#tbt: An Essay I Wrote on ARTPOP Two Years Ago

[Miel 15,009]

I was looking through some old crap and bam found an old essay written by recently graduated me, lol.

I also might have posted this on here two years ago lmao

---

Ray’s Reaches - A Quick Analysis on ARTPOP’s theme of Duality

“my ARTPOP could mean anything”

{this is just me supporting my own interpretation of the main theme, or one of the main themes, of Lady Gaga’s ARTPOP}

{where I look way too much into things, ramble a lot, and try to use quantum physics analogies to try and explain something that was seen on the same night Miley Cyrus left Hannah Montana in the dust}

—

One of the things that’s been rattling inside my head the last few days has been the theme of Lady Gaga’s ARTPOP album. It’s been a bit of the talk both within the fandom and outside, particularly anger and confusion over the general nebulous theme(s) of ARTPOP (“if ARTPOP even has a theme at all lol”).

In comparison to Gaga’s previous albums, it definitely feels nebulous, at least superficially. See:

The Fame - both a glamorization and a subtle satire about the materialistic journey towards the gaining of fame, while also a canvas for Gaga’s own philosophical recontextualization and redefinition of ‘the fame’

The Fame Monster - probably the most ‘thematic’ album, detailing per song an individual fear (‘monster’) that generally ties back into the idea of ‘the fame’ - generally seen as the other side to The Fame’s coin

Born This Way - a bit more varying in its themes, but still generally based around the idea of acceptance, not just of others but also of self, including the fight that happens along the way

ARTPOP - anything? possibilities? ???

Let’s go back to Gaga’s initial hintings of ARTPOP, during Born This Way:

“a hybrid can withstand these things / my heart can beat with bricks and strings / my ARTPOP could mean anything”

“ARTPOP is about possibilities”

These tweets, the first complete surfacing of ARTPOP, were released in the summer of 2012, while Gaga was touring the world for her Born This Way Ball tour. What I inferred from these tweets back then wasn’t all that much- just a possible discrepancy between ‘art’ and ‘pop’, and possible emphasis of bringing them together. It didn’t seem like much, and I didn’t expect all that much until later, considering that this was her first public acknowledging of ARTPOP as a new entity.

It wasn’t until around August when things started falling into place, both as theories back then and in hindsight now.

The first big clue was her dying her hair brunette. We’ve gotten only a few glimpses of her as a brunette post-2008, not counting the black highlight variations from 2011, so this would be the first time in a long time we would have a consistent dark haired Gaga. In any other given situation outside of the realm of Lady Gaga, it wouldn’t matter so much as her changing her hair to suit herself- but, going by general precedence in the realm of Lady Gaga, it definitely meant something.

Around the time she dyed her hair to a newly ‘Vuitton Brown’, she introduced plain blonde for the first time at the Born This Way Ball. In response to a pretty massive desire of her performing on stage as a brunette, she responded something about only being blonde on stage (a source would be nice for this, as I’m going generally by memory… LM.com post, maybe?). And that’s exactly what happened- no matter what variation of blonde she wore on stage, the brunette was kept solely in offstage and in candids.

This was the first possible indication of the theme of duality.

While we’re on the topic of Born This Way, some things I want to mention that I think definitely were a progenitor to ARTPOP’s theme of duality: that one thing Gaga said over and over during Born This Way, something about her “living between reality and fantasy at all times”- didn’t she restate this recently, in a manner of “living between art and pop at all times”?

Marry the Night’s theme of the collision between reality as it is perceived superficially, and reality as it is perceived through the creation of fantasy via the power of retrospect the general intense and laborious nature of the Born This Way Ball- the narrative structure, the architectural design, and overall physicality of it as a collective entity definitely brought out the idea (presented in Applause) of the “backstage and behind the scenes being part of the art”

It definitely seemed that everything up until the VMA’s performance of Applause, not counting the second blackout*, was all a culmination in ARTPOP’s themes of duality.

For a while, Applause seemed even more nebulous and all over the place than what many see as ARTPOP now. The first promo images, while exciting and objectively very very beautiful, added nothing except confusion (though, that was probably an intentional form to gain excitement among the masses). I thought, as time went on things would begin to fall in place. In contrast, things got even wonkier.

First the black hair then the Pierrot makeup then the Venus hair? And what’s all this with the septum piercing? Bringing in the video itself, my interpretation of ARTPOP was all over the place.

Nothing felt like a duality anymore because there was just so much more than two general opposing forces. It wasn’t until the VMA’s performance where things seemed to come together a bit more clearly.

The performance itself definitely had a strong undertone of duality**, but in a way I personally didn’t think of up until then. When I thought of duality in the context of pre-ARTPOP Gaga, I thought of the hair, of art and pop, of fantasy and reality. The problem is, I didn’t think of them all collectively- the performance brought them all together generally through the opposing forces of what constitutes as art or as an artist, on stage and off.

I’m gonna use an analogy probably isn’t the closest to narrative analysis but is what I understand in my head. Think of the general Schrodinger theory/quantum superposition principle. It was initially believed that an electron surrounded a nucleus in a fixed position, be it in a circle or some other kind of rotatory. Quantum superposition principles state instead that the electron is actually inhabiting all possible states at once, and is only in a static configuration when it is seen or observed at a given and linear point in time.***

Ever since her debut, Gaga’s been barraged with questions about the genuinity of her actions and her art. She’s mentioned that she’s the same person on the stage as she is off, that she considers her life as a continuous performance- and yet, people still question her. I think this performance is her answer to all that.

To Gaga, her art to her is similar to how an electron is perceived both in the context of the superpositional and of the originally perceived- art, to Gaga, is all encompassing and whole, while to others it is a mere moment, solely temporal.

Gaga has always redefined and recontextualized, for herself, what it means to be an artist. At the core, we all know she’s human- she gets hurt, she gets emotional, she reacts in forms that aren’t always what we consider rational or professional. And yet, sometimes she’s not human, going by what she considers herself- she’s an alien, she’s a woman, she’s a man, she’s a mermaid, she’s a goddamn cyborg walking across the country to find her love, she’s an omniscient computer entity bent on creating her own narrative dystopia, and sometimes she’s an octopus. The odd thing is, no matter if she creates another persona less than human, more than human, or not human at all, it’s all just an amalgamated and extended metaphor to emphasize that fact that she is human.

In the VMA’s performance, she doesn’t just recontextualize herself as an extended metaphor for what she perceives as self- she recontextualizes the situation and fourth-person perspective of the stage as an extended metaphor for what she perceives as the art. As what was created in the backstage of the Born This Way Ball, is recreated onstage for ARTPOP.

But even then, that’s merely the metaphor. The interesting thing about ARTPOP, as a collective item, is that it utilizes the general idea of the metaphor both as the metaphor and as the subject itself.

As is per the general narrative, Gaga herself is the one stating the meaning of ARTPOP through the album. And yet, at the same time, it’s almost as if she doesn’t claim the general concept of ARTPOP as her own, and is instead utilizing it as a metaphor to explain her own life story. It’s almost as if she’s using a concept she created on her own as a device to tell her own story.

"ARTPOP is what you have left to create. It doesn’t even exist yet. ARTPOP is that thing you’ve been meaning to do, it’s the idea that you’ve had, that you haven’t put on paper yet, or that you haven’t sang or danced. And that’s why it can be anything- because no one can tell you what it will be, except for you." -Lady Gaga at the artRave

Back to the superposition analogy, I guess it can be applicable not just to Gaga, but to everybody in general. The concept of ARTPOP may be something Gaga created and interpreted herself, but not something she claims solely as her own anymore. It exists because she says it can, because we not just individually but also collectively choose to let it be created.

Interpretation created ARTPOP as much as ARTPOP now creates interpretation. It all boils down back to square one- that ARTPOP could mean anything.

–

*The second blackout being Gaga’s period of healing after she broke her up. I personally don’t relate and contextualize this period up into interpretation of the canon of Gaga unless it has otherwise been explicitly related to a work done by Gaga (for example, the genesis of I Wanna Be With You/Dope, or the general recording process of ARTPOP). This was a personal time for her to deal with her struggles and get back on her feet, so I’ll leave it at that.

**All considering the intention of the performance she gave to us. I know there was a different performance planned, but since we don’t have complete knowledge of how that was to be, I’ll leave that out to avoid confusion. That said, I want to know more, because I feel like it’d add immensely to the discussion.

***If I’m inaccurate, please tell me so and I will fix. If it is beyond fixing, I’ll just leave it to the point instead.

[mister max 18,480]

Gaga has always redefined and recontextualized, for herself, what it means to be an artist. At the core, we all know she’s human- she gets hurt, she gets emotional, she reacts in forms that aren’t always what we consider rational or professional. And yet, sometimes she’s not human, going by what she considers herself- she’s an alien, she’s a woman, she’s a man, she’s a mermaid, she’s a goddamn cyborg walking across the country to find her love, she’s an omniscient computer entity bent on creating her own narrative dystopia, and sometimes she’s an octopus. The odd thing is, no matter if she creates another persona less than human, more than human, or not human at all, it’s all just an amalgamated and extended metaphor to emphasize that fact that she is human.

[littlepotter 75,154]

I don't want to say anything because it'll sound stupid compared to the amount of thought you put into this so I'll just leave this here.

[Fantina 3,370]

And people keep saying that it's a **** album...

I really can't argue with these people anymore lol

[XoXoJoanneGaga 629]

1 hour ago, Miel said:

As is per the general narrative, Gaga herself is the one stating the meaning of ARTPOP through the album.

There's some good ideas there, but do you have any justification for this part? Cause this is mainly a dissection of the themes present in her overall career leading up to and culminating in the VMA performance of Applause.

 

40 minutes ago, GodOfTheLove said:

And people keep saying that it's a **** album...

I really can't argue with these people anymore lol

The essay doesn't say anything about the music itself. There's a pretty big disconnect between the themes and concepts that Gaga's brought forth in interviews/performances/videos and the quality of a song like "Donatella" lol

[Miel 15,009]

5 hours ago, CoCo1 said:

There's some good ideas there, but do you have any justification for this part? Cause this is mainly a dissection of the themes present in her overall career leading up to and culminating in the VMA performance of Applause.

I was mostly just going by the general idea that an artist's work is their own to claim, if that makes sense? Like, if people would generally assume the idea of "ARTPOP" is Gaga's own, since she created it, as opposed to (or along with) the idea that, while she created it, it's was not meant to be as her own.

Did I answer the right question? :sweat:

[Miel 15,009]

5 hours ago, CoCo1 said:

The essay doesn't say anything about the music itself. There's a pretty big disconnect between the themes and concepts that Gaga's brought forth in interviews/performances/videos and the quality of a song like "Donatella" lol

Yes, definitely. I love dissecting ARTPOP thematically and lyrically, but I also acknowledge that it is, imo, not as sonically "out-there" as her other albums.

Duality again, lol

But!!!!

6 hours ago, GodOfTheLove said:

And people keep saying that it's a **** album...

I really can't argue with these people anymore lol

It definitely is a very, very smart album.

[eifulien 2,977]

@Miel Wow, just wow. You went deep with the analysis of ARTPOP. I'm not sure I get all your points cause it's way too abstract but I totally understand the place you came from back then. I also had some obsessive thoughts with ARTPOP (the term) but to be honest my idea of it changed a lot through the years. At first I also, like members here said, felt the idea disjointed with the music, but then I tried to find the explanation in a more simplistic way and the concept came closer to the music present on the album.

This interview is very good imo: 

 

I think she says some of the things that you conlcuded in a more simple way but you definitely hit it right. It's the part where she says that ARTPOP may not be actually new, she may not have invented it, and she has been making ARTPOP for quite some time but she's come to acknowledge it just now. 

And no matter what, I feel like the music will always raise question marks for people and how it is all related to ARTPOP cause just because it's simple, the idea is not obvious for the average Joe. 

I totally believe she's been struggling to define the word a lot. And so, as time passed by it accumulated a lot of different meanings since her ideas evolved. She was not on top of her game, quite confused and stressed out which made it harder for her to get across all this.

Let's not forget that ARTPOP was not only about music - it was about art, pop and tech coming together. So this unfulfilled feeling in the music will remain. ARTPOP was meant to be consumed as a whole package. So her fashion, her videos, everything was supposed to be inseparable. The music was the result of these things colliding into each other (in her). It is a celebration of dance, fashion, art and tech (celebrating the artisic process of her collaborating with people from different spheres in art). The music is also the pop part. It's a continuation of The Fame - Pop music will never be low brow statement is crucial for ARTPOP. She was the seller of pop by putting the art package on it (bring the canvas onto the soup can) = putting Daphne & Apollo; The Birth of Venus and the Koons statue on the artwork for the CD. 

So I am still thinking sometimes that ARTPOP is genius and flawed as a concept from the very beginning. While you can see how many interpretations it can provoke, and the idea is infinitely good and positive, its realisation was maybe bound to fail. I mean ARTPOP is an obsession of focus on the creative process. But this cannot be easily translated into lyrics. ARTPOP is not a final product it's a mean. ARTPOP gives birth to the songs themselves, the lyrics, the costumes, the videos. And the music celebrates all this. When people hear ARTPOP they assume something too high brow, whereas it is not. Then they heard the album and expected it to be artsy and that's how the disappointments came. But if you take time to really understand her intentions, you'll be able to discover her genius. Lyrically, she addressed very interesting and personal issues, while also setting the ultimate party mood.

At the end of the day, it was a dark age for her and I personally consider ARTPOP as the first album where she didn't properly channel her creativity into something comprehensible. That's why I love it and it's my favourite - it's an album of freedom, open to interpretation, a place of raw passion and pain. I think it's her boldest attempt at making an artisitc statement and it's one of the reasons it backfired. Another reason ARTPOP didn't happen was the trap she planted for herlself since day one, since the Just Dance era. And while during the era she tried to be ironic (she's over, don't buy Applause, ever since BTW she is a flop) it didn't help (Aura is the song that contains all the answers). It was her struggle with the image overshadowing the talent. She claimed many times she is being true to herself all the time. That by putting the costume it doesn't mean she isn't being authentic. But it was too late at that point. Which leads to the most discussed reason here ARTPOP didn't succeed as expected. She had set the bar way too high for anyone to beat. The media was waiting for the slightest hesitation or weakness to begin stabbing, and everyone wrote her off including the management.

Anyway, I hope you can understand my point cause I'm a mess so I have no idea if any of this will make sense. I assume for LG5 she will be following the opposite philosophy "sometimes less is more" i.e. less heavily reliant on the concept. But we will see.  

[Miel 15,009]

7 hours ago, Son of ARTPOP said:

@Miel Wow, just wow. You went deep with the analysis of ARTPOP. I'm not sure I get all your points cause it's way too abstract but I totally understand the place you came from back then. I also had some obsessive thoughts with ARTPOP (the term) but to be honest my idea of it changed a lot through the years. At first I also, like members here said, felt the idea disjointed with the music, but then I tried to find the explanation in a more simplistic way and the concept came closer to the music present on the album.

This interview is very good imo: 

 

I think she says some of the things that you conlcuded in a more simple way but you definitely hit it right. It's the part where she says that ARTPOP may not be actually new, she may not have invented it, and she has been making ARTPOP for quite some time but she's come to acknowledge it just now. 

And no matter what, I feel like the music will always raise question marks for people and how it is all related to ARTPOP cause just because it's simple, the idea is not obvious for the average Joe. 

I totally believe she's been struggling to define the word a lot. And so, as time passed by it accumulated a lot of different meanings since her ideas evolved. She was not on top of her game, quite confused and stressed out which made it harder for her to get across all this.

Let's not forget that ARTPOP was not only about music - it was about art, pop and tech coming together. So this unfulfilled feeling in the music will remain. ARTPOP was meant to be consumed as a whole package. So her fashion, her videos, everything was supposed to be inseparable. The music was the result of these things colliding into each other (in her). It is a celebration of dance, fashion, art and tech (celebrating the artisic process of her collaborating with people from different spheres in art). The music is also the pop part. It's a continuation of The Fame - Pop music will never be low brow statement is crucial for ARTPOP. She was the seller of pop by putting the art package on it (bring the canvas onto the soup can) = putting Daphne & Apollo; The Birth of Venus and the Koons statue on the artwork for the CD. 

So I am still thinking sometimes that ARTPOP is genius and flawed as a concept from the very beginning. While you can see how many interpretations it can provoke, and the idea is infinitely good and positive, its realisation was maybe bound to fail. I mean ARTPOP is an obsession of focus on the creative process. But this cannot be easily translated into lyrics. ARTPOP is not a final product it's a mean. ARTPOP gives birth to the songs themselves, the lyrics, the costumes, the videos. And the music celebrates all this. When people hear ARTPOP they assume something too high brow, whereas it is not. Then they heard the album and expected it to be artsy and that's how the disappointments came. But if you take time to really understand her intentions, you'll be able to discover her genius. Lyrically, she addressed very interesting and personal issues, while also setting the ultimate party mood.

At the end of the day, it was a dark age for her and I personally consider ARTPOP as the first album where she didn't properly channel her creativity into something comprehensible. That's why I love it and it's my favourite - it's an album of freedom, open to interpretation, a place of raw passion and pain. I think it's her boldest attempt at making an artisitc statement and it's one of the reasons it backfired. Another reason ARTPOP didn't happen was the trap she planted for herlself since day one, since the Just Dance era. And while during the era she tried to be ironic (she's over, don't buy Applause, ever since BTW she is a flop) it didn't help (Aura is the song that contains all the answers). It was her struggle with the image overshadowing the talent. She claimed many times she is being true to herself all the time. That by putting the costume it doesn't mean she isn't being authentic. But it was too late at that point. Which leads to the most discussed reason here ARTPOP didn't succeed as expected. She had set the bar way too high for anyone to beat. The media was waiting for the slightest hesitation or weakness to begin stabbing, and everyone wrote her off including the management.

Anyway, I hope you can understand my point cause I'm a mess so I have no idea if any of this will make sense. I assume for LG5 she will be following the opposite philosophy "sometimes less is more" i.e. less heavily reliant on the concept. But we will see.  

This is a fantastic interpretation!