If any of you have been keeping up on the indie music scene, or just watch MTV Canada on a regular basis, you have probably heard of Lana Del Ray.
Many people have criticized her for being a sell out, because of the facial and style reinvention she did, in order to create a more marketable image. Many people exclusively dislike her on that basis alone- even though her music has remained the same.
Its ironic, that we feel that we can criticize artists who are just trying to live off of their art- especially when their new image does succeed in bringing more attention to their music.
For those who want to check out her stuff, search up songs like "Videogames" or "Blue Jeans"- she has a nostalgiac style straight out of the idyllic, suburban Americana from the 60s, and her songs are admittably catchy.
However, to be fair, her wealthy upbringing certainly gave her access to great marketing resources- but does that matter if people actually like her stuff? Life isn't fair, and there are certainly better artists, no one denies that, so why should we judge her? And who decides the definition of artistic integrity, especially if it is performance art, like music, where public opinion plays a huge role? Justin Bieber, Micheal Jackson and countless others were heavily molded by forces other than their own artistic desires, so how is Lana Del Ray all that different?
No comments:
Post a Comment