evilentity

No it's not. I couldn't disagree with this more. Mindless praise isn't anyone's job. We're not her PR team. This is a discussion forum for discussing opinions about Lana and her work, both positive and negative. I happen to disagree with the basis of @@leaked_version's criticisms, but he has every right to voice them.

Except studying doesn't really cost anything. A lot of the kind of promotion you're talking about does. It's an investment proposition. How much of a return you get for how much of an investment. I can very easily imagine a hypothetical scenario where Lana might have sold more copies of an album-- enough not to be a "flop" by your standards-- but got there by spending so much on promotion that she actually made less money on it. How much is spent on production and promotion and such absolutely does matter. Take ARTPOP for example. While I think reports of ARTPOP being a commercial "flop" were exaggerated-- it was hugely successful in absolute terms-- to the extent that it was a flop, it was only a flop in the sense that it failed to live up to the impossible standard of matching the unsustainable sales success of her previous albums, the label made too much physical product based on overly optimistic projections, and they were rumored to have spent a shitload on promo. Lana, likewise, remains hugely successful in absolute terms, but will likely never match the commercial success of BTD. But I don't think her label has any illusions about that at this point and I don't think they're overspending on production or promotion. I think she'll be just fine. Sure, but I just don't think the sales she's doing place her in any danger of not covering those costs. I don't think Lana spent all that much making either of the last two albums. I think you're being extremely alarmist. I mean, we have like a hundred songs this girl recorded that she sold zero copies of. Zero. And now that she's selling hundreds of thousands of albums you think that's not enough for her to be able to keep fucking doing what she's fucking doing? Gimme a break.

Yay. Another thread full of anger at the inevitable frustration of unrealistic expectations for metrics of overinflated importance.

We all have our particular areas of interest. I actually appreciate that sales numbers are one of yours since it's not one of mine, but I'm sometimes curious about them and it's nice to be able to find that information right here on the forum. I just think the extent of your fixation on sale numbers causes you to overemphasize their importance, and in a way that I think detracts unnecessarily from appreciation of the music. The idea that her current sales figures (or even their current trend) realistically endanger her ability to continue making great art seems far-fetched to me, at best. (Yeah, she might not be able to make another Tropico, but that wouldn't exactly be a bad thing, in my opinion.) And if they don't pose any risk, why does it really matter?

As I'm sure a number of the albums that hit #1 or #2 do. It's still a pretty exclusive club. I'm not confusing them, but some here seize on irrelevancies to the point being made. Even if "Honeymoon" is the worst performing #2 of the year, the amount of sales required to achieve that feat, even in the worst sales week of the year for the industry, is still a significant amount of sales, and still places it in pretty exclusive company. The only way "Honeymoon" can be considered a "flop" is if you had unrealistic expectations to begin with.

While I understand the desire for a favorite artist to create more art, and the hope that other people will enjoy and be enriched by the music you enjoy, I don't understand the almost pathological obsession by some here with sales figures, promo for promo's sake (or merely for the sake of stimulating sales), or needing your listening choices validated by the general public's purchasing decisions. Also, aside from the possibility of not recouping an excessive budget (which seems extremely unlikely here), any metric by which an album that went to #2 on the Billboard 200-- a feat achieved by only 36 musicians on the entire planet the previous year-- would be considered a "flop" is kind of absurd.

C'mon you guys, "rapper's delight"? It's obviously about the granny from The Wedding Singer. And notice the flower crown? Is Lana just a big rip-off of Ellen Albertini Dow? (LOL. The troll face kinda looks like her.)

@@LoreleiLee I'm not sure if it was you or someone else, but the last time someone asked this I just changed the title for them. As I'm not a regular member, I'm not exactly sure what options are available to regular members. I always edit thread titles using the "Edit Title" option in the "Topic Moderation" dropdown next to the "Reply to this topic" button at the top of the thread, but I imagine not even topic creators have that. If not, perhaps try clicking "Edit" on the OP and then "Use Full Editor". I can edit the topic title there and I imagine regular members may also be able to if they started the topic.

CONTINUED... It's sad that the intensity of the criticism has so blinded to her to the enormity of her success here in the US despite it all, but it's encouraging that she's starting to get it. As @@Trash Magic pointed out to me, this may be the first time she's mentioned recording anything for BTD outside the US or UK. I don't believe the credits for BTD mention any studios outside the US or UK, but a number of the personnel credited on OTTR are based in Sweden. Two years before the release of BTD is roughly when AKA was digitally released, so she could also be speaking generally about all the music she worked on in between. If so, this comment could be a reference to her working with Swedish producers Markus Sepehrmanesh and Tommy Typser, who produced at least one of the versions of "Hit It & Run". Yeah, she really is light years better at making music than talking about it. Gee, I never noticed.

I missed this when it came out, but I thought it was worth commenting on. Yup, this sums up very well what's so beguiling about her. This is the crux of the issue. Over time, I've come around more to Franco's position on this, but it is nevertheless at odds with what Lana says about herself and her work. While I think this assessment of Franco's is true, and I would also apply it to myself, the plain fact is that Lana herself resists this interpretation and invites a fairly literal interpretation repeatedly throughout this interview: feeling like I was writing about things autobiographically for a writer, you don't know any story better than your own With a lot of my songs, you don't have to look much further. I'm right here. It's right here. We could almost talk about anything else because I'm putting it all out there already. Anytime you have a question you can always refer back to the songs. Therein the story lies. And statements like that are not at all atypical for her. I don't know, have you really Lana? You're always intimating toward such a history, but rarely in enough specific detail to know what to believe. Can you pander to @@Monicker any more, Lana? And again, suggesting "Florida Kilos" is aberrational in not being at all autobiographical suggests she considers much of her work to be to some degree. Lana definitely has the luxury of selecting things from her large body of work if she wants an album to have a concept or cohesive sound. The rawness of UV was such a welcome departure from the plasticity of BTD. More please. Ahem... Oh, I forgot to respond to this in my first post in this topic. I've never bought this argument about any celebrity unless they portray themselves as a role model. I'm with Charles Barkley on this one: Is James Franco just a big rip-off of, well... me? TO BE CONTINUED... (fucking quote limits)

I think a lot of people who know her from way back still call her Lizzy. The Lana Rey Del Mar name was mentioned in two articles in the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, published near her hometown of Lake Placid. However, there are no performances she is known to have performed under that name.

Space-X, man. This one, perhaps? Paging @@Monicker.

That was not at all clear. The original context did suggest that people making the arguments I was making did so because they want to be able to use the n-word or f-word. You've clarified and I accept that's not what you intended. Hopefully you accept why it read that way and why I took exception to that. Why are we still arguing about this? Let's move on.

You did give me an indication that it was talking about me. You said it in the context of quoting a characterization of my argument and then saying "That's what it eventually boils down to". You've clarified now and I take you at your word that that was not what you intended, but don't blame me for the unclarity. Disagreement =/= invalidation.

I mostly agree with your post, but I would add that I think usage of the word "bitch" may sometimes be a little more nuanced than this, and has been evolving over time, including becoming less gender specific. Men are now often called "bitch" as well, and it is often used without any gendered connotations or intent to feminize, almost like the word "asshole". Like a guy saying to another guy "You bitch!" when the other guy kills him in a video game. I highly recommend reading a surprisingly scholarly book called "Holy Sh*t: A Brief History of Swearing" that talks about this kind of fluidity of obscene language over time, including how the word "faggot" was first used as a slur against women before it evolved into a slur against gay men. Podcast with the author here (WARNING! EXTREMELY EXPLICIT LANGUAGE): https://soundcloud.com/panoply/lexicon-valley-28-a-brief It also seems to be less of a taboo to use when someone complains ("bitches") a lot, or behaves in a legitimately "bitchy" way.

Please. You were quoting another member's characterization of my argument. And were yourself characterizing everyone on the other side of the issue from you, which necessarily includes me. But whether it's about me or not, you were unfairly ascribing really odious motivations to people who disagree with you. That's worded in kind of an inflammatory way that insinuates you feel white people deserve to be called these things, but I don't really disagree with the substance, the causal relationship there. It's also not really relevant to the line of argument here: cimb: X doesn't exist. Me: X exists. Lists examples. AH: X only exists because Y. And that wasn't even one of my main arguments with what he said. Please address those if you're going to bother. Also, the "MUCH older" comment is unnecessary.

Ah the only people that argue this are the people that feel left out because they don't have an offensive word to reclaim. Sigh. Seriously? You really want to go another round? Fine. What are you talking about? I don't feel "left out". (But if I did, there's plenty of offensive words for white people out there like "cracker" or "honky" or "whitey".) Also, if you're going to rely solely on identity-based arguments, you might want to note that @@VegasBaby is a woman for keeping score at home, and as such, could lay claim to a whole host of slurs. Besides, the whole reason this controversy exists is because a lot of gay people in the media and on social media are also essentially making some version of this argument. LOL. You're beyond self-parody. Are you even capable of making an actual argument against an idea? Y'know, one that isn't essentially, "Oh yeah? Well... you're WHITE!" This is absurd. I've never called anyone either of the words we've been discussing nor wanted to. If there is anything here I'm offended by, it's the attempt by her defenders to apply a double standard, her inability to admit she was in the wrong here, and perhaps worse, trying to defend her slurs with the language of social justice. What it eventually boils down to is some of her fans are butt hurt that she is problematic and that people are realizing it and they don't want to admit it.

The language I call out may often happen to be foul, but it is generally not its foulness I'm calling out, rather something else I think could be particularly objectionable about it. Shit, if never using foul language was a criterion for being a mod, I don't think any of us would qualify.

Tell it to Lana, thanks. What is this, the BBC? Anyway, thou desperate forum members who have figuratively consummated their Oedipus complexes possess nary an iota of coolheadedness.

I meant the literal receipts. Like a contract for specific procedures on specific dates or something. See discussion of my nose job skepticism starting around here. I don't mean to sidetrack this topic.

Hmm, I never noticed this before. Anybody know more precisely when she chipped it? I'd love to see that tbh.

We need an emote of one of the scenes where she's putting her headphones on. @@SitarHero

Y'all thirsty motherfuckers have no chill.

I generally disagree with anything @@CarcrashBandicoot has to say about anything having to do with race, and I'm not quite sure his point actually addresses the point @@Atom Heart was trying to make (because I'm not sure if @@Atom Heart's point was merely that Azealia Banks use of the n-word is a reclamation, or if he was also arguing that her use of the f-word should be considered a reclamation). At any rate, I do think he's raising an important issue here that I haven't seen a lot of her defenders grapple with: Are reclaimed slurs still OK when they're derogatory and intended as a slur? I think there is arguably some license for derogatory use of reclaimed slurs for in-group criticism (like perhaps Chris Rock's controversial "Niggas vs. Black People" routine), but I'm not sure this meets the standard of acceptability. I mean, imagine if the steward was black and she called him a "fucking :)" or a gay male celebrity had called the steward a "fucking faggot" in that tone of voice. Maybe it's not as bad as if it had come from someone else, but I still don't think it's OK. But I also question whether Azealia should get the in-group pass here some defenders have been trying to give her. Sure, she's bisexual. So I'd concede that her membership in the broader LGBT community arguably gives her license to use the word in a positive manner. But should her being bisexual automatically be enough to excuse her derogatory use of a slur reserved for gay men when she is not a gay man and not part of the specific community it refers to? I'd argue not. (To me, that would be about as logical as saying non-black POC should have license to use the n-word derogatorily just because they're part of the broader minority community oppressed by white people.) Especially since her history of using the word "faggot", and other things she's said about gay men, seem to indicate she has a problem with gay men, and especially with anything "effeminate" about them.

No, that's not what I'm saying. She almost certainly recorded Sirens under the name May Jailer. And it's a reasonable assumption she may have recorded QN & FTE intending them to be May Jailer recordings. But there's no evidence she ever performed as May Jailer. Gig posters and event calendar listings for her earliest shows list her as Lizzy, Lizzie, or Lizzi Grant, even though she was probably playing a lot of May Jailer material and listed those shows on her MySpace page, myspace.com/mayjailer, which was redirected to by lizzygrant.com, lizziegrant.com, lizzigrant.com, and mayjailer.com... Girl was never consistent. Kill Kill was released in 2008 under Lizzy Grant. Lana Del Ray was released in 2010 as Lana Del Ray. The "AKA Lizzy Grant" is not actually part of the title. So, does that make "Kill Kill", "Yayo", & "Gramma" Lizzy Grant songs or Lana Del Ray? She started billing herself as Lana Del Rey at least as early as her Mexicali Live show in August 2009. Edit: And she was already toying around with a variant, Lana Rey Del Mar, at least as early as November 2008.