ARTPOP Is More Creative Than Lemonade

[Harry 26,836]

35 minutes ago, Drunk Poet said:

Gaga did more than just "throw some paint on her face". This isn't a 'Beyonce hate campaign' it's a simple opinion. And to me, it's the correct one. Gaga delves deep into the madness and insanity of creativity and what it can do to creative minds, speaks openly about drug abuse, is honest about who she has sex with, what she eats, what she drinks. She experiments wildly with hooks and beats and baselines and even sonically cracks speakers, and pulls it off. She uses motifs and metaphors to highlight her sexuality, sexual positions, writes stunning poetry with abbreviated titles and wordplay. With her first single she tapped into a Shakespearian philosophy about the 'performer' and in Swine used an unconventional and experimental formula to scream at her perpetrator. A lot of people don't 'get' ARTPOP simply because of it's artistic and creative integrity and intelligence. 'Aura' was sonically 'insane' to illustrate how insane she feels. 'Swine' was 'full of that awful screaming' because she felt terrible and wanted to scream. Only Gaga could pull off such literal meanings in metaphorical ways, could be so experimental and yet make it work coherently. ARTPOP wasn't made for an easy listen to an easily digestible and common theme like indefinitely. To us writers and poets and artists and fans of art, it is just that: a work of art. Art isn't always pretty, and it also doesn't always have to be good. Art just is. And considering the vast majority of pop music listeners don't have the intellectual capacity (not always their fault) to understand art, doesn't make ARTPOP a f*cking bad album. Some people have incredible vanity to suggest ARTPOP is bad simply because they are intellectually deficient. It's genius and it's badass. 

So anyone that doesn't like ARTPOP is "intellectually deficient"?

I enjoy ARTPOP but that is absurd. This whole argument of "if you don't like it then you're simply just too dumb to understand it" is completely ridiculous. You could make that claim for anything that people don't like that you do.

[crisTEAne 21,059]

28 minutes ago, Drunk Poet said:

Gaga did more than just "throw some paint on her face". This isn't a 'Beyonce hate campaign' it's a simple opinion. And to me, it's the correct one. Gaga delves deep into the madness and insanity of creativity and what it can do to creative minds, speaks openly about drug abuse, is honest about who she has sex with, what she eats, what she drinks. She experiments wildly with hooks and beats and baselines and even sonically cracks speakers, and pulls it off. She uses motifs and metaphors to highlight her sexuality, sexual positions, writes stunning poetry with abbreviated titles and wordplay. With her first single she tapped into a Shakespearian philosophy about the 'performer' and in Swine used an unconventional and experimental formula to scream at her perpetrator. A lot of people don't 'get' ARTPOP simply because of it's artistic and creative integrity and intelligence. 'Aura' was sonically 'insane' to illustrate how insane she feels. 'Swine' was 'full of that awful screaming' because she felt terrible and wanted to scream. Only Gaga could pull off such literal meanings in metaphorical ways, could be so experimental and yet make it work coherently. ARTPOP wasn't made for an easy listen to an easily digestible and common theme like indefinitely. To us writers and poets and artists and fans of art, it is just that: a work of art. Art isn't always pretty, and it also doesn't always have to be good. Art just is. And considering the vast majority of pop music listeners don't have the intellectual capacity (not always their fault) to understand art, doesn't make ARTPOP a f*cking bad album. Some people have incredible vanity to suggest ARTPOP is bad simply because they are intellectually deficient. It's genius and it's badass. 

i agree, but prepare yourself: anti-ARTPOPists will come after you—soon. 

i wouldn't say they don't have the "intellectual capacity" or are "intellectually deficient"; that's a bit extra and sort of condescending. rather, i'd say that they are simply unable to connect to it on an emotional and artistic level. ARTPOPists are either artists or genuine lovers of art: art and appreciation for art run in their veins. 

it's really hard to explain; i'm not even sure that it's possible. i think gaga tried her best in the interviews she gave during the era, but didn't always manage to convey her message. it's not her fault, really. as you said,"art just is" and it's not for everybody. 

[hmm 979]

39 minutes ago, Drunk Poet said:

Gaga did more than just "throw some paint on her face". This isn't a 'Beyonce hate campaign' it's a simple opinion. And to me, it's the correct one. Gaga delves deep into the madness and insanity of creativity and what it can do to creative minds, speaks openly about drug abuse, is honest about who she has sex with, what she eats, what she drinks. She experiments wildly with hooks and beats and baselines and even sonically cracks speakers, and pulls it off. She uses motifs and metaphors to highlight her sexuality, sexual positions, writes stunning poetry with abbreviated titles and wordplay. With her first single she tapped into a Shakespearian philosophy about the 'performer' and in Swine used an unconventional and experimental formula to scream at her perpetrator. A lot of people don't 'get' ARTPOP simply because of it's artistic and creative integrity and intelligence. 'Aura' was sonically 'insane' to illustrate how insane she feels. 'Swine' was 'full of that awful screaming' because she felt terrible and wanted to scream. Only Gaga could pull off such literal meanings in metaphorical ways, could be so experimental and yet make it work coherently. ARTPOP wasn't made for an easy listen to an easily digestible and common theme like indefinitely. To us writers and poets and artists and fans of art, it is just that: a work of art. Art isn't always pretty, and it also doesn't always have to be good. Art just is. And considering the vast majority of pop music listeners don't have the intellectual capacity (not always their fault) to understand art, doesn't make ARTPOP a f*cking bad album. Some people have incredible vanity to suggest ARTPOP is bad simply because they are intellectually deficient. It's genius and it's badass. 

Regarding people who dislike ARTPOP as "intellectually deficient" is a joke  Why would you even let your closing line of you analysis be such a disparaging comment to assert your own apparent superiority  

Self praise is no praise and all that 

[HighlandHeart 993]

8 minutes ago, Harry said:

So anyone that doesn't like ARTPOP is "intellectually deficient"?

I enjoy ARTPOP but that is absurd. This whole argument of "if you don't like it then you're simply just too dumb to understand it" is completely ridiculous. You could make that claim for anything that people don't like that you do.

 

6 minutes ago, hmm said:

Regarding people who dislike ARTPOP as "intellectually deficient" is a joke  Why would you even let your closing line of you analysis be such a disparaging comment to assert your own apparent superiority  

You're both completely misquoting me, as I knew you would. I didn't say "if you don't like ARTPOP you are dumb" I said it is vain to suggest that it is a bad album simply because you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art. Which is true. Nothing superior about it. Just simply the truth. 

It's fine if you don't like it. I said that art doesn't have to be good, it just has to be. Many people don't like it and still appreciate that it is a piece of art. My comment was aimed at those who think it is a piece of trash bad album with no artistic sensibilities. 

Stop interpreting things the wrong way and misquoting people; try actually to understand that I'm making a point based on intellect, not obsessive emotion, and don't come at me with 'superiority' crap when you clearly don't read my comment properly and make up your mind about it before you've understood it - that is the real disparagement. 

[Bette Davis 12,742]

22 minutes ago, BrianxRyan said:

ARTPOP is not more creative than Lemonade. There's nothing I haven't heard before in both albums. Overall, Lemonade is more creative especially with the Lemonade movie. As much as I love ARTPOP it's all over the place. The message is not clear. Lemonade makes it's message very clear. I think Lemonade by far is a better album. I can listen to it from beginning to end. I wish you guys would stop with this competition. Just let the album come out. It's the Hot 100 and Billboard Top 200 albums. Not the Gaga Hot 1 and Billboard Top 200. Just because an album or song does not get a #1 is not big deal.

/thread 

[Ciccone Madonna 1,362]

It so wrong some people discovered music like 6 years ago. What kind of discussion can i have with teenagers when it comes to music when the only music they know is from 2009 and after.....

[hmm 979]

Just now, Drunk Poet said:

 

You're both completely misquoting me, as I knew you would. I didn't say "if you don't like ARTPOP you are dumb" I said it is vain to suggest that it is a bad album simply because you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art. Which is true. Nothing superior about it. Just simply the truth. 

It's fine if you don't like it. I said that art doesn't have to be good, it just has to be. Many people don't like it and still appreciate that it is a piece of art. My comment was aimed at those who think it is a piece of trash bad album with no artistic sensibilities. 

Stop interpreting things the wrong way and misquoting people; try actually to understand that I'm making a point based on intellect, not obsessive emotion, and don't come at me with 'superiority' crap. 

Nothing you've said there has disproven the inferred meaning of your initial statement though; who are you or even how can you judge that people "don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art".  

[Bette Davis 12,742]

You all are reminding me of a friend I have who has self-esteem issues, so she constantly refers to other pretty girls as ugly just to make herself feel better.

[HighlandHeart 993]

4 minutes ago, hmm said:

Nothing you've said there has disproven the inferred meaning of your initial statement though; who are you or even how can you judge that people "don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art".  

Exactly, because there is no 'inference' to disprove. I never infer things, I state them clearly. 

You're actually making me laugh. You are the one whose being judgemental, making up your own meanings for what I say and taking it entirely the wrong way. Once again, for the sake of your simple mind, I'll state that I said that people who disregard ARTPOP as not being creative or artistic are people who know nothing about nor understand art, people such as ignorant critics and obsessive bubblegum pop listeners who love artists mainly based on popularity. And if you really want to contest that then you've only proven my statement. 

[hmm 979]

1 minute ago, Drunk Poet said:

Exactly, because there is no 'inference' to disprove. I never infer things, I state them clearly. 

You're actually making me laugh. You are the one whose being judgemental, making up your own meanings for what I say and taking it entirely the wrong way. Once again, for the sake of your simple mind, I'll state that I said that people who disregard ARTPOP as not being creative or artistic are people who know nothing about nor understand art. And if you really want to contest that then you've only proven my statement. 

"Your simple mind"  Need I say more? 

[HighlandHeart 993]

Just now, hmm said:

"Your simple mind"  Need I say more? 

Knew you'd bring that up; frankly, I gave that one to you out of pity because you don't have an argument. 

If you insist on making me repeat myself, I, in turn, am going to conclude you're not understanding a simple statement, and thus going to get frustrated, and call you simple. 

Broken down easily enough for you?

[TheBatman 951]

1 minute ago, Drunk Poet said:

 I said that people who disregard ARTPOP as not being creative or artistic are people who know nothing about nor understand art. And if you really want to contest that then you've only proven my statement. 

I don't find ARTPOP to be that creative or interesting, and I went to art school, studied performance art, and work as a performer, and live as an artist. I added a track by track breakdown in the ARTPOP In Depth Analysis thread recently, so if you want, check it out. But as a human, an educated artist, and a working performer, not to mention fan of Gaga, I did not find ARTPOP that creative. Sorry.

[Harry 26,836]

3 minutes ago, Drunk Poet said:

You're both completely misquoting me, as I knew you would. I didn't say "if you don't like ARTPOP you are dumb" I said it is vain to suggest that it is a bad album simply because you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art. Which is true. Nothing superior about it. Just simply the truth. 

It's fine if you don't like it. I said that art doesn't have to be good, it just has to be. Many people don't like it and still appreciate that it is a piece of art. My comment was aimed at those who think it is a piece of trash bad album with no artistic sensibilities. 

Stop interpreting things the wrong way and misquoting people; try actually to understand that I'm making a point based on intellect, not obsessive emotion, and don't come at me with 'superiority' crap when you clearly don't read my comment properly and make up your mind about it before you've understood it - that is the real disparagement. 

So how are you separating the people who just don't like it from those who don't have the intellectual capacity? So if someone thinks that it has no artistic sensibilities then they are just dumb? End of discussion? I think it's weird that people defend ARTPOP as this great work of art when I personally think the (few) examples people use to justify it can also be applied to her other albums. And they achieve it more successfully - in my opinion.

I'm not trying to put down people that do like it and find great meaning it, because that's the beauty of music and art. You can see things that other people don't see. But to say people think it's a bad album because they "don't have the intellectual capacity to understand art" is superiority.

I don't get why you're getting so mad about it lol. Misunderstandings happen. I was just having a conversation.

You're getting really aggressive about this, and that seems to be common with people that make out ARTPOP is artistic genius. Anyone that disagrees really touches a nerve with you guys and I feel like that's where all the overcompensating comes from.

[HighlandHeart 993]

1 minute ago, TheBatman said:

I don't find ARTPOP to be that creative or interesting, and I went to art school, studied performance art, and work as a performer, and live as an artist. I added a track by track breakdown in the ARTPOP In Depth Analysis thread recently, so if you want, check it out. But as a human, an educated artist, and a working performer, not to mention fan of Gaga, I did not find ARTPOP that creative. Sorry.

Don't be sorry, but I find that genuinely shocking. And, not to embarrass you, but if you analysed the album in depth, it shows that it is a work of art; only art and poetry can be analysed, trash can't. That is the point and contrast I'm trying to make here. 

[TheBatman 951]

Just now, Drunk Poet said:

Don't be sorry, but I find that genuinely shocking. And, not to embarrass you, but if you analysed the album in depth, it shows that it is a work of art; only art and poetry can be analysed, trash can't. That is the point and contrast I'm trying to make here. 

I can do an in depth analysis of a jar of mayonnaise if I wanted to, or the happy birthday song, or actual trash itself. Doesn't make it a masterpiece. ARTPOP is a piece of art. So is a Britney record, or the Wiggles. It's all art. Some art has more depth than others.