Quote:
Originally posted by haku
The whole concept of the project is based on lies and deception. Ivan just probably saw some Japanese animes and realized that having two real flesh teenage girls showing panties and making out would be a great sell, and it worked very well, beyond his wildest expectations i'm sure. The message of tolerance for same-sex couples was fake, just an unvoluntary side effect of showing two schoolgirls making out, but it was never the main goal of the project. The main goal was simply to sell a band using one of the most common fantasies: cute teenage girls kissing and groping each other.
|
The main fan base was teenage girls, not dirty older men (that's only here on Tatysite
). I think the explanation for their success is the one Ivan gave in the Ptyuch interview - two girls in love is the most emotionally powerful image and it plays on the secret fantasies of teenage girls.
There was more to the 'message' than tolerance of same-sex relationships. If you went deeper, it was more existentialist, lesbianism was used as a metaphor. Anatomy's portrayal of Yulia showed this perfectly: she was an existentialist hero, unafraid to explore her sexuality, prepared to take heroin just to make a point about personal choice over addiction, even prepared to lay down her voice and career for her country! It was about making brave choices, not giving a damn about consequences.
That doesn't mean the message was genuine. But the deep message was quite well-developed in some of Ivan's interviews (particularly with Malcolm McLaren in The Face) and in some of the songs (30 Minutes and so far as I could understand it in Ne Ver Ne Boisia). I think he probably was expressing genuine philosophical and political ideas, even though he didn't really care about gay rights per se.
Quote:
Originally posted by Lux
i don't agree with you in that ivan was just using that to sell. in russia, people didnt buy that, they never defended themselves as "oh we're lesbians/not lesbians" in their native country. the russians loved the music and found the image amusing.
if that is such a common fantasy, why didn't it sell in the west? it barely sold in the united states, where men are completely obsessed with girl on girl action. i'm sure its similar across the planet except no one uses it blatantly as a marketable image.
|
This is a fascinating point. I thought about your question and my theory is that Tatu's popularity was inversely proportional to how seriously people take sex. Anglo-Saxons, and particularly Americans, are notorious for taking sex seriously and for caring about authenticity. Most Russians, on the other hand, don't take sex so seriously or care about being lied to. The Japanese also don't take sex seriously or worry about authenticity. Most Europeans are somewhere between the Russians and the British. Anglo-Saxons generally didn't get the joke (even most of the Anglo-Saxon fans), while Russians did. Anglo-Saxons couldn't appreciate the humour because they think sex is a serious thing.
Tatu was a joke, but I think it was a joke with a point. I was reading an article in the New Yorker about the Yippies, who derived their ideas about political protest from Dadaist and Surrealist art techniques. The stunts, the use of shock tactics, the joking are all reminscent to me of avant-garde art.
Quote:
Originally posted by Lena410
Rob, I agree with you. They have/had the right message. It changed things. Honestly tatu never changed. They had those we have bfs one day and we are lesbian the other day talks all along. They never started something they didn't finish. People just saw what they wanted to see and still do.
|
I think that is very true. The trouble was that people took it too seriously.
What shocked me, though, was Lena saying in Anatomy that she thought what they were doing was sinful. I thought that was very damaging.