Monicker

I could totally get behind this. Except, ideally, i'd switch #1 with #2.

That is never the job or the responsibility of the singer. If the vocals were too loud that falls on the person doing the mix. Mixes for televised music performances can be pretty poor if the engineer is not familiar with the artist's music, which they're often not. Well, there needs to be a first time, no? I don't really understand where you're coming from with this. The impression i've always had with her mentioning charity work "too much" (i don't think that) is to emphasize what she says about music not being everything to her. I get the sense that she wants to convey to the average reader, who may have misconceptions about her, that she doesn't see herself as really fitting in with the image and perception that one may have her celebrity peers. It seems to me like it's her way of saying there's more to her than making records. And there's a lot of evidence that seems to verify that. Look how infrequently she tours and how little she promotes. She has already mentioned, within one year of her rise to fame, the idea of possibly moving on to something beyond music. By all accounts, she's a relatively private person. To say that she's not helping any organizations by not mentioning them specifically by name in interviews in pop culture media is baseless. The work itself is helping organizations. It is not her role to promote charities. She is conducting interviews in entertainment media regarding her music; the fact alone that she is mentioning these things at all is already above and beyond. Who's to say that she is obligated to give an interviewer specific information on the social work she's done or is planning to do? The onus in these interviews is not on her to prove to her fans the legitimacy of this work. And it's also not the sort of time-sensitive thing like, say, a hurricane relief effort, where anyone can pitch in money and act fast on a crisis, so "plugging" the charity is a moot point. There's nothing inherently dubious about this being a relatively private matter. Also, why should it have to be all-or-nothing, either mention the charity or don't say anything at all? What is the basis for imposing that on someone? You say you don't think wealthy people are obligated to make donations, but you do think they're obligated to disclose which organizations they're working with if they do decide to make donations? I don't understand that reasoning.

Oh, that all too familiar feeling of having big ideas, things that seem amazing in theory, all worked out nicely in the mind, only needing to be executed, and then...nothing happens.

Jesus. I'm sorry. Wow. I forgot (momentarily? thanks for the reminder...) that it's 2013. I thought we were in 2012, haa. You're right. Feb. 2012, not 2011. That's what i meant. I was thinking 2011 was last year... What is wrong with me? What a way to destroy my own joke.

Liz can't wait 2 B back at Ruby Tuesday in 2011, at the height of her career. But the pressing question: Waiting/hosting for old times' sake? Or just droppin' in for that amazing salad bar?

This is how shit starts.

I'm actually wearing it right now. I'm not giving it up. Sorry.

Sounds to me, Hillary, like you want to believe that i think a lot about this. I really don't though. It's just that one sees mention of it in threads all throughout the forum, it's unavoidable, even if, like me, one doesn't read Lanalysis . What i wrote was a reaction to the prevalence of this, not some sort of veiled attempt to deflect attention from my secret fixation with the subject. It's an unpopular opinion, i'm just playing the game. Is your dick ready 4 me in the D-A-R-K?

Why is the defeated creature facing away from us now? Is that, like, so defeated that you have to turn away because you feel humiliated? Or did we just walk 180° around and now we are behind the defeated creature? Why did we do this? That's probably making the defeated creature nervous. Why would we walk behind someone who is on their hands and knees? Is this going to turn into a BDSM thing?

I don't know about her (or you guys), but filling out the MySpace info with absolute bullshit was a thing. At least i thought that's what a lot of people did? I certainly was not truthful about any of the info on my profile. Then Facebook came along and it was time to get SERIOUS.

Weird, i don't get that feeling at all from the "oh my god." To me, it has a cute, sweet, and almost mischievous quality to it, as if she's about to start laughing nervously. I wonder what was going on that caused her to say that. Maybe she snuck a boyfriend into the studio and, right as she was finishing the vocal, he knocked his coffee cup into a grand piano, or like, dropped a $7,000 microphone that he wasn't supposed to even be touching

Is this thread real?

Because she's being cute and playful and maybe even a little nonsensical in that cute and playful kind of way Vodka Pepsi is to evilentity what neon reservations is to PrettyBaby. Keep fighting the good fight, you guys. KINKY MOM PANT ASS & PHOTON DADDIEZ 4-EVA

Oh boy. So cheap. I don't understand how anyone could/will watch this. It is... The end is nigh. It is pretty disturbing and revolting. What a logical pairing--Capitalism & Art. They sure do luv each other. This is the nature, i suppose, of the current entertainment industry, it's just ad space. Even if there's no product placement or nothing is being sold, everything, from movies to television to music just feels like a fucking commercial. Ha, i thought the same too, but it's: "But in the desert nothing is simple"...zZz

Are you sure? Are you sure? Are you sure? Are you sure? Are you sure? Are you sure? Hold on, i am going to go make a chart/graph that illustrates how you have, in one way or another, alluded to or directly mentioned something or another about gender/gender roles/sexes in, i think, every single post i've read of yours. It's remarkable.

Are you sure you're not hearing a k sound from the huge reverb of the handclaps? I have never heard anything other than P-P-Pepsi, studio or live. We've been over this

Well, that's a fair point. But i feel that it's all hanging on this, whether or not that bit of speculation is fact or fiction, right? But the question is framed as "Who was/is he?" Is it an interest in him, in who he was/is (again, whatever that means) or an interest in whether or not Lana was involved with someone who was sentenced to death row for double homicide? Or, i guess, both. Maybe there's no real difference. I'm not sure why i see a distinction between the two. I would have to think about this more. I'm just not a fan of persistent mythology when the focus always comes back to one point. I suspect that a big part of obsession in general, of any kind, is the obsession itself.

Here are, i think, two unpopular opinions. 1. I find the term Sadcore to be inane and embarrassing. Not only the term but also this kind of cult of sadness that follows her around and is built up by some parts of her fan base. Many people here have already astutely pointed out how she seems to have quickly been boxed-in (by the media, the general public, her label/management, and even by her fans and her herself) to this role of playing the sad songstress and representing all the sad, lonely people. The fucking sadcore club. Oy. 2. I am not even remotely interested in finding out/knowing who K is. I don't understand this fascination. At all. What does that even mean to know who he is? Like, what, finding out his full name and what he looks like? Then what? What happens once you know? Would it make a difference if his name was, say, Kevin or Keith or, i don't know, Keenan? Or what if K is the initial of his last name? What if the K doesn't even pertain to his name, but rather is a reference to the guy's ketamine habit? What then? What about whether he had a shaved head or long hair? Short or tall? Black? White? Filipino? I mean, i can see a minor/passing interest in it, like, perhaps if someone came forth with a photo of him, it'd be interesting to look at for a minute. But i find this ongoing fixation to be totally perplexing and kind of pathological.

It brings me great relief to come to the conclusion that "Bestest" is a parody account. I feel a little foolish for having fallen for it and being bothered by virtually every word that s/he has committed to the forum in such a short period of time, but now i can just have a laugh about it. Ha ha ha.

I hug myself. I wear clothing.

I really do not understand her. Can you imagine having around 150 songs and only playing the same 10 over and over? She is going to drive herself mad.

You can start with The Idler Wheel...

Terms like "stripped down" and "western" are pretty meaningless unless you know what the person who uses the terms means by them. These little types of catch phrases can mean anything. What one person considers "stripped down" can be very different from what someone else considers the term to mean.

I have heard one or two Adele songs, one or two Taylor Swift songs, zero One Direction songs, maybe like two or three Pink songs from like twelve years ago, zero Mumford & Sons songs (i don't even know if i've heard of them), and probably one Maroon 5 song but i don't remember but i think i wanted to blow my brains out when i did.

For some reason, eh? You're really hung up on this aren't you? How else do you expect her to talk about and reference the themes in her music, the sound and style of the music, the visuals she incorporates in her videos and overall work, and even the visuals that a lot of her music conjures up? She isn't misusing any of these words. I get the sense from the article that she hasn't even actually started tracking it yet, that it's still in the demo stages.