Gaga's Exclusive Haus Beauty Interview

[KNJ 4,170]

11 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Her talent and creativity

Ugh, here we go again... I'm not cynical about everything she does. I've been super pleased with some of the recent stuff she did. I thought ASIB was exceptional (both her acting and the soundtrack), and I consider some of those songs the best of her discography, I worship her covers of Chic's I Want Your Love (and esp. the Tom Ford ad) and Elton John's Your Song and consider the last one (as well as the live version) one of the best vocal performances of her career, I really enjoyed the Superbowl and thought some sections were a visceral return to her early artistic glory, loved the Superbowl national anthem,...

There's still plenty of reasons I'm around

About the high standard: that's not my standard, that's supposedly hers. She repeats it almost every time at Enigma: about how she holds her artistry to the "highest possible" level and isn't just some Hollywood celeb, blah blah. That's all very nice to hear but I can't help but observe that since 2014 she's shown less and less artistic involvement or passion for creating art in general. I always wondered why since this is supposedly the happiest she's ever been. Weirdly that's not translating into... art. Joanne was lackluster and was not at all an artistic improvement on her earlier work. So again, I don't understand why in a time where she can do whatever she wants, she chooses side projects and lesser artistry, even a goddamn make-up line over being an artist.

If me wanting her to be an artist instead of a singer is already too high a standard for Gaga rn, I can only conclude that all of your standards have been dropped dramatically. But not mine. I'm not losing any sleep over it though. These are just my opinions.

I think the problem is having a narrow definition of art.

I'm curious as to why youve concluded that,ironically, Gaga is less of an artist in your eyes since ARTPOP but more so during TF/TFM/BTW era?

[Didymus 34,380]

13 minutes ago, KNJ said:

I think the problem is having a narrow definition of art.

I'm curious as to why youve concluded that,ironically, Gaga is less of an artist in your eyes since ARTPOP but more so during TF/TFM/BTW era?

Not less of an artist, just not progressing. There's a difference for me. Like, for example, she presented Joanne as her most authentic, soul-searching album which would blend different genres into a new synthetic whole, and what we got was basically songs that had the same structure and chords as all her others, with actually less personal and emotional lyrics, a selection of songs she either didn't write or had minor artistic contribution to, and overall just... nothing fitting that description at all. It's just fine, but it wasn't great, and other (pop) artists have done what she claimed to do 30x better already The problem, then, is a lack of artistic ambition that even ARTPOP had in overflow.

I feel like most fans just sort of walk with her to wherever she goes and adjust their way of evaluating with how she evolves as a person and an artist. It's an understandable choice as a fan, and it keeps from getting disappointed. But I never stopped seeing her as the girl she presented herself as early on: someone who studies art and fame, is passionate about music, and wants to inject greatness and underground sensibilities into the mainstream pop industry. She's still claiming to do all that, but I'm not seeing it anymore. That might make me (too) critical as a fan, but I also remember she values such argumented criticisms when it comes from someone who has studied her career. I do think there's room for my voice here.

And like I said, she's done plenty these past few years that has pleased or impressed me. But selling make-up is not gonna be it.

[KNJ 4,170]

48 minutes ago, Didymus said:

@KNJ

Put more simple: if this were any other time, a time where she had just released a mindblowing music album, served us incredible artistic statements and performances, this make-up line would have bothered me a lot less. It's part of the pop game. No problem.

But this is a time where she's almost doing nothing but side projects. And that at a time where she's supposed to be most happy and free creatively. There's something there that's not right. Sure, she can be different things and change personalities, what not, that's totally her right and I'm not "angry" at her. But I am critical. Because she's actively trying to convince fans they should be excited about a ****ing make-up line, more so than new art and music, and that ain't right. I'm not getting brainwashed into celebrating let alone buying something she herself once mocked as superficial and tasteless.

I think u may be seeing these "side projects" as inferior distractions (and rationalizing it as a greed/ cash grabs) when they are actually  fuelling and reinforcing her creativity , passion and life purpose.

I say this as an artsy kid who grew up to  major in Graphic Arts/ Scenic Design and Construction, Film Production, took art elective in every field and floated as a means of transportation across campus bc  that is how fulfilled and electrified feeling my creative oats made me feel. A superhero 

Maybe that's why what you're saying makes my head and heart hurt bc art is truly in everything. And Lady Gaga is an artist with everything she endeavors.

She's known as successful musician but tether her to that box. Bc if you pull back and look at the entire picture, you see she is an empath. She is an empathic person with artistic inclinations --->with her musical skills,  she is drawn further into performing arts--->performing involves truly seeing ppl to emulate and communicate effectively to them, often transforming a part of yourself to achieve this deep connection (makeup, wigs, affectation, attitude) ---> in conjuring a fierce queen from the outside in she can now be that without all the artifice on the outside---> makeup helped her do that and even though there are plenty of beauty lines, none are providing something in these terms

Products for aesthetic transformation with the explicit purpose  of giving ppl tools to tell the world "f*ck off, I define my own beauty" from the artist Lady Gaga, is the most f*cking on brand Lady Gaga thing I can think off.

 

I really wanna break this down and talk more but I'm about to pass but I  really need to sleep. Forgive sp incoherence etc

[Hybrid AT 78]

What if the only reason she partnered with Amazon was to bundle a surprise album with each sale of the kit? 

[Didymus 34,380]

17 minutes ago, KNJ said:

She's known as successful musician but tether her to that box. Bc if you pull back and look at the entire picture, you see she is an empath. She is an empathic person with artistic inclinations --->with her musical skills,  she is drawn further into performing arts--->performing involves truly seeing ppl to emulate and communicate effectively to them, often transforming a part of yourself to achieve this deep connection (makeup, wigs, affectation, attitude) ---> in conjuring a fierce queen from the outside in she can now be that without all the artifice on the outside---> makeup helped her do that and even though there are plenty of beauty lines, none are providing something in these terms

Products for aesthetic transformation with the explicit purpose  of giving ppl tools to tell the world "f*ck off, I define my own beauty" from the artist Lady Gaga, is the most f*cking on brand Lady Gaga thing I can think off.

But that's coming from someone who's using fillers now and has actually dumbed down her presentation to the point of her looking like any regular celeb rather than an artistic fierce queen

If she did this in 2011 it'd make more sense. But suddenly now it's about owning yourself and discovering who you are in the exact period she's dressing down and showing less and less inclination to do something experimental or boundary-pushing or unique in terms of visuals and, yes, make-up?

That doesn't hold up. But I like what you're saying in general and agree with it. I just don't think it really applies to Gaga right now.

[FameHookah 4,615]

11 hours ago, LetsGetHigh said:

You're not allowed to paste the whole article. It needs to be 50% or less or you're gonna get a WP from a certain Haroon.

You're not allowed to talk about moderation either luv, i learned the hard way 

I'll shut up now 😂

[Itsbrenda 2,983]

Lol, this thread. 

Anyway, I have issues with her partnering with Amazon but let’s call a spade a spade. She has partnered with them because they are desperate to break into Make up (& fashion) and will push hard for it to take off. 

If Gaga had done her research she would see that of the 70ish companies Amazon owns 50+ of them are clothing and not one brand has taken off. They collectively represent less then 1% of Amazon.com clothes sales. 

They are likely to tank this ‘world changing’ Make up line too. 

I don’t want to be overly negative but this just isn’t it at all. The marketing for this remind me of the ill fated ‘Tidal’ launch where 30 of the worlds richest music acts came together to ‘change the world’... by creating an expansive streaming service. 

It’s all a bit ‘icky’

[Diamonster 1,786]

13 hours ago, KNJ said:

“I have a platform in the world. God gave me this voice for a reason, I don’t know why, I ask myself that question all the time, but I’m sure as hell not going to put out a beauty brand that is going to drive insecurity and fear into people. This is about liberation.”

This stuff are always fun to read to me because when I was in high school, the whole reason I was cutting myself and hating myself was because of her  And it lasted years, Gaga has made me feel empowered about music and being an artist for a while but never about looks 

[KNJ 4,170]

3 hours ago, Didymus said:

But that's coming from someone who's using fillers now and has actually dumbed down her presentation to the point of her looking like any regular celeb rather than an artistic fierce queen

If she did this in 2011 it'd make more sense. But suddenly now it's about owning yourself and discovering who you are in the exact period she's dressing down and showing less and less inclination to do something experimental or boundary-pushing or unique in terms of visuals and, yes, make-up?

That doesn't hold up. But I like what you're saying in general and agree with it. I just don't think it really applies to Gaga right now.

I need to go to work, but I'll say this

It sounds like you don't respect her any more. Ironically for being as fallible and real as the rest of, really.

1)I don't know about that filler stuff -- I've heard some cosmetic injections can help nerve pain too -- but I find that judging her for her insecurities doesn't hold up either. Just bc she encourages every one to love themselves wholly doesnt mean she's not reminding herself of that too. People can be more then one thing.

There are receipts on receipts of her being completely honest about this and her lifetime of insecurities, and saying something (manisfestating) something untrue until it becomes true., and the price she said she had to pay for holding herself up to that high pressure "never see me with our heels" standard you seem to long for the days of

2)I'll have to tackle that whole thing about interpreting her growing up and accepting natural herself and putting away the "masks" and stepping out into the world with her god-given face as an indictment of rejecting/bashing/betraying what? Her true self as you think it is? And is evidence of her being less inclined to be experimental and unique visually???? SO confused 

I'll leave with this: Patti LaBelle doesn't show up with 3 foot hair sculptures anymore,Cyndi Lauper doesn't put 100 colors in her hair  anymore, Cher doesn't rock Mackie headresses and assless pants anymore,Christina is much less xtina...Does any of this mean their core human inside has been rejected bc the outside shell has been taken down a few notches?

I'll tell you right now that what many wore in high school they would not wear now but that does not make them an inferior inauthentic version of themselves. Getting older is renowed for doing the opposite actually.

 

Again sorry for sp etc

Spoiler

Will talk later about that not progressing as an artist stuff when I get back .

 

[Didymus 34,380]

11 minutes ago, KNJ said:

It sounds like you don't respect her any more.

I only respect her work lol. I don't know her so she hasn't earned my respect yet, apart from my basic respect for every fellow human being

12 minutes ago, KNJ said:

judging her for her insecurities doesn't hold up

I see how it could've come across like that but that wasn't my intention. My point, really, was to highlight the fact that when she stopped wearing more theatrical make-up she actually chose fillers (at one point looking exactly like Kim K to the point where fans almost couldn't recognize her) to represent herself visually. I'll remind you that the filler era began most arrestingly when she claimed to be perfectly happy and in touch with her true self.

I'm not saying that's wrong (I don't like it though, 'cause it directly opposes her "don't try to look like someone famous" story she's selling with this line), it's just contradictory when she's now claiming she found that connection through make-up, because... she didn't If she doesn't represent the message she wants people to spend money on, then that's worthy of some skepticism at least, no? It would almost make more sense to sell fillers rather than make-up at this point It would fit her story better, and that's sad to me.

15 minutes ago, KNJ said:

Patti LaBelle doesn't show up with 3 foot hair sculptures anymore,Cyndi Lauper doesn't put 100 colors in her hair  anymore, Cher doesn't rock Mackie headresses and assless pants anymore,Christina is much less xtina...Does any of this mean their core human inside has been rejected bc the outside shell has been taken down a few notches?

It's predictable for younger artists to dumb down their work, and yes it has happened in all of those cases (regrettably) but what annoyed me is that Gaga was aware of this too and I remember one of her early interviews where she literally said she hated when artists spent less and less time and effort on upping their artistic game, simplifying their concerts every time to the point where there was barely any new creative idea

Part of her early charm for me was her dead serious belief in the value and beauty of avant-garde and her explicit admission that she was never gonna stop spreading it. Now of course people change, but I'm not gonna cheer her on for being smart in her 20s and generic in her 30s, especially when she was intelligent enough to understand back then that what she's doing now is exactly what she didn't like about other artists

Of course there's no point in bashing her again and again for that, but this make-up line was just another example for me of her leaving behind her old, much more admirable, philosophy of what it means to be an artist in pop culture.

[SEANGT 5,299]

19 hours ago, Didymus said:

But Gaga went on record to say that if her artistic integrity was ever challenged, she would actually go back to singing in bars

This was, of course, just a few weeks before she then slammed Interscope for changing all of her album vocals. Clearly the good sis Gaga is a pro at propping up her authenticity in self-presentation but really is not that bothered about applying all of those big "Gaga values" of her

I'm just fed up with her presenting herself as someone she's not. Correction: I'm fed up with the fans who still buy that tired old charade act I'm here for the fans to just drop the whole "Gaga's an angel" bs and focus on the releases, products, etc. with an open mind and without excuses.

I do agree with this. But there's also nothing wrong with calling her out when that intention is not reflected in the product. I mean, great for Gaga that she wants to empower people but this is still a ****ing make-up line, why should we pretend that's better than what she's supposed to be most passionate about: music and art?

That's what's annoying me. Sure, her angle here is genuine. But that doesn't make her decision to start a make-up line any less disappointing and generic.

what if....the marketing...is part of the product. Beauty marketing influences so much of our culture. I don't think it's right to dismiss the connection between her philanthropic work and her choice of product to sell. If she can show that you can sell makeup to people with a self-empowering message that doesn't make anyone feel ugly or like they NEED makeup, that would be quite a shift. And the only way to accomplish it is to make a ****ton of money & force other brands to follow her lead. 

[SEANGT 5,299]

5 hours ago, Didymus said:

Part of her early charm for me was her dead serious belief in the value and beauty of avant-garde and her explicit admission that she was never gonna stop spreading it. Now of course people change, but I'm not gonna cheer her on for being smart in her 20s and generic in her 30s, especially when she was intelligent enough to understand back then that what she's doing now is exactly what she didn't like about other artists

Of course there's no point in bashing her again and again for that, but this make-up line was just another example for me of her leaving behind her old, much more admirable, philosophy of what it means to be an artist in pop culture.

She's currently dropping from the ceiling like a human disco ball and riding a giant flaming robot multiple nights a week in Las Vegas. 

[KNJ 4,170]

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

I only respect her work lol. I don't know her so she hasn't earned my respect yet,

I find this to be v conflicted statement. She is her work. if you like her wirk, you like her message. Or are you just here for the sounds? And if you are just here for that, then why do you feel the need "bash" her (your words) for pursuing her other passions? How does this work in ur mind? 

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

My point, really, was to highlight the fact that when she stopped wearing more theatrical make-up she actually chose fillers (at one point looking exactly like Kim K to the point where fans almost couldn't recognize her) to represent herself visually. I'll remind you that the filler era began most arrestingly when she claimed to be perfectly happy and in touch with her true self

Wait wait wait so It's not the cosmetics, it's that you think she's trying to medically morph into famous ppl/ Kim K??? To the point where she couldn't be reckognized?? Where ? When?

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

it's just contradictory when she's now claiming she found that connection through make-up, because... she didn't If she doesn't represent the message she wants people to spend money on, then that's worthy of some skepticism at least, no?

She did tho...you know that time you love? When she was using theatrical makeup? 

if you're saying she's contradicted her entire message, in your eyes, bc you think she's become like that fn CatLady then I'll need proper receipts for that one, bc this is a damning aspersion to cast. And if ur talking about that one look at Elle womens award thing ....gurl. One could also argue that cosmetics/fillers are just expansions on the use of makeups as a tool, but I will not assume to know her motivations there.

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

It's predictable for younger artists to dumb down their work, and yes it has happened in all of those cases (regrettably)

Ok.... That was not what I was saying about them.  What do define as "dumbing down" and what do you think is their actual  "work"?   And if you're saying you think their early aesthetics were "dumbing down" then why is Gaga growing out of her  "younger work" an issue for you? ??

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

what annoyed me is that Gaga was aware of this too and I remember one of her early interviews where she literally said she hated when artists spent less and less time and effort on upping their artistic game, simplifying their concerts every time to the point where there was barely any new creative idea 

You really think that she hasn't been doing this?

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

Part of her early charm for me was her dead serious belief in the value and beauty of avant-garde and her explicit admission that she was never gonna stop spreading it

I'm SO confused. If Gaga is a generic pop star who the hell is avant -garde! Back to my prior question you haven't answered, if she's a disappointment, who the hell is doing it right? In your eyes.

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

Now of course people change, but I'm not gonna cheer her on for being smart in her 20s and generic in her 30s, especially when she was intelligent enough to understand back then that what she's doing now is exactly what she didn't like about other artists

I'll need major receipts about these dislikes bc I am trying SO hard to see her failing all of these points, like you're saying, and I cannot see your math.

13 hours ago, Didymus said:

but this make-up line was just another example for me of her leaving behind her old, much more admirable, philosophy of what it means to be an artist in pop culture.

You said she's not progressing as an artist. What does that progress look like to you? 

She is living her life according to dreams and visions for her career she's had in the works since childhood. She/ Bobby have said that she only wants to surpass herself. She said in FF2 that she has to leave herself behind to move forward.But that didn't mean her principles and artistry have fallen. 

  I'm trying so hard to see things through your lenses but it is hurting my heart and my head.  I cannot see how she is no longer all the things you say she's not? Over what makeup? I'm trying so hard, and really hope you show up with those hard receipts -- but I think you have a bit of a lack of imagination. People can subvert the norm from the inside.  How can you dismiss what is obvs her life passion bc she's now using a beauty brand as a conduit for her message?

Not avant-garde? PLEASE explain how you think  what she s doing and the way she does it, as basic bitchery and not fierce Queen moves? What are these examples of disappointment s you're collecting?

This is surprisingly upsetting me ( think it's the sleep). You said you're here for the artistry but can't seem to see it in different forms.At the end of the day, you don't like her or her stuff you don't have to buy it or buy into it. but don't call someone and everything they stand for full of sh*t, when they  have proven consistently that they are one of the few actual good ones. I'm a deeply rational and healthy skeptic. I don't accept overwhelming cynicism without just cause. Bashing her and the ppl a little less cynical and a little more excited about her "side projects" isn't just. 

You are so confusing  my head hurts . I just can't understand how after all these yrs and all things she does that you can't see she's the exact same Queen who is doing everything you re convinced she is not. Wild smh

----

Still sleep deprived, hope it makes sense