M.I.A. Trashes Lady Gaga: An Analysis of the Gaga Phenonmenon

You wouldn’t automatically think Lady Gaga and M.I.A. have much in common, the way Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera do. Gaga is pure pop and M.I.A. is experimental. In the current issue of NME (The New Musical Express: a popular magazine in the United Kingdom), M.I.A. complains, “Lady Gaga sounds more like me than I fucking do,” before the release of her upcoming album due out this summer. Yeah, Gaga and M.I.A. share a certain effortless raspiness in their vocals and infuse electro-pop elements in their music, but the claim is a bit much. Gaga’s rasp is showcased in her piano ballads like “Speechless” and “Again Again,” more so than in her Billboard charting dance tracks. In contrast, M.I.A.’s vocals are always raspy, plus she’s rapping, not singing. Oddly, M.I.A.’s comment simultaneously offends Lady Gaga and herself. This subtle pronouncement of self-deprecation reveals M.I.A.’s insecurity as an artist. So is M.I.A. simply jealous of Lady Gaga or is she just trying to say Lady Gaga is a copycat? The motive behind M.I.A.’s unprovoked verbal slap in the face to Lady Gaga is certainly questionable.

M.I.A. uses Lady Gaga as an example of commercial success, to contextualize the state of music in an era of excessive consumerism and overexposed celebrities who peddle products packaged with the empty promise of a bit of glamour for the average Joe. M.I.A. mentions Lady Gaga three times throughout the interview, and armored each time with a clever backhanded compliment and perhaps a tinge of jealousy. M.I.A.’s biting discourse on Lady Gaga has spurred mixed reactions from fans of both artists.

Lady Gaga fans believe M.I.A.’s comments were an attempt to spark controversy and garner media attention. Why would M.I.A. feel the need to assert her relevance in pop culture? Probably because she’s been M.I.A. from the music scene for the last few years and has yet to satisfy her fans with a follow-up to the mainstream success of Kala, her sophomore album released in 2007. It’s not about the fame or the money for M.I.A., which is clearly evident in her refusal to endorse products or participate in anything too trendy/commercial/mainstream or lacking in substance (whatever that means.) She was asked to record a song for a Twilight soundtrack, an offer which most artists would not hesitate to accept. She explains, “Luckily, Jimmy [Iovine, chairman of M.I.A.’s U.S. label Interscope] had beef with the Twilight people, so he stepped in and told them to fuck off.” It’s not surprising that M.I.A. would rather not be a part of the Twilight enterprise/phenomenon. She’s just too cool to be associated with something as trendy and campy as Twilight, but even Radiohead appeared on the Twilight soundtrack. Pitchfork Media, one of the most pretentious music review websites, calls out her out, saying “When it comes to film, M.I.A. only fucks with Best Picture winners and, um, trailers for pot movies, apparently.”

Is it elitist to be selective about what projects you’re a part of? Well, I guess it depends on your criteria. Obviously, M.I.A. isn’t willing to associate herself with anything considered “corporate” i.e. you’ll never see her endorsing an energy drink. Not selling-out is important to her. She’s not going to compromise her artistic integrity to cash in, unless it’s for a good cause, which really translates into backing her own political agenda. When she is asked if it’s possible for a musician to “sell-out” in 2010, she skirts the question and cites her so-called “selling-out” show for MTV. Her defense was “They paid me a hundred grand and I built a school with it in Africa.” I’ll give her credit for her philanthropy, but this response drips with pretension. M.I.A. knows she’s no longer underground. Commercial success has revoked her hipster credentials. In other words she has lost the respect of the “I only listen really obscure bands because I’m too cool to listen to anything on the radio” niche. Maybe, M.I..A. thought targeting the world’s biggest pop star with a mass following would somehow salvage her anti-establishment reputation. It’s like when Spin magazine said “Radiohead kinda blow.” Another article about how Radiohead is the “vanguard of music” is redundant and well, boring. M.I.A.’s verbal attack on Gaga was a cheap shot and it worked, but probably not in the way she intended.

Anyone who has read the NME article or the Gaga snippets, M.I.A. fan or not, can see her arguments were poorly thought out. M.I.A.’s main complaint is that Gaga isn’t progressive but a good mimic, who “models herself on Grace Jones and Madonna, but the music sounds like 20-year-old Ibiza music, you know?”  Gaga never claimed she was progressive. In fact, Gaga has said, “I’m just trying to reinvent Pop in a fresh way; I'm not trying to recreate the wheel. Everything’s sort of been done before; however I feel that I can make it feel new and fresh - and still be commercial.”

Lady Gaga has her monsters (pet name for her loyal fans) and she has her fair share of haters. You either believe she’s reinvented pop as we know it, or you think she’s a rip-off of Madonna. Whatever side you’re on, there’s no denying she’s the reigning pop icon of the decade. How exactly did she earn this coveted title of pop icon? Well, the press and media would want you to believe she’s got an edge and style like no other. Given, oversized hair bows and bedazzled disco sticks are original creations by the Haus of Gaga (Lady Gaga’s creative team), but shouldn’t originality extend beyond quirky accessories or flashy gimmicks, at least when we’re referring to music? Then again, Lady Gaga is a package deal. Without the persona, the image, and the performance art, Lady Gaga wouldn’t be Lady Gaga. So is she just a modern day mash up of Grace Jones and Madonna?

Grace Jones makes it clear in an interview with UK's Guardian newspaper that she isn’t a fan of Gaga. She says, “I really don’t think of her at all. I go about my business.” Jones also confirms the rumor that Lady Gaga asked to collaborate with her. Jones says, “Yes, she did, but I said no...I’d just prefer to work with someone who is more original and someone who is not copying me, actually.” Jones is right about Lady Gaga’s outfits being similar to hers, but the tirade is excessive, just as M.I.A.’s complaints are. 

M.I.A. whines about how “people say we’re similar, that we both mix all these things in the pot and spit them out differently, but she spits it out exactly the same! None of her music’s reflective of how weird she wants to be or thinks she is...” M.I.A. may be referring to the song, “Chillin” by Wale featuring Lady Gaga released in June 2009. It’s undeniable how similar Lady Gaga’s voice, tone, and inflection are to M.I.A.’s on the track. The song even references M.I.A and “Paper Planes” in the second verse. Wale raps, “Yea, They Keep Sayin Where I'm From, My Name Wale/ Ho's Call Me Mr. Never Wear The Same Thing/ You Redundant, You Never Ever Change/And I'm The Same Way, M.I.A./ That Mean Cool And Dre Get High Like Planes.”

“Chillen” is the only song that supports M.I.A.’s claim and plus, Gaga is just featured on the track. One example isn’t enough to hold up M.I.A.’s argument. Perhaps, M.I.A. realized this fact midstream and decided to go on a tangent; pinning Gaga as the poster-child for what’s wrong with the music industry.

M.I.A. criticizes Lady Gaga for product placement, saying “she plugs 15 things in her new video. Dude, she even plugs a burger! That’s probably how they’re making money now- buying up the burger joint, putting the burger in the video, and making loads of burger money.”  According to Advertising Age, paid advertisements in the “Telephone” (Lady Gaga’s most recent single featuring Beyoncé) video include Miracle Whip, Virgin Mobile, Polaroid; unpaid advertisements include Wonderbread, Plenty of Fish.com, Heartbeats headphones, Chanel, Diet Coke, HP Envy, and Beats laptops.

M.I.A. may have slightly exaggerated the amount of product placement in the video, but she does present a valid argument. When artists endorse a product through their music, it just seems wrong. The artist becomes a (commercially viable) brand, and his or her image is the commodity. Whether or not a fan is aware of the somewhat subliminal product placement in lyrics or music videos, the artist is exploiting his or her popularity in order to sell x, y, and z. It’s slightly better when the artist’s image somehow captures the brand of the product i.e. Gatorade commercials featuring professional athletes. But in this case, Miracle Whip, a salad dressing/sandwich spread alternative to mayonnaise, in no way relates to Lady Gaga’s edgy, futuristic image. But she needs the money and she needs it for art’s sake. She has gone bankrupt four times and her tour has lost about $3 million to date. According to March 28^th’s issue of New York Magazine, Gaga refuses to compromise on any aspect of the stage show. She says, “I spent my entire publishing advance on my first tour…I’ve had grand pianos that are more expensive than, like, a year’s worth of rent.”

M.I.A.’s burger comment is amusing, but she jumps to the wrong conclusion. Gaga isn’t promoting products to pocket the money for herself, well at least not all of it. M.I.A. doesn’t grasp the concept of Gaga. Like Madonna and Grace Jones, Lady Gaga is more than her music. Gaga is fully committed to the public persona she has created. She explains, “I wouldn't want people to see me- me - in anyway except my music and stage performances.” Gaga doesn’t want to become a victim of overexposure. She says, “today with the media, and the way that it is, you see absolutely legendary people [Michael Jackson] - taking out their trash. It’s something that we as a society don’t want to see, but we keep buying into it; and I think its destroying show business.”

 What M.I.A. fails to see is how favorable having a public persona can be. Gaga’s act is not only for the sake of self-preservation. It also allows her to be completely immersed in the art she has dedicated her life to. She explains to New York Magazine, “What I’ve discovered is that in art, as in music, there’s a lot of truth—and then there’s a lie. The artist is essentially creating his work to make this lie a truth, but he slides it in amongst all the others. The tiny little lie is the moment I live for, my moment. It’s the moment that the audience falls in love.” Lady Gaga is a performative escape from reality. Her music is vapid but its fun. Who said music has to have a message to have substance? Gaga defends her music against critics who think she’s all style, and no substance with, “People believe electronic music is soulless - and it's not. Do you know why I know it's not? Because the soul that I feel from my fucking beautiful fans at my show cannot be a lie - it can't. I've never in my life seen the intensity in their faces - I mean they bloodsuck and kill to be together; I mean there's glitter, and there's sweat, and there's dancing, and there's hair bows, and they believe in it so much and it's real. In those moments: it's real; and they bring my music to life.” So Gaga’s music isn’t really groundbreaking, but at least our generation can finally point to a pop culture icon, who isn’t an embarrassing reality star or a peroxide blonde celebutante.  

Lady Gaga has yet to dignify M.I.A. with a response or legitimize the one-sided feud. If you haven’t been brainwashed yet by the hipster elites, trying to persuade you mainstream music has no merit, you’ll come to the realization that M.I.A. makes an ass out of herself in the NME article. Mainstream music is just music that becomes widely listened to and it can be good and bad- you can turn on Z-100 and hear Kings of Leon and then Ke$ha.

Lady Gaga’s music may have been considered “underground” pre-stardom, but now it’s mainstream because she’s achieved commercial success. She says, “I think dance music in America is - or was for a very long time - kind of like, underground, and 'gay,' and not on the mainstream, very ‘Oh, that'll never be played on the Top 40.' My fans aren't normal Top 40 radio fans, they're like crazy punk rock fans - with me tattooed all over them, with wigs, and throwing glitter and hairbows, and fainting all over themselves. So, when my record label heard The Fame Monster they said 'It's confusing, it's too dark, you look gothic, it's not pop,’ and I said, ‘You don't know what pop is, because everyone was telling me I wasn't pop last year, and now look — so don't tell me what pop is, I know what pop is.’”

            The only thing that saves M.I.A. from being completely pretentious is admitting the practicality of Lady Gaga. M.I.A. says, Gaga is “a talent and she’s got a great team behind her, but she’s the industry’s last stab at making itself important - saying, ‘You need our money behind you, the endorsements, the stadiums. Respect to her, she’s keeping a hundred thousand people in work, but my belief is: Do It Yourself.”

            Gaga did do it herself. Drawing inspiration from influential pop icons isn’t cheating. It’s impossible to call anyone original in 2010. It’s all been done before. People who think M.I.A. is more original than Gaga is only ignorant of the fact that M.I.A.’s influences are obscure (sampling African and Middle Eastern tribal music) and can’t be easily compared the way Gaga is to artists like David Bowie, Queen, and Madonna.

You don’t need to appreciate the art in Gaga’s bedazzled disco sticks and oversized hair bows to see her genius. She’s a living caricature. No idea or design is too wild for the Haus of Gaga. Lady Gaga can pique your interest just by looking at her. She starts a conversation. And if you’re sulking over sour grapes like M.I.A., at least you’ll get a joke out of it.  When asked about how important image and visuals are, M.I.A. says, “It’s not like ‘Haus of Gaga’ (laughs). Me blindfolded with naked men feeding me apples and shit.” 

M.I.A.	vs.	Lady Gaga
Political hipster	Image/Look	Futuristic dominatrix
500,000 copies of Kala sold in the U.S. to date	Record Sales	10 million albums sold worldwide
“Money is always the enemy of music.”	Motto	“For some people, fame kills it and becomes more important than the music or the performance. But for me fame is like rocket fuel. The more my fans like what I’m doing, the more I want to give back to them. And my passion is so strong I can’t sleep.”
Rolling Stone and Blender’s Album of the Year in 2007, earned a slot on Time Magazine’s “World’s Most Influential People” 2009 list	Awards	2 Grammies, 3 MTV Music Video awards, 9 Billboard Music Awards
“Paper Planes” reached #4 on the Hot 100 chart	Billboard Charts	6 number one hits on the Pop songs chart (tying her with Mariah Carey and Beyoncé)