This is an online supplement to Maisonneuve’s print-only “The Music We Hate” feature (Issue 36, Summer 2010). To read Carl Wilson on Radiohead, Sean Michaels on Sufjan Stevens and more, buy the print edition in stores or contact us to order it.

A few months ago I got into a debate with a couple of friends over Lady Gaga. We listened to some songs. We watched the videos for “Bad Romance” and “Paparazzi,” then watched them again. “Don’t you see how avant-garde this is?” a friend asked. Or, later, “Don’t you think she gives us a more complicated view of female sexuality than other pop stars do?” I hung my head in despair.
Since the 2008 release of her debut album The Fame, Gaga has increasingly been showered with this type of praise from critics and supporters. She is called a visionary performance artist and compared to Andy Warhol; her music videos are hailed as ironic, intelligent critiques of gender conceptions, consumerism and celebrity.
But as far as I’m concerned, what Lady Gaga does is neither avant-garde nor particularly smart. (It’s clear that she herself disagrees, calling her “Telephone” video “groundbreaking,” for instance.) Musically, Gaga gives us the same vapid stuff pop stars have been churning out for years. And few notice that Gaga’s so-called “critiques” are staged through music videos that—like Britney’s or Christina’s before her—feature a platinum-blonde, airbrushed, scantily-clad star and a wealth of product placements. Yes, there’s a dose of the bizarre mixed in, perhaps to distract the audience from the fact that they’re seeing the same old thing. But Gaga claims to challenge celebrity culture while simultaneously revelling in her current ubiquity. This doesn’t make it any easier to believe that her persona is more than superficial: rooted in a desire to get more attention and sell more records and be more famous than anyone else.
That the twenty-four-year-old NYU dropout has managed to use nothing more than smoke and mirrors—and a huge amount of money—to convince much of the Western world that she’s doing something new and different is one of the more distressing realities to emerge from the pop music world of late. There’s no question that a lot of people think Gaga is the real deal. Time magazine recently named her to their “100 Most Influential People in the World” list. The editors of the well-known blog Feministing can’t get enough of her. And Meghan Vicks, a doctoral student in Comparative Literature, recently started a blog-slash-online journal called Gaga Stigmata, which publishes scholarly writing on Lady Gaga (most recent entry: “Rah, Rah, Ah-Ah-Ah (Ro-Ma, Ro-Ma-Ma): Lady Gaga, Hysteria, Commodity Feminism”). Why do we buy into this?
It’s not the fact that Lady Gaga has become a successful musician that pisses me off—if this was just about the meteoric rise of another pop star, I still wouldn’t like Gaga, but I wouldn’t hate her either. The difference is that, in this case, more is at stake. Gaga takes everything she touches—weirdness, feminism, being queer—and makes a carnival-esque spectacle of it. So rather than bringing the marginalized into mainstream acceptance, she draws attention to—maybe even reinforces—otherness. Instead of opening doors for independent women, for instance, Gaga setting a man alight and then reclining smugly next to his charred corpse (as in the video for “Bad Romance”) just strengthens our polarized vision of women as either meek or domineering, with nothing in between. That she does all this simply to cause a stir and sell records—convincing person after person that by consuming her cultural products they’re taking part in some novel, enlightened phenomenon—is maddening.
Part of why I dislike Gaga so much is because she has short-changed me. I want nothing more than a young, progressive star who’s going to use pop music to engage with society; who’s going to say, “No, I’m not going to get naked on the cover of GQ”; who’s going to fight back against the destructive superficiality of celebrity culture instead of urging audiences to “take my picture.” I’m still waiting for this person, but everyone else thinks they’ve found her in Lady Gaga. God help us if, in the annals of counter-culture pop stars, Gaga turns out to be the end of the line.
Amelia Schonbek is a Maisonneuve intern.
Related on maisonneuve.org:
—The Music We Hate: Destroyer
—The Music We Hate: Belle and Sebastian
—The Music We Hate: Timber Timbre
Subscribe to Maisonneuve — Follow Maisy on Twitter — Like Maisy on Facebook
The problem with what your saying is that you look at her pop music like all other pop music, you don't hear the words, nor do you jam down… maybe to other music, but you don't listen, I don't care if you've heard all the music, I bet you cannot tell me where pop evolved from… if you knew maybe you'd have some authority in the field but you do not seem to, I did not even read the rest of your article…I don't need to. All your stating is that your narrow minded, and okay with handing out rejection…what this beautiful lady is saying is that we don't need the borders and hate that exists in the world…she is a leader, and her sexuality is of no consequence because you yourself are sexual (hopefully). Given the choice would you take connections from other people in pain, or unable to relate..would you take that happiness away from them? if so your no creature of God, so be careful how you speak, and look up the definition of the word “expression” don't ever forget what that word means, because if you were not so relentlessly conservative you would not suppress the world around you to act out and grow in a more wild direction, for we are the results of each other….remember.
Posted by Matthew Tiller on June 27, 2010
Regarding the above…. What?
I mean, what?
Matthew Tiller, I don't agree with the critque in this article myself, but your comment does the impression of. something. Drugs* maybe?
*Note that you are free to use drugs if you so like, you will never be subjected to my meaningless judgement for that, but I gotta say that the very act of being in an altered state will generally inhibt communication with ppl who are in other states. i.e. Don't do Drugs (And Comment :P )
Amelia Schonbek, This is gonna be harsh, but if you are intelligent enought to write such an interesting article, you deserve to feel unplesant (pissed off, maddened and short-changed). I mean really, expecting a form of this 'counter-culture' from a mainstream artist? [I have different defintion of it myself: Reaction to mainstream culture, that defines the things it sees as 'good' by what mainstream views as 'bad'.]
I feel you are unlikely to see the celberity that dosen't do the whole “take my picture” kind of thing. It is that and the ability to make music enough people enjoy that generally make fame.
The above is why “counter-culture pop stars” seems like an oxymoron to me. It's the stars bit, not the pop btw.
Posted by BeepSmile on September 8, 2010
I enjoyed reading your review. I've been somewhat baffled about the mass hysteria with which lady gaga is revered, particularly in the queer communinity. I never knew how to express it though (or maybe just didn't care enough). This review seems to have put words to my feelings. When I heard so many of my LGBT peeps raving about her as some kind of avant-guard heroine I thought, queer+avant guard? Gotta check it out. But I was disapointed. Could not get beyond the dull thump-thump-thump and boum-chickaboum of her poppiness. Sorry I know we are not supposed to be snobs about pop but it does nothing for me.
Posted by Luna on September 10, 2010
A little question,
If shes just another normal celebrity,
then why is she so damn famous..why do all these people think she is different? Why haven't they seen by now that's she just another Madonna or Britney Spears or something?
Posted by Sasha on September 19, 2010
Beyond the despicable relativity of taste, class and time, you might want to take a look at what is probably the most pertinent (and rather exhaustive) critique of the gaga phenomenon, below:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/magazine/article389697.ece
Posted by ntzsch on December 28, 2010
There's no such thing as progress or counter-culture, and if there is it will never from celebrities and it won't involve “not going naked” or fighting back against “destructive superficiality”.
Posted by Adam on June 24, 2010