Is Lady Gaga already becoming irrelevant?

[mirgro]

.:Dark Prince:. said:

mirgro said:

.:Dark Prince:. said:

The very same people that say that quality in (usually Nintendo's) casual games is subjective are bashing Lady Gaga and calling other performers "real-art". Hypocricy at it's finest.

Just because some people listen to upbeat, catchy songs instead of jazz or the old stuff doesn't mean they have no taste or they're listening to crap and not art. For me dance music is art, to some it isn't. Deal with it.

Actually no you can't. You can't call it art when it isn't, but you can call it your preference. Your opinion does not make things fact, and they can be easily wrong. Art has an actual definition, and you cannot say something is art that doesn't follow the definition. You can go ahead and call it "subjective art" or "art to me" but you cannot call it art because that is just wrong, hence you are wrong. Deal with itl

May i see that definition of art just to see why some artists fit to it but Gaga doesn't?

Art stimulates you intellectually and evokes emotion. Not just the "yea let's dance and drop some X" sort of emotion/intellect either. The best example is opera. I hate opera and find it to be one of the most boring things that has ever existed. However, and I know this experience is not just me, when I hear a good singer I get goosebumps and tears actually form in my eyes. I don't know what the hell they are singing about, or what it means, or really anything, but it still happens.

So no, Lady Gaga's songs are not art, they are just entertaining and that is what they will remain unless she does some amazing change. As I said you can call it "subjective art" or "my form of art," but if you call it actual art, then your opinion is wrong.