evilentity

All the things you go on to mention are not at all what I'm talking about. I'm specifically talking about her agreeing to do these interviews in the first place, then rudely overreacting to fair questions provoked by her own music and words, dramatically shutting down interviews, and even attacking her interviewers. It's just atrocious behavior and completely disproportionate to anything the interviewers are doing. If this is the way y'all act, well, then I'm glad I don't know you IRL. It would be one thing if she were reacting this way to the same members of the media that unfairly criticized her in the past. But they're not. In fact this interviewer clearly says those criticisms were wrong. If she expects a fair shake from them she needs to give them a fair shake. It's pretty clear from the article that he was asking this facetiously and that Lana also took it that way. A thought experiment: Put yourselves in the interviewer's shoes for a moment. How many of you really think you could interview her as long as this guy did asking interesting questions without accidentally setting her off that results in something that's interesting to read and isn't just a fawning paean to your goddess? Obviously I couldn't. But I doubt you could either. And I still haven't heard a good answer why she can't just politely demur when something makes her uncomfortable.

Exactly. I don't think she's shown decency towards the journalists that are interviewing her. Accountability for what? These recent interviewers haven't done anything wrong. Absolutely not true. I hear, and remark on, many positive things. Just recently I specifically praised her NYT profile and how well she came across in it. "Put her in her place"? Please. That's an incredibly loaded phrasing carrying connotations (including sexist overtones) far beyond anything I'm trying to convey here. I'm merely saying I see a pattern of behavior in her interviews that I find objectionable and unwarranted and that I'm frankly mystified when others fail to see it or find it off-putting. I never said that you specifically try to "absolve every crazy thing she does" in every case, just that there's a tendency among many on the forum towards doing this and I think it would be misguided to do it in this case. And I don't relish picking on her personality at all. I'd love to read more interviews and not find her behaving appallingly towards her interviewers. I'd love for her to come across well more often so that people don't wrongfully dismiss her. Unfortunately that just hasn't happened very often recently. ...Except that other than her shutting down I thought this was a very good, mostly positive article and that up until that point she came across pretty well. (Aside from the intro which foreshadowed her meltdown.) I think the only reason the story headed in that angle is because of the way she reacted.

This is really insightful, though I disagree with some of it. Perhaps her responses are sensationalized sometimes as the media is wont to do sometimes with everything, but I don't think it's necessary with Lana. Her responses read dramatically because she's being dramatic. But I think you've really hit on something here that I've expressed better in other interview threads. People defending Lana and blaming her interviewers talk about them provoking her with their questions. But their questions are naturally provoked by Lana, her music, her statements, and the controversies they've provoked. I think one side is mostly innocent here, at least in this post-SNL backlash era. It is Lana who initiates the cycle of provocation. LOL. Wow. Seriously? Has this discussion really devolved into psychoanalyzing each other's motives? I think the usefulness of arbitrary personality type designations like Myers-Briggs is vastly overstated, but if I'm going to be psychoanalyzed by my personality type, allow me. I think I can do a much better job. (There's nothing anyone could ever tell me that I don't already know. I know everything about myself. I know why I do what I do. ) From the portrait of an INTP: This is a gross oversimplification of how these traits lead me to my position, but here goes:The interviewer is asking questions that are logical and reasonable. Because they are logical and reasonable, they deserve the courtesy of a reasonable, polite response. However, she is responding emotionally (illogically and unreasonably). Ergo, if anyone is at fault here it is Lana. I dunno. I don't think I buy this. Your "withholding judgment" seems pretty selective to me. Have you really expressed your opinion in over a thousand posts here without making judgments? You wasted no time passing judgment on me as judgmental in this very same post. Also, not necessarily in your case, but sometimes this "withholding judgment" of Lana seems to imply passing judgment on others, like her interviewers, or as you admit yourself, giving Lana a pass indefinitely. And if there's a source of bias in my assessment of LDR's choices, it's from my strong belief in the principle of taking the plank out of your own eye before pointing out the speck in another's, holding yourself to a higher standard than others. This may seem paradoxical since I seem to be pointing out the specks in Lana's eyes. But I extend this principle to group dynamics. To the extent that I identify with Lana as a fan, I hold her accountable for her actions to the extent she is responsible before others. Much as I've held this forum accountable for it's interactions with others outside the forum more than those others, or as I criticize my own country for its faults before finding fault with others. I'm perfectly fine with this point of view. I just disagree with people always absolving Lana of any responsibility and blaming the interviewers. Or denying that she's exhibiting a pattern of behavior here independent of who's interviewing her.

OK, then explain to me how my characterizations of what you said are inaccurate. Really? Where do you think this view of her came from? Am I just imagining her Twitter tantrum over the Guardian interview or the numerous other frosty interviews and interviews she's cut short over the years? No, I'm not sympathetic to the fact that she can't seem to handle being asked expected interview questions or have the grace to just politely say "no comment". If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Sorry, but this is just excuse-making for shitty behavior. There's also a complete double standard being applied here to Lana and her interviewers. And he/she has the right to print how it went down. My main objection here is I don't think most of you defending her behavior are being objective. If this was an artist you disliked or had never heard of acting this way I don't think most of you would respond the same way. Except perhaps those of you who celebrate any and all confrontational drama even when unjustified because it's "sticking up yourself", a trend in our culture I find really disturbing. Or perhaps those like @@PrettyBaby who think those mean ol' journalists should have to dumb down their interviews to the level of their subject's emotional intelligence no matter how low it is. On another note that pic in the Rob-style Hawaiian shirt is so fucking hot.

In other words you think she should be treated with kid gloves and get special treatment because she complains about it or whatever reason. So you want them to falsely portray her? If you ask me, the solution is for her to either learn to become comfortable with the media or stop giving interviews. Or at least stop taking it out on the interviewers. Seems to me a pretty low bar.

Assuming the worst? I'd say objectively critiquing her responses in interviews based on the information at hand without allowing myself to be prejudiced by the fact that I love her music. If anyone's assuming anything here it's you assuming the worst about her interviewers. Are you really telling me with a straight face (no pun intended) that you don't see a pattern of behavior here? You really think all these different interviewers are uniquely unfair to her and provoke this kind of response from her, but not their other interview subjects?

Perhaps not, but even still, hasn't there been a pattern here for some time?

CONTINUED Someone's been reading Lanalysis. Actually, between this and the age thing and the FMWUTTT/Lorde thing I think this guy's been reading a fair amount on LanaBoards. This is really interesting. It explains why her high school yearbook photo said she was college bound for SUNY Geneseo even though she ended up at Fordham and the apparent gap between high school and her starting college. But it makes when she might have lived in Alabama all the more mysterious. Ha! Me and my momma we don't get along, indeed. Though I can just see her being the kind of waitress that tries to make up for shitty service by flirting with her male patrons. She still remembers these lovely early songs. Say hi to your Bond girl sister Pussy for me, will you? Ha, look at get all defensive about his cardinal error as her manager. I guess you guys weren't the only ones that noticed this. I'll be posting more about this soon. This is too long to type up. Read from the paragraph beginning "Then, really without warning" to the end: "Maybe I'm sensitive. Do you think?" "You're asking all the right questions. I just really don't want to answer them." "I'm just uncomfortable, and it has nothing to do with you." I think these quotes really highlight what's going on here. Interviewers ask her perfectly reasonable questions to ask, nevertheless she still feels uncomfortable being asked them. What I don't understand, given that so many of her interviews have turned out this way, why she still does them or why she doesn't just say "No comment" or "I'd rather not answer that" and move on rather than throwing a hissy fit at interviewers who are just doing their job. Why should it be out of bounds to ask about something she has consistently volunteered detailed information about unprompted in multiple interviews and may be referenced in several of her songs?

This is bound to be a controversial opinion, but I think this is a fantastically well-done profile, perhaps one of the best. I don't believe it's the job of a journalist, even in the fluffy realm of music journalism, to humor the people they cover. The job of a journalist is to portray their subjects accurately and in-depth. This article accomplished that in spades. It goes into great depth about her history and provides new details about unanswered questions, it demonstrates the author did his homework, confirms the recent NYT profile's angle that she's been misunderstood and the backlash was premised on bullshit, but pulls the curtain back on what it's like to interview Lana Del Rey and her mercurial nature. That said, the one quibble I have is that I felt they removed all context from her comment about not wanting people to hear and think about her music when promoting this profile online. Some specific thoughts: What's that sound? Is it @@evilentity sobbing tears of joy? Like lemonade. What'll really make me happy is if those fuckers on Wikipedia will change it permanently now without me having to make a case for it on BLPN. I can't say I am anywhere near as familiar with other pop stars to say if this is true, but it's nice to see even music journalists that aren't as fawning as the NYT's John Pareles say this. I also like that this article describes her name change as merely "showbiz-as-usual" and said this: Get it girl Let's see. She started breaking up with Barrie "starting in December or so", right around the same time she previously said she stopped having writer's block and her concept for the album started to come together and she began recording stuff for it at Electric Lady Studios. And then there are those lyrics. Hmm... Give us the demos Dan! Fucking labels, man. The irony of this has always struck me. Her parents moved away from the city to the countryside because they had Lizzy who of course was powerfully drawn to the city when she grew up. TO BE CONTINUED... Fucking quote limits.

'Twas a chick.

Much like "Florida Kilos" seems inspired by Spring Breakers, I'd bet cake this was inspired by the Lars von Trier film. #PartyLikeItsDogme95 I'm telling you: This is true. The original file was named "Lizzy Grant.mp4". An LDR.FM mod had previously scrobbled a track named "methamphetamines" of similar length so it was assumed to be named "Methamphetamines" when it surfaced. I'm still amazed someone so (rightfully) vocal about their victimization by hacking continues to provide such specific identifiable information about her past addresses and lovers. (This is not the first time she's done either.) It's almost like she wants us to sleuth.

Can someone link me to an updated list of all her known leaked and unleaked unreleased titles? I can't be bothered to go looking through the almost 300 odd pages of this thread.

She should cancel this show tbh.

Not surprisingly, I've got no problem with writing that is critical nor am I necessarily opposed to writers wearing their command of vocabulary on their sleeve. (Or should I say their "sesquipedalianism"?) But for the most part, these articles read like the worst kind of college essay writing, larded up with pretentious jargon and employing buzzy academic concepts creating the illusion of intellect while only occasionally making the odd insightful or cohesive point. If I were their professor, I would ask them to rewrite their essays as plainly and as tersely as possible-- think the Revised King James Version of the Bible, Hemingway, or even fucking Dick and Jane-- with primarily monosyllabic words a fifth grader or their 90-year-old grandma with a fifth grade education could understand, and see if it still works before judiciously adding back in some of the fancy lingo and terms. #evilenglishteacher Edit: Oh, BTW, the irony of me of all people quoting the bolded part in support of this takedown is not lost on me.

Wow. Didn't know it was still possible to hear a live Lana vocal at these audience singalongs.

You're trash if you think other fans are inferior for being newer/less knowledgeable. Better to go with the forum's official passive aggressive expression of old news:

Probably a good idea if you're fucking your way to the top.

^ Not a joke. Just an observation/opinion.

I actually think they'd be kind of perfect for each other:

Tempted to rename this thread "Textual Appropriation".

I'm gonna stick up for the principle of innocent until proven guilty here. Ahmed ran various fan sites including a Lana one called Lana Daily. In September 2012 he was arrested by the FBI for allegedly hacking Sky Ferreira. While it's reasonable to think a Lana fan arrested for allegedly hacking another artist might well have hacked Lana too, we don't actually know this. In fact, while I've heard rumors that he served time for the Sky Ferreira hack, I've never actually seen evidence of the outcome of his case if it was ever even brought to trial. Yes.

The thread that covers that topic and my pedantic ranting about the inability of anyone to define wtf they even mean by the term 'outtake' is here.

Ew at everyone saying "Colors of the Wind". #ShmaltzyPopSchlock How about "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf"? Come on and eat me up, up, up! Or "Hi Ho!" as another Gaga diss track. J/k. But imagine her covering this with fucked up stacked vocal harmonies: Disney is so much better under the influence of drugs.

Your proposed timeline doesn't make sense to me. According to Lana, she mostly had writer's block and the album didn't really come together until December 2013 when she recorded the whole album at Electric Lady Studio before re-recording it with Dan Auerbach in 2014: It's also notable that "Pretty When You Cry", which you list early in your timeline, credits Lee Foster, owner of Electric Lady Studios, as a producer. Also, while it's possible the guy on the couch in the background could be Dan Heath, the main guy in the photos from that "Trans Am" session who's clearly running the show is Rick Nowels. It also took place at Rick Nowels' personal studio. Nowels is not credited on any of the tracks Heath is credited on.