You don't think those are costumes either, though? We've seen candids of all three girls you mentioned, and they certainly aren't wearing those sexy outfits that they were on stage, off stage.
Just because a dress isn't moving, or there's not a carousel wrapped around your waste or you're not looking like you're being gangbanged by dozens of Japanese toys doesn't mean it's not a costume either.
Exactly. Rihanna's "normal girl" image is just as much of a costume. Everything she wears is a costume some team picked out for her or some designer paid her team to make her wear.
The whole purpose of this GQ article is to reinforce that costume.
But I'm not even saying that her using an image to sell is a bad thing, unlike some on this thread portraying theatrics as a bad thing. Artists have used theatrics in the past and will continue to use it. It's entertainment. And it takes talent, imagination and hard work.
"Theatrical" and "gimmicky" are different things, as are "real" and "relatable".
They're right, she isn't as theatrical. Rihanna doesn't wear meat dresses or squirt cream from her boobs, no, but she has certainly played costume over the years with more than her fair share of gimmicks. GGGB and before had her as a sexy R&B princess, Rated R had her eccentrically playing dark and damaged, she then became red haired and carefree, then thuglife gangsta Ri appeared. All at the flick of a switch.
Rihanna now is more "relatable" than Lady Gaga, Nicki Minaj and Katy Perry because they're embodying eccentric entertainers whilst she's opted for a more toned down look (now) ...but let's not mistake that for more "real" or assume she isn't still playing a character. We have no idea what the Rihanna off camera is like because we don't know her. Robyn Fenty isn't necessarily the larger than life, groin slapping, gangsta thug Rihanna the popstar. Neither is Kathryn Hudson the candy barbie Katy Perry, Onika Maraj the bipolar hip-pop star Nicki Minaj or Stefani Germanotta the alien pop diva Lady Gaga.
So, sure, Rihanna isn't as obviously theatrical but it's presumptuous to assume she is any more "real".
Technically no, but Rihanna isn't any different from them. She's not her "true self" either. She doesn't write her own music, come up with her own videos or performances, etc.
"Theatrical" and "gimmicky" are different things, as are "real" and "relatable".
They're right, she isn't as theatrical. Rihanna doesn't wear meat dresses or squirt cream from her boobs, no, but she has certainly played costume over the years with more than her fair share of gimmicks. GGGB and before had her as a sexy R&B princess, Rated R had her eccentrically playing dark and damaged, she then became red haired and carefree, then thuglife gangsta Ri appeared. All at the flick of a switch.
Rihanna now is more "relatable" than Lady Gaga, Nicki Minaj and Katy Perry because they're embodying eccentric entertainers whilst she's opted for a more toned down look (now) ...but let's not mistake that for more "real" or assume she isn't still playing a character. We have no idea what the Rihanna off camera is like because we don't know her. Robyn Fenty isn't necessarily the larger than life, groin slapping, gangsta thug Rihanna the popstar. Neither is Kathryn Hudson the candy barbie Katy Perry, Onika Maraj the bipolar hip-pop star Nicki Minaj or Stefani Germanotta the alien pop diva Lady Gaga.
So, sure, Rihanna isn't as obviously theatrical but it's presumptuous to assume she is any more "real".
