Jump to content

Mika's Sexuality (A Different Kind of Thread)


JackViolet

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 301
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

First off, I just wanted to say that I agree with all of you who are nostalgic over the Koko performance. :blush-anim-cl: I would place it as already moving away from his earlier style, but yes, it remains among my most favorites. He's certainly improved since then on the whole, and I am glad to see him make better use of the stage and work the entirety of the space he has rather than concentrating on the center, and to see him amp up his physical energy, but despite all that, there was just "something" in the Koko show that causes it to stand apart.

 

CazGirl, Yop was right that she only got a :mf_lustslow: and a brief mention in my last post, and the rest of it was a general response. But I must give her lots of :wub2: because we are in love you know. :thumb_yello:

 

I think he's very conscious of what he's doing as well, but believe he may be building on the audience's response rather than trying to manipulate it in a certain direction from the outset. The audiences did change in a very short period of time and so did Mika's performances, but he seemed to be responding to the new demographic rather than the other way around, at least in North America.

 

when it comes to his motives, I am on the opinion that it was more of an unconscious move as he has been gaining more and more confidence as a performer, backed by audience's response rather than anyone else, especially record company manipulating him to do that.

 

I would think it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. It seems to me a somewhat conscious move to step away from the feyness, as Gatagordinha so aptly put it, and a somewhat conscious move to go in a more sexy direction, but the way these things manifested and their particulars were unconscious or subconscious. I think he’s a bit more controlling than to do everything purely unconsciously, no matter what he may say, and too clever not to be aware of what he is doing.

 

I agree with you on this; he appears to be a very instinctive and intuitive person in general, he adapts to his surroundings and the situation he finds himself in, I believe largely unconsciously so, though I can see why some might think it is a conscious and more cynical act....

 

In my view he is taking his cue from the different audiences he finds himself performing to, in the same way a good teacher tailors a lesson to suit the demands of a particular class, often without being able to plan ahead much.

 

Well, you seem to be in agreement with the man himself in this point, Gatagordinha, since we just read that in an interview he said, "So much of what I'm doing on stage is built on instinct so it's hard to say....it depends entirely on the audience. A good audience gets a good show. A serious audience gets an serious show."

 

I think that, as you and Christine say, he works off audience energy at the outset, but then as he feels out what works and what doesn't, he decides to push more in one or another direction rather more consciously. But there are elements that he introduces or takes away based on personal considerations apart from immediate audience feedback. Then again, maybe the audience in the Grace Kelly clip was just particularly flirty. :bleh:

 

By the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with consciously modifying his performance style--I don't think that's cynical, I think that's smart. However, I think he's much more consciously calculating in his interviews than in his performance, where he does indeed let instinct take over (even as he remains quite obviously in control).

 

Oh Jack has plenty more where that came from don't you Jack?? :biggrin2:

 

I do, but as others said, so do you! Your posts on the subject are just as interesting. I'm really happy with a lot of posts in this thread. :thumb_yello:

 

--Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, I am still going to say this, even though I'll be beaten up...virtually.

 

The Koko gig wasn't my favourite, and it still isn't. For me, there wasn't enough movement and the crowd...was different. I don't really know how to explain it, but his shows nowadays have more "oomf" in them.

But then again, this could be because I've seen so many "sexy" videos of him on YouTube, so watching the past was difficult for me to grasp, because it was different to what I have experienced today.

Throughout the entire concert (which was aired on TV a few weeks ago) I was afraid that my parents wouldn't like it, but I was sincerly hoping they would because I know his shows have changed, and I'm pretty sure they'd enjoy his recent shows more (at least I know my mother would!)

However, my dad watched the concert and did not:

1) leave to go to the computer (which is a LARGE achievement I shall add) and;

2) Did not fall asleep.

 

Which I take as a compliment! :thumb_yello:

 

im gna end here, coz i dna where im going with this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Excellent writing JackViolet. A++ on the essay:wink2:

 

I think it would be good if we had a video that showed various parts of Mika performances in chronological order so we can see the development of his performance style. Of coarse it would be a massively long video.

 

And i had to go and ruin this very intelligent thread full of good words and put 'massively' in. Sorry. And sorry for going off track. :thumbdown:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A belate response, as usual, most of the things have been said so far…been just intending to quote

Initially…to many to quote tho’ so I will just address to some issues that have attracted my attention + forgive a not completely awake advilled mind

 

 

1. By Jack (please forgive me for maybe tearing out of the context , but I hope I am not doing any manipulation with quotes here….):

 

“Mika sang “Grace Kelly” as I only hoped it could be sang when I first heard it—he was blatantly flirting with the audience, and not in the cheeky way he sometimes flirts now, but full-on propositioning!”

“God, I wish he’d kept that, it was so appropriate for the opening lyrics of the song.”

 

By Yop:

The change in his performance we're talking about. Being less "girl prostitute" and more "playful sexy man-ish",

 

 

I think one can attribute the change in his “routines” to the fact tat he was more “acting” in terms of impersonation before, that has not been understood for what it really stood by general public, and the current change is just the way to aaproach the performance and public in a slightly different, more (MALE)personal-projecting way :

 

(Well, the whole earlier visual setup – the dress, the performance and expression through dance and gestures— has been misinterpreted IMO and only triggered speculations and un(?)healthy interest in only one direction )

 

Regarding particular Gr K moves - the people didn’t probably get his way of “ pushing forward” his lines about being “anything you like” (becoming a “prostitute” that is ) into a “PHYSICAL” – BODY LANGUAGE FORM

It is a VISUAL , just like the album art - an idea put into simplified and filtered form of simplest “codes” and most explicit gestures and moves – as a child does - (i.e – sad=hand to the eye, and anything you like=prostitute=hips and Freddy=hand and such…just like a video storyboard or CARTOON)…

I think it is a mere straightforward illustration of the “prostitute” word here, without any sexual context implied (for this one)….he is not “suggesting” something to people, but just “IMPERSONATES” THE LYRICS in the most asexual and childish straightforward descriptive way (btw-think Big Girl- I’m on my knees, and arms curving in a “big balloon” and kneeling at “pray for me” in H Johnny….)

 

(And, roughly speaking, neither of an M-performers' or M-humans sexuality or gestures, but rather sexuality of an imaginary female 3 minute alter - ego, related to that particular song)

 

.(.well, I could continue on the body language thing forever, I watch people a lot, but that will draw me far away from the main topic and into the realm of “sensitive points” and not very respectful discussion of someones physique and dyslexia, which might have triggered one’s expressiveness though gestures and such….though in case “different countries ” topic pops up – I might “speculate” on some Mid-Eastern theme…)

 

Anyway, this “flirting” and “offering” with audience has been misunderstood and taken way too serious and seeing the “female” onstage the people have rushed to put a roughest “ready-made” G- stamp (…just don’t want to use the word “label”… wonder why :) hehe….…..) and draw conclusions and dig - jokingly or lovingly – or else- into his pants/ head/ family album/ favourite body parts….NON-STOP avalanching throughout the whole ’07 and still going up…

 

(doing the same at the moment…pffff……..that seriously bugs me lately – sorry for the off topic, but all the press speculation and such is a bull****, but the AMOUNT of it would, mildly speaking, “irritate” just anyone…and what seems pretty innocent and witty and “lovingly said” by one person/journalist/poster might be quite hurtful…due to general misinterpretation or plainly due to the number of repetitions . That is - one drop of water is nothing, but repeated on top of your head…. )

 

So maybe (I think Christine has already mentioned it here to some extent) he has “toned down” the expressiveness of those “Visuals” a bit, because he realized that it just drives people to some wrong conclusions and stupid actions (that might (or ARE) negatively affect M-human in the future).

 

Hence the general shift of the emphasis – from one-man-showmanship impersonation of a FEMALE – persona and hence a feminine sexuality (nothing to do with M- performer or M-person), which is a momentarily on-stage ILLUSTRATION, that only triggered the easiest “effeminate” comparisons, to ….erm…”person-showman”….of a MALE origin, now projecting more onto an M-person himself…so talking about two different types of sexualities is completely justified, which are sexualities of 2 different personas, roughly speaking. And certainly, catering to a different audience (already mentioned here) had a huge influence on re-thinking the means of "pushing forward" the lyrics as well....

 

 

 

2. By Yop:

"....Cause i forgot to mention the interviews since the beginning, but i do think there is a slight change / evolution / whatever into them too..."

+ those TESTING comments

 

 

… Well, in the context of things I mentioned above - it only confirms the fact, that he is a different (sometimes also acting and “impersonating” the “public figure” audience wants to see) entity in his interviews. The interviews imply more self-projection, so more of an M-child, or M-man, M-artist, M-philosopher and general M-project here…as opposed to 3-min onstage impersonation of a female…

 

So theres no surprise I have never personally seen any hints of effemination of an M-human (not talking about onstage and his diva-ish photoshoots) in interviews whatsoever …and not only lately, but from the very beginning…it is a MALE (boy) origin things are coming from, and have always been…regardless of who he b***s “physically” in the meantime…it’s a typical male, machoist approach to sexuality and idea of a “perfect” physical intercourse – “F*** her sensless” (M-quote from ’06-07 http://www.mikafanclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188)… ...and banging on a bin fits in perfectly…

 

The "evolution" of the interviews that we see is more related to M's personal evolution as a performer and growing up as a human and developing a different take on the whole M-project....

 

(slightly off-topic again – into a slippery personal realm…will try not to be too invasive, but SORRY anyways…. I do not say there has never been any confusion ab s-ty for him as a person, well, one never knows the ways inside someone’s head …he has clearly thought into it, and into the bitter consequences a confusion about s-ty may bring –A HASTY APPROACH to treating one's sexuality that is…hence a B Brown song – not about a G* affair IMO, but about a family wrecking and ruining one’s life as the result of an unthoughtful and rushed approach to oneself . So M’s personal somewhat “pending” take on things is 200% justified and RESPECTED….generally-when he said ”listen to the lyrics” –don’t think he meant a descriptive way of projecting his life, but rather projecting and explaining his APPROACH to the problem….and thoughts about consequences…and explaining his refusal to label things right away)

 

….So ImO the performance has become more personalized in a certain way…giving audience more insight into a real man (maybe partially attributed to “stage-confidence” and partially – to the wish to “correct” the initial public confusion mentioned above…and maybe give a bit of an insight onto the man behind...)

 

+ Having said that I would like to mention, that IMO he didn’t really DIRECTLY interact with the audience at all at earlier stages, unlike now-ish – US tour and festivals with handing the mic to public….

It has been multiply discussed and puzzled me a lot, that he has almost never actually looked into the audience at “early stages”, even at the video from Nov he stares mainly in front of himself…which is much higher than the level of people’s eye…he had hardly given a look into the crowd while the Bush gig itself (we were very close, 2d row I think) , but he “overviewed” the audience while standing at the door to the stage before jumping into the relax intro. All the “interaction” part seems to appear only during the last US tour.

 

So maybe there is a testing of somewhat more conventional and easier-digested model of interacting with public – less “impersonating” by himself while standing still, but more of “acting” and “interacting” together with BG’s and band and being more “personal” with public (as the result of maybe gaining more confidence + as the rewarding result of seeing loyalty in the crowd)…..plus plainly taking in “what looks good” on bigger stages and what could “keep” the larger crowd…

 

 

OK…gotta runrunrun….hope willl be able to amend later…

 

P.S. sorry, but : regarding the “dinner talk” about sexuality and such :

Cant resist myself and post one of the maakies – wonderfully bringing things to the level of a total absurd:

http://www.maakies.com/frames/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I think I would have to disagree with some things here.

 

I think one can attribute the change in his “routines” to the fact tat he was more “acting” in terms of impersonation before, that has not been understood for what it really stood by general public, and the current change is just the way to aaproach the performance and public in a slightly different, more (MALE)personal-projecting way

 

Huh, I think it's kind of the opposite. Kata mentioned that to her, it seemed like in the GK clip, Mika was flirting more naturally with the audience--the way he would actually flirt, so to speak--while as in his recent performances, it felt more staged. I think I'd agree with that; his recent performances are more performative in general. If he's "acting" anywhere, I'd say it's now, with the polished staging and the costumes and everything. (Though I don't think "acting" is the right term, but he is more "rehearsed," perhaps. More professional, which also means less raw, even if he still works on instinct.)

 

I think it is a mere straightforward illustration of the “prostitute” word here without any sexual context implied (for this one)….he is not “suggesting” something to people, but just “IMPERSONATES” THE LYRICS in the most asexual and childish straightforward descriptive way (btw-think Big Girl- I’m on my knees, and arms curving in a “big balloon” and kneeling at “pray for me” in H Johnny….)

 

Well, I agree that he likes to illustrate his lyrics with body language, and that's what he was doing in GK, but I would hardly say that was an asexual performance. The way he acts it out now is much more so, and much childish-straightforward, as you say. I've always wanted it to be more sexual and teasingly provocative, and I think that earlier version was closer to how I envisaged it.

 

what seems pretty innocent and witty and “lovingly said” by one person/journalist/poster might be quite hurtful…due to general misinterpretation or plainly due to the number of repetitions . That is - one drop of water is nothing, but repeated on top of your head…. )

 

...because he realized that it just drives people to some wrong conclusions and stupid actions (that might (or ARE) negatively affect M-human in the future).

 

Oh, it's obviously annoying that everyone feels the need to talk about that, but I don't know if it's "hurtful." A lot depends on who's doing the speculating, or how. And Mika said himself, "How can somebody saying I may be gay be a bad thing? I don’t care about that," so I think he's got the right attitude.

 

And I don't think we know whether any conclusions are right or wrong yet.

 

it’s a typical male, machoist approach to sexuality and idea of a “perfect” physical intercourse – “F*** her sensless”

 

Wow, I would not say that at all. Not that I think Mika is particularly effeminate, but the last thing I'd call Mika is macho... and I seriously doubt he was describing his own approach to sex there. He keeps that quite carefully away from the table.

 

Having said that I would like to mention, that IMO he didn’t really DIRECTLY interact with the audience at all at earlier stages, unlike now-ish – US tour and festivals with handing the mic to public….

 

Oh right, I should have clarified--there's a difference between audience interaction and connection. You can interact with an audience by going through the motions and establishing no personal connection whatsoever, and vice versa. He may have mostly looked out front in that clip, but I got a greater sense of intimacy and personal connection to the crowd than at some of the more recent shows. He definitely feeds off the audience and takes his cues from it and reacts to and along with it now, and plays up to it, but I actually think he keeps himself a little apart. (Which may not be a bad thing, and which approach works better in larger venues anyway.)

 

But I will agree that there was less interaction before the US tour. He's learned to work the room, so to say, a lot better now. I'm always impressed at how he continues to push his show forward on all levels with every week that goes by. I do hope he'll decide to bring more audience banter and in-between-song chat to his shows though.

 

--Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the main discussion is over, dunno whether it makes any sence to write more. Just wanted to clarify a few things

 

1. Looking at the post from todays morning-Sorry for typos!!!!

:blush-anim-cl:

 

2. Generally the whole post can be cut at least by half and re-organised...

 

Summmarising a smudged all-over post:

 

The MAIN idea of the whole post was - we are looking at M's stage personalities - "female" Ho in first part, and more masculine and maybe more self-reflecting one in the second part of the post. Two different types of s-ty. Which have generally A VERY LITTLE to do IMO with the Mica-man himself. The public keeps mistaking the role he is playing for the real personal behaviour. Both for the gigs and the M-project interviews (though latter give sometimes a better "projection" of a person). Was trying to attribute different types of sexuality to different stage personas and guess the amount of M-human self projection onto them.

 

P.S. I hereby confirm, that I have never met Mica P in person and never received any personal information disclosing his sexual preferences and explaining his particular ways of manifestation of sexual behaviour neither from Mica P himself nor from the third parties. All I can do is to look at M-project performing and giving inteviews and try to speculate.

 

 

Now - only briefly will try to clarify some lines...sorry again for a messed long post..

 

Re:

If he's "acting" anywhere, I'd say it's now, with the polished staging and the costumes and everything.

 

Meant - as in the post - “acting” in terms of impersonation before,

that is - the emphasis of his acting has been made on direct impersonation unlike later - on (you are right) stage theatrics and projecting male-Mika part... and people have misunderstood the initial "impersonating"

 

 

Re:

...I would hardly say that was an asexual performance... + childish way

 

Meant - show a kid some video footage of a Ho strolling by - and they will mock it exactly the same way M does move in his earlier videos. Copying the exact body language, flirty look, but in somewhat strange way...some understanding is missing...Do not want to go into further definitions. But am not implying he is personally a virgin and etc... blah...

 

 

Re: everyone feels the need to talk about that...."How can somebody saying I may be gay be a bad thing? I don’t care about that," so I think he's got the right attitude....

+ And I don't think we know whether any conclusions are right or wrong yet.

 

Meaning: more in the context of body-parts talk...and such...

+ dont think have ever posted anything regarding the direct "M is gay" or "M is not" thing. And will never do I guess. Though think other people have all the right whatsoever to do so. And by stupid conclusions I mean extending the stage performance into claims about someone's personal life.

 

 

Re: but the last thing I'd call Mika is macho... and I seriously doubt he was describing his own approach to sex there. He keeps that quite carefully away from the table.

 

Meaning:

neither Mika-Macho (LoL) nor direct Freudish analogies here. Just - the approach to s-ty, the origin of s-al behaviour, INDIRECTLY reflected through choice of rude words regarding the sexual act, which is, IMO, a typical MALE and AGGRESSIVE type of manifestation of s-ty.

 

 

Re : Oh right, I should have clarified--there's a difference between audience interaction and connection. You can interact with an audience by going through the motions and establishing no personal connection whatsoever

 

meaning - I was NOT trying to approach the "connection" part. Only described some facts about interaction as it is, nothing deeper than that.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I saw this thread a few days ago, and still haven't managed to find five minutes to comment. I'd love to write an in-depth response, but I'm going on holiday tomorrow and suitcases don't pack themselves, unfortunately.

 

I just wanted to say that what you've written - and what other people have said in response - is quite enlightening, really. The overall concept surrounding how a performer (particularly such a unique and intelligent performer such as Mika) injects sexuality into his performances is quite intriguing. I really wonder how the next five years will see him evolve.

 

Clearly, he knows that he's teasing the audience nowadays when he performs - braces flicking, topless trash-can-banging, anyone?

 

I wonder, though, if he knows just how much he lures many of us in with his offstage demeanor, in the interviews we see. We all know that he's attractive and all that jazz (and I definitely won't be complaining about the almost-X-rated Sweet Dreams dancing!), but for me, the side of him that makes me crazy is what we see when he's being interviewed. And whereas the sexual element to his latest performances is pretty black and white (pelvic thrusting!), the attraction from his interviews is so many shades of gray: his choice of words, his body language, his insight, his masterful ability to dodge ignorant questions from ignorant interviewers. I would definitely say that all those pieces of the puzzle that we see, even in a "controlled" environment like an interview, contribute far more to my attraction to him than do the hyper-masculine, sexed-up performances we saw during his last US tour. I guess it does, however, depend upon your interpretation of the word "attraction".

 

Anyhow, I'm off on a tangent, and my as-yet-empty suitcase is calling me - just my two cents from out in left field. :mf_rosetinted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is such an interesting discussion!

 

I've been trying to find a bit of time in which to read all the (loooong!!!) posts and collect my own thoughts so that I can add something that has not been repeated a hundred times and that makes some sense.......

 

Which means that I will have to wait til a bit later and hopefully I'll come up with the time today

 

But well done everyone, there are some pretty interesting views here, and also very well written 'essays' hehehe...and if for nothing else, it's great to read only to see how so many different points of view and interpretations can come out of the same facts.

 

Quite fascinating isn't it???:blush-anim-cl:

 

Anyway hopefully see you later. I need to go to work :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

 

Sara.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed reading this tread, many of you have said just what I've been thinking but haven't been able to put in words.

I can agree with lollipop monkey about the interviews - this is what often makes me go crazy about him. When I recently saw an interview in French I couldn't take my eyes off him, although I couldn't understand anything - his moves, his face expressions - it was all so vivid, so capturing!

And about his performances - although I don't mind at all him taking his shirt off, it is really that childish way of flirting that works for me - it just makes him irresistible :wink2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, this is not about whether Mika is gay or not. That doesn’t matter, any other person doing those same moves would make the same impression. Whether he is gay or not, it seems that either he or his management decided somewhere along the way that his self-presentation on stage ought to be a little less coquettish. That makes sense: if you think he’s getting plenty of rude comments about being a “fag†now, you should see how that kind of sexual coquettishness would have been received. Mainstream society at large does not take well to men who are willing to sexualize themselves in terms of object rather than subject.

 

As such he’s moved from female to ambiguous-male sexuality in his evolution as a performer, and I think he’s still moving in that direction.

 

I do wonder what exactly motivated this departure for him in the first place, however, and if it was all his idea.

 

It occurred to me the other day that these "self-presentation" transformations, might also apply to his way of dress. Remembering photos from his earlier studio days in making the album in Miami, I remember noticing more makeup (in particular - eyeliner) longer, wavy hair, and feminine looking yellow slipper-shoes in another photo (I think these were from the Jodi Marr or Greg Wells sites). His styling has evolved to something more boyish today(braces, Chuck taylors).

 

"I tried to be like Grace Kelly, but all her looks were too sad, so I tried a little Freddie..."

 

 

eyeliner.jpg

 

yellowslippers.jpg

 

photos are small - here's the link to have a better look. Just click on "Photos" and then it will take a moment to load

http://www.jodimarr.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Emz-Mika-Luva

wow that was a long read....... but it was good. i never really knew that nthe way he dances and moves could contribute to people calling him homosexual. but oh well if he is! i actually like the way he shakes his thang xox

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurred to me the other day that these "self-presentation" transformations, might also apply to his way of dress. Remembering photos from his earlier studio days in making the album in Miami, I remember noticing more makeup (in particular - eyeliner) longer, wavy hair, and feminine looking yellow slipper-shoes in another photo (I think these were from the Jodi Marr or Greg Wells sites). His styling has evolved to something more boyish today(braces, Chuck taylors).

 

"I tried to be like Grace Kelly, but all her looks were too sad, so I tried a little Freddie..."

eyeliner.jpg

 

yellowslippers.jpg

 

I like the photos! But I actually think those outfits were more boyish, in the sense of more sloppy. :-P He's much more put-together now, which makes sense, since all the photos we get of him now are at public appearances. Though I do miss the longer hair sometimes.

 

--Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the photos! But I actually think those outfits were more boyish, in the sense of more sloppy. :-P He's much more put-together now, which makes sense, since all the photos we get of him now are at public appearances. Though I do miss the longer hair sometimes.

 

--Jack

 

yeah i agree. as for the long hair....maybe he couldnt afford to have it cut at the same time xDDD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurred to me the other day that these "self-presentation" transformations, might also apply to his way of dress. Remembering photos from his earlier studio days in making the album in Miami, I remember noticing more makeup (in particular - eyeliner) longer, wavy hair, and feminine looking yellow slipper-shoes in another photo (I think these were from the Jodi Marr or Greg Wells sites). His styling has evolved to something more boyish today(braces, Chuck taylors).

 

"I tried to be like Grace Kelly, but all her looks were too sad, so I tried a little Freddie..."

eyeliner.jpg

 

yellowslippers.jpg

 

you're a good observer! :thumb_yello:

and I had never noticed the coincidence with Grace Kelly ==> Freddie!!

 

I miss the longer hair too. and the eyeliner looked sooo great :wub2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Privacy Policy