Bad girl: will MIA be measured against her own revolutionary demands?
Last week, MIA for her new song “bad girl” a piece of video, it is the singer best a good packing: include a variety of political and cultural rebellion, reshape their sexy and powerful. In the video, women in burqas raise their fists while driving. MIA herself poses on the side of the car in an uncool pose, and is mysteriously gliding through a desert highway with two wheels. The camera follows a line of men in keffiyehs, who calmly gaze at the audience. This is a revolt against the Arab spring’s stirring energy.
A few days later, at the super bowl halftime show, Madonna flipped her middle finger to millions of viewers. The response was predictable: the parents’ television committee roared that the move was indecent; Others responded that it was no big deal. MIA apology. In the process, she is neatly on the ground with Madonna, the famous pop star of the popular music. This seems to be a suitable relay torch.
Of course, for MIA’s video in 2010, controversy is nothing new, “naturally free” because it shows police hunting red hair and shooting a child, banned from YouTube. In 2010, an article in the New York times scoffed that MIA was not real because MIA had children in the hospital and was eating truffle fries. The reporter seems to be asking, what is the revolutionary life on the corner of Beverly hills?
MIA’s business success never bothered me. People should be able to make a living and change the world. What bothers me is a related question: is MIA living up to her reputation because she has a political relationship with her music?
I think the answer is yes. For about seven years, MIA has been creating music against state power, political corruption and class inequality. When she first entered the scene, she sounds j, without breaking voice concern – she always makes people want to dance – and she seems to be speaking for those who don’t have much choice or control. “Every day I think about how we’re going to get through my IOU/everything.” She’s knocking on her debut album, Arular. And: “out of all my fingo/exit like my ringo do I/you want to go? / do you want to win a war? Like PLO, I don’t surrender. ”
When she spoke of the sri lankan government’s persecution of Tamil minorities, her public radicalism was stirring. But MIA does not draw attention to the fact that the Tamil tigers themselves are exploiting communities by recruiting children and targeting the Tamil Muslim population, and idealizing militant groups. Since then, her music and video have been linked to other political movements, but also without any political nuance.
Her latest video continues this model, using the mood of the Middle East protests that rocked the world last year. When you look at it, you feel somehow as if you were looking at the same radicals, now celebrating in the desert. Bad ass, you think. The video was rated Saudi Arabia’s ban on female drivers. If this is a response to the law, it is visually stunning. “The quick/dead young/bad girl is doing very well,” MIA intoned. And… That’s the main one. It is not clear how video gave Saudi women power or increased awareness of the law. In most cases, it looks good.
In this way, the MIA is more effective than old-school political banal characters like Bob Dylan and Joni Mitchell. MIA’s music makes you feel electricity, just like you can do anything from dancing in the evening to the full revolution. Her energetic, vague references to resistance make every listener feel included in an ambiguous protest movement. Unlike other musicians who describe marginalized groups, MIA doesn’t make you feel like you’re suffocating the world. She allows you to identify with people who resist these injustices and make you want to raise your fist with them. This is a quite remarkable feat.
But she doesn’t ask you to do anything but dance. Whatever you think about the utility of John lennon and yoko ono, they have a very clear message about our military activities. The MIA’s music may have been a headache for people to organize around social change, which apparently didn’t happen.
The traditional excuse is that what a musician can do is limited. But that doesn’t exactly match MIA’s reputation as a serious political artist. In an interview with the infamous New York times, she complained, “the whole idea of going to the grammys is to say, ‘hey, 50,000 people are going to die next month, and that’s your chance. No one has done it.” But she didn’t clear what kind of people can do to help, and there is no specific call to take action, it is not possible with Jay Z and TI performance at the awards ceremony is to activate the plight of the Tamil people around, people in Sri Lanka.
Her critics say MIA did a good job of linking herself to the political movement so that she could polish her image with reflected light. Although I don’t think MIA just sell radical fashion, but now it is time to use in the form of a kind of a little authority her obvious political interests, rather than “give war a chance” inflammatory remarks. I’m not sure what even that means. Provocative provocations are good, but MIA is one of the few artists who can do more. She won our respect and our feelings, she spoke for the people. It’s time to connect the way her fans feel with specific goals. After the Arab spring and occupy Wall Street protests, people are ready to be inspired and take meaningful action. They ‘
I admit these are high expectations. But the thing is, MIA throws herself into this role and becomes the heroine of the power truth. She’s not saying she’s just creating wonders, making money like superstar Madonna, Lady Gaga and Kanye West. MIA has deliberately linked herself to the deadly political movement, and with that connection she has gained some power. Without it, she’s just another artist who’s going to dance music for cool kids.