Don't blame the critics

[LadyGagasGodSon 410]

Also most of these critics are probably not even "journalists" in the sense that they didn't have training in news or editorial writing but probably more on creative non-fiction writing where as long as you can write a feature article, you're in, regardless of whether or not you actually know what you're talking about, just have to seem like you do. Not shading their educational background or jobs at all, I just mean like they're no Music degree holders to be credible enough to say what is musically authentic and what isn't etc. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,787]

I wouldn't have a problem with the critics if they actually...

- Critiqued the music instead of Gaga and what they think of her.

- Critiqued the album regardless of how will the era began or how the singles performed.

- Praised her for doing her own thing and being different like they do other artists.

- Showed the same overall fairness to her that they do other artists.

Gaga is treated pretty badly by critics these days because she doesn't get the amazing PR she used to and her singles don't sell like they used to. That's what the critic game's all about. When you're mainstream, if you ain't selling, you ain't getting fair treatment. Only a few of them have their heads screwed on right and don't just follow what everyone else is thinking. The rest of them need to pull their socks up and question if they're in the right job. Not to mention, stop being greedy and stop accepting money for positive reviews. I mean, don't they not hate being suck-ups for some and deliberately playing dumb for others? I pursued what you had to do to be a professional critic so I could show them a thing or two...but then realised you have to get a university degree in something to do with music. Sorry, no, not going back there. Particularly if I only write a bunch of BS with my hard-earned degree because some jumped up pen pusher in charge is telling me to be mixed at least or is bribing me with money to be an adoring little lapdog. I'm not giving someone a good review because they're a man or because they're 'artistic' or because they paid me. I'm not giving someone a bad review because I don't like them as a person or because they're going through a bad patch commercially. I listen to the music and judge that, I don't care who's it's coming from or how cohesive it is or what the genre is. Because I have something called ethics.

54 minutes ago, jajagaga1896 said:

Critics are just that - critics. They seldom like anything, and it is pretty much their job to pick things a part [whereas to anybody else it would seem unnecessary] and point out different factors and flaws within them. I will admit that critics can have a much better way when it comes to examining people's work, and they often lack tact and get too caught up in trying to produce an overly-analytical and rigorous review of a work, just to show they have knowledge in various areas in which to critique, instead of actually seeing an art piece for what it simply means to be. 

Really... critics are a wholly unnecessary group and occupation. Everyone's a critic! 

I'd actually disagree on that because critics seem to be too easily impressed. I don't get why they think the majority of albums these days are better than average. Most of them are mediocre, with a few surprises here and there. I usually struggle to make a top ten list every year that's made up for "very good"'s or better. When I compose my top 20 this year, there'll be a few 3 star reviews in it. That's how hard it is to find solid albums nowadays. That's why I don't understand what professional critics are seeing that I'm not. Surely, a music critic should be able to note bad vocal technique, laughable lyrics, ridiculous production? If I, as a non-professional, can see these problems, why can't a professional? Unless, again, they're being paid to be be positive.

[Ronk 14,761]

2 hours ago, Sycamore said:

No. It's about her music, not her career.

This.   They are supposed to be critiquing her music, specifically they are only supposed to be critiquing Joanne.   Otherwise, it is a story about Gaga, not a review of Joanne and should not be billed anywhere as a review of Joanne, including metacritic.

[Jed 7,716]

@StrawberryBlond see I always look forward to responses like yours (specifically from you) but a lot of people on here don't know how to actually read arguments and address points

[Ronk 14,761]

29 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I wouldn't have a problem with the critics if they actually...

- Critiqued the music instead of Gaga and what they think of her.

- Critiqued the album regardless of how will the era began or how the singles performed.

 

This.  Otherwise, it's not a review of the album.

[Delusional Aura 5,129]

It's rigged 

[Gardevoir 9,816]

I've been a little worried about critical reviews. I mean It breaks my heart a little bit, cause you can clearly tell this album is wholly from her heart and it's really good, musically and lyrically. So it really bugged me that it has some mediocre reviews, but.. Let's be honest, is that really that important considering that critics can't clearly speak only about her music, not attacking her or personal life? It's worth nothing to me, to be honest. And I think that it's a shock for everyone that she changed her direction a little bit. I think that if Joanne was the second album after this change, the reviews would be far better. Cause everyone is saying things like "it's inauthentic" and stuff, but please, If you're following her career interview by interview, performance by performance you can clearly tell it's not forced at all. If the last thing you remember of Gaga is her wearing meat dress then sorry..

[Leaf 2,429]

Even Anthony Fantano calls their bias out.

 

[Brian Ryan 1,468]

Outstanding try. They will never end.... the endless search of gratification from the public or GP that they don't even know

[XoXoJoanneGaga 629]

The reviews are mostly fine from what I've seen. I haven't read all of them but the ones I've seen have all given fair rationale as to why they like or don't like the album, everything par for the course there. I like the album a lot but I wouldn't give it more than a 3-3.5/5, that's a very fair score for an album that is safe and derivative but enjoyable, with no outright bad songs. 

[Ronk 14,761]

1 hour ago, Delusional Aura said:

It's rigged 

We should get The Donald on their case.  Those critics betta run.

[Katie14 4,828]

I just don't understand what they are hearing. And any little thing that can be perceived as a flaw seems to be blown way out of proportion.

Also, how can they lower her score because they think the lyrics are inauthentic? Who are they to claim that? What does that have to do with the sound and quality of the songs? I just dont think its fair to rate an album in the context of who the critic believes the artist to be. Its like saying a song is bad because the lyrics discuss god and Christianity and you hate religion. Its totally besides the point. 

[Ronk 14,761]

1 hour ago, Leaf said:

Even Anthony Fantano calls their bias out.

 

Although I don't agree with many of his thoughts, this ARTPOP review was very well done.  He dissected every track in detail, and also reviewed the album as a whole.  He did not bring in external factors about Gaga, he stuck to the music. 

If reviewers did reviews like this for Joanne, even if they gave the album a bad score, I would welcome it because it is honest and sticks to the music.

[REALITY 76,110]

4 hours ago, Jed said:

If people don't like the music, or find it inauthentic they have every right to say that. This was Gaga's bid at authenticity and if you personally think she achieved it then that's fine! But don't get messy because some music critics don't agree with you.

The thing is though, that this music is objectively authentic. She's said herself, that this album would be deeply personal, and that every song would be autobiographical. Even the genre is objectively authentic. The genre of this album, overall, is pop, but there are obviously influences from other genres; however, you can clearly tell that the album's authentic—not to say her previous works weren't. She's expressed that the different genres on Joanne are representative of genres she knows/loves. 

[OMF 3,431]

Guys even if Joanne sticks to 65/70 that is still in green and very positive. Keeping in mind the warm reception from GP, the fact that the album went to number 1 in over 60 countries and the general reception of Gaga has been very positive...well it's all going great:) If Gaga keeps it up, this could be her biggest album release since BTW. And all this without massive promo or great fanfare. I actually truly believe the dive bar tours live on Facebook was a stroke of genius. She spent all that money promoting BTW and ARTPOP yet Joanne is doing even better in many respects