because of her over-reliance on style over substance, was seen as an entertainer, while Lauper, with her impressive vocal chops, was seen as an artist. The distinction seems trivial as pop stars are often both entertainers and artists at the same time.

However, in this case, this crucial difference cemented each artists’ long-term fates. Madonna’s job was merely to entertain us. It didn’t matter how she did that, so long as she held our attention. She has obviously been able to do that exceptionally well through a mix of button-pushing, over-the-top antics, innovative music videos and a constant reinvention of her style and look. Accordingly, her biggest hits have become some of the most beloved pop songs of all time.

[cyndi lauper, madonna, britney, christina aguilera] Lauper, meanwhile, had to carry the burden of being an artist. It’s not enough for an artist to make music: they need to wow us with their brilliance on each outing. The bar of expectation is higher for them, and when they do not deliver, their failure is amplified in a way that “regular” entertainers are shielded from.

Lauper’s noteworthy vocal range landed her an enviable career in the ’80s, but it paled in comparison to Madonna’s. The most damning evidence of this came in 1989, when both artists released albums. By this point, Madonna was an icon and her Like a Prayer album hit #1. Meanwhile, Lauper’s career was starting to fade and her A Night to Remember album barely scraped the top 40.

Lauper had the odds stacked against her from the very beginning, and in a world where there was only room for one Queen of Pop, the entertainer had beat the artist.

This same scenario played out again in the early ’00s when Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera hit the scene. Both Spears and Aguilera worshipped at the altar of Madonna (even going so far as to infamously share the stage with their idol at the 2003 MTV Video Music Awards).

(As an aside, there is also usually a strong, R&B singer whose career runs parallel to, but separate from, these entertainer/artist divisions: there was Janet Jackson in the Madonna/Lauper era, Beyonce in the Spears/Aguilera era, and Rihanna in the Lady Gaga/Perry era.)

This cycle tends to repeat itself every ten years, and with Lady Gaga and Perry having debuted in 2008, we’re getting close to a new batch of contenders. When they come out, look for the one who comes across as a naughty s-x kitten; she’s the one who becomes the entertainer and subsequent pop legend. And look for the one who is supremely talented: she’ll end up with the acclaim, but will never be as popular. And that’s how it is for the queens and princesses of pop music.

https://unicornbooty.com/the-entertainer-and-the-artist-the-future-of-lady-gaga/

 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yanko

Lady Gaga is going to follow Cyndi Lauper’s career arc.

thats not a good thing ya know :rip: 

gaga is better than cyndi imo 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didymus

"Lauper, meanwhile, had to carry the burden of being an artist. It’s not enough for an artist to make music: they need to wow us with their brilliance on each outing. The bar of expectation is higher for them, and when they do not deliver, their failure is amplified in a way that “regular” entertainers are shielded from."

Erm.. bull ****. Maybe in the case of "regular entertainers" like Katy, Miley,... but not in the case of Madonna :smh: Not at one moment of her career.

Edit: People who haven't read it in full - what I'm saying is that for Madonna the bar of expectation was also incredibly high and she had to top her previous efforts constantly (and she did) just like Gaga. I don't believe that Gaga carries a "burden" Madonna didn't/doesn't bear.

I'll miss so many of you so much. Can't post or message anyone ever again. Sorry i couldn't say goodbye. All the best to all of you! <3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yanko

When they come out, look for the one who comes across as a naughty s-x kitten; she’s the one who becomes the entertainer and subsequent pop legend. And look for the one who is supremely talented: she’ll end up with the acclaim, but will never be as popular. 

:awkney:  yeah no 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jester

That'd be sad and I really believe that's not the scenario that's going to happen.

Lady Gaga is uniquely talented and much smarter than a typical musician. She's got all of it, brains, huge talent, insane creativity and great entertainment skills

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didymus

The conclusion of the article is a bit dumb imo. It's not like either Katy or Gaga will eventually survive (and apparently the writer believes it has to be Katy) according to some made up "rule" of history.

I think a far more important factor is the decline of pop music in general. I think both Katy and Gaga are in danger of being overrun by other genres just because more and more people stop caring about style over substance anymore. All pop entertainers are in danger.

Anyway, that's the story I see nowadays. I guess that goes to show how differently you can interpret the evolution of (pop) music.

I'll miss so many of you so much. Can't post or message anyone ever again. Sorry i couldn't say goodbye. All the best to all of you! <3

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jjang

The entire time while reading I was anticipating the article's conclusion and it turned out to be total BS. What a waste of time.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serendipity

Gaga is the most versatile artist to grace the Earth ever

She has all the elements needed in her

Like she says she is every icon

It's not Madonna she's gonna become, she'll be on the level of MJ

artistry that changes the world with a noble cause

See talent here-->http://bit.ly/2eqeUxK

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serendipity

I wonder when we'll get the next Mariah-someone with immense vocal ability, songwriting skills as well as immense success

See talent here-->http://bit.ly/2eqeUxK

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
super ultra

,,(As an aside, there is also usually a strong, R&B singer whose career runs parallel to, but separate from, these entertainer/artist divisions: there was Janet Jackson in the Madonna/Lauper era, Beyonce in the Spears/Aguilera era, and Rihanna in the Lady Gaga/Perry era.)

This cycle tends to repeat itself every ten years...."

well, this part is true but the rest of the article... :rip: 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wet Fire

Lady Gaga will be the one and only Lady Gaga.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serendipity

,,(As an aside, there is also usually a strong, R&B singer whose career runs parallel to, but separate from, these entertainer/artist divisions: there was Janet Jackson in the Madonna/Lauper era, Beyonce in the Spears/Aguilera era, and Rihanna in the Lady Gaga/Perry era.)

This cycle tends to repeat itself every ten years...."

well, this part is true but the rest of the article... :rip: 

​That means the next Madge/Brit/Gaga's gonna arrive in 2019 and is already in the making:udidnt:

See talent here-->http://bit.ly/2eqeUxK

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
freebit

But didn't Madonna also market herself as an ~artist~? She was very into the 80s NYC art scene. For example, I remember her mentioning how Basquiat would come and paint on her outfit before a show. Anyway, I feel like the writer warps things to fit their own narative in that regard. 

Their point of "s-x kitten marketing ALWAYS equals longevity" is a fallacy when you think about how Paula Abdul also marketed herself as a s-x kitten, and that didn't help her longevity any.

I think what it all comes down to is hits, cultural impact, and timing. You can't really create a formula for that. Every artist is going to have a different set of variables as to how they perform over the years because they're all individuals with their own unique set of circumstances.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serendipity

But didn't Madonna also market herself as an ~artist~? She was very into the 80s NYC art scene. For example, I remember her mentioning how Basquiat would come and paint on her outfit before a show. Anyway, I feel like the writer warps things to fit their own narative in that regard. 

Their point of "s-x kitten marketing ALWAYS equals longevity" is a fallacy when you think about how Paula Abdul also marketed herself as a s-x kitten, and that didn't help her longevity any.

I think what it all comes down to is hits, cultural impact, and timing. You can't really create a formula for that. Every artist is going to have a different set of variables as to how they perform over the years because they're all individuals with their own unique set of circumstances.

​Believe me, this article is utter reach and delusion

The author seems to carve any proof that comes out of his imagination

 

Another one of their delusions

https://unicornbooty.com/rugby-is-the-new-gay-s-x/

 

See talent here-->http://bit.ly/2eqeUxK

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
super ultra

​That means the next Madge/Brit/Gaga's gonna arrive in 2019 and is already in the making:udidnt:

and the next Rihanna as well :giggle:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...