[So-and-so] is the new Madonna. | Page 2 | The Popjustice Forum

[So-and-so] is the new Madonna.

Discussion in 'Pop & Justice' started by DiscoBlue, May 9, 2009.

  1. Go Paula!!!

    And ditto to the comments that Madonna has already broken so many barriers that remain broken, and therefore, Madonna cannot be emulated. I think arguments about anyone being the 'next Madonna' are futile as all of the people that get compared to her - Brit, Pink, Kylie, Gaga - are all different and each have something of their own to offer.
     
  2. I totally agree with this, and what IMA Fever wrote.

    You're right on all counts -

    1) One simply cannot SELL records like Madonna did in the current climate.

    2) One cannot break down any boundaries any longer

    3) The schizo pop culture of today cannot be dominated by any one period for any length of time like Madonna did

    4) and these current crop of pop singers don't have the cultural knowledge Madonna does. It's unlikely lady gaga has ever watched "Mildred Pierce"
     
  3. I totally agree that Madonna has done it all first. And I also agree that there's no opportunity anymore for current stars to even get anywhere near Madonna.

    Funny that this thread got started. Someone on the Katy Perry forum posted a thread calling her the new Madonna and then there was a plethora of replies saying - and seriously, I shit you not - "oh yeah, Madonna is great, but Katy is like WAY better. She's so real, and redefining and original and cool".

    I mean. What the actual fuck. I could respond only with "P-M-S-L at this" because shock rendered me too incoherent to verbally barrage the idiots with proof of their own stupidity.
     
  4. Gaga may actually be smart enough to look into the art world etc for inspiration. Not that I like her. at all, but I think there is some intellect there.

    Xtina gets the idea of creating a style for an album and running with it.

    I
     
  5. Look, like I've been saying, these kids who like the new acts were born/not yet born/really little when Madonna was in her 1989-91 imperial phase, let alone her 80s work or her 90s work. They don't know. Isn't that a shame?
     
  6. Yes, and they just see her as some crusty old hag! Show some respect etc!
     
  7. No-one who thinks Katy Perry is 'original' can possibly be older than six.
     
  8. You can tick of almost every box with Madonna. The other big factor, which one can forget with the chicken cutlet cheeks, is that she is one of the most beautiful women in pop culture history.

    #1:
    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_38T64sfKt...-h/italian_vogue_madonna_meisel_Scan10160.jpg

    #2:
    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_38T64sfKt3Y/SgZ4k0x1DgI/AAAAAAAAEZk/9-pPYF9oeC4/s1600-h/island.jpg

    #3 this one, which reminds of the line "the flames rose to her Roman nose..."

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_38T64sfKt3Y/SXqgvxZ12II/AAAAAAAAAkc/_6Ir3Z_XLJI/s1600-h/lavsmeisel_(32).jpg

    I'll shut up now, I sound like a crazy fan. I just find kneejerk "the new Madonna" comments to be annoying.
     
  9. Mvnl

    Mvnl Staff Member

    Since breaking every taboo isn't possible anymore, and there'll never be anyone who'll accomplish exactly the same as Madonna, I think, when talking about 'the new Madonna' we should be looking for 'the next best thing'.. someone who is creative, gets away with a lot of different images/influences/sounds/styles, isn't afraid to speak her mind (both publically and in her music), puts on a great show, can sing/dance, and who will be around for a long time...
    Sure it will never be the same thing as Madonna 1.0, but I don't think it's entirely pointless to contemplate which female star has it in her to be to new generations what Madonna was to us.
     
  10. your description just brings Gaga to mind...
     
  11. Mvnl

    Mvnl Staff Member

    Well I didn't have anyone in particular in mind while writing it..
    It could be Gaga, but I thinks she'll need a few more albums to prove her staying power.
     
  12. I agree. In terms of successors to Madge, it would probably be between GaGa, P!nk and maybe Xtina. But yeah, there won't be another 'Madonna 1.0.'

    Also, I would just like to point out not all young people are clueless about Madge. I'm 18 and I have to come to learn about and respect her a great deal, and I also recognise her Queen status fully. And for the record I most definitely do not agree with that Katy Perry thing; P-M-S-L is the only appropriate response to that.
     
  13. I don't get the fuss about Pink. Never have. She doesn't draw my interest in the slightest. *shrugs* She's done some wicked songs though.
     
  14. It's not that I would say I'm clueless about Madonna, I just feel that there's a difference between Madonna in 2009 and Madonna at her 80s/90s peak when she was obviously at her most controversial and 'boundary pushing'.

    I'm 22 and only became aware of her when I was 11 in 1998. Nothing I've experienced of Madonna since then has particularly excited me. Of the stuff I didn't experience first-hand (pre-1998), I accept that a lot of it has had a huge impact on pop but the fact I didn't live through it myself alters my perception of it. Thus, I'll never quite view her as the Queen of Pop: the Queen Mother, yes.

    It's far too early to bring Lady GaGa into this kind of discussion when she's only one album into her career.

    P!nk is a great pop/rock artist and as a live performer, far better than many of her peers (hello Britney!). HOWEVER, she seems to be firmly cementing her place as a pop/rock artist these days. "Funhouse" is her first album to be an all-out pop/rock album; even "Try This" and "I'm Not Dead" had a few songs which couldn't be placed within this genre. I'd like to see P!nk branch out a bit more - "Funhouse" was commercially far too safe when it really didn't need to be. The lead single sold the album enough as it is to afford her a few non-pop/rock songs of the type you wouldn't necessarily associate with P!nk anymore.
     
  15. On a slight tangent (but in response to some ideas that have been posted in this thread), to say that there will never be another artist who has the impact of Madonna seems wrong to me. Yes record sales have fallen, and there are many more niches in pop culture; things are much more erratic and the mainstream seems to be shrinking, but I sometimes think all of that is just an excuse to cover up pop culture products that aren't very successful.

    Madonna played a game. Madonna's pop ideal was the Hollywood starlets of the 1950's - infact, according to several books, Madonna only saw music as a stepping stone to movie stardom. She didn't realise in the very early days that she could define herself better through music.

    And Madonna beat out many of her contemporaries by embracing new media formats like the music video and MTV, and being highly intuitive about what her audience were into. Alot of people: stars, labels, management etc. avoided things like music videos, and Blond Ambition was considered in 'higher circles' to be a complete folly before it got off the ground. The vanity project that was Madonna's Truth Or Dare was scoffed at, but it went on to define her popularly considered public persona for years to come. And then there was SEX...

    There's probably more scope out there now for new artists to define themselves and their work, to promote and to be genuinely creative. The real problem is that much of that is unexplored or treated as an aside to the traditional product that is the album.

    Being the "next Madonna" is not about retracing her steps (which, sadly, is GaGa's view of the world to an extent), but about carving out some brand new steps and making it seem completely natural.
     
  16. Totally agree. As great as Funhouse is I miss the WTF moments she used to have... the whole M!ssundaztood project, "Oh My God", even "Stupid Girls" and "Fingers" had that feel for me.
     
  17. Yeah, we have yet to see Gaga do anything beyond a certain thing. She is probably versatile vocally, but it's too early to say much more
     
  18. Someboy

    Someboy Staff Member

    This may seem wrong, but I do understand how people might make the connection between Madonna and Katy Perry. And more than just the 'she's a female pop star so she's like Madonna' connection.
     
  19. multimediac17

    multimediac17 Moderator

    I can see that too, but in the worst sense possible. Katy Perry encompasses the "LOOK AT ME" attention-seeking side of Madonna and has no other sides, where of course Madonna had many.

    As for young people - I've been a massive, MASSIVE fan of Madonna since I was nine years old, in 1999. I'm 18 and have managed to turn a few of my friends onto her songs. Only one of my friends is anywhere near the fan I am and even he probably couldn't name much of her pre-Music material.

    By coincidence I was having this discussion with my mother in the car today. She said "Younger people don't care about Madonna" and I countered it with the notion that Madonna is no longer a big young popstar on the radio. Madonna is no longer an artist that you become a massive fan of through repeated radio plays or strings of huge hits. If you're younger, you get into Madonna if you seriously love pop music, want to know the history, how things came to be today.

    Madonna herself may not like that, but I think it's wonderful.
     
  20. could anybody recommend me a good book for me to learn about this madonna person and how she has changed the music industry world? i've just bought 'Hard Candy' and I am pleasantly surprised at how amazing it really is... I will definitely be buying the rest of her discography soon!
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.