ReportWire

Tag: Madonna Blond Ambition Tour

  • Mondo Bullshittio #49: Attempting to Sue Madonna For Being “Pornographic”

    Mondo Bullshittio #49: Attempting to Sue Madonna For Being “Pornographic”

    [ad_1]

    In a series called Mondo Bullshittio, let’s talk about some of the most glaring hypocrisies and faux pas in pop culture…and all that it affects.

    If one was under the misguided assumption that the collective population has been far too desensitized since the days when, for example, “Justify My Love” was causing enough of a stir to get banned from airplay on MTV, rest easy: being scandalized by Madonna’s sexuality is still alive and well. Or so the latest lawsuit stemming from The Celebration Tour would have one believe. While fans might have thought that the fresh complaint would stop at being related to her tardiness (a long-standing trait of Madonna’s when it comes to arriving onstage any “earlier” than ten p.m.), the most recent disgruntled concertgoer has upped the ante by centering his grievance on the pop singer’s penchant for exhibiting “pornography without warning.” If this causes a bit of a laugh (as it should), that’s likely because, if Madonna’s various reinventions throughout her career have all shared one thing in common, it’s this: sexually provocative content. 

    As a rebuttal, some might point out that now fabled period during the early years of her marriage to Guy Ritchie when Madonna was cosplaying a “staid” English country housewife, complete with serving as the cover star of Good Housekeeping and writing a series of children’s books (which were met with the narrow-minded response that the woman who wrote Sex shouldn’t be “permitted” to tell children’s stories). But even during that period, her always radiating sexuality was present in videos like 2003’s “Hollywood” (which itself was a nod to the Erotica era at the end when she’s hitchhiking), 2003’s art installation collab with Steven Klein, X-STaTIC PRO=CeSS, locking lips with Britney and Christina at the 2003 VMAs, 2005’s “Hung Up,” featuring a moment (in both video and live performance form) where Madonna writhes in orgiastic ecstasy with her then current cabal of dancers, and pretty much any of the visuals (picture or video) for her 2008 Hard Candy album. Not so coincidentally, 2008 would mark the year of her divorce from Ritchie. 

    All of which is to say that Madonna has never really tried to suppress her sexuality for the sake of catering to other people’s comfort levels. Even when she “put her clothes back on” for the Bedtime Stories/Something to Remember era, it wasn’t as though her lingerie didn’t still peer out (very much so in the “Take A Bow” video, for instance). What’s more, M’s predilection for skin-baring has only seemed to amplify in the years when our patriarchal society would expect/“demand” that she “cover up” (the MDNA Tour comes to mind). The Celebration Tour proved no exception to the rule, with an entire segment of the show featuring Madonna clad in nothing but a red silk slip with black lace embellishments.

    This ensemble, appropriately, was worn during the Act II portion of the show that most likely caused “offense” to the plaintiff (whose name is quite public but will not be mentioned here). During this part of the concert, Madonna sings her most notoriously sexy songs, including “Erotica,” “Justify My Love,” “Hung Up” a.k.a. “Hung Up on Tokischa” (a select performance of which allowed Tokischa the chance to join Madonna onstage at Madison Square Garden to engage in one of their numerous public besos since meeting one another). 

    Many of the headlines about the lawsuit are sure to include not only the phrase “sued by fan” (a label that doesn’t really befit someone who claimed to be surprised by Madonna’s sexual “escapades” onstage), but also “sued by a male fan.” In fact, the lawsuit against Madonna for her tardiness at Barclays was also brought against her by two male fans. And, you know, not to stereotype, but one can presume said fans are gay. Which makes this look like, well, the worst kind of cunty queen behavior. Not to mention rooted in a particular kind of gay male misogyny. After all, the fan in question was seemingly most affronted by being “forced to watch topless women on stage simulating sex acts.”

    First of all, “forced”? Please. Secondly, it’s interesting that “topless” (a.k.a. wearing flesh-colored clothing) women should be called out by a man. Not usually a problem for most straight men—which is what leads one to believe the plaintiff is gay or gay-adjacent. What’s more, Madonna actually did have a topless dancer open her concert (and appear topless repeatedly thereafter) during 1993’s The Girlie Show. A tour that, even more than Blond Ambition, touted Madonna’s “pornographic” brand. And, speaking of Blond Ambition, one ought to bear in mind that Madonna actually did “simulate sex acts” by way of her illustrious masturbation sequence at the end of “Like A Virgin.” A performance so controversial it almost got her arrested in “the fascist state of Toronto,” as immortalized in Truth or Dare.

    A replica of the bed she performed that very act of self-love on was, appropriately (or inappropriately, to some), displayed in all its full glory at the opening of Act II, as Madonna performed the same arm-centric choreography fans would recognize from the “Papa Don’t Preach” of Blond Ambition. With this bed serving as the “harbinger” of what “sexual hijinks” were yet to, er, come, Madonna did technically give more than enough of a hint to anyone who might not be expecting “pornography.” And yes, maybe this plaintiff has never actually seen any real pornography in order to understand that The Celebration Tour was not that.

    Then again, these are times fraught with “highly sensitive” (read: performatively fragile) people. In addition to extremely sue-happy ones, often seeking to make a fast buck from someone they view as having plenty to spare. Alas, one imagines that this plaintiff really didn’t think his accusation through. For Madonna’s lawyers have ample evidence to support her lifelong commitment to being a “pornographer.” Ergo, it being no surprise when she flaunts such “porno predilections” onstage.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The Celebration Tour: Madonna’s Shelved Biopic Reanimates in the Form of a Pop-Theater Concert

    The Celebration Tour: Madonna’s Shelved Biopic Reanimates in the Form of a Pop-Theater Concert

    [ad_1]

    Among the many memorable statements Madonna made throughout 1991’s Truth or Dare, the one that stuck out most, in terms of characterizing the Blond Ambition Tour, was this: “It’s a journey that you go on… You take a journey. It’s cathartic. You can’t get to one place without going to another place.” Madonna has obviously borne that same statement in mind with regard to the conception of her twelfth—that’s right, twelfth—tour. For we, the audience, are all taken on the journey of her life. So yes, more than a “greatest hits” tour (with that term being used more loosely in Madonna’s interpretation), this is a “pop” odyssey. Except that Madonna doesn’t like the word “pop” to describe her show. As she told the crowd, “I really hate that word, ‘pop,’ ‘cause it sounds disposable, and I am not.” This much she’s been determined to make the masses—however hating and skeptical they are—consistently aware of. Even though some of her more adamant detractors (Morrissey especially) have billed her as precisely that. Designed for disposable, assembly-line consumption with each new era. Ergo, a nickname like McDonna (an insult hurtled at Madonna by, who else, Morrissey) referring to her McDonald’s-like nature, capitalism-wise. And sure, Madonna has never made any attempt to hide her zeal for money, but if that were the only thing motivating her, she would have stopped (to many people’s delight) a long time ago.

    In truth, she had a number of opportunities to simply “take the money and shut up” in her early days, as she was forging an artistic path for herself. One that quite a few others tried to help shape along the way—apparently not aware of the iron will they had come up against until it was too late, and they had already sunk a lot of money into molding their “coquette.” This included Belgian producers Jean-Claude Pellerin et Jean Vanloo, who hired Madonna to be a backup dancer for Patrick Hernandez in 1979, but also wanted to make her into their next Big Thing. They flew her to Paris and put her up in a nice place near Parc Monceau so they could work on that “shaping” with vocal coaches, the works. Then there was Camille Barbone, who managed Madonna under Gotham Management from 1981 to 1982, when Madonna broke out of her contract to pursue her own artistic route. One that was not in line with the Pat Benatar-inspired sound and aesthetic Barbone was cultivating. Of course, these are not the people or occasions M references in The Celebration Tour. Though she says, “I think of it as a retrospective. I’m gonna tell you the story of my life—the last forty years of my life,” that story can’t feature any of the people who might not have gotten a “return on their investment” in supporting Madonna Ciccone before she was: MADONNA. Although perhaps it could if Madonna ever did release the biopic she was working on for three years (starting in 2020). And obviously, this tour is meant to be a “substitute” for that biopic (as opposed to a substitute for love). The one that she publicized at length via her various writing sessions with both Diablo Cody and Erin Cressida Wilson. The production also involved intense auditions (described as “Madonna boot camp”) for the lead role, with Julia Garner finally winning out over competitors like Florence Pugh, Sydney Sweeney, Alexa Demie, Odessa Young, Emma Laird, Bebe Rexha and Sky Ferreira. But maybe Madonna, in the end, got “creeped out” by someone trying to fulfill an impossible role, preferring to just do it herself by going on tour. Thus, the announcement at the beginning of 2023 that, while the movie was shelved, there would be a tour to soothe wounded fans instead. Indeed, many fans likely breathed a sigh of relief, knowing that the delicacy of telling such a story could go wrong in manifold ways. Even with (or perhaps precisely because of) Madonna directing the project herself.

    A world tour, on the other hand, that was something she could guarantee to conquer (or so she thought before that major “health scare” a.k.a. near-death experience over the summer). And she could also tell her life story that way instead, as The Celebration Tour is so clearly “runoff” from the Little Sparrow (the main working title) script she had been working on for years. Mining through so much material to ensure the accuracy of her story’s telling. Maybe even snippets of the dialogue were repurposed in some of the “vignettes” of The Celebration Tour…like Madonna trying to get into a club (presumably Paradise Garage) and being rebuffed. A slight she wouldn’t forget about, she admits, informing the audience, “Nobody let me into any clubs dressed like this. Can you imagine? Assholes! I’ve been getting revenge for the last forty years.” For who would deny Madonna entry into any club now? Having all but assured every DJ has a dance hit of hers that will undoubtedly get the crowd going. This fear of rejection she has stemming from being “bounced” so often in her pre-fame days manifested most overtly in a 2000 MTV promo for the Madonna V.I.P. Contest, wherein M appears at the front of a line outside of a club, only to be met with the jarring question, “Are you on the list?” She looks at the bouncer skeptically and replies, “People don’t usually ask me that question.” Unmoved, the bouncer says, “Well I can’t let you in here if you’re not on the list.” Out of patience, she reminds, “Excuse me but I’m…Madonna.” The bouncer then points to the slew of other people dressed like Madonna (a running theme throughout her career) waiting in line (or “on line” as  New Yorkers annoyingly like to say) to get inside. As Madonna realizes that the bouncer sees her as another “wannabe”/nobody, it seems to take her back to those days when she couldn’t get into a club just for being herself. Awakening from the nightmare in the comfort of her palatial abode, she remarks, “Thank god, it was just a dream.” She then looks into the camera as cliché cheeseball music plays and adds, “But for millions of people not getting into a nightclub, it’s a reality they have to face every day… Won’t you please help put an end to club-going nightmares? Enter today.” So yes, to say that club culture was, is and remains a heavy influence on Madonna’s psyche would be an understatement. And it’s a culture that infected her upon encountering “the scene” in New York City. The “stage,” naturally, where she begins The Celebration Tour’s story. For it was this moment that she attributed to the birth of her “Real” Self: in 1978, when she moved to New York.

    Thus, it can be no surprise that the “journey” of the tour commences with mentioning the “transfer” to her beloved adopted city, centered around “early days” tracks like “Everybody,” “Burning Up” and “Holiday.” “Can you imagine moving to New York in 1978?” she asks the crowd at one point. Because, sure, 70s and 80s NYC is plenty glamorized now, but back then, it was truly the last place a girl on her own should move. Even a girl as “tough as nails” as Madonna. But it was perhaps New York itself that transformed her into the level of “tough” we know today, having endured all manner of horrors upon arrival, including being raped at knifepoint. But Madonna’s the type of person who can take all of these traumas “in stride”—that is to say, she believes that every struggle is what makes you into the person you are (ergo, “You can’t get to one place without going to another place”). So who would she be, indeed, without all those emotional scars (or “Beautiful Scars,” as one of her Rebel Heart-era songs is titled)? Especially the one that stemmed from her mother dying of breast cancer when Madonna was five years old. Had that not happened, there’s no denying Madonna’s drive for fame wouldn’t have been as intense. Not to say that it was a “good thing” her mother died so she would be compelled to seek love from the entire world so as to fill the void where maternal love was supposed to be. Indeed, during a video portion of the show, Madonna features a soundbite of herself from a 1995 interview wherein she says that she would have gladly traded her fame and fortune for one thing: a mother. The concept of motherhood is, in fact, very much omnipresent throughout the tour. And yes, of course, lots of sexuality and writhing. After all, how do you think women become mothers? (Answer: by fucking).

    But before Madonna became a literal mother to six children and a metaphorical “Mother” to all the gays, as well as every pop star that came after her (Britney included), she was a loudmouthed “street kid” aspiring to be a club kid. And that’s the version of herself we see sitting next to her after her performance of “Into the Groove.” Dressed in what look like “rags” by today’s standards. And Madonna is the first to admit her 1981-era sartorial choices were slightly “tragic.” Nonetheless, she turns to the dancer mimicking her early 80s style while wearing a flesh-colored mask that obfuscates their real face (for an eerie effect) and asks the audience, “Anyways, have you met Me? Have you met Myself?” By some accounts, none of us ever really will (#nobodyknowsme).

    With this reflection on the past, it’s ironic that Madonna should begin the tour with “Nothing Really Matters.” Not because, for most non-fans, it wouldn’t be considered a “greatest hit,” per se, but because one of the defining lyrics of the song is: “Nothing takes the past away like the future.” She then proceeds to bring the past back after that song, as though to further prove she can defy time however she wants to. Of that rag-wearing club aspirant, Madonna notes, “I like to keep her by my side. I never forget where I come from—the struggle, the humility, the hard work. And I just want to give you a hug right now, thank you.” Yes, Madonna symbolically hugging and thanking her early twenties self for all the bravado and determination she brought to New York so that the Madonna of forty years later could relish the fruits of those labors is a combination of being ultra-meta, a psychologist’s wet dream and, to the more cynical, yet another sign of Madonna’s enduring narcissism. Something her former University of Michigan roommate, Whitley Setrakian, once commented on by shrugging, “Her passion was…herself. The Project of Madonna.”

    That passion for the Project of Madonna is alive and well for The Celebration Tour, with those “past selves” and incarnations being constantly present onstage. And yes, she might owe a debt to the 9.9.99 VMAs for that idea. It was during that year’s awards show that a slew of drag performers dressed in some of her most iconic looks gave her a nonverbal introduction before she took the stage to then introduce Paul McCartney and present the award for Video of the Year. With the endless barrage of options in terms of “Madonna looks,” the pop star has long been a favorite of drag queens, and so it’s only right that the tour should be emceed by one. Specifically, Bob the Drag Queen, who introduces the show in Madonna’s famed Marie Antoinette ensemble from the 1990 VMAs (and yes, one of the drag queens at the 1999 VMAs wore that look, too). He’s also sure to call out that legendary tidbit about how Madonna arrived in NY with a mere thirty-five dollars in her pocket, adding to that reminder a touch of goading about how he’d like to see you try to become the Queen of Pop with just thirty-five dollars and a dream in New York City. Of course, one of the unacknowledged things about Madonna is that she did benefit, like the rest of her baby boomer cohort, from the time and place she found herself in. For, while it was difficult to do what she did in many regards, it was also much easier to become famous in the early 80s without any…polish. Particularly as she got in on the ground floor of the postmodern/MTV pop star period that would dominate until the 00s. There wasn’t much competition in her field—not the way there is now in terms of everyone vying for the same piece of “virality pie.” One wonders if Madonna would have been able to thrive in such a climate, or if she was truly built for the more “blood, sweat and tears” form of fame that did not rely on smartphones and the internet for some kind of “democratizing” advantage. She herself has said she’s glad she came up during a time before social media, for it allowed her to experiment and become the artist she wanted to without risk of it somehow backfiring on her later with the video and photos “receipts.” Many of which we have access to, but a great many that we don’t.

    Even some of those very earliest performances of “Holiday.” A song that stands out more particularly than previous performances of it on her tours in that she uses it to show the drastic “comedown” effect that AIDS had on the club and party circuit. Lending new meaning to phrase, “Keep dancing till we die.” Incorporating Chic’s 1978 single, “I Want Your Love,” at one point, the song starts to slow as ominous musical undertones begin to creep in. Soon, Madonna is repeating the word “holiday” with a melancholic tone as the music has stopped altogether and the gay man she was dancing with (“played” here by Daniele Sibilli) proceeds to fall to the ground—his light-hearted dance now transformed into a danse macabre. Resigning herself to this loss, she places her coat (lined with Keith Haring’s signature graffiti) and kneels over him as the stage’s trap door opens to take them both down into the depths. The opening to Madonna’s least appreciated song (and definitely not a greatest hit), “In This Life,” then plays before transitioning into “Live To Tell.” This precursor to how AIDS put a stop to the party and cast a dark pall over the 80s for anyone outside of a conservative yuppie bubble is what helps to lend such a powerful effect to the performance. Serving as a contrast and visual manifestation of how everything changed once AIDS arrived and gay men—gay men that Madonna knew—started dropping like flies.

    “Live To Tell” not only makes excellent use of the many hanging retractable screens that appear during the show, but it also marks the first appearance of the “portal frame.” A sort of life-size picture frame Madonna can stand in while suspended in midair, “going back in time,” as it were. And seeing the faces of those she lost to AIDS, including her first gay friend and mentor, Christopher Flynn. Then, of course, her “twin flame,” Martin Burgoyne. Both of these men being who she refers to in “In This Life.”

    Being that no greatest hits tour of Madonna’s would be complete without “Like A Prayer,” she uses it once more to draw on her go-to theme of Catholicism’s intertwinement with sexuality. That, by repressing it, the religion ends up rendering sex “taboo,” therefore even hotter because of its “forbiddenness.” Choosing to incorporate Sam Smith and Kim Petras’ “Unholy” before and after, the audience is treated to dancers in gimp masks gyrating before neon crosses. Because without Catholicism and its subversion, there is no Madonna. What’s more, the themes and visuals presented by this back-to-back pairing of “Live To Tell” and “Like A Prayer” ultimately serve as a better representation of what Ryan Murphy was trying to convey in the atrocious AHS: NYC.

    Unfortunately, Madonna may have grown too accustomed to death already after her mother’s premature one. And, after her performance of “Don’t Tell Me” (which expectedly features a bevy of glam cowboy costumes), she informs the audience, “When I was a child, of course, I associated being a mother with death because my mother had many children and then she died. And then I thought, ‘Why would I want to be a mother? It just ends up in death.’ So my whole life I just kept saying, ‘I’m gonna live the life my mother never had. And I did. Oh boy, did I.” Eventually, though, she “surrendered to the pleasure” of motherhood. Being among the first of her kind to show others that you can be a mom and still be a badass. You don’t have to give up all of yourself to do it (though, some mothers are wont to point out that Madonna has had an army of paid staff to help her raise her children, therefore remain “herself”). In fact, you can even impart some of yourself onto the children. Which Madonna would like to think she’s done in that all of them have artistic inclinations. She’s taught them, in effect, that art is the best and healthiest way to cope with trauma and loss. To put it another way, “Everything in this show is bits and pieces of my life. People I’ve loved, people I’ve lost, friends I’ve lost, peers I’ve lost, children I’ve gained, family, art, life—all of it. That’s what saves me, and that is how I survive.” Naturally, this leads into “I Will Survive” (a gay anthem, bien sûr), Madonna’s chosen cover track for the tour (whereas the Rebel Heart Tour favored “La Vie En Rose”). It’s a pointed selection, of course, for the crux of this tour seems to be about Madonna dealing with her survivor’s guilt over the years, particularly with regard to so many of her contemporaries dying before her. Most overtly, this pertains to Michael Jackson and Prince (both of whom Madonna “dated,” as much as one can date men like that). When combined with Madonna, they formed the Holy Boomer Trinity of pop culture icons, all born in 1958. Both men are acknowledged during the tour, though Prince to a much less cringeworthy degree. His “cameo” arrives, fittingly, at the end of “Like A Prayer.” For the album of the same name is heavy with Prince contributions, from “Love Song” to the closing track, “Act of Contrition”—wielded at the end of “Like A Prayer” here so that the Prince lookalike can do his guitar-scorching thing.

    Regrettably, Madonna remains among the many to act as though 1) pedophilic allegations against Michael Jackson never happened and 2) Leaving Neverland doesn’t exist. Strangely, Madonna’s Jackson obsession has only increased over the years in spite of how vocal he was about his contempt for her. At one point calling her, in his taped recordings with his “spiritual advisor,” Shmuley Boteach, a “nasty witch.” He also listed Madonna as one of the people who was “jealous” of his talent by saying, “They admire you and know you’re wonderful and great, but they’re jealous. ‘Cause they wish they were in your place, wish they were in your shoes. And ‘M’ is one of them. Madonna. She’s not a nice… she hasn’t been kind. She’s a woman, and I think that’s what bothers her. Women don’t scream for other women. And men are too cool to scream for women.” Needless to say, Jackson doesn’t seem to be factoring in the many screaming gay men at Madonna’s shows. The Celebration Tour being no exception to the rule. But it seems the segment that features her and Jackson’s 80s-era silhouettes dancing (to the tune of “Billie Jean” and “Like A Virgin,” in a nod to what Madonna did on The Virgin Tour) against one of the screens is more for the people who really were seeking a greatest hits tour in buying a ticket. Digging deep among the few images of them actually together, Madonna displays the three “photo sessions” of the two of them (the first when she went backstage to see the Jacksons after their 1984 Victory Tour, the second when they went to The Ivy together in 1993 and the third, of course, from their 1991 “date” at the Academy Awards). It’s no longer totally obvious why Madonna is so dead-set on solidifying her association with a child molester (and master manipulator of those children and their parents) except the usual excuse about how there’s no one else on the same level to compare herself to anymore. Least of all in the present climate of TikTok and YouTube nobodies coasting off millions of views rather than actual star quality and charisma.

    Oddly, the main criticism about the Michael portion of the program, which, alas, sticks out in one’s mind because it’s toward the end of the show, has little to do with Madonna continuing to elevate and idolize a sexual assaulter and more to do with being “hokey” or “corny.” Um, no, the real problem is Madonna remains hellbent on aligning her affections with someone who was blatantly inappropriate with children, whether one believes the “allegations” or not. Her blind spot about Jackson also negates Madonna’s feminist persona. One that would surely adhere to the adage about believing victims. Women or men. Like the men in Leaving Neverland (James Safechuck and Wade Robson, of Britney-kissing fame). Considering Madonna herself was the victim of sexual assault, it also seems bizarre that she would be so willing to gloss over this “complicated” aspect of Jackson’s legacy. Yet, in some sense, it mirrors the glossing over of her own complicated one. From the cultural appropriation arguments (ostensibly “amended” by featuring the Queens Remix of Beyoncé’s “Break My Soul” during the “Vogue” segment) to ignoring the fact that she and Sinead O’Connor weren’t exactly “best mates.” Or even in possession of the kind of acquaintanceship that would warrant Madonna flashing her image on one of the screens during, of all things, “Don’t Cry For Me Argentina.” To add insult to injury, O’Connor’s image is displayed right after Marlon Brando’s—not exactly a known advocate of women’s rights.

    In fact, one of the key clashes between Madonna and O’Connor stemmed from their divergent views on feminism. With O’Connor saying of Madonna, in a 1991 Spin interview, “Madonna is probably the hugest role model for women in America. There’s a woman who people look up to as being a woman who campaigns for women’s rights. A woman who, in an abusive way toward me, said that I look like I had a run-in with a lawnmower and that I was about as sexy as a Venetian blind.” To be fair, Madonna was no kinder in her assessment of appearance when it came to her “beloved” Michael Jackson either, publicly declaring she wanted to give him a makeover, starting with his hair and also, “I wanna get him out of those buckly boots.” For someone as prone to and reliant upon image overhauls, there was no chance things could have worked out between them, “romantically” or platonically.

    Additionally, Madonna’s affection for Jackson makes little sense when taking into account that he echoed what many detractors have said over the years: “Let’s face it, she can’t sing and she’s just an okay dancer. What does she do best? She knows how to market herself. That’s it.” And yet, one apparently can’t put a price on effective “marketing.” Madonna was even able to market herself as a “better” Catholic than Sinead by commenting of her ripping up an image of Pope John Paul II on Saturday Night Live, “I think there’s a better way to present her ideas rather than ripping up an image that means a lot to other people.” Evoking a sort of, “Hey, that’s only okay when I do it” philosophy on Madonna’s part when it comes to controversy-starting. Once more highlighting the palpable tinge of hypocrisy in featuring Sinead’s image during the tour.

    After her performance of “Don’t Tell Me,” Madonna is due for her second speech of the night. And, after talking about motherhood, she took the opportunity to address the shitty state of the world by inquiring of her audience, “How can we change this? What can we do? Do you ask yourself that question? You know how you can change it?” “Give you more money,” someone in the audience jadedly quips. Because, sure, it’s no lie that Madonna has cadged her fair share of dough from fans as she assures them it’s all for a good cause. But, ultimately, isn’t it? If one woman can still bring so much joy and entertainment to people in a world that is increasingly bleak as fuck in general and utterly flaccid on the showmanship front in particular, there can be no denying she’s earned those millions. And yes, Madonna does make someone like Taylor Swift, with her “precious” Eras Tour, look positively banal. The Celebration Tour, accordingly, is a reminder to those who have been foolish enough to forget that there is only one true master in the art of pop stardom, and it’s the very woman who helmed it.

    While some have said that Madonna “conceding” to a greatest hits tour is a sign of desperation, this is not a conventional “greatest hits” tour by any means (and certainly, few would cite “Mother and Father” or “The Beast Within” as being among her hits). Unless one counts the fact that these are the greatest hits to the gay men who have enjoyed dancing to these tracks in the club the most. How else does one explain the presence of “Fever,” “Justify My Love,” (cover or not) “I Will Survive,” “Bedtime Story” and “Rain”? What’s more, her overt preference for the Erotica album on this tour not only reveals that she thinks the record has finally been vindicated enough to be truly appreciated, but that this, like so much of what she’s done, is a tour for the gays. Correction: the older gays. In other words, the proverbial last of the Mohicans in terms of having any fucking taste.

    *note: this review references the November 19, 2023 performance

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • For the Broke Asses in the Ultra Cheap Seats: The Eras Tour in Movie Format Makes It Clear That Taylor Swift Is Still the Apolitical “Good Girl”

    For the Broke Asses in the Ultra Cheap Seats: The Eras Tour in Movie Format Makes It Clear That Taylor Swift Is Still the Apolitical “Good Girl”

    [ad_1]

    Billed instantly as a “three-hour career-spanning victory lap,” Taylor Swift’s sixth tour is, needless to say, her most ambitious yet. Part of that ambitiousness has extended to releasing it as a concert film while still touring the world with the production. Obviously, she’s not worried about losing any profits by making it available to the “broke asses” who couldn’t manage to get themselves to the real thing. And even to those who already did, but simply want to see it in an even more “larger than life” format (IMAX being designed to accommodate such a desire). As Swift says, “Too big to hang out/Slowly lurching toward your favorite city.” That she is, as movie theaters across the globe roll out the reel and proceed to endure what can best be described, rather unoriginally, as Swiftmania. Indeed, one wishes Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr would weigh in on the matter, but instead non-Beatle Billy Joel already decided of Swiftie fanaticism and the Eras Tour, “The only thing I can compare it to is the phenomenon of Beatlemania.”

    Rob Sheffield of Rolling Stone tapped into part of why people are so, ugh, enchanted with the tour when he wrote, “​​Taylor Swift keeps building the legend of her Eras Tour, week after week, city by city, making every night so much longer, wilder, louder, more jubilant than it has to be. There’s nothing in history to compare. This is her best tour ever, by an absurd margin. It’s a journey through her past, starring all the different Taylors she’s ever been, which means all the Taylors that you’ve ever been.” The thing about that, of course, is, well, Swift hasn’t exactly been all that multi-dimensional over the years. Sure, she’s changed her sound from country to pop and dabbled with some musical styles in between, but, in the end, she’s still the Aryan wet dream wearing red lipstick. Steadfastly committed to delivering a good time without much of any true substance to say in her position of power. Not through the music itself anyway (unless one counts the forced feeling of “allyship” in “You Need To Calm Down”). Over every so-called era, that has remained the most constant of all—Swift’s singular focus on one non-political topic and one non-political topic only: bad boyfriends. And, sometimes, when she’s cresting on the high of being in love, “good” boyfriends…before they inevitably turn bad. 

    This is one of the key aspects of Swift’s “relatability quotient.” With the “everywoman” seeing themselves in her despite the fact that few “average” women are giraffe tall, thin, blonde and blue-eyed. The Barbie ideal, as it were. Once upon a time, this was embodied by Britney Spears, who experienced a similar level of fervor at her so-called peak (that word always suggesting, somewhat rudely, that a person will never be as good as they were at a certain moment in time). The fundamental difference between the two is that Swift has remained America’s sweetheart throughout her career, while Britney defiantly ripped off the shackles of that role when she shaved her head and, months later, gave a somnambulant performance of “Gimme More” at the MTV VMAs. Up until that instance, Spears had always been a consummate performer. Dancing, (mostly) singing and sexing it up for the crowd. She chose one year in her life to have a rightly deserved breakdown, and things never really went back to being the same for her. 

    In 2007, Swift (a Sagittarius like Britney) was eighteen, and had just released her self-titled debut one year prior. This reality seemed to reinforce that, when it comes to the music industry, there is always another young(er) blonde pop star in the making, waiting to take over for the current “hot thing.” And Swift would embody the same “I’m a good girl who does as I’m told” aura (that Britney initially did) for the vast majority of her career. Herself admitting, “My entire moral code as a kid and now is a need to be thought of as good” and “The main thing I always tried to be was, like, a good girl.” Even now, after “going political” (a.k.a. making one public statement against a Republican Congresswoman), it’s clear that what lacks most from Swift’s work, ergo her stage shows, is a message worth imparting. Of course, her fans and casual listeners alike will say that there can be no more important message than simply “making people feel good.” To a certain extent, that’s true. However, after a while, one wonders if Swift’s failure to say anything on the same level as a Madonna stage show is an exemplification of how the public no longer really wants to be challenged. “Preached to,” as it were. This, in some respects, is emblematic of the “algorithm effect” that has taken hold of society, with everyone seeing only what they want to see, and no “unpleasant” (read: contrary) viewpoints thrown into the mix. Including the one that would dare call out Swift for being anything other than perfection. 

    In this regard, too, she differs from Spears, who was far more derided for being a talented blonde girl, but with “nothing to say.” This being most clearly immortalized in an 00s interview during which she said of George W. Bush, “We should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that, you know. And, um, be faithful in what happens.” Alas, Spears’ faith in a few patriarchal institutions has been shaken to its core in the decades since and, similar to Swift, she’s had a reckoning with the “good girl” she once thought she wanted to be in order to receive endless accolades and praise. For someone like Madonna, who provided the blueprint of the modern theatrical stage show with 1990’s Blond Ambition Tour, that was never a reckoning that needed to occur. She was always a “bad girl” from the start. In other words, a woman who spoke her mind without fear or inhibition. This is why one of her earliest stage shows, the Who’s That Girl Tour, addressed political topics ranging from AIDS to essentially directing the missive of “Papa Don’t Preach” at Ronald Reagan and the pope. No other woman, least of all in the hyper-conservative 1980s, would have ever dared to do that, and certainly not at the very beginning of her career. 

    And yes, it is Madonna, who was once marveled at for staying in the business for a paltry fifteen years, that has allowed for someone like Swift to exist in it for almost two decades without anyone questioning it. Because, as Madonna established, the idea of a pop star, particularly a woman, having many eras is merely a reflection of an inherently misogynistic public that expects to see something new in order to be kept interested in the same woman. Especially when there are more youthful options cropping up all the time. As Swift noted, “The female artists have reinvented themselves twenty times more than the male artists. They have to or else you’re out of a job. Constantly having to reinvent, constantly finding new facets of yourself that people find to be shiny.” This speaks to something Madonna said about the Who’s That Girl Tour: “That’s why I call the tour Who’s That Girl?; because I play a lot of characters, and every time I do a video or a song, people go, ‘Oh, that’s what she’s like.’ And I’m not like any of them. I’m all of them. I’m none of them.” In actuality, the real reason to highlight that title was the fact that she had a movie of the same name playing in theaters (briefly) the summer the tour was happening. A movie that was originally going to be called Slammer before then-husband Sean Penn ended up being thrown in the slammer himself and it seemed like it would be in poor taste. 

    Swift’s luck with movie roles hasn’t been much better than Madonna’s, but people seem to talk about the clunkers that are Valentine’s Day and Cats far less than, say, Body of Evidence or Swept Away. Both Swift and Madonna are, of late, focusing on what they do best, with the latter kicking off her own world tour the same weekend the Eras Tour film debuted in theaters. Perhaps an unwitting “flex” on Madonna’s part, as she still seems keenly aware that, of all the pop stars, she’s the only one willing to make a truly political statement during her shows. What’s more, no matter how “old” she’s gotten, she has always been an active participant in the choreography expected of a pop star/musical extravaganza. And so, while the Eras Tour film is deft in creating the kind of spectacle that allows the viewer to feel like they’re actually at the show (complete with annoying audience members singing along in the theater), perhaps what stands out more in the movie than it would in person is the lack of choreography that Swift herself engages in. Instead, she’s a master at the art of the illusion of movement as she struts frequently up and down the ample stage. Here, too, Swift can be differentiated from a “real” pop star in that she has always merely dipped her toe into what that means as someone who more strongly identifies with the singer-songwriter qualities that theoretically mean chilling at home and writing poignant lyrics without having to worry about executing a dance move correctly onstage. But this is where Swift makes it clear that, in the twenty-first century, a musician has no choice but to become the multimedia art project that Madonna always was from the get-go. A walking, talking embodiment of synergy. Even if an embodiment that has never truly “ate” (despite Swift’s recent comparisons to the likes of Madonna and Michael Jackson…stage presence-wise, among other ways). 

    The uninformed accusations that Madonna is jumping on the Taylor and Beyoncé bandwagon of doing marathon, theatrical shows is rather absurd considering this is what Madonna has been doing from the beginning, long before anyone else thought to put in the effort it requires. Particularly the effort it takes to endure the personal risk to one’s life and reputation by speaking out against the injustices of the world. This has not been received warmly by quite a few institutions, not least of which was the Vatican, who urged Italians to boycott Madonna’s Blond Ambition Tour for being blasphemous. In response, Madonna made a public statement in Rome during which she declared, “My show is not a conventional rock show, but a theatrical presentation of my music. And like theater, it asks questions, provokes thought and takes you on an emotional journey. Portraying good and bad, light and dark, joy and sorrow, redemption and salvation.” 

    As the Eras Tour film underscores, that’s not really what’s happening at a Taylor Swift show. And that’s fine, one supposes—it just serves as a reminder that what people go apeshit over often isn’t very thought-provoking. With Swift preferring to, instead, take a page from the name of an LCD Soundsystem documentary by just “shutting up and playing the hits.”

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • In The Wake the Lizzo Debacle, One Is Reminded That Madonna’s Own Behavior Toward Her Dancers Might Not Have Sat So Well With People Today

    In The Wake the Lizzo Debacle, One Is Reminded That Madonna’s Own Behavior Toward Her Dancers Might Not Have Sat So Well With People Today

    [ad_1]

    As Lizzo has gone expectedly silent amid a climate that doesn’t take so kindly to emotional abuse anymore, one can’t help but think back to a time when it was easier to “get away with” being both a bit bawdy and “bullying” with their dancers. For example, no one was about to cry “sexual harassment lawsuit” or “failure to prevent and/or remedy hostile work environment” in 1990, the year Madonna spent touring the world with her coterie of hand-picked gay male dancers. Many of whom contributed to making the subsequent Truth or Dare documentary as entertaining and eye-opening as it was. Indeed, they tended to feel the same way. Which is why select members of the troupe did decide to sue her after the film’s release. Those members being Kevin Stea, Gabriel Trupin and Oliver Crumes. 

    Funnily enough, it was also three dancers (Arianna Davis, Crystal Williams and Noelle Rodriguez) from Lizzo’s The Special Tour who decided not to take any further abuse from the erstwhile Svengali formerly pulling the strings. In Stea, Trupin and Crumes’ scenario, the affront came when they realized the extent to which they and their personal lives were paraded in Truth or Dare. With the lawsuit also filed in California, the dancers cited the emotional detriment of Madonna featuring scenes in which the dancers “discuss[ed] intimate facts about their personal life not previously known to the public.” Chief among them, the fact that Kevin and Gabriel were gay, and did not necessarily want that information to be so public at a time of peak homophobia in the U.S. Of course, Madonna would likely insist that she did them and the world a favor by committing something akin to “immersion therapy.” Getting viewers accustomed to seeing more gay men onscreen, as well as forcing Kevin and Gabriel to be “open” about who they were, etc. Where was the “harm” in that (apart from to the eyes of Republicans “hate watching” the documentary)? 

    What’s more, this height of Madonna’s career (so oversaturated that she eventually quipped that she only ever felt overexposed at the gynecologist’s) did not exist at a time when “consent” was such “a thing.” Not sexually or otherwise. And, to that end, it does bear noting that Truth or Dare was produced by Harvey Weinstein’s Miramax Films, therefore it was also named in the suit against Madonna and her company, Boy Toy Inc., as well as Propaganda Films (co-founded by “Madonna music video director,” David Fincher). 

    The lawsuit itself arose at the beginning of 1992, which was evidently already establishing itself as a tumultuous year for Madonna. And yet, the dancers weren’t about to, well, dance around the issue at hand. While Stea and Crumes were more concerned about rightful compensation for their images being used, Trupin was most harmed by the personal life damage it did, stating that he had to undergo therapy afterward because it “exposed him to contempt and ridicule.” Just as Lizzo’s own dancers are at this moment in time by those who refuse to believe their “god” could do any wrong. And they, too, are being asked, “How could you?” Not just by Lizzo fans, but Lizzo herself, who claims to have been “blindsided” by the dancers’ complaints. Even though said dancers stated that multiple attempts were made to get Lizzo’s attention re: the severity of the matter, and the lawsuit was the last-ditch effort to do so. In which case, mission accomplished. 

    With Madonna, the relationship with her dancers was a bit different. Not just because they were gay men who themselves thrived on sexual energy coursing through their veins the way Madonna did (and still does), but because Madonna “cultivating” them for her tour was considered more groundbreaking in that period due to their sexual orientation. While some (including Lizzo herself) would point out that Lizzo hiring “fat” dancers is also groundbreaking, it doesn’t hold the same political gravity as what Madonna was doing in 1990, and at an apex of the AIDS epidemic no less. And so, with this in mind, the dancers were likely “just grateful” to be considered for such a major world tour at all. In fact, their presence in Truth or Dare was one of the first mainstream instances of homosexuality displayed onscreen, prompting many men to come out afterward. 

    Nonetheless, that wasn’t “enough” to keep Madonna’s trio of dancers from speaking up about their violation of privacy. With Trupin’s experience being that “director Alek Keshishian told him he could delete any footage he believed was an invasion of privacy, and says that when he asked that the scene in which he kisses the other dancer [“Slam”] be removed from the completed film, Madonna shouted, ‘Get over it, I don’t care!’” Something, of course, that Lizzo would never be free to say today. Though we all know she wants to. Because the thing about major celebrities hiring “backup” is that they become mere brushstrokes in the painting of the “star” herself. Who wants the painting to look a certain way without considering the, shall we say, painstaking strokes it takes to make it look that way. 

    We may never know if the dancers of Truth or Dare were genuinely “okay” with Madonna’s sexually charged presence both onstage and off (see: the Evian bottle scene) during the Blond Ambition Tour, or merely responding to it “positively” because they were a product of the time they lived in. When you really were expected, especially as a dancer, to just be grateful to have work with such a big star, and one who paid so well. Plus, as Madonna was sure to point out, most of the dancers had never been given the chance to “see the world” as the Blond Ambition Tour was about to enable them to. Something that Madonna felt proud of in terms of her ability to “give that” to them, which, in turn, allowed for effortless emotional manipulation. Manifest in the more than somewhat problematic voiceover of Madonna saying, “The innocence of the dancers move me. They’re not jaded in the least. They haven’t been anywhere. This was the opportunity of their lives. And I know that they’ve suffered a great deal in their lives, whether with their families or just being poor or whatever. And I wanted to give them the thrill of their lives. I wanted to impress them. I wanted to love them.”

    Taking in such scenes and presentations as this prompted bell hooks to write, “Given the rampant homophobia in this society and the concomitant heterosexist voyeuristic obsession with gay lifestyles, to what extent does Madonna progressively seek to challenge this if she insists on primarily representing gays as in some way emotionally handicapped or defective? Or when Madonna responds to the critique that she exploits gay men by cavalierly stating: ‘What does exploitation mean?… In a revolution, some people have to get hurt. To get people to change, you have to turn the table over. Some dishes get broken.’”

    It was obvious that, more than viewing her dancers as “dishes” to be (further) broken, she saw them as her little dolls. To play with and “position” as she wanted. All while assuming that the dancers would be ecstatic merely for the privilege of being around her. And for a time, they were. To boot, every dancer has ostensibly “made peace” with what happened, with Madonna even joined onstage by Jose Xtravaganza for her Finally Enough Love Pride event in June of 2022. The dancers also “expressed themselves” regarding the Blond Ambition Tour via their own 2016 documentary, Strike A Pose. So who knows? Maybe Lizzo’s dancers will one day make their “catharsis doc” as well, and could even end up saying they harbor no ill will toward the self-proclaimed “Big Girl.” Who, in a similar fashion to Madonna, expected nothing but gratitude.

    In that spirit, Lizzo was reported as saying something to the effect of, “You know dancers get fired for gaining weight; you should basically be grateful to be here.” Where once (including in 1990) this “logic” might have gone largely unquestioned, it’s becoming less and less acceptable to put up with abuse just because someone is a “major pop culture fixture.” In other words, celebrity/pop icon privilege is slowly but surely starting to unravel. And one tends to believe that the recent barrage of onstage attacks has something to do with that. Not just because fans feel entitled to a “piece” of the celeb or want to create a viral moment with them, but because they no longer seem to believe a celebrity is an “untouchable creature.” Wanting to prove that point by more literally knocking them off their pedestal. 

    The modern genesis of this may very well have started with what Madonna’s dancers did. In J. Randy Taraborrelli’s Madonna: An Intimate Biography, the revelation about the trio suing her is described as follows: “Madonna was angry about the suit. ‘Those ingrates,’ she said to one colleague. ‘To think that I made them who they are, then they treat me like this.’” A line that reeks of Norma Desmond-level delivery. Taraborrelli added, “Shortly after the suit was filed, Madonna happened upon Oliver Crumes at a party. ‘If you want money,’ she told him, her tone arctic, ‘why don’t you sell that Cartier watch I bought for you?’” Everything about this exchange (whether “lore” or not) exhibits what’s wrong with how celebrities view the people in their employ. 

    Regardless, some can still only see it from the celebrity’s side, with Keshishian defending Madonna back then by saying, “…it was extortion, in my mind. They’d signed the releases and it wasn’t as if we were filming it in secret. The cameras were there all the time. They did the interviews. What did they think was being filmed—a home movie!? I didn’t respect that. I felt bad for Madonna because she really did love those kids and they turned around and did that. That’s why celebrities grow more and more weary of getting close to anybody.”

    By the same token, that’s why people in the arts grow weary of working with celebrities: the expectation that they can be treated “lesser than” just because they’re working for some post-modern equivalent of a deity. Even so, there’s no denying that the current trio of dancers’ lawsuit against Lizzo is a harbinger of change. A warning to other singer-industrial complexes that what might have eked by largely unpublicized (with Madonna eventually settling out of court), therefore unchecked, is not going to anymore.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link