The question of mainstream versus individuality is a huge question facing niche artists. There’s an amazing article in the New Yorker that discusses Lady Gaga’s awkward position of making the weird and off-beat mainstream. As Sasha Fere-Jones puts it Gaga “knows that the one-hit wonders are weirder and cooler than the well-paid musicians who stretch their careers over seven years on the stage and twenty more behind it. Can she have it both ways?” Lady Gaga tries to be an artist, calling her label Haus of Gaga, pushing the limits with fashion, and name dropping high-brow philosophers.
She also thrives off being different. Recently Gaga wore a dress made out of real meat, created an elaborate music video for Alejandro, and in general is known as an unconventional pop-artist. She allows for music snobs to appreciate her music for intellectual reasons. The question is how long can that last and does it matter to her. In this day in age pop has become weirder. Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson represent the cookie cutter, bland pop of the 90’s. Now artists like Rihanna and Gaga are pushing ahead with a new brand of pop. They have music videos that are more elaborate, more disturbing, more violent, than any ground covered by Mandy Moore. The question is what happens when weird becomes normal? This phenomenon happens with any form of anything. For example, punk music went from extremely fringe with dangerous undertones to so mainstream that Disney stars like Selena Gomez often wear clothing formerly identified with punk style. Personally, I’m interested in seeing how mainstream will affect the fringe groups. If everything is normal, what is weird?
I have to say I agree with Frere-Jones: Lady Gaga can really sing, and she can really write. In addition to her musical skills, she is a master of the art of “image” which is so crucial for attracting an audience that can’t usually see past the image.