Sunday, February 28, 2010
Play the Game
Bang Bang, You shot me down...
Friday, February 26, 2010
On to the next one
Creamy Steve
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Can You Get It Up?
Brush, Brush Away...
I am well aware that we live in a visual culture.
Artists create works of art full of symbols and signals.
I often wonder where the ideas come from?
Why did they create this certain persona, etc.
Someone sent me this article about Lady Gaga and the Illuminati (http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=1676) and after reading several other articles by the author, I am trying to grab some insight on it.
The author writes about Metropolis, the 1927 Fritz Lang film. I'm highly interested in German expressionist films and I did my term paper on this particular film. The author of this article claims that the film is about mind control and using robots to maintain control etc.
In the film, the scientist makes a robot in the likeness of Maria, the people's advocate. Maria did not consent and conspire with the scientist to make a robot of herself like the author says. Maria was captured by the scientist and he performed experiments on her to transform the robot into her likeness. If Lady Gaga is a willing participant in this mind control by the music industry like the author says, she cannot be compared to the character Maria in the film.
Metropolis is yes, about robot mind control, but it is also about war, fascism, the plight of the working class toiling away in the factory. It relates more to socialism than it does government mind control. In the end of the film, the true Maria tries to stop the robot from controlling the workers. She tries to save the people from the destruction, and she does succeed in ending the turmoil.
Although, what the author writes about Beyonce and Rihanna seems somewhat accurate. Rihanna was a "good girl", just singing about music and dancing. Until her "Good Girl Gone Bad" album. She seemed to have changed her image over night. Everyone was talking about her "new look" etc. And she just kept getting darker and darker. Like she sold her soul to the devil? As soon as she went darker, her album sales jumped.
Before I read the analysis of "Run This Town" by Jay-Z, I kind of wondered what it was about? I still do. The lyrics didn't seem to be telling at all. It wasn't talking about sex or money so it must be talking about fame?or something else.
This also made me think of how Beyonce and Gaga recently joined up for two songs, which just struck me as, a extremely odd collaboration. Not their style at all. I still wonder why they chose to do so.
So the author, from most articles I have checked out, is really saying that the music industry is using superstars like Gaga to control the population for evil purposes. This theory is not revolutionary, but it may be far fetched, maybe not.
A while ago, I read this book published in the 80's about how rock bands worshiped the devil and were brainwashing teens to become satanists and fornicate all the time. I thought the book was silly, but not completely crazy.
So in 2010 terms, rock music is a dying breed. So maybe the satanists needed some other type of stars to control the minds of people. So they took in control over the pop music industry. They have the right medium and can do it subliminally. Right?
It all reminds me of the song "the Devil Went Down to Georgia", and how the man sells his soul to the devil in order to play like a fiddle god. Fame comes with a price after all.
Think about the demise of Britney Spears. She was and innocent girl (Think "Hit Me baby One More Time" video), the music machine got a hold of her, made her into a star(think "I'm a Slave for You" era), and then a monster. I don't think she will ever recover. And think about how fucked up she was a year ago. She probably still is.
One thing that does not sit well into this theory yet, is someone like Taylor Swift. Where does she fit in? How is she being controlled by the music industry?
Or the Disney owned Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus. They have received immense fame and there is no evidence of symbols or whatever. The author has a theory. And that's all it is, just a theory.
Maybe we are just reading too much into it. But then again those who do not question, must then be accepting it.
Those who do not question anything in life, follow along like sheep to the slaughter.
All I am really saying is, watch what you are feeding your mind. Question the images you see, wonder where the ideas come from. Think of the message behind it. Don't just eat up the music/images like it's porridge to your soul.
Stop Tempting Me!
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Screw the Champagne Shower...
You Can Call Me On The Telephone
Connections
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Polaroids Pt. 2
Go for it Tiger
The Snow Leopard hits it hard!
Thursday, February 18, 2010
We are all Golden!
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Good Bye
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Repetition Kills You..
Wander away...
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
What I Have In Common With Andy Warhol
Commonalities between a "Superstar" and a small town girl can exist. I feel that I connect with Andy in many ways, more than the average Warholian fan. Andy Paperbag is "abstract" and seems "superficial" or rather an empty/void, but I find him relatable on many levels.
Andy did not like to be touched. He liked to be a voyeur, an external observer, and physical contact seemed obscene. Andy would have liked to touch, but he did not like to receive touch in return. This is how I feel. I do not like to be touched. I don't like to even be touched by my mother. When someone attempts to hug me, I kind of cringe and shrink away. The physical connections between people seem irrelevant. I like to connect with people visually and through the abstract way: words. When I go out dancing, I do not like to be touched by the other people dancing around me(which is difficult at a club). I like to dance in my own world, with my own frame of reference. This is how it is-you can look but you cant touch. And if you touch, it is because I have allowed this physical interaction to happen.
Andy felt like a prisoner in his own body. Much like the Portrait of Dorian Gray, Andy felt like the disfigured painting of something that once was beautiful.
Andy liked Repetition. Take the soup cans,coke bottles, the Marilyns, polaroids, etc.
Andy liked the trashy and obscene. He liked to showcase it, flaunt it. Decadence.
Andy was the director. He was the true artist. Coming up with the concepts and ideas, and getting others to act them out, paint them, make them into reality.
Andy liked celebrities and Fame. He had a fascination with their faces(silk screening them onto a canvas) and their lives. He took his friends and made them into mini celebrities, Making them famous on their own accord; making them into "Superstars".
Andy liked to take photographs. He liked how they portrayed "reality" or his version of staged "reality". He was always taking polaroids of friends and things around him.
Was Andy decadent? Did he live to excess. I think he had lived quite a simple life at home. The Factory/studio was his playground. Perhaps the people around him were extravagant and he was just a pawn, an illusion of decadence.
Was Andy a dandy in his own right? Did he live like Oscar Wilde as a peacock displaying his feathers. I don't think so. I think what appears to be decadent of Andy is actually the props he used to hide his insecurities (ex- his trademark silver wig).