For anyone who missed out on the Madonna chapter in our book, not to worry...I've got you covered. While I can't say I was the biggest fan of A. reading the wrong chapter or B. the chapter itself, I inadvertently stumbled onto my topic for this blog post. Sex sells music videos. No denying that. Hundreds of artists have tried to cash in on provocative content.
But what about those videos that are truly unforgettable? The ones that keep people talking, whether they liked it or not? The magic word: controversy. And when you pair sex with strong religious overtones, themes, and imagery...you strike a chord with people on both sides and create...you guessed it...controversy. Fierce loyalties and strong opinions lead to a lasting dialogue, and the longer we talk, the more money they make.
As the author of the chapter said, "...it takes effort to remember when Madonna videos were not moldy oldies on VH-1." So for those of you, like me, who would get smashed in an 80's Pop Culture trivia challenge, let's start the discussion with someone you know. Someone whose wardrobe, music, and image scream promiscuity. Someone whose lyrics contain so many explicit sexual references you wonder how certain songs clear the FCC for daytime radio. Someone with music videos so controversial they've been both banned and censored from YouTube and MTV. Someone whose taste for shock value rivals that of even Madonna.
Meet...Lady Gaga.
Labeled this generations's "Queen of Controversy," Lady Gaga is known for her taste for taboos. With her music video for her latest single—Alejandro—she's lived up to her name. I'll embed the video below, but be advised...it's racy, raunchy, and unsettlingly risqué.
For those of you who want to spare yourselves from its graphic nature, here's a brief description of the controversial imagery that's causing public outcry. I'm not inclined to rehash it in detail, so I found a blip from FOXNews that I believe does it justice.
"The pop princess, real name Stefani Germanotta, recently released the music video for her single “Alejandro” and has sparked quite the outcry given its saturation of controversial imagery, including her swallowing rosary beads in a latex-version of a nun’s habit, holding the crucifix in front of her crotch and simulating group sex with a bunch of beefed-up men, who are nearly naked save for underwear and high heels."
As expected, Gaga has received quite a bit of praise for pushing the envelope. But this song is the first that has had an overwhelming negative response from the music community. Music critics have called the religious elements of the video "confusing" and "over-the-top." They fail to see how the religious imagery ties into the video's narrative (which the video's director, Steven Klein, describes as "the character's battle between the dark forces of this world and the spiritual salvation of the soul).
Fellow pop artists are voicing criticisms as well.
Despite her skin-baring spreads for magazines and highly provocative lyrics, singer Katy Perry launched an attack on Gaga's Alejandro video back in June. In a twitter post, Perry said "blasphemy as entertainment is as cheap as a comedian telling a fart joke." In a later interview with Rolling Stone she spoke up again, referencing Gaga's video before saying, "I think when you put sex and spirituality in the same bottle and shake it up, bad things happen."
Like A Prayer, one of the highest selling-singles of Madonna's career, featured similarly controversial religious images. Complete with a gospel choir, Madonna's passionate kiss and implied sexual encounter on an altar with a black Jesus, seductive dancing in front of burning crosses, and a clearly drawn comparison between Christ's suffering and the suffering of a man who has been wrongly accused of rape (and is later cleared by Madonna's Good Samaritan act of testifying on his behalf), it's clear that this video is rife with religious imagery. It caused so much fall-out with religious communities that Pepsi withdrew a very lucrative ad campaign to save itself from from being labeled as "the blasphemous cola."
Madonna, on the other hand, defended her video. She said, "Passion and sexuality and religion all bleed into each other for me ... I think I’m religious in the broadest sense of the word, and I am very sexual in that I’m very aware of my sexuality and other people’s, and am very interested in it."
Not a very strong defense, but that's how some artists see it. They see music as an arena for artistic expression and see no lines, no restrictions, no protected territory. They play on the most sensitive issues because they feel those elicit the strongest emotions and leave the greatest impact...good or bad.
But my question to you is if it's right. I realize our bias and conservative tendencies, but try and think of it from a free speech perspective. Is this ok? Can you juxtapose religion and sex to make a statement? How about to make a buck?
And another angle...how does this affect religion? Does it undermine that which is sacred? Or do the religious symbols retain their value because people simply write these controversial videos off as cheap attempts at producing shock value?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs most of you, looking at those videos made me feel uncomfortable. However, even though I don’t agree with this mix of religion and sex, I think they are a sample of what the misunderstanding of freedom of speech can do. Everyone is allowed to express what he or she thinks in the way the want. However, if Lady Gaga and Madonna want people to respect their freedom of speech, they also need to respect other people’s beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI feel what lady Gaga and Madonna are trying to do is call people’s attention by opposing to what is established. I don’t think these videos affect directly any specific Christian religion but they may offend people from other religions.
These videos definitely call media attention due to their offensive and controversial content, which is not even directly related to the songs’ lyrics.
-Stefani Leyva
To expand on what you say in your post, sex most definitely speaks to the "soul." It sells. And, it DEFINITELY sparks controversy.
ReplyDeleteFor me, although some of the videos you posted were quite remarkable in their shock-factor, I think they prove just how powerful the medium of music and then its translation especially to film/music video can really be. ESPECIALLY when the topic is sex. These examples are great in proving the power of (either for good or bad) the freedom of speech and the potentially impacting messages they bring to their audience - on this level, their MASS audience.
Not to contradict anyone or any one of thinking though, I find it remarkable when artists choose to push the envelope this way. Although it is sometimes clear that their intentions are to simply spark controversy and be in the next headline for celebrity purposes, I think it sparks powerful debate across the mass audience. Especially concerning religion. It gets people going! And this is exciting to me! Lady Gaga can wear this or that with an intention (quite possibly) to knowingly offend a conservative Christian/Catholic audience, but ironically, she seeks to become a symbol of political speech speaking out against the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy at the MTV Video Music Awards. It's amazing that one can knowingly offend so many and then, fight for those she feels have experienced the greatest of offense when it comes to the United States' military... without even thinking she was willing to offend as the offender. It's interesting to me... Now that she's on this "become a celebrity symbol for EVERY social injustice issue in America EVER" kick. It's ironic, I think (just at the VMAs - vegetarian/vegan promotion, fight against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" most publicly, become your own CRAZY expressive person by wearing anything and everything etc.).
To answer your question more directly, it is most definitely FREE SPEECH. Bottom line. Although the messages are risque, we don't HAVE to watch or buy into any of it. And neither does the mass audience/public. We just have to take it for what it's worth... and for me, I just take it as unique social commentary, quite frankly, no matter how disappointed I may be in our society when it comes to the degrading reverence for organized religion or even basic spirituality. And to be blunt, this is not the first time religion and sex have been juxtaposed on a large scale to make a statement/point. And to do so all while making a buck? Of course. It's been that way for a while now. Doesn't mean it's right, morally or ethically we may argue, but it's not going to change for now. SEX SELLS. IMAGES SELL. AND PUSHING THE ENVELOPE WITH SEX AND COMPELLING VIDEO... IT'S PROVEN IT SELLS EVEN MORE. AND THE AUDIENCE IS STILL BUYING IT (even in some cases not for the social commentary itself which I tend to enjoy analyzing - alarmingly and disgustingly enough... sometimes it's just for the sex).
Of course artists are getting away with undermining that which large religious groups deem sacred... mockery will never be fully disregarded. But I will say this - I think more and more often, religion is standing their ground, unaffected by these media stints of social commentary through the juxtaposition of sex and religion, because so many artists are doing it now to try and be "cutting edge" and push the envelope further than the last guy did. Sorry, celebs, I don't think your audience gives you as much credit as you think they do... we don't buy that all of you have such a broad interpretation of spirituality like Madonna has (had?). We're not stupid. You seem to be if you really think your ideas are anything close to revolutionary concerning the presentation of these two ideas together at the forefront of new media technology. We're used to it by now - we're numb to your "revolution!"
-Brittany Glas, COMMS482-Blog C Response
-BrittanyGlas@gmail.com
As artists continue to create songs and music videos like those that Lady Gaga and Madonna have, the sacredness of religion will continue to be watered down. Religion means something different to every individual person. Because of my beliefs in religion and how I believe it should be approached, these types of portrayals are very offensive. But because religion has the ability to mean something different to every person, it is subject to being portrayed as the artist sees it.
ReplyDeleteWhen Madonna said she believes religion, sexuality and passion all go together, she has the ability to portray religion in whatever light she chooses. The sad thing to me is that instead of shunning these portrayals of religion that are so contrary to our Latter-day Saint beliefs, people have become obsessed with videos and songs like Alejandro thereby making them the type obscene popular culture that defines our society today.
And another angle...how does this affect religion? Does it undermine that which is sacred? Or do the religious symbols retain their value because people simply write these controversial videos off as cheap attempts at producing shock value?
ReplyDeleteWell, as in the case of the Gaga video, I only briefly saw bits and pieces when it came out and chose to turn it off because it was too weird for my taste. Thinking back on it, religion is NOT the first thing that came to mind. I do now vaguely remember religious undertones but they didn't leave an impact like the overbearingly racy images did.
Initially I did not think that it was polluting religion, but that may be because it's so often done that I'm desensitized. As a result I feel as though it's not leaving an impression until I have to sit and reflect on the sacred matter at hand. Although I may not use a cross to symbolize my faith, those who do and live a religious lifestyle are probably offended to a degree. I also believe people understand it's Lady Gaga and expect that she will cross the line any chance she gets.
I think that the vast majority of people belong to a religion but may not practice their faith as diligently as those we surround ourselves with at BYU. That said, religion used in pop culture and media may not have a very profound statement unless it's included under the direction of Country music. Religion in media has a wide range of influence. I'll be honest, if I'm listening to an acoustic guitar song, I'm much more likely to have a spiritual connection and see music through a religious lens than if i'm listening or even watching a Gaga song.
So I guess I'll conclude by adding that it simply depends on your preferences, demographics and religious affiliations that controls whether sex sells and if religion is seen as being perverted.
Great post chelsey...really got me thinking.
ReplyDeleteThe first time i saw Alejandro I was shocked. She got me, if lady gaga wanted shock value reactions, I was a sucker for her technique. What struck me the most however, that you didn't mention....but I think needs to be pointed out, is that not only was religion a subject for her controversy, but her support of the gay and lesbian community. After seeing alenjandro I heard some talk in the news about her intent in the music video to involve the homosexuality card with the sexuality card and mix it with religion.
It does go to prove that her popularity and her media coverage based on shock value are not only earning her HUGE amounts of money, which i bet she doesn't mind, but also accomplishing a political and social agenda that lady gaga has. Of course we can't miss her support of don't ask don't tell and other political causes she has spoken out for.
So in my opinion, lady gag is not only trying to make money, and succeeding at it, creAte shock and popularity, which she is succeeding at, but also tackling a social and political agenda and gaining me coverage than any lucky politician.
Smart if you ask me, but that doesn't mean i agree with it.
She takes it as her responsibility to push boundaries, and I would say that she crosses the line in most cases, but the weird thing is, in this conservative majority country she is still listened to and idolized....which is the mystery to me...so until people stopp giving her fuel by listening to her and purchasing what she has to offer, in my opinion she is completely within her right of free speech and he commercialist right to produce music.
When you ask is it right? I can't say yes it is right and maybe that is because of my bias. But yes I do believe it is protected under our first amendment right. It does not only protect the people that want to talk about conservative or nice things. It lets people be creative and controversy comes along with this creativity. Hollywood stars are trying to stand out and be remembered and one of these tactics used by people like Lady Gaga or Eminem is controversy.I think it does work for them and they obviously get a lot of attention for it. Many people wonder why Lady Gaga is so weird but I think it is a show and she is using this creativity to be remembered. She is "weirder" than any other star I can think of but that makes her memorable. Also she gets away with a lot of things because she is who she is and people have learned she is going to be absurd.
ReplyDeleteAs for how this effects religion, I do think that the value is still retained for the religious symbols. It probably gives them more attention actually. But I do believe it starts to desensitize people from the sacred nature of the symbols. However I do think that it is more our job not to watch these music videos rather than complain about how bad they are. In my point of view because we have free agency, this is the bad side of it and now it is our job to make sure we use our free agency to stay away from it.
Of course this causes controversy. It's like burning a pig on the altar. They've taken the sacredness of intimacy between spouses and crapped all over it.
ReplyDeleteWhat better way to make a buck than create controversy? The best way to make money is to get noticed. If I sell the greatest set of knives in the world, but nobody outside my neighborhood knows about them then I'm stuck with just a few bucks. If I can break into the mainstream and get the word out, then I'm raking in the money.
These artists have to do something that spreads the word. Now, of course they are established by this point, but they still need to continue to sell their image. They have to keep doing this in order to stay relevant.
Does this undermine that which is sacred? Yes. The reason something is sacred is because it is privileged. There is an element of respect associated with it. The Christian world holds marriage as a sacred institution. When these artists exploit the sacred intimacy that should only be shared between two individuals and not for the world to be seen, they are disrespecting the sacredness that should exist there for Christianity.
As we can see from the response from even the music community, Lady Gaga's outright disregard for that which is sacred to some is like a slap in the face. All she wants is for people to talk about her and talk about her music... and that's what it's done. Like Candi admitted, it does create quite a reaction. I had never watched these videos and I found myself trying to analyze every move she made and every image that was created in the video. I tried to find deeper meaning, but maybe it just went over my head. I couldn't understand why she included all of the sex images. But then again, I'm not in it for the money.... and I think that's all it's about. Publicity, controversy, debate.... they all just add up to more money.
ReplyDeleteI feel almost bad watching the videos. Sex is something that I feel should not be so openly discussed and ridiculed. I agree that we have freedom of speech, but I feel like this isn't to make a point or to fight for something. These videos are to push the boundaries and make money.
Beth Grimmett
It is their agency and right to be able to do what they want. On that same note though, it is our agency and right to ignore their music. If you feel that what they are saying is immoral then don't listen. But you can't deny them their right to do what they want.
ReplyDeleteThe challenge becomes, what do we do when we like the music, we enjoy the beat but the lyrics are something with disagree with? Lady Gaga is a good example of someone who most of her songs have a catchy beat and fairly clean lyrics but when there is a music video like this, how do we react? Do we ban Lady GaGa completely, do we just listen to the songs and not the music video, or do we accept everything has it is? I do the middle ground mostly. I choose to ignore the medium that is specifically wrong. So if I can't see her getting busy in a music video but I still want to listen to the song on my ipod, well all the better.