Lady Gaga: artist or charlatan?
Lady Gaga has been inescapable, unavoidable and omnipresent in 2009. She has worn an outfit composed entirely of Kermit the Frogs, carried a purple teacup round with her for no discernible reason for DAYS, pretended to die covered in blood onstage at the VMAs and gave a press conference through a gimp mask she insisted on referring to as a hat.
She is all surface, all Gaga and all faux couture explosion. In fact her facade is so successful I genuinely don’t think I would recognise her if she stood next to me at a bus stop and I see pictures of her every day at work! I heard someone refer to what she does as ‘art’ the other day and it got me thinking about whether I agree or not. I certainly think that up until maybe November I would probably have said yes – she played Lady Gaga so well the mask never slipped.
I guess that couldn’t last, though – earlier this month I started seeing magazines quoting her as explaining “Why I’m afraid of sex”. As far as I’ve understood ‘Gaga’ that’s not something she does or says. It feels as if, having successfully split her life into two parts, Stefani Germanotta is now trying to reunite the pieces. Bits of Stefani are now leaking into Gaga. It’s strange to see and I wonder what effect it will have on the persona.
What do you guys think? Artist or charlatan?
Lady Gaga: Artist or Charlatan?
1) She’s a true artist!
2) Nothing but a fraud and a charlatan!
3) No idea but she’s magnificentt!
4) Ugh – I can’t even bear to look at her!
5) I’m a free bitch, baby!