Jump to content
Elle

Interview with MTV - Next Music Video, Tour, & ‘Cola’

Recommended Posts

she continuously taks about her "controibution" and emphasizes the end of white mujtsang with get free playing shows her driving away in a car.......

her song with contribution details is "coachella"  maybe my contribution could be as small as hoping words could turn to birds and birds could send my thoughts your way

driving in cars with boys drinknig in the white noise

full circle is driving away from the boy

ride "i hear the birds on the summer breeze i drive fast"

now shes driving slow there no more war in her mind no more burning desire

out of the black into the blue

song noir "i can make u dopsick from my naughtiness  lets go to vegas i say who the best   etc

song national anthem  drinking and driving

cherry   cherries and wine

watch me fall  "without you"

full circle  watch the world fall ( the nuclear bomb at end of video)  macro  micro  her perosnal life vs the world

its a pure zen buddhism message

queen of saigons in national anthem

stnaley kubricks movie  about vietnam war has soldier with a hat saying "born to kill"  and the solder says its a buddhist meaning

she mentions in this interview how on first album her boyfriend always kills her  "born to kil" on the sodier hat in vietnman

"queens of saigon" line in nationalk anthem   UNDENIABLE FACT its connected

i can go on and on and on and on  been perfecting this theory for years and its get more obvious with every day

 

If you wrote this in sentences and paragraphs id understand what you are saying!

I think it sounds cool but I just don't quite get it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wrote this in sentences and paragraphs id understand what you are saying!

I think it sounds cool but I just don't quite get it

I AM DOING THAT BUT ITS ALMOST IMPOSSIOBLE TO MAKE IT ALL MAKE SENSE IN A BRIEF POST SO I JUST BLURT OUT SNIPPETS HERE AND THERE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things that i love about Lana's newest interview with MTV is how personable, genuine, honest and warm she is. Definitely displaying how mature and comfortable she become in her own skin dealing with interviewers. Makes me wish i could just sit up at a cafe with her and discuss life. That would be so great. And relaxing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked this interview! and lana looked so comfortable with the interviewer! but I feel there was a part that I believe was unnecessary and kinda forced and made Lana feel uncomfortable. When the interviewer asked her about Cola... the way she practically forced Lana to agree to remove the song from the list with how she was like "a song you will retire from the catalogue now?" Lana didn't have really a choice but to agree..

I understand that she absolutely supports the women and she also pointed that out but that song was written way before the harvey allegations surfaced. It has nothing to do with what Harvey did. It's just a song. Besides what's the difference? Heroin refers to the Manson Family murders w/ the blood on the walls and even namedropping him in the opening line,jonestown massacre in the original UV video/freak video, the pedo (lolita) theme, violence references in her songs? why censoring Cola? by that logic she should censor the rest songs too.


:woot: giphy.gif :woot:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked this interview! and lana looked so comfortable with the interviewer! but I feel there was a part that I believe was unnecessary and kinda forced and made Lana feel uncomfortable. When the interviewer asked her about Cola... the way she practically forced Lana to agree to remove the song from the list with how she was like "a song you will retire from the catalogue now?" Lana didn't have really a choice but to agree..

 

I understand that she absolutely supports the women and she also pointed that out but that song was written way before the harvey allegations surfaced. It has nothing to do with what Harvey did. It's just a song. Besides what's the difference? Heroin refers to the Manson Family murders w/ the blood on the walls and even namedropping him in the opening line,jonestown massacre in the original UV video/freak video, the pedo (lolita) theme, violence references in her songs? why censoring Cola? by that logic she should censor the rest songs too.

 

i think it's because it's not an abstract theme you can "comfortably" quote rn? manson and jonestown were specific events that happened decades ago and are used often as reference in general culture, like dropping a bar like "she eat your heart out like Jeffrey Dahmer"  in a pop song. And pedofelia is a dark theme, but she uses a renowned classic novel to draw the imagery not a recent case? 

I think like in 5/10 years it's going to be the same for Weinstein, his name won't be just *His* but it's going to be a label for that kind of behaviour and people will name drop him too as the hollywood mogul executive who preyed on women but rn because of him a lot of people are coming out about their experience, and not just women: men and (former) child stars. So it's delicate because it involves people and eventual new voices. 

 

And I agree about the suggestive interview, altho it could have been planned in advance? I don't know if they still do that but the girl interviewing her was really cognisant about lana's body of work and they both seemed comfortable, maybe they reviewed the points they were going to talk about before to give structure to the interview. The Harvey thing is super delicate as I said previously, so I don't think Lana would talk about it without working on her statement before hand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked this interview! and lana looked so comfortable with the interviewer! but I feel there was a part that I believe was unnecessary and kinda forced and made Lana feel uncomfortable. When the interviewer asked her about Cola... the way she practically forced Lana to agree to remove the song from the list with how she was like "a song you will retire from the catalogue now?" Lana didn't have really a choice but to agree..

 

I understand that she absolutely supports the women and she also pointed that out but that song was written way before the harvey allegations surfaced. It has nothing to do with what Harvey did. It's just a song. Besides what's the difference? Heroin refers to the Manson Family murders w/ the blood on the walls and even namedropping him in the opening line,jonestown massacre in the original UV video/freak video, the pedo (lolita) theme, violence references in her songs? why censoring Cola? by that logic she should censor the rest songs too.

Lolita is meant to be taboo and fit a very specific theme; it's also considered to be a classic novel, much like clockwork orange. incredibly awkward themes but its meant to be like that

 

Jonestown n Manson at this point are decades old and pop culture references- tragedies but something that transcended censorship. 

 

the Harvery situation is a helluva lot different- for Lana the song and the idea was a joke, it's an obvious hollywood speak n tell that Harvey was a predator but people either played the rumors like a joke or were silenced, Lana had no harmful intention when writing the song but seeing how big of a monster that man was and how many women he's scarred it probably upset her. That the whole fantasy to her was a joke while there were many women that had to deal with the abuse and rape as a reality, it must feel v shitty for her to think about any damage she could've caused at potentially normalizing or downplaying a real life offender

 

it'd be like if Foster The People wrote and played pumped up kicks as a hollow; neutral intended song, but then a month later something the size of columbine happened, obviously didnt mean it but it becomes a horrific reality to some people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She has a secret. She doesn't want to talk about it. Well, not now. Maybe one day. It's ok.

 

 

What did you notice, sleuth? 

 

When she was talking about Jhene she stated how "brave" she is because she's able to talk about her whole story in music/interviews and lana said thats something she hasn't done. The interviewer didn't even catch on to that comment tho. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so intrigued now that she said she has some many aspects of her past life still uncovered (when talking about Jhene Aiko)... I'm sure one day they'll come out


                                                           giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it's because it's not an abstract theme you can "comfortably" quote rn? manson and jonestown were specific events that happened decades ago and are used often as reference in general culture, like dropping a bar like "she eat your heart out like Jeffrey Dahmer"  in a pop song. And pedofelia is a dark theme, but she uses a renowned classic novel to draw the imagery not a recent case? 

I think like in 5/10 years it's going to be the same for Weinstein, his name won't be just *His* but it's going to be a label for that kind of behaviour and people will name drop him too as the hollywood mogul executive who preyed on women but rn because of him a lot of people are coming out about their experience, and not just women: men and (former) child stars. So it's delicate because it involves people and eventual new voices. 

 

And I agree about the suggestive interview, altho it could have been planned in advance? I don't know if they still do that but the girl interviewing her was really cognisant about lana's body of work and they both seemed comfortable, maybe they reviewed the points they were going to talk about before to give structure to the interview. The Harvey thing is super delicate as I said previously, so I don't think Lana would talk about it without working on her statement before hand. 

I don't think its a matter of being "comfortable" to quote now or tomorrow or in 5-10 years. The manson murders and jonestown massacre just because they happened decades ago doesn't mean its "okay or not okay" then and now to use as reference.They are horrible events that no matter how many years will pass they will be still important and shocking parts of history.

Who says it will be ok in 5-10 years for weinstein? and not just for weinstein but for any horrible event like the manson murders.who says when it's 'okay' or not for that and how they draw the line for the Harvey incident but not for the manson murders? No it's not delicate because it involves people and new voices, they are all delicate not just the Harvey incident. the manson murders is delicate too, jonestown massacre is delicate too, pedophilia, violence and so on. They are all important. If singing about manson is "okay" then it should be "okay" for Cola too. There is no difference in those events because they are all in fact important and shocking and horrible. As for the Harvey case, the only "new and fresh" bit is the exposure of Harvey's actions. The stories of those women that came forward are not "fresh". They all came forward to share stories that happened 5-10-20 years ago.

If people are okay with lana or any other artist singing about the manson murders,jonestown,lolita and pedophilia,violence etc then they should be okay for Harvey in the Cola song too. No exceptions. They can't cherry pick and say "Oh! I love when lana is singing about the manson murderss in that song yess i love it, but no no no i dont want her to sing about Harvey in that song". This is hypocritical. They either won't like ALL of those songs or they like them all. No exceptions.

 

Lolita is meant to be taboo and fit a very specific theme; it's also considered to be a classic novel, much like clockwork orange. incredibly awkward themes but its meant to be like that

 

Jonestown n Manson at this point are decades old and pop culture references- tragedies but something that transcended censorship. 

 

the Harvery situation is a helluva lot different- for Lana the song and the idea was a joke, it's an obvious hollywood speak n tell that Harvey was a predator but people either played the rumors like a joke or were silenced, Lana had no harmful intention when writing the song but seeing how big of a monster that man was and how many women he's scarred it probably upset her. That the whole fantasy to her was a joke while there were many women that had to deal with the abuse and rape as a reality, it must feel v shitty for her to think about any damage she could've caused at potentially normalizing or downplaying a real life offender

 

it'd be like if Foster The People wrote and played pumped up kicks as a hollow; neutral intended song, but then a month later something the size of columbine happened, obviously didnt mean it but it becomes a horrific reality to some people

Well of course Lolita and that theme is a taboo. It's about an adult molesting a 12 year old.Also there is rumors about the author of Lolita being a pedophile.As for clockwork orange, UV was named after that novel and that novel features probably the most famous rape scene in a movie of all time. Yet lana is singing without any problem about all the above. There is no issue singing for the manson murders or the jonestown massacres (where 909 people died) or pedophilia,domestic violence,etc yet somehow its not "ok" for her to sing about Harvey? Says who?

And how exactly those tragedies "transcended censorship" just because they are decades old? What about the manson murders and how Sharon Tate was brutally murdered with her baby still inside her?? What about her sister that is still alive to this day and has to live everyday with the horror of what happened to her sister? Are you going to tell her "hey get over it.it's decades old.people can sing about it" ?

What about the 900+ dead people in Jonestown massacre? They are all dead. It's okay to sing about them but not for Harvey? How? Who says that?

 

Ramones, Neil Young, David Bowie, and many more acts were singing about the Manson murders/referring to Manson very early on,so is time still an issue for these people? what about all the rappers who refer to heinous crimes making punchlines out of them too?

"time" is no excuse whether it's decades old, or 1 year old or fresh. People use columbine,manson etc all the time. It's not even a matter of what is "socially acceptable" either. It's not socially acceptable to sing about being beaten either but lana does it. so what?

 

 

I think it's utterly ridiculous to say that Lana is upset by the Harvey incident because I'm sure she is helluva upset about the manson murders too, the jonestown massacre,pedophilia,violence. She is upset for ALL of those things but she still sings about all of them, so why not sing about Harvey too? There is absolutely no logic in this. No logic at how people assume and say "ohh it's okay for lana to sing about manson murders who cares its decades old but noooo it's not okay to sing about Harvey" Where is the logic? I see none. Just because one event is 5-10-20 years old doesn't take away the horror and importance from it. They will be all equally upsetting.

We can't be "okay" with one and "not okay" with the other. We will be okay with ALL of them or not at all.

 

The only reason lana agreed and did the smart move to remove Cola is because people will be disgusting and try to bully and ruin her. Not because it "upset" her. Yes what happened with Harvey upset her just like how the manson murders and pedophilia and everything else she sings about in her songs upset her too.

 

You guys keep mentioning that with time these cases push through censorship, so what? Does that change the pain of over 900 families? That's how many died in jonestown. Does that change the 7 victims families that were left affected by the murders the manson family carried out? Will the pain miraculously disappear for the victims of Harvey Weinstein? No. So how come in your minds Lana singing about the manson family, domestic violence, pedophilia etc and demonstrating rape in the video with eli roth or mass murder like in jonestown massacre inspired freak video is ok due to "time passing"? people are still widely affected by this and copycat crimes too. no matter how much time passes, one isn't better than the other.

You guys just want to make yourselves feel better about your hypocrisy towards the matter because you conveniently forgot that the other things Lana sings about that you love and treasure is just as "bad" as the Harvey line in Cola.

 

 


:woot: giphy.gif :woot:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's cheapening her art by pulling Cola. Is it really because of the Harvey line? Wasn't it "Ah he's in the sky" to begin with? and secondly, it's not even in reference to him so why??

 

The second an artist begins censoring their work for the comfort of others, appeasing the current zeitgeist, they've lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...