1. Why is Lady Gaga so loved by our generation?
2. Is Paglia biased tword the older gereation of music and thinking?
3. Is Gagas extreme wardrobe and overtly sexual lyrics "corrupting" our younger generation?
In response to Camille Paglia's "Lady Gaga and the Death of Sex" I will be answering all three of the questions above.
It seems like every time I turn on the radio a Gaga song is playing on at least one of the stations if not more. She is definitley loved by many people, but why? I agree with Paglia in the sense that her songs are a bunch of catchy nonsense that you cant help but get stuck in your head, but I think she is loved for alot more. Lady Gaga is not afraid to be put in the spot light thats for sure, she says what she wants and dresses in wildly outrageous costumes, and I commend her for that. She encourages self expression.. maybe not in the best way, but she does tell her "little monsters" that they ae beautiful just the way they are and I feel that this is why she is so loved by so many. Our youth today are bombarded by the superficial standards of what is beautiful. Even back when I was growing up I always felt the pressure to have the "supermodel" physique, and the fact the Lady Gaga takes the time to tell her fans that they are perfect the way they are and that self expression is a beautiful thing, I think, is why she has such a large fan base.
Now with all that said, I have to touch on Gagas Lyrics and outrageous outfits. Normaly I wouldent have a problem with extreme or avant garde outfits, which seem to be on trend these days, but Gaga takes it to the utmost extreme. It seems like everywhere she goes she is wearing some horrendously absurd costume (I think we all remember that all meat dress she wore a few years ago). What does all of this say to the younger generations? Gaga is undoutably a role model to many young adolescences and the fact that she is bringing sex and violence into her songs and performances could be taken in some circumstances as "corruption" of their inocence.
Ok enough with Gaga, on to the author. Camille Paglia does make some good points but all of what she is saying doesnt seem to be anything but a rant about how much she dislikes Gaga. Throughout the piece she is constantly comparing Gaga to older well known artists, mainly Madona. The piece as a whole just seems a little to one sided, favoring Madona and the other older artists. I never really understood what her argument truely was, it was mostly a piece about how much she dislikes Lady Gaga and how she favors other artists. I personaly was extremely confused by the end of the article because the author never really got to poving her title.. that Gaga is in fact " the death of sex ".
Friday, February 8, 2013
Friday, February 1, 2013
Be Well Informed
David Weinberger's A Marketplace of Echos is basically asking if these "coffee shop forums" and "echo caves" are dentramental or helpful to the way we argue.
1. Is the internet giving us more or less diversity?
2. Are these echo caves detramental?
3. Is the internet strengthaning our beliefs of "brainwashing us"?
Im going to address a little of all of these questions.
Yes i think the internet is giving us more diversity but i feel its what we do with that diversity that defines us.
This is where the "echo caves" come in. The use of these sites and forums I believe are detramental to the way we think and therfore the way we act. Upon entering these forums dedicated to only onesided topics we are immersed in a sea of people that all have the same veiws and opinions as us. This only sterenghtens our veiws making another oppinion seem way more out in left feild than it may really be. At this point the other side of the argument may seem irrelavent to others and once they enter into an argument they may not even stop to concider what the other individual has to say, thinking their oppinon is right no matter what.
That is what I mean when i say "brainwashed". Are these sites helping us to better understand our position or are they just strengthening them to the point that our side is all we can see on that subject? Arguments should be held not only to convey your side of the oppinion but also the see the opposing argument as the other person does. This doesnt mean you have to convert you opinion, but at the end of the argument you should come out enlightened in a sense with a better understanding of the other side of the argument. I think these "echo caves" are brainwashing us in a sense that we can no longer take the opposing argument into concideration, thus loosing the whole point of arguing.
In conclusion I think that the forums mentioned in A Marketplace of Echos are detramental to the way we think and argue. I have always belived in being fully informed on a topic before engaging in an argument with an individual, and these sites are making that very hard for some people.
1. Is the internet giving us more or less diversity?
2. Are these echo caves detramental?
3. Is the internet strengthaning our beliefs of "brainwashing us"?
Im going to address a little of all of these questions.
Yes i think the internet is giving us more diversity but i feel its what we do with that diversity that defines us.
This is where the "echo caves" come in. The use of these sites and forums I believe are detramental to the way we think and therfore the way we act. Upon entering these forums dedicated to only onesided topics we are immersed in a sea of people that all have the same veiws and opinions as us. This only sterenghtens our veiws making another oppinion seem way more out in left feild than it may really be. At this point the other side of the argument may seem irrelavent to others and once they enter into an argument they may not even stop to concider what the other individual has to say, thinking their oppinon is right no matter what.
That is what I mean when i say "brainwashed". Are these sites helping us to better understand our position or are they just strengthening them to the point that our side is all we can see on that subject? Arguments should be held not only to convey your side of the oppinion but also the see the opposing argument as the other person does. This doesnt mean you have to convert you opinion, but at the end of the argument you should come out enlightened in a sense with a better understanding of the other side of the argument. I think these "echo caves" are brainwashing us in a sense that we can no longer take the opposing argument into concideration, thus loosing the whole point of arguing.
In conclusion I think that the forums mentioned in A Marketplace of Echos are detramental to the way we think and argue. I have always belived in being fully informed on a topic before engaging in an argument with an individual, and these sites are making that very hard for some people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)