Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
Have you guys ever heard of the band SSION?
They have an awesome track called “Clown”, which borrows lots of elements from Madonna’s Holiday and Everybody
It doesn’t sound as a rip-off. If anything, it is a well-done homage. It’s not pretentious and it’s pure fun.
When I listen to this track, it makes me smile every time I recognize a Madonna reference (including a few lines from “keep it Together”) hidden underneath (there are many).
That’s not all. There’s more:
The band (pronounced /shn/ as in “passion”) also recreated the choreography in Madonna’s Holiday circa 1982/83. It’s awesome:
See Madonna doing the same steps in 1982/83:
Gaga Reductive needs to learn how to pay homage properly. But she can’t. She comes off as a wannabe even when she doesn’t try.
Have you ever heard of SuperAmanda or seen her listal page where she claims Madonna ripped off Marilyn Monroe and several other Hollywood icons? Just wondering what, if any, opinion you have about that? Thank you.
I heard about this person in the comments section of a blog called Gaga Cheat. One of the discussions there was that she was accusing the person responsible for that blog and mine of being the same (plus a bunch of other delusional stuff). So all I know about her and the kind of ludicrous things she says is from there.
I haven’t even checked her website because it sounds so lame. I mean, comparing Madonna to Marilyn Monroe and calling it a “rip off” is the utmost gesture of ignorance and lack of knowledge. This kind of comparison and accusation can only be made by people with no understanding of the subject at all.
You see, unlike Lady Gaga, who egotistically talks about herself as an “original” artist, and makes a huge effort to be seen as the real deal; Madonna has never disguised her influences, nor has she pretended to have re-invented the wheel (even though she has been groundbreaking in several moments of her career).
The comparisons between Lady Gaga and Madonna versus Marilyn Monroe and Madonna come from two different worlds. You see, Lady Gaga is a popstar whose existence takes place in the very same realm Madonna helped build. Without Madonna, there would be no Lady Gaga (as we know her). Whereas Madonna and Monroe came from two different fields in entertainment, and the non-existence of Monroe (a star from Hollywood’s Golden age) would not have affected Madonna’s career as a singer/songwriter.
What comes to mind when one thinks of all matters related to Gaga?
Broadly speaking: pop music performer, sexually charged videos, gay activist, outspoken and stuff like that.
What comes to mind when one thinks of Madonna?
Pop music performer, sexually charged videos, gay activist, outspoken and a bunch of other stuff.
The thing is: Madonna did it all decades before Gaga, when no other female was doing it (at least not on the same level and rate).
On the other hand, what comes to mind when one thinks of Marilyn Monroe?
Broadly speaking: gorgeous actress, a sex symbol often referred to as a “bimbo”, innocent, and somewhat clueless.
Madonna has never embodied innocence, cluelessness, or any other trait that could make her look like a “bimbo”. She has always been in charge, she has always been two steps ahead of everybody else (the complete opposite of Marilyn Monroe), and that has been Madonna’s trait since her boytoy days.
But they (Madonna and Monroe) do share a few common traits. They both emit sensuality and sexuality. That’s why the media paired Madonna with Monroe even before the Material Girl video came out.
To make it easy and simple, Lady Gaga’s career was built on Madonna’s career: the music, the connection with fashion, the activism, the style. Everything. It’s a no brainier. Whereas Madonna’s career has nothing to do with Monroe’s career, or any other Hollywood star. That’s how shallow and pointless comparisons between Madonna and actors from the Golden Age are.
The aesthetics and visual inspirations Madonna has taken from actors, choreographers, painters and designers have nothing, or very little, to do with her work as a pop musician. The song Material Girl would still be the same if its video had been a spoof of a Jane Russel movie scene, and not Monroe’s. Or if Marilyn Monroe had never existed, the platinum-blond-lock look that Madonna sported years later, would still have existed through Jayne Mansfield, Marlene Dietrich, Barbara Lang and oh-so-many others.
It’s a little too desperate, pathetic, and above all, uneducated, when someone says “Madonna copied Monroe, or Dietrich, or Bette Davis”. The moments Madonna visually channeled those stars, it was just on “the look” department, and not on the core of her work.
What if Material Girl had never been filmed for a video? The song would still be in the album (just as other songs from the same album that did not get a video). What if Vogue didn’t get a video either? The song would still have existed and kicked ass. What if the video for Vogue had been inspired by Marie Antoinette, just like the MTV performance? You see, the imagery could have been different, but the music would have been the same.
So comparing the visual inspirations Madonna took from Marilyn Monroe and several other Hollywood icons is just so uneducated and mindless that is a waste of time paying attention to it.
On the other hand, when Lady Gaga channeled Madonna on the song Born This Way, or on the video for Alejandro, Madonna’s presence is in both: looks and content of the work. If Lady Gaga were 70 lbs heavier and still a brunette, Born This Way would still sound like Madonna’s Express Yourself. The concept for the Alejandro video would still be related to Madonna’s Like a Prayer, Vogue and X-Static Process video installation. That happens because Madonna’s “DNA” is not solely on the aesthetics Gaga approaches, but it is on what she does, the medium she works.
It’s tricky to discuss originality when it comes to visual style, though. The elements that form and shape its “image” are not really tangible or concrete here. Whereas in other art forms related to image, such as painting or photography, the “model” can be traced back to. For instance, if I take a picture of the Brooklyn bridge or paint it on canvas, you can appreciate my art and still go to NYC and cross the bridge yourself. My inspiration would be a real, tangible object. But who can pinpoint with precision who “defined” the blonde bombshell look? Nobody. We can point at certain iconic figures and use them as stylistic reference, but never really define one single person as the “origin” of the style of an era.
In other words, the big picture on the whole Madonna/Gaga thing is that Lady Gaga has copied Madonna’s style and career stunts. And the worst part is: Gaga often denies it, which is one of the reasons why she pisses people off.
With images like this…
… it is kind of mind-blowing that Gaga has the audacity to go on TV and while talking specifically about style, say she is “inspired by no one”.
Which makes people like Super Amanda even more pathetic, because they think they are doing the world a favor for “revealing” Madonna’s visual inspirations. Little they know that, unlike Lady Gaga, Madonna reveals her inspirations. She discloses and embraces them all the time. Always has. Fast-forward to second 0:35:
Thank you for writing.