PrettyBaby

I read this article twice and I found it fascinating, from a psychological standpoint. It's almost as if Lana keeps trying to get different results from performing the same actions. Don't people like to say that's what insanity is?

Some people do. Often the same ones who enjoy telling everyone how logical they are, more than actually putting it into practice consistently

 

But I get what you're saying. It's too easy to shut down when overwhelmed by one's emotions in social situations. The good news is, some people who have built up numerous connections between the two sides of the brain, ie multitaskers, report that they can learn how to process emotions along with rational thoughts at (more or less) the same time. Apparently it's a skill one can get better at with practice

Here are a few other "inauthentic" singers and musicians who changed their names:

 

 

 

Gene Simmons - Chaim Witz

Katy Perry - Katy Hudson

Shania Twain - Eileen Edwards

Stevie Wonder - Steveland Judkins

Dusty Springfield - Mary Isobel Catherine O'Brian

Lady Gaga - Stefani Germanotta

Dean Martin - Dino Crocetti

Bob Dylan - Robert Zimmerman

Bruno Mars - Peter Hernandez

Dido - Florian Cloud de Bounevialle Armstrong

Judy Garland - Frances Gumm

George Michael - Georgios Panayiotou

Flea - Michael Balzary

Slash - Saul Hudson

You mean no one really named their kid Flea? This calls everything concerning RHCP's authenticity into question from now on.

LOL. Wow. Seriously? Has this discussion really devolved into psychoanalyzing each other's motives?.

Yes, when you accused people of giving LDR a pass because they like her music, the conversation on this and other threads devolved to this level. I should not have responded in kind. I'm sorry for offending you.

 

Rather than bore everyone with our little drama, I'll continue this conversation via PM if you don't mind. When I have time, and access to a mouse :/

 

I do want to go on record as agreeing with EE's primary concern that journalists should be treated with respect and basic human decency. I just don't think anyone has to agree to equate resembling someone's pet peeve with actually committing wrongdoing.

@@evilentity Didn't you say you're borderline INTJ/P? There's no way you're really this judgmental. Why do you insist on playing devil's advocate when it comes to Lana Del Rey? Cynicism, while the opposite of naive idealism, is no more objective; it's just biased in the opposite direction. There is nothing particularly truthful, or brave, in such an approach.

 

Withholding judgment is not the same as defending. It is simply admitting "I don't know," putting a pin in it, and waiting for more information to pass judgment. Waiting forever if necessary; not everything needs to be decided. This is my approach to life in general, and my intent in discussing LDR or anyone else. I'm not saying I'm always successful at avoiding bias, but I do consistently try.

 

If there's a source of bias in my assessment of LDR's choices, it's not from liking her music. It's from identifying intensely with the reactions she inspires in others. The things people say about her often echo criticisms directed at me in my own life, and I'm honestly baffled by many of them. In my case, being "highly sensitive" has less to do with injured feelings or low EI/EQ (though they do factor in), and more to do with a tendency to be overwhelmed sooner than others by certain forms of environmental stimuli. For me, processing social cues is an exhausting task. So when people like me ask to be treated a certain way, it sounds like we're saying we don't want to work as hard as others, when really we're saying we ARE working hard, to the point of fatigue and rapidly diminishing returns. Does this make any sense? (For anyone who's interested in learning how to work/live with the sensitive people they know, I highly recommend "The Highly Sensitive Person" by Elaine Aron.)

 

But this isn't supposed to be about me

 

I don't think this was a terrible job on the interviewer's part. I think he went too far in a few cases, like we all do sometimes, but saying he "triggered her red flags" is intended as a neutral description of what happened, not accusing him of wrongdoing. I'm glad he gave his account of how it went down. (But it is HIS account.) An interview is not a fixed, physical commodity. It is an interaction between people, colored by the personalities of each, and that is okay. I'm not trying to pronounce judgment on one party. I'm trying to leave open the possibility that even in a situation of conflict, NEITHER party is necessarily in "the wrong."

It is endlessly fascinating to me how a sensitive person can simply stand up for herself and refuse to play the diplomacy game, and get called a bitch for it.

 

Apparently there is pressure in some form for Lana to do interviews. I say good for her for knowing to call it quits this time. (After, what, seven hours of interview time the day before?)

 

Yes, indeed there is a place for treating different people differently, and treating more-sensitive people with greater sensitivity. It's called emotional intelligence, and anyone who works with people would do well to at least consider it in their approach. (I don't usually extoll the virtues of EI because I think it gets overemphasized these days compared to other forms of intelligence... But completely ignoring it is just as ridiculous.)

 

Whether the established players like it or not, Lana is going to have to find her own approach to the game. If a journalist triggers her red flags, then she has the right to enforce her boundaries by ending the interview. (He even says she told him it wasn't about him. That's a conciliatory move. Artless? Maybe. Hissy fit? Hardly.)

So much hype, I have to try Rebel's playlist sometime this week. (With TVIB&W )

The contest thing doesn't seem to work that much, especially when nothing can be won. So I guess it should be more of a collaborative project than a contest with no prize. 

 

Maybe you could publish the list of the songs already remixed so new contestants could focus on unremixed one ? 

 

I think this is a great idea!

 

I don't have the skills to participate (if I did, I'd for sure add some prominent basslines to "Guns and Roses"), but I'd love to hear what other people come up with!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1_Cz9EzE8&sns=em

 

MY RULEZ

 

Why is there a copyright claim against this video?

Anyone manage to find a copy of "My Rulez" with Liz?

The Pass - Rush

 

 

 

 

 

Love this one! 

I think she might be combining people named jim/jimmy. The parts about it being a ~rough relationship~ = Jimmy Gnecco, the cult leader line = The AA guy, and the fact that Jim Jones is a famous cult leader = Icing on the cake. Everything she writes is personal, but that doesn't mean that she speaks straightforwardly about one situation for an entire song every time. All writers combine experiences and situations to create songs or stories.

I like the combination of Jims theory for Ultraviolence. It wasn't ringing true for me that it would simply be about Jimmy Gnecco.

 

The casting of another MM for Shades of Cool has really got me thinking it's a Mike Mizrahi song.

 

I'm getting Arthur Lynn vibes for Brooklyn Baby, and Guns and Roses too. (But maybe they're about Reeve Carney? Did he and Lana ever play a gig together? Do we know anything about their relationship aside from a few photos and a Gramma video?)

 

I don't think the main UV tracks are about Barrie, just Black Beauty and Is This Happiness.

The cover really bothers me so I made this:

 

No one asks for my playlist updates, but I'll post them anyway 

 

 

 

 

 

I think @ pretty much summed it up. The reason 'we' are included in the 'game' is because we're as much a part of it as the celebrities are. We are the ones who judge the people in the public eye. It is definitely societal and we are creatures of society, but whether that is something innately human is up for debate, I guess.

 

I think society plays a huge role. It seems that in the 90s we were deluged with "beautiful losers" in the form of slacker culture. But it's innately human to express confidence or humility in varying degrees, both of which can be good things. I guess it's the affectation of either one that can be particularly grating. And when a personality style becomes culturally sort of mandated, the outliers who don't fit the pattern understandably resist.

 

I'm just tired of watching the pendulum swing. I wish we could find a way to not just co-exist, but appreciate each other's diverse styles of coping with the world.

"'...well, APPARENTLY, there's something to this.'" 

UV sounds amazing on vinyl

 

It breaks my cold, dead little heart to know people have only heard the awful CD version

 

I don't want to go back to the aggravations of the vinyl formal. I really, really don't. But GAH.

RIP

The Yayo, Queen of the Gas Station, and TOSTB are so beautiful.

Can you do one for Meet Me In The Pale Moonlight ?    

 

Not sure I captured the mood of the song, but this spoke to me for some reason. Hope you like it

 

I think he killed her off metaphorically by leaving her. And he rues the day. And she knows it.

 

(Well, at least that's the story.)

Someone asking for my help?!? You have no idea how excited this makes me. (Or maybe you do. Hee.)

 

"The Revenge of Lana Del Rey" could work as a title, maybe, if you put something like "She's Not Me" at the end of it... but yeah, I'm not feeling it either. It reminds me a lot of my "Hollywood Playaz" playlist:

 

 

 

 

...so I think something from that shoot (Wonderland Magazine 2011 by AJ Numan) would work; I don't know how you feel about the one with the red leather dress, but maybe if you call it something like "Playing Dangerous"? Though you also have songs on there that fit with 2010 Nicole Nodland pics of the Lizzy/Lana transition...

 

 

 

 

...so yeah, I'm feeling "Hollywood Playaz," "Playing Dangerous," or even "Beautiful Player" for this one.

 

"St. Tropez" reminds me of my "Lost in N.Y.C." playlist with some "Neon Gold" thrown in, but yours is heavier on the Lizzy era I think. (Not surfer girl Lizzy, but trailer-park-gone-ghetto Lizzy) "Party Girl" says it all. (I don't think you need PG on the playlist to use it as a title.) So a Chuck Grant photo 2008-9, like when she's wearing the black cat mask, or the blonde wig and navy polka-dot bra, would be perfect I think.

 

 

 

 

I take it you don't like Daddy Issues? I love it, ha, but beyond that, I think it would stick out like a sore thumb on "Champagne Sighs" more than any other playlist I could envision. I think it would go perfectly at the end of your "St. Tropez" playlist.

 

Hope some of this helps! Keep tweaking it till you love it

***** & a rainbow...

1. Cruel World

2. Flipside (I'm addicted to the guitar in this one)

3. Florida Kilos

 

*****

4. West Coast

5. Old Money

6. Brooklyn Baby (it's growing on me; I could see it climbing as high as #4 for me)

7. Black Beauty

8. Shades of Cool

9. FMWUTTT (the melody is what keeps me from writing this one off... simply gorgeous)

10. Guns and Roses (also a grower; I wanted more bass but hey, this is 2014)

 

****

11. Ultraviolence (can't quite give it 5 stars yet, but it's hovering at 4.5...)

12. Pretty When You Cry

13. Is This Happiness

 

***

14. The Other Woman

15. Sad Girl (I know it's not exactly the same content as PWYC, but it FEELS too same-y to me)

 

 

*

16. Money Power Glory (the guitar solo on this one is the only moment on the album that is truly unlistenable) 

She has been victimized by the media, but not by this journalist.

 

No, I actually don't think this journalist victimized Lana in any way or even did anything ethically wrong. Lana on the other hand... And if anyone was victimized here it was the journalist.

 

I see.

I really don't understand Lana's reaction or the reaction of most of this fanbase to the interview. Many of you have completely lost any shred of objectivity in worshiping your queen. "I'm your cult leader", indeed. Neither the interviewer nor the editor did anything wrong here.

 

...

 

This is just the umpteenth example of Lana's victim-playing far exceeding her victimhood. It's getting really old.

 

So did they do nothing wrong, or was she victimized to a point?

 

 

My point was more that I think much of her sadness is innate or internal, but to the extent that it's caused by external factors there are many different courses of action she could take to minimize them, but she'd rather just continue playing the victim and scapegoating the media far beyond the extent she was actually victimized. It's bad enough when she complains about media coverage of her generally (it's been two and a half years since SNL now), but particularly shitty in this case because she personally attacked a journalist who did absolutely nothing wrong or unusual-- in fact, he'd almost be negligent as a music journalist if he decided not to lead with that quote-- mostly in reaction to how other media outlets covered the interview. Surely this is not the way to get favorable media coverage or dispel negative media narratives about her.

 

 

While it may be true these journalists did nothing illegal, that's actually a fairly low standard for evaluating the ethics of their behavior. EE, I'm sure you know more than I do whether the writer did anything unusual... but when you say, "in fact, he'd almost be negligent as a music journalist if he decided not to lead with that quote" you seem to protest more than a bit too much. Again, did the journalists at the Guardian do "absolutely nothing wrong or unusual," or is there in fact an "extent [to which] she was actually victimized"?

 

I think it's important for us to see legal and professional codes as a floor, below which we must not sink, but it's also important for us to be objective enough to take a step back from time to time and decide whether we should do even better. Do you agree with that much, EE? I mean, what do you think? Is there room for discussion about whether journalists in general, and the Guardian journalists in particular, have done this enough?

 

There's definitely room for discussion about what Lana may have contributed to the problem, and I think you and FSP make some excellent points. Additionally, in calling Ariel out she wrongly suggested he was the writer (but are we expected to believe that he was completely uninvolved?) and made, imo, overly specific charges. I mean maybe the contact person and/or the interviewer were hiding sinister motives, but that's rather speculative. I wish that she had handled it differently by focusing on the end result, the actual article written by Tim Jonze and published by the staff of the Guardian, and what it was about the article that made her feel wronged. But that doesn't mean she was in the wrong to call them out at all. That's how communication works, or should work: if one party misunderstands, or distorts the communication through wrong emphasis, then the other party may attempt to set the record straight. The problem is, I think she tried to set it straight by presenting a fuller picture of the situation, when I think what was needed was clarification.

 

Communication is a tricky business, and personality styles indeed play a part in how we handle it, as well as education (including which models we adopt) and professional training (or, admittedly, lack thereof ) But I think we can all do better if we try.