deeman 189 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said: She was kinda depressed back in TFM era too. She went on to say later that she was so depressed during that era (which goes to show that success doesn't equal happiness, although it hardly suggests that success made her depressed). I don't think she was lazy at all ] succeed "succeed (v.) late 14c., intransitive and transitive, "come next after, follow after another; take the place of another, be elected or chosen for" a position, from Old French succeder "to follow on" (14c.) and directly from Latin succedere "come after, follow after; go near to; come under; take the place of," also "go from under, mount up, ascend," hence "get on well, prosper, be victorious," from sub "next to, after" (see sub-) + cedere "go, move" (see cede). Meaning "to continue, endure" is from early 15c. The sense of "turn out well, have a favorable result" in English is first recorded late 15c., with ellipsis of adverb (succeed well). Of persons, "to be successful," from c. 1500. Related: Succeeded; succeeding." cede (v.) 1630s, from French céder or directly from Latin cedere "to yield, give place; to give up some right or property," originally "to go from, proceed, leave," from Proto-Italic *kesd-o- "to go away, avoid," from PIE root *sed- (2) "to go, yield" (cognates: Sanskrit sedhati "to drive; chase away;" Avestan apa-had- "turn aside, step aside;" Greek hodos "way," hodites "wanderer, wayfarer;" Old Church Slavonic chodu "a walking, going," choditi "to go"). Related: Ceded; ceding. The sense evolution in Latin is via the notion of "to go away, withdraw, give ground." http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cede&allowed_in_frame=0 Interesting etymology for something that is supposed to be desirable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrawberryBlond 14,881 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Just now, deeman said: Course if GAGA wishes to be succeed "succeed (v.) late 14c., intransitive and transitive, "come next after, follow after another; take the place of another, be elected or chosen for" a position, from Old French succeder "to follow on" (14c.) and directly from Latin succedere "come after, follow after; go near to; come under; take the place of," also "go from under, mount up, ascend," hence "get on well, prosper, be victorious," from sub "next to, after" (see sub-) + cedere "go, move" (see cede). Meaning "to continue, endure" is from early 15c. The sense of "turn out well, have a favorable result" in English is first recorded late 15c., with ellipsis of adverb (succeed well). Of persons, "to be successful," from c. 1500. Related: Succeeded; succeeding." cede (v.) 1630s, from French céder or directly from Latin cedere "to yield, give place; to give up some right or property," originally "to go from, proceed, leave," from Proto-Italic *kesd-o- "to go away, avoid," from PIE root *sed- (2) "to go, yield" (cognates: Sanskrit sedhati "to drive; chase away;" Avestan apa-had- "turn aside, step aside;" Greek hodos "way," hodites "wanderer, wayfarer;" Old Church Slavonic chodu "a walking, going," choditi "to go"). Related: Ceded; ceding. The sense evolution in Latin is via the notion of "to go away, withdraw, give ground." http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cede&allowed_in_frame=0 Interesting etymology for something that is supposed to be desirable. That's the artsy fartsy definition. And it's taking about success in a different way when it refers to succeeding someone. This isn't what we're talking about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeman 189 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Seems like a word lacking in substantive goal orientated meaning. No wonder success doesn't equal happyness. Words are important so may I suggest it is time too choose better words that focus intentions on life fulfilling outcomes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiona Apple 13,006 Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 29 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said: That's how all record labels work, it's a fact. Maybe some of the indie ones are better, but I'm talking about mainstream ones. Yes, she wanted to realease a jazz album but I'm sure the label saw the potential money in this as well. Because the public was getting bored of craziness and wanted something more stripped back, that Gaga had always been praised for her voice, that Tony's last album had been a big success and given him a comeback...it had all the makings of a new beginning. She wouldn't have been allowed to make such an album back when her pop and crazy antics sold. And I think the length of time between albums has been ok. She's hardly pulled an Xtina. Katy's started taking 2+ year gaps between music, as has Britney and Madonna and Ellie and so on and so forth. Even Rihanna, queen of the annual release. It's a normal schedule these days. Receipts. You can't state something as a "fact" without proof..I mean it's obvious that her record company just wants to make money but she always speaks good words about interscope Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Temptation 11,209 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Nobody who cares about Gaga cares about whether she is commercially successful or not. If you want commercial success **** trying to understand the artist. Just chase the charts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinsey 313 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Hello everybody! This is my first post. All of my friends call me Kinsey so I used it as my display name. I do care about commercial success, at least if we are talking profit. I think it is natural that because Lady Gaga is such a big celebrity she will naturally make money. But the success of an album and its tour bring in a lot of profit that fund all of the touring and payment for her team. It is her immense wealth that allow her to create such astounding visuals I'm not saying that I'll be bothered if the album doesn't sell well, but I think it is comforting for her when it is successful so she can use its profit for her various endeavors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicole 1,809 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 To a degree, success is important because at the end of the day, being an artist is her job. If she doesn't make money, her "boss" won't make a profit and either will she. If she isn't "successful" she won't have the means to make the big productions she does or even take them overseas etc. The definition of success though varies according to the individual. Some might say it's the money that makes someone successful, and that's true. But I doubt Gaga bases success on pure financial grounds. there are many other aspects but fanbases, when it comes to their fav, often measure their success on a commercial degree probably because it allows them to compare to their contemporaries and establish a superiority ladder based on stats and financial earnings. For me personally, I do see some sort of commercial success as desirable in that I live in a country that many smaller artists have not come to because it's too expensive and don't make a profit coming here, that's a selfish point though haha. Otherwise, I don't give a crap if an album goes #1 or #50. Sure, I'll be happy if it did do well but at the end of the day, i don't really care if it doesn't Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeman 189 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 30 minutes ago, Lord Temptation said: Nobody who cares about Gaga cares about whether she is commercially successful or not. If you want commercial success **** trying to understand the artist. Just chase the charts. Suppose so but I think Gaga is on the money. Destruction will become increasingly costly and unmarketable such that profit will amass in the pockets of those working on the clean up and be invested to close down remaining destructive acivities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronk 14,762 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Does Gaga care? As an artist, Gaga knows how she envisions each song to sound, the structure, the texture, the mood, and how it should be sung. She also knows which songs she wants on an album, in what order, which songs should be singles, which should be videos. Everyone else involved (management, label, etc) are concerned with one thing; profit. They would change the sound of the songs to match their vision of what will sell, rather than Gaga's artistic vision. They choose the songs for the album, the singles, the videos, the promotion, the advertising, all based on profit. Gaga can push back, but many of those decisions are not hers to make. Would Gaga rather have an album be exactly how she envisions it artistically, even though it might not sell as well? I think Gaga would be willing to take that risk. I live outside the space time continuum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hexxx 2,244 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Commercial success is good. it's not that much of a big deal, but for a mega star like gaga, it seems awkward for her not to be topping charts. It's the GP we shouldn't be caring about. Lady Gaga/ Madonna/Lana /Azealia Banks/ Jazmine Sullivan/ DEEE-LITE/ Moko Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Temptation 11,209 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 4 hours ago, deeman said: Suppose so but I think Gaga is on the money. Destruction will become increasingly costly and unmarketable such that profit will amass in the pockets of those working on the clean up and be invested to close down remaining destructive acivities. "I just love the music, not the bling. Music! Not the bling!" - Lady Gaga in ARTPOP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pacify Him 9,073 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Didn't she say once that she almost went bankrupt for spending too much for her tours? Then she gave like half(?) of her earnings to her dad or something? I'd say it's a little bit of both that's enough to make her paranoid if she didn't make enough after spending too much on her work I’m getting on your nerves Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Temptation 11,209 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, Satyromaniac said: Didn't she say once that she almost went bankrupt for spending too much for her tours? Then she gave like half(?) of her earnings to her dad or something? I'd say it's a little bit of both that's enough to make her paranoid if she didn't make enough after spending too much on her work Yeah she almost bankrupted herself three times creating her first two world tours. If that's not dedication to her art and to her fans I don't know what is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deeman 189 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 24 minutes ago, Lord Temptation said: "I just love the music, not the bling. Music! Not the bling!" - Lady Gaga in ARTPOP So we do have money? I'm so confused is money not music? bamboozleindeed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nr33m1zXVE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Temptation 11,209 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 17 minutes ago, deeman said: So we do have money? I'm so confused is money not music? bamboozleindeed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Nr33m1zXVE Music can generate money. But money comes and goes, whereas music is eternal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.