Don't blame the critics

[Gagz 2,579]

I agree that there is not a big conspiracy against her as some people believe. I can't speak on the reviews, as I don't read them. 

[Ronk 14,761]

Some say critics should talk about other things, not just the music.  There is a big problem with that.  They choose to mention the negative things, or at least things that the GP feels are negative, such as the meat dress, perceived past failures, etc.  They try to find anything that will give the reader a bad impression of Gaga.  They carefully pick and choose which things from her past to mention.  If they are going to mention anything other than the songs on the album, they should try this:

Lady Gaga founded the Born This Way Foundation with her mother; has a Born Brave Bus at concerts and a Born Brave table in the arenas of other concerts, to assist anyone seeking help; had a project to help earthquake victims in Japan; traveled the world with UNICEF to visit and assist families, orphanages, and communities in need; participated in the Polar Plunge to support the athletes of Special Olympics; openly advocates for good causes around the world; donated a wheelchair to a fan in need; helped her father open a restaurant in NYC because it was his dream;  through her words at concerts and interviews and in lyrics helped thousands of bullied kids and LGBT gain strength, confidence, bravery, and self-worth, and has saved lives; shows the world the virtues of kindness, compassion, and positivity, and leads by example; and works to inspire art and creativity in her fans.  Many of her good deeds are not listed here, and many are done on the down-low because she doesn’t want to take credit.  She gets so personally involved with her good deeds.  Helping others and changing the world is a life's work to her.

[Lord Temptation 11,209]

6 hours ago, Jed said:

I can find good examples of actually musical criticisms in most of the metacritic reviews

Show me then.

[disneyhigh 43]

Who really cares about critics. I never listbtend to them and never will. The important thing, is every day people like it and from what I have seen (okay i have no friends but reddit lol), people actually do like it. Her post got upwards of 1000 up votes on r/music and many commenters were praising the album. This is reddit so obviously doesnt say much but again, reddit is full of average white guys lol

[MonsterPaws 2,726]

I'm perfectly content with all the review except for the NYTimes one. That review/reviewer was being ludicrous.

Totally agree with you OP 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

7 hours ago, A Gaga Lad said:

Except some clearly arent reviewing the music 

Thank you. I'm fine with it not being people's cup of tea. Plenty of the mediocre reviews I've been fine with because they explain their POV and what they believe does and does not work for the album.

Then there are reviews like the NYTimes where it is just so personal, with words like "flop" included...yea that bothers me.  Credits to OP for trying to play devols advocate though, however, we're not coming for all poor reviews just the ones that focus on Gaga rather than musical content.

[ImNotBritney 66]

Is Joanne still numbers 1 in America? That's all I need to know, someone update me please 

[Ronk 14,761]

35 minutes ago, ImNotBritney said:

Is Joanne still numbers 1 in America? That's all I need to know, someone update me please 

I think so, if this is where to look:

http://kworb.net/itunes/artist/ladygaga.html

[NIghtmareElm 2,606]

It's getting positive reviews though.  It has a 65.  I was expecting a 60 or below. 

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

9 hours ago, Fantina said:

I would agree with these critics if they would go song to song and tell us why they hated it in a critical way and not in a "COPIES MADONNA YET AGAIN" way  

This. As a music critics you don't get to simply say you don't like it cause you aren't feeling it or cause you think it's a rip off of something. I expect LEGITIMATE reasons and for it to be done in a critical way, not some superficial BS that I would expect from a Katy or medoner stan

[Turbogirl 32]

A critics opinion can be whatever it wants to be, as long as it's well written and their views are articulated well.

While it's easy to say this is just backlash from a dedicated fan base against poor reception, I feel it's actually a backlash against modern critics in general.

I used to be a professional critic in the tv / film industry - as well as the music industry. I've worked for professional outlets, and have thus crossed paths with a lot of well known critics and publications.

So I feel I have some insight. But the "art" of criticism has drastically shifted in the last 15 years. The internet and the era of the "blogger" and social media had a profound impact on the medium.

Critics used to be well educated on the medium they covered. Almost like scholars. Criticism was about placing a piece of art within the context of its peers (and the medium). But criticism has shifted to it being more about the critic who inserts themselves into the review, as the focus is more on their experience and how they feel.

I think those aspects are valid in a review, but should not be the sole focus of one. Too much focus has been shifted to the reviewer instead of them analyzing the art itself.

The other trend, is for critics to talk about the artist themselves - and various outside factors, without critiquing the music itself. Pitchfork is notorious for writing long winded essays that don't connect the actual music being reviewed. But this is something I see a lot of critics do.

And I think people are getting tired of it. To an extent, critics have become tastemakers - and you follow your trusted critics to recommend you stuff. They have become more of a consumer guide. 

Truth be told, anyone can become a critic. You don't need education on the subject you are covering. And that is disappointing. You still have to be a good writer (well not always but lol) - but being a good writer, doesn't mean you have a good grasp on the medium. Which is why I feel most critics revert to talking about the artist personal life and outside cultural elements to try to craft a narrative. Modern critics love narratives, and rely heavily on them.

This isn't to say there aren't fans that are just being salty. Let's be real, a lot of people aren't capable of taking criticism of their favorite things. Even if a review was well written, some fans would still call the review crap.

I actually find reviews that have an opposite opinion of mine - to be more interesting and helpful. Reading reviews that just echo my own thoughts, doesn't tell me anything new. And I don't need validation. People with different opinions can get me to think about my own opinions. They can get me to see the album in a different light (even if we don't end up agreeing).

But I still think most people are tired of modern criticism, and to be honest it's gotten pretty bad.

 

[Jed 7,716]

9 hours ago, Katie14 said:

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. 

But who are you to say that those lyrics are authentic? Just because you're a fan and the lyrics are religious in nature doesnt mean your viewpoint is more valid than the critics. I actually think sinners prayer is an AMAZING song but that doesn't mean I think the album overall is a 4/5 or 5/5

 

maybe y'all should stop making excuses for other people's opinions and start remembering that your own opinion is the only one that matters

[Jed 7,716]

3 hours ago, Turbogirl said:

A critics opinion can be whatever it wants to be, as long as it's well written and their views are articulated well.

While it's easy to say this is just backlash from a dedicated fan base against poor reception, I feel it's actually a backlash against modern critics in general.

I used to be a professional critic in the tv / film industry - as well as the music industry. I've worked for professional outlets, and have thus crossed paths with a lot of well known critics and publications.

So I feel I have some insight. But the "art" of criticism has drastically shifted in the last 15 years. The internet and the era of the "blogger" and social media had a profound impact on the medium.

Critics used to be well educated on the medium they covered. Almost like scholars. Criticism was about placing a piece of art within the context of its peers (and the medium). But criticism has shifted to it being more about the critic who inserts themselves into the review, as the focus is more on their experience and how they feel.

I think those aspects are valid in a review, but should not be the sole focus of one. Too much focus has been shifted to the reviewer instead of them analyzing the art itself.

The other trend, is for critics to talk about the artist themselves - and various outside factors, without critiquing the music itself. Pitchfork is notorious for writing long winded essays that don't connect the actual music being reviewed. But this is something I see a lot of critics do.

And I think people are getting tired of it. To an extent, critics have become tastemakers - and you follow your trusted critics to recommend you stuff. They have become more of a consumer guide. 

Truth be told, anyone can become a critic. You don't need education on the subject you are covering. And that is disappointing. You still have to be a good writer (well not always but lol) - but being a good writer, doesn't mean you have a good grasp on the medium. Which is why I feel most critics revert to talking about the artist personal life and outside cultural elements to try to craft a narrative. Modern critics love narratives, and rely heavily on them.

This isn't to say there aren't fans that are just being salty. Let's be real, a lot of people aren't capable of taking criticism of their favorite things. Even if a review was well written, some fans would still call the review crap.

I actually find reviews that have an opposite opinion of mine - to be more interesting and helpful. Reading reviews that just echo my own thoughts, doesn't tell me anything new. And I don't need validation. People with different opinions can get me to think about my own opinions. They can get me to see the album in a different light (even if we don't end up agreeing).

But I still think most people are tired of modern criticism, and to be honest it's gotten pretty bad.

 

Love how elequent you responded. I have no disagreements with what you said whatsoever 

[Jed 7,716]

5 hours ago, ImNotBritney said:

Is Joanne still numbers 1 in America? That's all I need to know, someone update me please 

AKA I need a charts position to rationalize how I feel about a piece of art.

theres my whole point - y'all find too much meaning in things that don't matter 

[Naufri 7,424]

My main problem with the complain about authenticity of Joanne, is that in my book the authenticity doesn't matter.

A song is good or not, and that is absolutely disconnected with who write or sing it. Who cares if Gaga is a credible country or americana artist, who cares if she have a real input in folk music? Why she only can soun authentic making dance/pop?

Some of the best critics she's receiving are pointing in fact that Joanne feels like another persona/pose for her BUT it doesn't matter cause the music is good, and that's all.