NY mag: "What's the point of Katy Perry, even?"

[Mark 4,065]

WTF, although some may be true... this is way too harsh.

At the end of the day, Ms Katherine has got more money in ha pockets. Bye.

[Bitter 3,640]

 

The idea that pop artists have to be avant-garde or challenging sadly defeats itself on multiple levels. 

That's not the definition of a pop artist, that's the definition of an artist in general.

Katy is a great, fun, safe and successful entertainer. She is not an artist. 

[Redstreak 6,653]

Anyway another day, another article full of countless praise for the queen. Give it up GGD  

[Didymus 34,379]

That's not the definition of a pop artist, that's the definition of an artist in general.

Katy is a great, fun, safe and successful entertainer. She is not an artist. 

That's semantics and you know it.

I mean, if we're really gonna be that literal I guess it's a good moment to point out that Gaga, in 2013, confessed that she didn't see herself as an artist but as a student of art. In 2014 she also proclaimed that she would always be a "pop star".

Clearly the use of the word "artist" is extremely relative, even by the people who are called artists. And even if we forget that, the idea that there is a definition of an "artist" is bs because there isn't. Add to that your assumption that the definition of an artist is that he has to be avant-garde, you miss your hit entirely since avant-garde is one of many artforms.

So meh. Not impressed.

[Haroon 49,685]

Reading that article was a struggle because it doesn't seem like the writer has done their research  Her looks have changed more than just by hair colour and her music has as well, the difference is very clear when you listen to her albums  I'm not quite sure what they're complaining about and why, like what exactly do they want from her?  I don't really see what point they're trying to make, if any  

[Bitter 3,640]

That's semantics and you know it.

I mean, if we're really gonna be that literal I guess it's a good moment to point out that Gaga, in 2013, confessed that she didn't see herself as an artist but as a student of art. In 2014 she also proclaimed that she would always be a "pop star".

Clearly the use of the word "artist" is extremely relative, even by the people who are called artists. And even if we forget that, the idea that there is a definition of an "artist" is bs because there isn't. Add to that your assumption that the definition of an artist is that he has to be avant-garde, you miss your hit entirely since avant-garde is one of many artforms.

So meh. Not impressed.

I could care less about what Gaga thinks of herself or whoever other artist.

We judge everyone according to their work and not according to their words. 

It has already been proved through her work that Gaga meets all requirements to be considered an artist whereas Katy..  well you know.

 

[AddMeOnMYSPACE 1,932]

Dumb article! Not every pop star has to be a sjw. Katy is just having fun, which isn't too bad. This was obviously written by Taylor nation. Or at least Taylor herself 

[Didymus 34,379]

I could care less about what Gaga thinks of herself or whoever other artist.

We judge everyone according to their work and not according to their words. 

It has already been proved through her work that Gaga meets all requirements to be considered an artist whereas Katy, well you know.

But obviously the way Gaga presents herself is a massive part of her art. You're basically discarding a meaningful portion of her artistic output because it doesn't fit your narrow point of view. That this is crude and ridiculous manipulation of Gaga as an artist for your own ends, and therefore disrespect to Gaga's work is more obvious than the proof (show it pls, I haven't seen it anywhere) that Gaga meets "all requirements" (what are these exactly?) to be an artist.

I personally don't feel passionate enough about Katy to defend her as an artist, but also because I think that stuffing words on someone's face to make them superior is child's play and it's, frankly, beneath me. Art has always been debated and I learned long ago that people who claim to know what it is have no idea what they're talking about.

I mean, one of the key missions in Gaga's career is to push the boundary of what art can be. And not in a classical art sense but in a pop cultural sense. This is essential to understand Gaga as an artist - she rejects the idea that pop culture is beneath the attention of an art lover. So, in truth, a major dimension of Gaga's art is entirely lost on you, so repeat again why you think your opinion on her work should be taken seriously?

[Desperado 2,439]

Katy is wack, whats new? 

[PaperIz 7,337]

Rude. 

[yASSsss 35,510]

so basically what this article means is that if u delete Katy and her discography from history,no on will miss her.

i agree 100%

 

[Bitter 3,640]

But obviously the way Gaga presents herself is a massive part of her art. You're basically discarding a meaningful portion of her artistic output because it doesn't fit your narrow point of view. That this is crude and ridiculous manipulation of Gaga as an artist for your own ends, and therefore disrespect to Gaga's work is more obvious than the proof (show it pls, I haven't seen it anywhere) that Gaga meets "all requirements" (what are these exactly?) to be an artist.

I personally don't feel passionate enough about Katy to defend her as an artist, but also because I think that stuffing words on someone's face to make them superior is child play and it's, frankly, beneath me. Art has always been debated and I learned long ago that people who claim they know what it is have no idea what they're talking about.

I mean, one of the key missions in Gaga's career is to push the boundary of what art can be. And not in a classical art sense but in a pop cultural sense. This is essential to understand Gaga as an artist - she rejects the idea that pop culture is beneath the attention of an art lover. So, in truth, a major dimension of Gaga's art is entirely lost on you, so repeat again why you think your opinion on her work should be taken seriously?

It's not about competition and someone being beneath or above others.

I'ts not even a bad thing, everyone has their spot.

Katy's spot is being an entertainer, there is nothing wrong with that especially since she's a successful one.

As a fan of Gaga you should know better what are the requirements that makes her an artist but let me remind you some of them:

she is versatile
she takes risks
she pushes the envelope
she is very talented
she's been a trendsetter
she has received much acclaim
etc.

Katy could disappear tomorrow, what would her legacy be to the pop culture apart from her 10 hit singles?

 

 

[LoveandMagic 1,731]

I guess I get what they are trying to say, but come on. Woman-kind comes in many forms and there is nothing wrong with what Katy is doing. She's girly, fun, and makes light pop songs that people enjoy. She's made a career off of being fairly uncontroversial, allows herself to be put into a pretty pastel package, and has lots of radio friendly songs in her catalogue. It may not be ground breaking or innovated, but honestly who cares? She's not hurting anyone by doing this. She clearly loves performing and has found success in that. Not everyone has to be a deep thinker and talk politics and such all the time. She's not discouraging others or being hateful to disenfranchised groups. She's just having fun being a pop star. So what? It's profitable and fun. No need to drag her for it. 

And yes, I'm a feminist. 

[Riot Poof 2,236]

While there's some reaching in this article, I can't help but enjoy the utter lulz at Katheryn's expense. 

[Der Meister 3,000]

My two cents: