Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
OP's acting like their examples are polarizing or something that turned the GP off.  Every single example in the OP is cartoony, childish, safe, and generic. I mean, what was there for Katy to tone down? She was never avant-garde or experimental, nor was she ever as silly/stupid as Nicki was at her peak. Katy's image has always been safe, generic, childish, and cartoony, and thus has never needed to be toned down. |
Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
Her image is unoffensive, unlike popstars such as Madonna and Gaga - who have always pushed the limit when it comes to their imagery. While artists like Madonna and Gaga had to evolve and tone it down once they reached the peak of "doing too much", Katy can continue doing the same childish things she does because no one is going "that makes me uncomfortable, I don't get it, that makes me think, that isn't pretty enough for me". As an artist, if you're not pushing anyone's buttons or making anyone think, what is the point of your artistry, even?
|
Why are you even bringing up Madonna out of nowhere?
Madonna started in the 80's while the thread is about Katy's peers
You're making as much sense as me claiming that Katy Perry, just like Beethover, didn't need to change her image or sound because they're timeless and people just won't tire of them. And that's not all, when Madonna started her career, her fashion was as generic as it comes. Teenage girls dressed up like Madonna to school on a daily basis. Do you see many teenage girls wearing cupcake bras or jungle headdresses to school on a daily basis? Exactly! Madonna only reached the point of doing too much in the nineties. It had nothing to do with an artist like "Adele" coming up or people tiring of her outlandish outfits. It simply had to do with her becoming too oversexualized to the point that most people found her vulgar and crass. I'd respect Gaga's evolution if it wasn't a forced evolution of the post-Adele world. And who are to decide that Katy's image is offensive?
- Roar -------->
offended animal activists
- Dark Horse -------> offended
muslims
- Unconditionally -------->
offended whoever it is that decided to get offended out of nowhere
- This Is How We Do --------->
offended the black community
- The superbowl ------->
offended gay rights activists
- The tour --------> offended
the black community and
the people of China
Basically, your whole "Katy's image is inoffensive" claim is as baseless as any claim can be. You're just stating your opinion and you're hoping that no one would respond because most people are too lazy to prove you wrong
Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
One could argue that she can't tone it back, that her success is so reliant on what she has been doing for the past six years that any change in her formula could result in the public pulling away from her. One could argue that Katy is afraid of that and would rather stick with repeating herself as opposed to pushing herself as an artist because quick #1 singles are too important to her. One could argue that unlike artists such as Madonna and Gaga, Katy's cartoony, childish, generic, and safe image is all she has, that she can't reinvent herself because reinvention requires you to be a multifaceted entertainer as opposed to a one-trick pony.
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
Anyways, I digress. I do think Katy has the ability to evolve, I just don't know if she is brave enough to take the risk. Just like with every other popstar who has played it safe for too long, people will eventually get bored and move on. Why Katy Kids think it's somehow a good thing that Katy can get away with doing the same things over and over again is entirely beyond me. Why a fanbase is happy with their fave continuing to peddle to the lowest common denominator is just... confusing to say the least. Fans should push their faves to be more artistic, more mature, and to grow as a person and artist, not keep wanting them to do the same things so they can brag online to total strangers about how many #1 singles their fave has. |
I do know Katy has it in her to evolve. Shame the thread isn't about that. I for one do want to see her do great things with her career however I'm glad she didn't have to ditch her entire imagery for success in the post-Adele world as if that imagery is as disposable as any imagery can be. I'm glad she stayed true to herself instead of ripping off the next big act around and completely changing up her image. I'd be more than happy if Katy completely revamped her image for next era. And tons of critics (Katy's #1 opposing demographic in the industry) have pointed that Dark Horse as a risky sound and there it is in the OP. People seem to love it when she does something experimental (E.T and Dark Horse) so I fail to see why she should feel discouraged to ditch bubblegum pop
Quote:
Originally posted by Bang Up
Katy Kids |
Um why the need to stoop low and diss her fanbase on the way though? Like if we check for most fanbase stereotypes on this site, Katycats needing extra calcium is hardly the worst one of the bunch
I mean, if you ask most people in the street if they'd rather be a 10 year old who enjoys cartoony imagery or, for instance, someone in their mid-twenties whose life revolves around having multiple accounts in multiple pop forums (In one of which he has so many extra accounts that the moderators eventually just gave up on banning him) and many active tumblr blogs (one of which is dedicated to the artist he detests), I'm pretty sure most people would pick the former.
.jpg)
:origin()/pre08/afe3/th/pre/f/2013/254/9/b/katy_perry___roar_by_juaanr-d6lyig8.png)
Not them bringing up "Katy Kids!!1!" ;;p (who even finds this funny