Yet she's contributed nothing
of her own, thus making her just a conglomeration of other people's ideas. There's nothing original about that, and people are stupid enough to sing her all sorts of undeserved praises. That's utterly confusing.
I don't think you could measure Germanotta's present popularity with anything Michael had. The two are forever divorced, with Michael being the actual artist. He contributed all sorts of original concepts, and was in word and deed a true revolutionary. Germanotta, on the other hand, is just a cheap copy of things we've all seen before, and if people are intelligent, they'll get bored quickly and move on.
She (or rather, whoever is in charge of her PR) is smart in the brilliant manipulation of a bunch of impressionable pedestrians, yes. May as well milk it for all it's worth while the getting is good, because in a few years, the next stupid thing will come to replace her. Yes, I would say that's pretty smart, and I can't say I wouldn't do the same if I was a thoroughly ordinary person with mediocre talent and a good PR person.
As for owning anything--it's a bit too early to tell, no? Century? Not a chance in the world. Decade? It depends--there's plenty if impressionable idiots in the world with too much time and money on their hands, so that's perhaps likely.
Indeed. That also happens to be my opinion on mosquitoes. We should start giving them grammy's too, after all, we wouldn't want them to feel left out.
Well, some of her songs are catchy. I dislike the new song, however, for reasons I have already stated in previous posts.
Why are her fans lucky bastards? If anything, they're quite unlucky--the lot of them are, as evidence shows, easily impressed and manipulated. I daresay it's quite the opposite. I'd like to at least put up a bit of a fight before I throw my money away on useless crap.