Since her genie in a bottle days, I've been an avid Christina Aguilera fan. I've watched Christina grow and mature as an artist. She got us feeling all hot and bothered, filthy, literally Dirrty back in 2002 with the first single from her sophomore release, Stripped. I must admit; I was slightly skeptical of her overzealous sexual direction. I'm not prudish. But the transition into more "adult" content like, "I'm a sex kitten in heat" is so superfluous. Still, she took bold chances both lyrically and musically with her new sexed up persona. I think it paid off. 'Dirrty' the first single didn't chart well. But, 'Beautiful, Fighter, and Can't Hold us Down', were all chart toppers. Each video and single, showcased Aguilera's vocal talent and versatility. She embraced a marketable feminist philosophy lambasting sexism and homophobia in her songs.
Christina solidified her musical and artistic credibility. Stripped sold millions. And a few years later in 2006, she emerged with Back to Basics, paying homage to the smooth jazz, r&b, and pop influences of the past 50+ years. Today, to anyone paying attention, Christina has evolved stylistically. Currently, on her fourth studio release of new material (I'm not including her spanish lp or the greatest hits cd) 'Bionic' she's delving into the realm of electronic pop. Electronica is the new zeitgeist in pop music. And if I'm being honest, Lady Gaga has helped to maintain and usher in the dance/electronica vibe. She's a great bricoleur. She's capitalized on the obtuse hunger for fashion, style, hyperbole in pop music. Let's face, what's a pop star if he or she can't play in the realm of fantasy? Gaga has done well. She's crafted songs that are catchy, to the point of nasseum, and videos that are artistic and visionary. But, and here is a very big BUT, she hasn't produced anything really original. Buzz and hype maybe, but the public's current obsession with Gaga is amusing. I like her; I am a fan. But, I don't give her credit for any of the aesthetic styles she appropriates. She is not original. And if you think she is. Look up original in the dictionary. Trust me; you will not find a picture of Lady Gaga next to it. Lady Gaga is what she is and she doesn't seem to take herself too seriously. Maybe that is what makes her so appealing. I think it is easy and a typically simplified observation to claim Christina Aguilera has jumped on the Lady Gaga train. Christina has tried to push the envelope before and she's doing it again with 'Bionic'. The current issue of Rolling Stone describes Christina as getting into Lady Gaga Drag. The writer didn't do his research. Augilera and Gaga are as similar as apples and oranges. Beyond the blonde hair and similar vocal inflections, the two women are drastically, distinctively different. Both women are dominant forces in pop music. Each has a unique voice and are wildly entertaining. Can we (as a consuming public) not just appreciate them both for what they bring to pop music? I know; it's a lot more amusing to pit women against each other. Why not just bring out the mud and kiddy pool? Enjoy the following videos; they are two of my favorites.
Is style really just a matter of taste? In pop music, however, style is everything, simply put, image is everything. Crafting, developing, and selling a contrived image is the foundation of most, if not all, popular culture's productions. Selling images that resonate within particular audiences, (young girls ages 12-17) is the sugar, refined, non-artificial, pure South Colombian cane that makes the product oh so sweet. Images that are provocative, fantastical, ostentatious, hyperbolic, and creative give consumers a meaningful product. Current pop music phenomenon, Lady Gaga, is no exception. I describe her as a phenomenon simply because her success, or the rise of her star, has seemingly happened over night and shows signs of lasting. In just two short years, Gaga, as she prefers to be called, has taken the pop music industry by storm. She's had multiple number Billboard hits, won awards, sold out stadiums, and produced album sales in the 6 digits, a true feat in these days of digital downloads. Subsequently, with fame, comes criticism and Gaga has had her fair share. In recent blogs, other pop divas have reportedly attacked Gaga, claiming she stole or jocked their style. Most noteworthy is Grace Jones, who says Gaga has ripped off her style. By style, I'll assume most of these complaints are based upon Gaga's fashion choices. But style can encompass an array of cultural meanings, image, aesthetic, even communication. The term itself is an umbrella term that in popular contexts comes to represent multiple significations. According to an interview posted on IDOLATOR.com, Grace Jones states, “Well, you know, I’ve seen some things she’s worn that I’ve worn, and that does kind of piss me off.” Apparently, Grace is mad as hell and she's not taking it anymore, off with the gloves--the girls are about to go toe to toe. Come on just picture it, Gaga vs. Grace the ultimate battle. Whether or not Grace Jones is truly "pissed off" isn't so important. However, what her statements reveal about style is for more interesting. Since, style is so amorphous in popular culture, no one artist can really claim ownership of a particular fashion aesthetic. While in the 80s, Jones was a provocateur of high fashion, avante-garde style. She was by no means its creator. Moreover, fashion inspires both women's "look". Like Madonna, Cyndi Lauper, Janet Jackson, these women capitalized on an image that would propel them to the top. They captured an audience that felt empowered by their image because they seemed to resist the common cultural terrain for femininty. Still, most of these so called beefs are really about media attention. And I'll end with a line from Bonnie Rait, -"Let's give'em something to talk about." The kids are talking.
Enjoy the videos
Reviewing, Not Myself Tonight, Christina Aguilera
The 'Not Myself Tonight' video hit the all "tubes" Friday and the Facebook, Twitter, and Media commentary has not been all too positive. I think it's easy to dismiss the video because Christina expresses herself within the confines of sexuality as most mainstream female pop stars do.
"Not Myself Tonight' represents a multiplicity of meanings, too many to deal with in a blog post. I like the video, more than the song. The song is pretty generic in terms of production. The pulsating drum beat gives it some flair. But, it sounds like it may have needed another edit. Ok back to the video. The intertextuality of the video can be read on multiple levels. Primarily, I think it's the classic "Good girl" vs "Bad Girl" narrative that dominates the video. Although the video is a rather derivative play on sexuality, I do think the clear connection to the lyrical content of the song adds depth to the images as a whole.
In the video, the "bad girl role" is presented as fantasy, that one can step outside or away from everyday hetro normative experiences and play in the realm of taboo. For example the video, opens with a zoomed in close-up of Christina. The platinum blonde hair and softer make-up help to emphasize the "good" girl image. Seconds later that shot is contrasted with multiple images of Christina in S&M garb. I think I counted 13 total outfit changes. The cherry red lipstick, harsh make-up, leather, lingerie, fire, black and red clothing help to emphasize Christina as the villain, the "bad" girl. The video ends with the same close-up face shot. Christina's "look" or "gaze" turns away from the camera. The ending, oh so important, the "look" reveals that maybe she's not so afraid of being herself tonight.
The problem with Whitehead’s argument is his reasoning. He primarily puts forth a false dilemma. Lady Gaga and pop music videos may influence teenagers of all shapes, creeds, colors, and sizes, simply because she and the medium she operates within are apart of what make pop culture popular. Communications Professor John Fiske suggests that “ popular culture is made in relationship to structures of dominance. This relationship can take two main forms—that of resistance or evasion” (2). The relationship Gaga has with her millions of fans is one of resistance. She, for them, signifies empowerment because she seemingly resist convention. Her hyperbolic excessive style and attitude creates solidarity among her fans. And for a lot of teens, anyone who seems to defy traditional gender or social roles is appealing. Whitehead’s argument could have been stronger if he'd attempted to deconstruct why “pornification” appears so pleasurable to millions of teens in American culture. Thus, to suggest that somehow Lady Gaga’s influence trumps other factors is a harsh generalization.
No comments:
Post a Comment