MUSIC: Adam Lambert: The Next Lady Gaga
In the days leading up to this year’s MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs), Newsweek sat down with Lady Gaga to discuss her then upcoming performance. Never one to be shy about her work, Lady Gaga said that she planned something “rooted in New York-style performance art.” When asked if her performance would be a defining moment of the VMAs, Lady Gaga said it would and added that there’s no reason to do things “unless it’s going to change things, unless it’s going to inspire a movement.”
Unfortunately for Lady Gaga, her VMA performance not only didn’t inspire a movement, but it also didn’t generate much interest. That was largely due, of course, to Kanye West’s stage blitz during Taylor Swift’s acceptance speech but, even without that distraction, Lady Gaga’s performance was hardly the revolutionary “performance art” extravaganza she promised. To be fair, it was comparatively entertaining and included a lot of stage blood, but it also emphasized the fact that it may be impossible to equal or top past performances — which included Madonna kissing Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera, among other things — without getting completely censored. In other words, Lady Gaga perhaps didn’t deliver something as provocative as she promised because doing so would have required her to fill impossibly big shoes.
Of course, all of this would be old news except for the fact that last week Adam Lambert performed at the American Music Awards (AMAs) and managed to accomplish everything that Lady Gaga wanted to but couldn’t. More specifically, while performing his song “For Your Entertainment” Lambert kissed another man and pushed a male dancer’s face into his crotch, simulating oral sex. The moment instantly became headline news and, not surprisingly, groups like the conservative Parents’ Television Council were outraged.
As is usually the case, this controversy has only benefited Lambert. Though ABC canceled his gig on Good Morning America in response, Lambert immediately booked a performance on CBS’s The Early Show instead. More importantly, newspapers and magazines across the country have made Lambert the centerpiece of their entertainment coverage. Whether you love or loathe Lambert, his profile is higher than ever and he’ll undoubtedly sell more records.
However, Lambert’s other, somewhat more abstract reward for his AMA controversy is his new status as a fledgling gender-bending icon. It’s the kind of thing Lady Gaga wanted to be, but which her VMA performance didn’t quite deliver. In the wake of the AMAs people aren’t just talking about Lambert, they’re talking about what he represents, which is something edgier and more appealingly dangerous than most female pop stars can manage. If he isn’t exactly starting a movement, then he is definitely beginning to be remembered.
While sexually explicit imagery is the norm in contemporary pop music, Lambert’s performance pushed the envelope by highlighting something many people still aren’t comfortable with — gay men. As a result, Lambert’s persona (if certainly not his music) places him in illustrious company with people like Prince and Freddie Mercury. The apparently improvised and supposedly offensive elements of Lambert’s performance also recall controversial appearances by Elvis Presley and the Doors on The Ed Sullivan Show. In other words, Lambert found something that could push people’s buttons today the way that gyrating hips could in the ’50s and drug references could in the ’60s. He managed to find and walk the line of sexual ambiguity in a way that other artists only dream of.
This episode certainly illustrates an inherent hypocrisy in the music industry and especially in the way the music industry is covered by media outlets. As a gay male, Lambert can push envelopes that aren’t available to a performer like Lady Gaga. However, no one ever said the entertainment marketplace was politically correct and Lambert deserves credit for using that hypocrisy to both make money and, in a round about way, undermine it. In the end, Lady Gaga’s pre-VMA interview serves as a kind of manifesto — not for what she can accomplish, but rather for what Lambert might do if he’s as smart and innovative with his music as he is with his image.
Jim Dalrymple is a regular correspondent for Rhombus. You can follow him on Twitter @jimmycdii.
[...] http://www.rhombusmag.com/music/music-adam-lambert-the-next-lady-gaga/In the days leading up to this year’s MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs) Newsweek sat down with Lady Gaga to discuss her then upcoming performance. Never one to be. [...]
[...] http://www.rhombusmag.com/music/music-adam-lambert-the-next-lady-gaga/In the days leading up to this year’s MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs) Newsweek sat down with Lady Gaga DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES dvd to discuss her then upcoming performance. Never one to be. [...]
It’s good to know the media still would laud a musicians acts, rather than their music. Sometimes I wonder if anyone from the current generation of musicians will be known for something other than the controversy they raise. Maybe that’s what make our classics, the classics?
Lambert’s antics “smart an innovative”? Ha. I’ve lived my life in a bubble, but even I can think of numerous dirty things that would “push the envelope.” Anyone can. Shock takes no smarts, no talent. Shock just takes an unflinching desire to sell records. Loyalty to The Man.
There are scores of artists making terrifically smart music today, and the fact that the general public ignores such artists and instead lauds the Lamberts, Perrys and Spears speaks volumes about the stupidity of youth. I’d place everything I’ve got that these artists will end up like Madonna.
“smart *and* innovative.” Ha on me for a misspelled conjunction.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jim Dalrmple II, Michelle. Michelle said: Have we seen this article? http://bit.ly/8UjUb0 [...]
[...] This post was Twitted by alreference [...]
LOVE this article! Adam is brilliant! He’s SO talented, genuine, honest, kind, hardworking. . . what all of us should aspire to. . . Adam rocks!
I actually agree with you. I really like Lady Gaga too, but I agree that Adam got people talking, with stuff that I normally wouldn’t even pay attention to: double standards, etc. I enjoy the antics, to be honest, and I absolutely ADORE his music!! (bought the album). It’s different and has a lot of personality. The songs in the album are very Adam.
I’d love to see him in live concert one day, where stuff won’t get televised/edited out, and hopefully he can do other cool over the top stuff w/ the dancers and his band.
Jon I think that you’re right about the shock value aspect. It doesn’t take much to stir a pot, what is noteworthy – making a new pot that noone has ever heard before. Wait, this analogy has run it’s course huh? It’s too bad too, I had really high hopes for mr Lambert. He has a great voice.
But here’s the thing both Jon and Colton are missing — yes, it seems there are a lot of entertainers out there today that specialize in trying to “stir the pot,” but doesn’t the sheer volume of them really add to the accomplishments of those who do so successfully? Shouldn’t someone like Adam Lambert — whose actions legitimately did shock some people, no matter if they were calculated or not — and, to a somewhat lesser extent as Jim point out, Lady Gaga receive more credit for finding a new way to shock us in a world where so little is still shocking and everything seem to have “been done before?” Doesn’t this extend a certain level of creative authenticity to their performances, as they have gone beyond the scope of what most people imagine to really create something new?
And Jon, you seem to suggest that because Lambert has decided to pursue a Madonna-esque path, he is therefore prevented from making quality music. I don’t understand this. Music is ultimately a performing art and, if nothing else, that was certainly one hell of a performance at the AMAs. Sure, it was one of the worst technical performances of the man’s career to this point, but we’ll chalk that up to first-time jitters for now. But the man has otherwise been rather outstanding in creating a fairly unique brand of glam-pop and, as Colton pointed out, he does have a great voice. People seem unable to separate the music from the spectacle — or to accept that each might mutually enhance the other. The same goes for Lady Gaga — she’s a trip and a half to see perform with all the weird costumes and dancers (which is actually kind of brilliant, I think), but even without all that she’s making some of the best dance-pop we’ve heard in years. Besides that point, I don’t think either of the aforementioned artists would shrink from you pejoratively say they will end up “like Madonna.” I just don’t know too many performers who wouldn’t like to end up like one of the most important and iconic performers of the last thirty years. It’s not exactly an insult, you know?
Right, but in thirty years, or sixty, are you going to be watching his performance, or listening to him on your iPod? Performances definitely start out a career, but kissing the same gender isn’t all that shocking. I think a good example of great performers and great musicians is U2. I saw them in D.C. about 8 or so years ago. They didn’t have any gender bending acts or any shocking stage moments, but I will never forget that concert. It was the most spectacular concert I’ve ever seen, the only thing that compares is when I saw them in IMAX in 3D.
Perhaps what we’re getting at are two different types of “acts.” The shocking ones, which probably will be just as memorable due to the content as those like U2. In the end it just boils down to personal preference. Some people enjoy being titillated by the more visceral and edgy. Some enjoy other aspects.
Who knows, maybe in ten or twenty years Mr. Lambert and all of us will credit this performance with a long and fruitful career.
Jon Schwarzmann hit it on the head: there’s a difference between the sexpectacle of Lambert and the spectacle of someone like U2. One takes no talent, is not innovative, while the other really pushes the envelope in intelligent performance.
.
The Madonna link rotted, but I’ll try to post another. If that one rots search “Madonna untouched photo drug” or something like that: the pictures of her drugged up arms. It’s true that these artists are talented singers, and it’s true that they’re getting very rich, but if most of these shock pop artists are total wrecks in their 50s and 60s then how can we say they’re “successful”?
.
I’d say there are few people more miserable.
[...] Adam Lambert is Jewish. Cool! Really good article MUSIC: Adam Lambert: The Next Lady Gaga – http://www.rhombusmag.com/music/music-adam-lambert-the-next-lady-gaga/ @JoMoFan Adam Lambert would make a hot vampire! @gingercara THX! Adam Lambert said in his [...]
U2 are always cited as a credible band, particularly by the over 30s..I have never seen them in concert (so that spectacle has eluded me) but as artists they have become tedious, self-important and self-satisfied. The Joshua Tree was an iconic album, granted.
Adam Lambert’s significance can’t be understated, I think – whether or not he manages to get a coherency to his music. His performances have that coherency, because he is essentially a performer rather than a “musician”. His versatility may work against him, ironically perhaps because it is his constancy in presenting himself as a sexual, unabashedly gay man which his his greatest strength.
The guy’s an exceptional vocal talent with star quality by the bucketload and a touch of the eccentricity of great artists of the past who was not previously given the chance by record companies for this very reason.
As for his versatility, I hate this idea that artists should be one thing and one thing only. He’s got it so why shouldn’t he flaunt it? Did it do Freddie Mercury any harm?
I think what so disappoints me about Adam Lambert is that he could be so much better than he is going to be, based on what he’s done post-American Idol. American Idol is interesting because it forces people to sing a bunch of different songs from different genres, and the best contestants are those who can do it all. I thought that Adam Lambert was going to be one of those people, and that he would be smart enough to play to many different crowds, and he has not done that. Instead, he’s put himself in a pretty expected role (the bizarre). I honestly don’t know why anyone was shocked about what he did at the AMA. Did they not see it coming? I think he will be, as Jon as suggested, just another wasted potential Hollywood druggie who made a few decent songs. I don’t anticipate him making any massive social changes that will better the country.
I think that Adam Lambert is going to continue to surprise us in the years to come. ‘He could be so much better than he is going to me’ seems a quite premature judgement. Being a magnet for discussion does not make him less than a spectacular artist. His voice is unique and he will be heard – of that I have no doubt. The whole idea that an artist cannot be true to themselves until after the public has accepted them as a pre-packaged image is outdated and punitive. First you must impress me, THEN you can say something? This is why so many worthy artists never get noticed and why twerps like Justin Beiber are top sellers.
Yeah, although I love her to pieces I mostly feel sad that she derailed a way back.