Look, I'm not an idol killer. I'm simply not. I'm an idol apologist. I stand up for Stevie Wonder's now borderline laughable career (I even publicly big upped the fucking JONAS BROTHERS in an effort to do this. Stevie, you owe me at least one more good album before you die.), I act like the 90's didn't exist for Springsteen, I cover up for Prince's erratic behavior, and even more erratic albums, and I act like Jay-Z never swore he was retiring after the Black Album. The generation prior to me made a living out of killing their idols, so the way I see it, I at least owe it to musical karma to make up for it.That said, I guest wrote a piece for a friend's zine recently where I took aim at Lady Gaga, and the frustrating state of solo female pop music. Gaga is typical fare, and does nothing new. Which, in and of itself, isn't terribly bad. It's when the PUBLIC acts as though it's new that draws my ire a bit. It seems as though Gaga (it pains me to continually type this. All the good names must be taken, eh guys?) is the new go-to girl with urban/pop appeal, as she appeared on rapper Wale's lead single, "Chillin'", released this month. This event is what irked me to the point where writing was necessary. This was an obvious forced collaboration, not that UMG's label head Sylvia Rhone tried to hide the fact, which made the song unlistenable, basically. Here's the main gripe. Gaga is a mediocre vocalist, by almost every and any way you measure vocal ability, she doesn't craft her own music, or write her own lyrics, as it has the mass produced sound of much mainstream pop, and other then light tickling of a synth here and there, she's not much for instruments. What she does have, however, is sex appeal, and lots of it. Shortly after her first single, the somewhat infectious (I'll admit) "Just Dance" dropped, she was in Rolling Stone telling every lewd and sexual story she could. Now, first let me say, objective as I may be, and contrary to popular belief and general insults...I am a heterosexual male. And there are worse looking women on this earth than Ms. Gaga. That said, I have long railed against the "Why have talent when you can have sex appeal?" line of musical thought. And then, it hit me. I can't blame Gaga. Or even Spears, Aguilera (who actually does have talent, as we all know), Jessica, Rihanna, or any other host of barely post-teen popettes. It traces back to one person.
This is all Madonna's fault.
And, again, Madonna is very much entitled to the throne of pop music. No other female solo pop act has been able to compete, with the exception of maybe Janet Jackson, who we'll tackle later (sadly, not in the literal sense...), but Madonna set a precedent for changing the perception of sex, and even gender roles, from a mainstream musical standpoint. She took control of her own career, created her own image, stood up to firestorms of criticism, and until recently, made really, really good music. And we look at Madonna, as fans, critics, and enjoyers of music, and we wonder what makes her great. Like almost all of the aforementioned, she's a decent, but not brilliant vocalist, not an instrumentalist by any means, yes, she has a much better ear, and has greater pop craftsmanship than average, but she was, and to some extent still is, driven by her sex appeal. It's sold her albums, books, and...well.....probably not movies so much. But, she took "sex sells", and ran with it from a musical standpoint. Sex follows controversy follows units being moved. But, at least for a while, Madonna did it RIGHT. How great was the "Like A Prayer" video? I mean, even if you were offended, you had to be a little bit like, "shit....that was cool...", and she grew appropriately. In the 90's it's like every album, she used a new style, and even if it missed, you had to admire her for trying.
And then, something happened. All of those girls that were in the Mickey Mouse Club by day, but snuck off to watch Madonna videos at night? well....they grew up. And suddenly, at around 1999 or so, Right after "Ray Of Light" got showered with acclaim, and awards, Madonna found herself competing with 18 year old clones of herself. One might say that it rings unfair, and I can't disagree, that at over 40 years old, and coming off of your biggest critical success, you have to be faced with sexier, younger talent...who can dance better than you ever could. Chief among those, of course, was Ms. Britney Spears. In the Rolling Stone Immortals tribute to Madonna (who was ranked the 36th greatest artist of all time, by the way...), Spears opened her gushing, run-on sentence of a tribute with the line, "I'm sorry, but I'd rather meet Madonna than the president of the United States." Which, though she got flak for it, I appreciated. Spears, Willa Ford, Jessica Simpson, etc, represented the wave of girls who grew into women through Madonna's music....yet, it just turned out that Madonna created a misguided monster. These girls-now-women missed the point, and just draped everything in as much sex as possible, so that people didn't notice their lack of talent. I exclude Christina Aguilera at this point, because she has thankfully departed from the stigma that was attached to her through her first two records, and now we know she's got one of the best voices in modern music.
But, damn, Jessica Simpson?? Oh, sweet....we get it. You're all soaped up and washing the General Lee. That's hot. Nothing gets me going more than bikinis and confederate flags. Gee, it sure is good that Willie Nelson is here to help you through that fit of seizures that you call dancing. Willa Ford, and a handful of others simply fizzled out, although I do have "I Wanna Be Bad" on a mix CD somewhere (Again, I AM a heterosexual male. I know what you're thinking...), so we for a time were left with Spears, and Spears alone. And I'll say this, I'm not a Britney fan. But, for that brief time, lets call it....1998 until about 2002 or so...I saw why she worked, I saw some of the creativity and brightness that Madonna had hoped to inspire . The Spears/Madonna collaboration, "Me Against The Music", to me, stands as one of about 3 tolerable Britney songs. And then, and even MORE odd thing happened....when N'Sync collapsed, and that type of pop just kind of fizzled out, not only did Britney start grasping for any reason to stay relevant, but Madonna joined her. The saddest moment in Madonna's career, aside from the "American Life" album that was released shortly before this incident, was the infamous kiss at the VMA's. First off, how awkward was Aguilera at the time? like, did she really NEED to be there? I never got the media's insistence on making us feel like Spears and Aguilera could stand each other. Second, Britney and Madonna kissing wasn't sexy. Or edgy. Or even the least bit attractive (Hetero Male. Hetero Male.)...if I want to watch two people fake affection as their careers go up in flames, I'll just look for a picture of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes. As I watched Spears and Madonna tasting each other's desperation replayed on every station ad nauseum, I turned to my girlfriend at the time, and simply exclaimed, "This is fucking MADONNA!! why is she doing this?? she doesn't need this!!"....and she wisely agreed.
I blame that sole moment, and not the whole of Madonna's career for the brand of female pop we have now. Spears' decline is well documented. Yeah, can she still pack a house? sure. But so does Monday Night Raw. Somewhere, Spears tried to re-invent herself, and forgot that musically, she's so limited, that she needs to exist in moments like "Gimme More", which is a simple, infectious beat, long, repetitive chorus, and as few lyrics as possible. Which, in itself speaks to a sad state of music. And Madonna is flailing right along with her. Reinventing yourself a few times here and there is cool. Beyond that, it just gets annoying. She's released nothing since 2000's "Music" that's been good, despite winning a few awards here and there because, well....she's Madonna. All this has shown girls who have traced her career trajectory, or more importantly, label executives that have traced along, is that sex sells. They don't get the creativity behind it. Yeah, Seymour Stein was, and is, a label head. But he gave Madonna so much creative freedom to express herself when she was young, and never reeled her in when she crossed lines, which he knew would be important for women in the future. But, Spears should have been reeled in, and when she wasn't, she fell apart. Artists like Lady Gaga and Rihanna are so label, and industry created that it gets seen right through.
Janet Jackson, Super Bowl incident aside, has kind of been the antithesis of Madonna. Yes, both are sex symbols that have used sex as power, and controversy as record sales. Difference is, Janet Jackson is so comfortable in her legacy, and so secure in her career, a career which is brilliant, and has far surpassed her more popular brother's (Yes, I said it.), that she doesn't feel the need to grovel. Beyonce picked up her torch, and has carried it nicely, with little to no interference from Janet, which to me, speaks a lot to Janet's legacy. I won't ramble on about women empowering themselves, because I'd likely embarrass myself. But, until more creativity gets pushed WITH sex appeal, that side of pop music may always leave something to be desired.
At the end of Spears' Immortals write up on Madonna, she states, "As part of the generation that's coming up, you look at Madonna and you don't want to let her down."
How do you think she thinks that she's doing on that one these days?
In the meantime, I'm stickin' with Karen O, Katie White, M.I.A., and Chan Marshall.
No comments:
Post a Comment