ReportWire

Tag: Madonna Truth or Dare

  • When It Comes to Her Father-Daughter Dynamic, It’s Just as Madonna Once Said: “Life Is a Circle”

    [ad_1]

    There was a time in Madonna’s life when it probably would have been unfathomable (mostly for Madonna herself) to imagine having a close relationship with her father, Silvio “Tony” Ciccone. But it seems that, with time, not only has the Queen of Pop “softened,” but so, too, has her father. At least in terms of his erstwhile strict views on how his daughter should act. The very same views that forged Madonna on the path toward becoming famous as a direct result of her perennial rebellion, her staunch flouting of “the rules.” Or, as she once put it, “I wouldn’t have turned out the way I was if I didn’t have all those old-fashioned values to rebel against.” So yes, there’s no denying the masses that came to adore and admire Madonna have none other than Mr. Ciccone to thank. A man who was himself raised with some very strict, old-fashioned values. After all, his parents were of the Greatest Generation, and “Old World” Italian immigrants, to boot.  

    Part of the Italian diaspora that took place from 1880 to 1924, Michelina Di Iulio and Gaetano Ciccone settled in the Beaver County area (yes, of course Madonna’s roots would have such a suggestive name), with Silvio, their youngest son, being born in Aliquippa. Eventually, “Tony” as he came to be known, thanks to the Americanization of many Italians (whether genuinely dal vecchio paese or “first generation” and beyond), started working in a steel mill in Pittsburgh. It doesn’t get more working class than that. But Tony clearly wanted to transcend this status, to take advantage of the then still believable and achievable American dream that would allow him to have the better life his parents had immigrated to the U.S. for in the first place.

    As Madonna told Time in 1985, “My grandmother and grandfather spoke no English at all. They weren’t very educated, and I think in a way they represented an old lifestyle that my father really didn’t want to have anything to do with. It’s not that he was ashamed, really, but he wanted to be better.” And so, he became an optics engineer after serving in the Air Force, where his friendship with a fellow Airman led him to Madonna Fortin, a Bay City native, as her eldest daughter, Madonna Jr., would be. Though, of course, to her eventual fans, there was only ever one Madonna—theirs. MLVC: Madonna Louise Veronica Ciccone. 

    To Madonna herself though, M Sr. would forever loom large as the idol of her own life, saying during Truth or Dare, “She seemed like an angel to me.” That opinion would only increase the more that time went on in the years after Madonna Sr.’s death from breast cancer when “Little Nonnie” was just five years old. And it was her mother’s death that seemed to harden Tony all the more, to reinforce that he had to be strict with his children. And that, furthermore, they needed a new mother figure to help light the way. Enter Joan Gustafson, the Ciccones’ housekeeper. In somewhat cliché fashion, Tony would end up marrying her because, hey, what is the ideal wife if not a housekeeper? He did so in 1966, three years after Madonna Sr.’s death. Obviously, Madonna was not a fan. Neither of Joan, nor of her father being so quick to seemingly “forget” all about his real wife.

    Besides that, it was apparent that Madonna was exhibiting some classic signs of the Electra complex, which she, for all intents and purposes, openly addressed in the abovementioned Truth or Dare. This when telling her then bestie, Sandra Bernhard, “I had those dreams for, like, a five-year period after that. That’s all I dreamed about was that people were jumping on me and strangling me and I was constantly screaming for my father, and no sound would come out.” Bernhard then asked, “And what happened when you woke up? Were you crying?” Madonna replied, “I’d just be sweating and afraid and I’d have to go to sleep with my father.” This “subconscious” word choice leaving it open to plenty of innuendo-laden connotations since she didn’t opt to instead say something more measured, like, “I had to go into my father’s bedroom and fall asleep there.”

    Even so, Bernhard practically invokes what follows when she further questions, “How was that when you slept with him?” Without missing a beat, Madonna says, “Fine, I went right to sleep—after he fucked me.” She starts laughing and quickly adds, “No, just kidding.” Though, of course, there was a small kernel of truth in what she said in terms of wanting to “possess” her father fully, to have ownership over all aspects of his love, in a way that she wouldn’t ever be able to from a romantic/sexual perspective. And certainly not after Joan entered the picture to kick Madonna out of Tony’s bed—literally. 

    The friction Madonna experienced with Joan, who she had nothing but contempt for as a teenager, based on comments about Joan making her wear the same exact dress patterns as her sisters and refusing to let her use tampons, only compounded the friction she already had with her father, who she undeniably resented for bringing a strange woman into their home. A woman who was now not only replacing Madonna Sr., but also Madonna, with the latter taking on the “wife role” as the eldest daughter. With Joan in the mix, it appeared as though Madonna’s drive to “get the hell out of Michigan”—or, for the time being, at least out of her father’s house—became only stronger. Breaking out of there at eighteen to attend the University of Michigan on a dance scholarship, Madonna dropped out after a year to answer the apparent call of destiny by moving to New York in 1978, a maneuver that caused a major rift between her and her father, who couldn’t understand why she would throw away a college education and a solid path to that “better life” his own parents wanted for him, and all because of some whim. A whim that even Madonna herself couldn’t fully explain, apart from taking Christopher Flynn’s advice to go where it was all happening, get on a faster track to becoming a professional dancer through Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater. 

    Once she moved to the proverbial big city, Madonna’s ties to her father grew frayed, something she reflected on in that ‘85 Time article with the assessment, “When I moved away for a long time we weren’t really that close. He didn’t understand what I was doing when I first moved away. First I was a dancer and I would call him and say, ‘Well, I’m dancing.’ He never, well, he’s a sensible guy, and what’s dancing to him? He can’t imagine that you can make a living from it or work at it or be proud of it or think of it as an accomplishment. He could never really be supportive about it.” And yes, there were many times when he urged her to just give up and come back to Michigan, but the thought of doing that is what actually kept her going during some of her darkest days in New York, vowing that to return home would be the ultimate failure—the ultimate way to prove that her father was right. 

    After Tony started hearing his daughter’s songs on the radio, however, he couldn’t deny that it was Madonna who had been right. That she did “make something of herself” as she says in Truth or Dare. But as Madonna’s star rose, so, too, did her penchant for pushing buttons, for stirring up controversy. One of the apexes of that occurring in 1989, with the “Like A Prayer” video, which no doubt gave Tony a shock as much as any devout Catholic. And yet, despite stating, “More than anything, I want my father’s approval, whether I want to admit it or not,” that has never prompted Madonna to shy away from doing “scandalous” things, mainly of a sexually-charged nature. This infamously reaching an apex in the 1992-1993 era, with the back-to-back unleashing of Erotica, the Sex book, Body of Evidence and The Girlie Show. And yes, even before this point, Tony was obliged to ask his daughter of the Blond Ambition Tour, “You undress in this performance?” She balked, “No, of course I don’t.” But that didn’t mean she wouldn’t have other people undress later on in The Girlie Show. What’s more, Tony is also recorded asking Madonna if she would “tone down” her performance during the night he chose to come see the Blond Ambition Tour. She immediately replies, “No, because that would be compromising my artistic integrity.” 

    Her unwavering devotion to her craft, her work, however, is something that has always innately bonded her to Tony, who she credits for her incredible work ethic. And then, later on in life, when she had children, it seemed that she could better understand where her father had been coming from with all of his strictness. With Madonna herself turning out to be quite the “stickler” for the rules she made for her own children to abide (including, most illustriously, not letting them watch TV). 

    In more recent years, as Tony entered his nineties (indicating that Madonna, too, might have the same longevity—something she’s alluded to in her Madame X Tour, during one of the banter sections), it seemed that Madonna grew ever more protective of their relationship, of keeping him close. This even more important after the back-to-back deaths of Joan and Madonna’s younger brother, Christopher (at one point a frequent artistic collaborator of hers in the late 80s and 90s before the pair had a falling out), in September and October of 2024, respectively. This just a year after Madonna’s oldest brother (and overall sibling), Anthony, died in February of 2023.

    So yes, the sense of loss in the Ciccone family has been palpable of late. Which is surely part of why Madonna had a Thanksgiving with Tony at the table in ‘24, sharing pictures of her children and father, along with a caption that read, “Watching him cry in the cemetery when we buried my brother Christopher—right after he lost his wife—was a moment I will never forget. Spending time with him and all my children on Thanksgiving was Medicine for the Soul.”

    In June of ‘25, Madonna shared another post featuring an image of herself and Tony (plus Madonna’s current much younger boo, Akeem Morris, for an added bit of freaky-deaky cachet) in honor of his 94th birthday (June 2, 1931), captioning it, “Congratulations for riding the roller coaster of life with humor and sanity intact. Thank you for sharing your mantra in life with me, which is: ‘I’m gonna go until the wheels fall off.’”

    This year, as Madonna turns sixty-seven, not only does she herself continue to adhere to that mantra despite all the naysaying against her (she’s too “old” to keep putting out music, she should just pack it in, etc., etc.), but she also appears as in touch with her father’s Italian roots as ever, spending yet another birthday in Italy. The place that essentially helped give her what Norman Mailer called “a heart built out of the cast-iron balls of a hundred peasant ancestors.” Madonna’s own patriarch being a very integral one of those hundred “peasant ancestors.” For, yes, life truly is a circle, as M sings on 2019’s “Extreme Occident” (or, as she says in a different way on 2003’s “Easy Ride,” “I go round and round/Just like a circle/I can see a clearer picture/When I touch the ground, I come full-circle/To my place and I am home/I am home”). And it’s a circle that has led her right back to the father she once so vehemently rebelled against. But whose love and approval she still so badly wants.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Madonna and the Wheelchair Debacle

    Madonna and the Wheelchair Debacle

    [ad_1]

    While many things unrelated to the remarkable nature of the tour itself have made headlines (including a certain tumble in Seattle) since Madonna kicked off The Celebration Tour in London back in October of ‘23, one of the least likely to be foreseen on the proverbial bingo card was wheelchair-shaming by none other than Madonna herself. Unintended of course. But it nonetheless still made for some cringeworthy content. During which Madonna, upon approaching the audience to get a closer look at who dared not to stand up when she told them to, made the quick apology, “Politically incorrect. Sorry about that.” Ironically, though, Madonna has made her entire career out of being politically incorrect—perhaps only now coming to realize that it no longer works as effectively in the rigid, faux-woke climate of the present. 

    The foray into needlessly putting a spotlight on an audience member using a wheelchair started “innocently” enough as she shouted to the Los Angeles crowd, “…take this ride with me! What are you doing sitting down over there? I—what are you doing sitting down?” Appearing genuinely affronted by the perceived “lack of enthusiasm” where most performers might have left it alone, Madonna, ever the “pushy broad” she’s known for being, kept pursuing the matter, subsequently taking her mic off the stand so she could walk to the edge of the stage and better berate the person. 

    Alas, upon closer examination—and as the crowd cheered her on for her beratement (themselves not knowing the whole story either)—she saw the reason why the person “chose” to remain seated, immediately reacting with, “Oh. Okay.” She then added, in something resembling a Valley Girl accent (it was, after all, at one of her L.A. performances), “Politically incorrect. Sorry about that.” She quickly followed that up with the insistence, “I’m glad you’re here.” Which somehow came across as more demoralizing than welcoming, as though calling out the fact that somebody in a wheelchair shouldn’t be able to engage in such “regular person” activities as concert-going. Not “shouldn’t” from, like, a “societally shunned” perspective, but “shouldn’t” from a “oh it must be so hard for you to get by at all” perspective. Something that not only invokes the kind of pity Madonna herself would abhor, but also fails to take into account that California—the milieu where she was performing—is among the most accommodating states for people with a physical disability (with San Francisco and L.A. topping the list of the most wheelchair-friendly cities in the United States). However, considering that Madonna is still of an era when it was acceptable to say “handicapped” and managed to fall into the trap of being the very thing she once accused Lady Gaga of being (“reductive”) by calling Californians at the March 9th show, “You flip-flop, short-wearin’ motherfuckers!,” perhaps her view of the physically disabled is still entrenched in the past. Hence, her surprise at seeing someone of the kind at her show. 

    Funnily enough, it was also during the March 9th date at the Kia Forum that Madonna mentioned the importance of having an avatar, so to speak, of her 1982 “incarnation” onstage with her so as to remind herself what she stood for, and what she has always stood for. This, in theory, is tolerance and acceptance for everyone—making everyone feel as though they belong and are in a “safe space” so long as they’re with her (whether via her music or in person at a live show). Unfortunately, the exact opposite of that was displayed by Madonna in this brief but mortifying (for all involved) exchange.

    And it’s not just  people who use a wheelchair that Madonna might end up making feel uncomfortable with such behavior, but also anyone with the “gall” to enjoy a concert without standing up or screaming/singing along to every word throughout the show. Sometimes, even a select few performers admit to despising this, as it prevents their own ability to sing the songs very well over the din of the crowd (something Lorde went viral for a while back, during an instant when she shushed the audience while trying to sing an a capella version of “Writer in the Dark”). 

    The performer’s argument, though, usually aligns with Madonna’s long-standing spiel about how she feeds off the visible/audible energy of the crowd, hence her contempt for anyone she sees in the audience and instantly clocks as “not having a good time” (these reactions immortalized in Truth or Dare when she tells her manager of the L.A. crowd, “Somebody stuck some big fat man up in the front to give me dirty looks. I swear to God. There was only industry people in the first two rows… They totally bummed me out. They sat there with their arms folded, dirty looks on their faces. I swear to God… It was so distracting and so depressing to me to have two rows of people looking like they weren’t there to have fun”). But what if some people don’t feel that displays of “having a good time” need to mean that you’re screaming or smiling like a goddamn idiot?

    Indeed, that’s one of the worst parts (nay, the worst part) about concert-going for introverts and generally shy people—the pressure to conform to how you’re “supposed to” act at a show (some people will even opt to miss out on seeing their favorite musician precisely because of these warranted phobias). Especially when the very performer putting it on is directly pressuring you to do so. Madonna and the “wheelchair debacle” highlights many important conversations about how to amend the concert-going experience in the future for those who don’t fit into the so-called norm of what’s “right,” or “expected” of someone just because the majority acts a certain way at a show. 

    Interestingly, at the March 5th date, she shaded L.A. once more by remarking, “This is probably too intellectual for a show at the Forum.” But Madonna proved herself to be unwittingly anti-intellectual by making “one size fits all” assumptions about her audience members. This, again, being the very thing her brand has gone against since its inception. Dichotomously, though, Madonna’s music has reached so many people and become so popular over the decades that she herself has become “one size fits all,” the way most juggernaut icons do (e.g., the increasingly problematic yet still pervasive Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson). Perhaps when that happens, it does an icon some good to be rudely awakened by a scenario such as this.

    [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

  • The Expectation That Being a Fan of Something Creates An Automatic Bond With Another Person Or That There’s a “Right” Way to Be a Fan

    The Expectation That Being a Fan of Something Creates An Automatic Bond With Another Person Or That There’s a “Right” Way to Be a Fan

    [ad_1]

    There’s a series of scenes in the opening credits to Daria that present her in an array of different scenarios being stoic amid a sea of overly enthusiastic twits. That’s often how one can feel when they’re not someone who expresses “fandom” in the “correct” way among other “true” fans of a particular “star” (that word being so open to interpretation nowadays). For example, when a Daria type shows up to, say, a concert to enjoy music on their own terms while expected to act like some kind of uncaged monkey by others who view them as “not acting right,” the divide becomes clear. That is, the divide between a fanatic for the sake of honoring blind fanaticism and someone who can be a fan with a bit more objectivity.

    Having “objectivity,” of course, automatically brands the Daria breeds as “haters” for merely critiquing something with an analytical eye. Treating art (if that’s what celebrities actually want their work to be seen as) with the according level of criticism that should come with taking it in. But no, all of the sudden, calling things out in such a way not only gets one marked with the “hater” brand, but also invokes celebrities to goad, “If you don’t like me and still watch everything I do, bitch you’re a fan.” Never taking into account that someone can be a fan, while still not insisting that everything the celebrity does is spun gold. But that doesn’t “compute” for celebrities themselves or their fans. The ones deemed “true” for lapping up all their shit and assuring the creator that it tastes like coq au vin (to borrow a phrase from Succession’s Lukas Matsson) no matter what. In this era, more than ever, that’s what’s expected of a bona fide fan. Something that harkens back to the kind of ancient and Middle Ages “devotion” displayed by acolytes of various churches and their “founding fathers.”

    Fanaticism, needless to say, has existed in religious form for centuries, ultimately evolving into what we have now: celebrity fanaticism. The same tenets of religious zeal still apply, with the worshipper having no tolerance for contrary views to their reverent opinion of the (false) idol in question (there’s a reason religion has been the source of most wars, after all). A “satire” on that point was recently explored in the Janine Nabers and Donald Glover-created series, Swarm. A “sendup” of the Beyhive’s worshipful attitude toward their god, Beyoncé. Who gets rebranded as “Ni’Jah” (Nirine S. Brown). Among the diehard legion of fans that call themselves The Swarm (you get it—because bees/The Beyhive) is Andrea “Dre” Greene (Dominique Fishback). A fan so committed, she’ll kill anyone who says an unkind word about Ni’Jah, even if it’s just in the comments section—where humanity’s true nature can be found. Although intended to be a “parody” of the level of “vehemence” that fans have in the current landscape (especially those of “Queen” Bey), it’s really not that far-fetched to imagine a fan going to this sort of length to defend the “honor” of their beloved idol.

    The tracing back to this current fanatical tendency to “redoubl(e) your effort when you have forgotten your aim” (as philosopher George Santayana once put it) is inextricably linked with the dawn of the internet’s power. Where once someone like Pauline Kael could exist without being sent death threats or getting doxed, there is patently no place for someone with “highly opinionated and sharply focused” reviews within the context of this easily affronted century.

    Starting practically at the beginning of the new millennium, the evolution of fandom into something wherein fans were expected to make celebrities their gods incapable of doing any wrong, creatively or personally, was made apparent on a show like MTV’s FANatic. The premise being to have the purported “biggest fans” (as judged by their video submissions) meet their idol and interview them. Although the show only aired from 1998 to 2000, there were sixty-three episodes—all of which showcased the bizarre, often random fixation on a particular person (or group of people…e.g., the cast of Dawson’s Creek).  

    One of the show’s crowning episodes occurred in season five, with the appearance of Madonna/Rupert Everett. A lopsided duo, to be sure, but, at the time, they were promoting 2000’s The Next Best Thing together in any way they could. And, oddly enough, the Rupert fan, Ellen, came across as far more enthusiastic and knowledgeable about Everett’s career. But that’s the thing: there shouldn’t be any rule that someone has to act or be a certain way with regard to their fandom. Even if the Madonna fan, Miriam, was foolish enough to waste one of her questions for the pop star on asking her what she had for breakfast that morning (nothing, because a bitch can’t practice yoga on a full stomach). Or if she treated the whole thing more like job interview with language such as, “Thank you so much for this opportunity.” But with Miriam and Ellen’s politeness and articulateness (connoted by such first names as theirs), what stands out most about FANatic now is that to put people in such positions in the present would result in far less dignified behavior. For most have become so accustomed to the extreme parasocial relationships that have developed as a result of “social” media that it would be impossible to imagine most fans’ ability to treat a celebrity like a “regular” human being while in their midst.

    At one point during the show, Madonna remarks, “There’s a difference between true fans that respect your privacy and give you space and people that, you know, follow you everywhere.” Of course, both types of fans can fall in the center of that Venn diagram—many of which have aided in Madonna amassing her level of wealth (especially because of the fans that follow her everywhere when she tours, shelling out high amounts for the front row every time). But perhaps, at that moment, Madonna was still thinking of one of her most obsessive stalkers, Robert Dewey Hoskins, a man with a Dre in Swarm kind of appreciation for the pop star who scaled the wall of her Hollywood Hills home more than a few times throughout 1995 and 1996. It was clear he was of the erotomaniac/borderline-pathological sect of celebrity worship (like the Dre character).

    Eventually, Madonna was forced to face him in a courtroom, where she identified him as “the man who came to her estate and threatened to slice her throat ‘from ear to ear’ if she did not become his wife.” And yet, there are some who would see that level of “fervor” as genuine fandom. Which perhaps just goes to show that because there are so many shades and degrees of “commitment” and “ardor” within a fandom, “liking the same person” isn’t always grounds for forging a bond with other fans (indeed, it can actually be a way to alienate oneself from them). Particularly since some fans view themselves as “more deserving” than others and some fans are really just “haters” (ergo, comments from certain fans that say things like, “Honestly, this fanbase is so toxic it’s making me not even want to be a part of it anymore”—but of course they will continue to be). Fittingly, Madonna herself pointed out this type of phenomenon within the framework of being a celebrity, stating of meeting other famous people in Truth or Dare, “I’ve always found it a little weird that celebrities assume a friendship with you just because [voice changes to sarcastic mode] you’re a celebrity too!”

    The varying tones and timbres of fandom over the past several decades even prompted an official scholastic field for it to be established in the early 90s: fan studies. Not merely studies of various fandoms’ behavior and sense of religious ecstasy over their version of “Jesus,” but also “fanworks,” which are usually centered around art, fiction and “remix culture” in general. This form of “fan labor” (unpaid, more often than not) presents a so-called “higher” tier of fandom that proves a particular breed of fan’s “superiority” over others. In this and many other regards, it’s no wonder those of the Daria ilk, who show up to events or online spaces with an utterly blasé, “what the fuck are you so excited about?” attitude, would “prefer not to” engage or participate at all, lest they be tarred and feathered for not “properly” conveying their appreciation.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The Only Person Who Can Have an “Eras Tour” Is Madonna (But Does That Really Mean She Should?)

    The Only Person Who Can Have an “Eras Tour” Is Madonna (But Does That Really Mean She Should?)

    [ad_1]

    The rumors have been brewing for a while now, reaching a crescendo throughout all of January as Madonna finally confirmed on the 17th that a greatest hits tour has, in fact, been in the works. And it’s called, almost as generically as 2004’s Reinvention Tour, The Celebration Tour—named as a nod to her 2009 greatest hits compilation, Celebration. Being that Madonna’s last album, Madame X, was released in 2019, perhaps she’s “surrendering” in some way to the idea that the most money to be made from her music, in terms of “drumming up” tour business, is through the assurance of greatest hits. For she already knows her die-hard fans will show up for anything she does—now she wants “the leftovers” who can’t respect some of her more “experimental” phases to join in too.

    As for the timing of the tour, it seems to indicate Madonna losing a certain “ahead-of-the-curveness” in that Taylor Swift already stole headlines recently for the announcement of her own 2023 greatest hits show, called The Eras Tour. Which already made history for shutting down Ticketmaster during the presales due to “overwhelming demand” and subsequently inciting an antitrust investigation. It’s unlikely that The Celebration Tour will have the same issues or history-making propensities, but there’s no denying that it will sell out in most cities, maybe even the two dates (thus far) Madonna has bestowed upon New York, the place she’s almost grotesquely fond of because it “made her into the person she is” (though Madonna students know it was her mother’s death and the tutelage of Christopher Flynn that did that). Ergo, the tour announcement was sure to mention, “The Celebration Tour will take us on Madonna’s artistic journey through four decades and pays respect to the city of New York where her career in music began.” It’s unclear how much more respect Madonna can pay to it, but anyway… She herself also added, “I am excited to explore as many songs as possible in hopes to give my fans the show they have been waiting for.” How Taylor-esque.

    And yet, the only person who can really give people a bona fide “Eras Tour” is Madonna. After all, she isn’t called the Queen of Reinvention for nothing, having “revamped” herself repeatedly over the years. Some people would cynically call that a “bid to stay relevant,” while Madonna has described it as the search for her true self as she slowly peels back the layers (yes, it’s very Kabbalah-spurred). Either way, it’s been iconic and culturally impactful for the rest of the world to watch. From the Boy Toy incarnation of Like A Virgin to the bleach-blonde, slicked-back hair and gamine physique of True Blue to the dominatrix of Erotica to the “Ethereal Girl” of Ray of Light to the glamorous cowgirl of Music to the Che Guevara imitator of American Life to the “disco dolly” of Confessions on a Dance Floor, Madonna has provided look after look (therefore Halloween costume after Halloween costume) for the masses to soak up and embed in their collective cultural lexicon.

    With Taylor, those marked reinventions—aesthetic or otherwise—have never really been there. Sure, her “sound” has evolved from the country-ier days of Taylor Swift, Fearless and Speak Now to the more pop-centric focus heralded by Red. But, in the end, her “deal” is being a singer-songwriter that sort of fell into being a pop star (something Lana Del Rey hasn’t been able to do on a similar mainstream level—possibly because she’s viewed as “too dreary” for the main mainstream). Madonna, always underestimated for her singing-songwriting abilities, is, in contrast, a pop star of the prototypical order. The blueprint for every girl who came after her. She was the post-modern ideal (that arrived just as MTV did): media savvy and never missing an opportunity for self-promotion and “synergy” (read: advertising ventures with such companies as Mitsubishi, Pepsi [short-lived, but still], Motorola and H&M).

    What’s more, she had no aversion to being in the public eye on an almost constant basis—prompting the rockumentary meets early reality TV stylings of 1991’s Truth or Dare. It is this Alek Keshishian-directed film that Madonna parodies in her ad for The Celebration Tour, with appearances by Amy Schumer, Diplo, Judd Apatow, Jack Black, Lil Wayne, Bob the Drag Queen (who will open on Madonna’s tour), Kate Berlant, Larry Owens, Meg Stalter and Eric Andre subbing out for the original Blond Ambition Tour dancers. A.k.a. the ones that sued Madonna afterward and then made a follow-up documentary called Strike A Pose in 2016.

    The allusions to her early 90s projects also expand when Judd Apatow (one of many inexplicable presences in the room) dares Madonna to recreate one of her Sex book poses with Larry Owens, Jack Black and Lil Wayne. Afterward, Schumer then dares her to go on a world tour to perform all of her “greatest mothafuckin’ hits.” Madonna replies, “Four decades?” “Yeah bitch.” “As in: forty years?” “Yes.” “As in: all those songs?” “Fuck yeah.” “We’re talking ‘Like A Virgin’—” (a song, by the way, that Madonna has frequently paraded her contempt for). Amy interjects, “We’re talkin’ [singing], ‘Open your heart,’ we’re talkin’ [singing], ‘Tropical the island breeze.” Madonna and the others join in to sing, “All of nature wild and free/This is where I long to be/La isla bonita,” with Madonna stopping to say, “Wait, hold up. That’s a lot of songs.”

    Ironically, however, in far fewer years, Swift has almost as many studio albums out as Madonna, making it possible for her to have fifty-five singles under her belt in the span from 2006 to now. That’s getting awful close to Madonna’s robust ninety singles—especially at the rate that Swift produces. So sure, Swift has the “rep” and the “cred” to do a greatest hits tour, but it’s hardly something that should be called “Eras” (perhaps largely inspired by the fact that she didn’t get to tour folklore and evermore thanks to Miss Rona). For the eras of Swift are ultimately always the same, expounding on this, that or the other heartbreak (all while sporting the same blonde hair and red lipstick). Madonna’s lyrical topics are, conversely, far more varied. Needless to say, so are her looks.

    And, though it makes more sense for Madonna to do a greatest hits tour (despite balking at the notion for so long), it’s odd, in a way, for her to bother with such a “theme,” for she always includes a few crumbs of that ilk on every tour—usually favoring the inclusion of “Holiday,” “Vogue” and the aforementioned “La Isla Bonita,” at the bare minimum. This is why one has to ask, is it really a “Celebration” Tour or a Capitulation Tour, with Madonna finally surrendering to the fickle tastes of the philistine hordes? You know, like Taylor Swift. But maybe, in the name of pop star symbiosis and catering to the hoi polloi, the two can join each other onstage again like they did at the 2015 iHeartRadio Music Awards. Since they’ll both be in greatest hits tour mode at the same time and all.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link