Tuesday night's "The Politics of Lady Gaga" event, sponsored by the Columbia Political Union, brought out a sizeable crowd for a rainy weeknight. Judging by attendance throughout the entire event, free food wasn't the only draw to the event. We were all there for our Gaga fix.

The event was a discussion of Gaga's video "Telephone" with the panelists Bryan Lowder, Jason Bell, Lauren Herold, and the audience. The night started off with opening remarks by each of the panelists, within which each of them outlined what they thought the greater significance of the video/Gaga was, if there was any, and how they would frame that within politics.

Bell started out by realistically bringing the event back down to earth. He noted that trying to superimpose the structure of academia onto discussions of pop culture might become a little muddled. His main point in his opening discussion of Gaga was her commoditization of everything including herself and her sexuality. Her gender identity in the music video as well as her general persona all plays into commercialism and consumerism. He quoted a critic who remarked that "the other" can be declawed through commercialization and consumption. In this case Lady Gaga is selling queer and we're the buyers. Bell stated that he believed that everything about Gaga is up for consumption and display, including the sexuality that she exudes. Further, Bell made connections to this consumerism and violence. He linked the violence of capitalism and consumption with fantasies that people have of committing these very same acts of violence that are in Gaga videos. In conclusion Bell said that Gaga's videos didn't directly comment on gay identity but it is the imagination of violence that is important.

Lauren Herald, a woman's studies major, approached the topic by examining the role of the woman in Gaga's videos. She observed that violence happens on both macro and micro levels in the video with the dance movements and plot line. In the video, sexual violence is used to strike down the male antagonists. Herald notes that this is a shocking transition from the traditional way women are supposed to handle conflict. Gaga is basically naked at many points during the video which draws men to look at her, and then she responds with violence. This is a topic of concern for Herald as she made a link to a Fanon type argument; The only way to fight violence is with violence. Women, the presumed majority of those suffering from domestic abuse/controlling spouses, should fight that violence with more violence. Lauren commented on the dangerous cycle that this type of attitude could take. She ended her opening remarks by pointing to the fact that Gaga herself never addresses the violence in her videos but performs it just as powerfully as she does everything else.

Brain Lowder began by calling attention to the implications of Gaga's queer appeal. Is it all about power? Is it all about money? Gays should be weary of the hold that Gaga has over the community and recognize that she is also in it for the money making. He went through his own encounter with Gaga in D.C. and how she had a powerful and electrifying affect on the crowd. He made note that it's fun to dance to her songs and it would also serve well to engage with her intellectually as well.

Other interesting points were made throughout the event by panelists and audience members. One that stood out is the discussion of the diner scene. Lowder commented that one way to interpret the scene is that Gaga is feeding the American public queer and they are consuming it unknowingly. Like Beyonce's boyfriend, they think it's delicious, and they think they're in control the whole time. In fact, Gaga and Beyonce are in control. When the public all dies, Gaga and her dancing friends create a new world in their image: a dance party. An audience member added onto this and said that another interpretation was that Gaga and Beyonce are "America" and kill everybody and then dance about it. This can be viewed as the U.S. involvement overseas in situations where people are dying, but destructive government foreign policies still stand.

Bell commented that during the kitchen scene, while it may seem that Gaga is flipping the whole "housewife" stereotype and actually putting poison in the food, this is not entirely the case. By being in the kitchen in the first place, she fails to transcend the stereotype and in fact feeds into it. The kitchen was not reappropriated for queer people and women but the fact that she's still in the kitchen actually hinders breaking traditional gender roles completely.

Herald made the observation that in the "Prison for Bitches" scene a variety of body types were included. This can be viewed as Gaga's attempt to expand awareness of the bodies and struggle of trans people. Herald wished that the sexual relationship that Beyonce and Gaga had was made more explicit than it was in the video.

Lastly was the confounding issue of the lyrics and how they seemingly have nothing to do with the music video. While many reasons for this were thrown out, Lowder's was the most interesting. Perhaps it's the media who keeps calling Gaga on the telephone and trying to keep tabs on her. By calling her, they keep telling her what she should be and how she should act. There have been reports calling Gaga a man, or a trans person, which may stem from the fact that she doesn't want to conform. She's not answering their calls. She will not pick up the phone for people who want to turn her into something she isn't and something she doesn't want to be. This message hits home for queer people who aren't viewed as "traditional" in the eyes of the media.