Talk:Madonna studies

Proposed merge with Madonna (entertainer)

Very short section, no scope of expansion anymore, every item has been included in the short prose, can easily be included in #Legacy. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 12:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

No per this. Best regards, Apoxyomenus (talk) 16:44, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I have the answer, but I will give a  couple of hours.... Regards, Apoxyomenus (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay I'm back. The case not proceeds because no is necesary, that simple. It is only a article too small, in short words is a Stub that can we easily enlarge. There are several references that can be added, for example:

• 1991 from Orlando Sentinel (of three pages and several comments on this term)

A bit of information

Marilyn Young, Wells' professor at the Department of Communication, says: People assume Madonna's not serious because she's kind of flip. But her impact is serious. She's an icon of pop culture. To the generation coming up, Madonna is more important than Leonard Bernstein. . . . We want to apply scholarly rigor to the study of pop culture. Wells is one of a growing number of Madonna scholars around the country - professors of English, anthropology, communication. They write papers for academic journals and conventions and discuss the videos in class. Many outsiders, of course, get a big laugh when hearing of Madonna studies. Others become indignant: So this is what goes on at state universities. Nor does this topic of study sit well with some scholars of higher education. There's no subject too ridiculous to be a subject of research in academics, says Charles Sykes, who has written two books critical of university teaching methods. This type of research is routine, says Theodore Clevenger, dean of FSU's Department of Communication. From an academic point of view, it doesn't seem peculiar to me. Think of it like this: If you're a Martian trying to figure out what's going on on Earth, Madonna is a blip on the planet. One year, it's the hula hoop. This year, it's Madonna.

• 1994 from The New York Times

A bit of information (Madonna's reaction to the Madonna-studies industry?)

What do the professional students say about Madonna? "I look at her as a barometer of culture," says Cathy Schwichtenberg, the editor of "The Madonna Connection," a 1993 collection of academic essays exploring the performer's influence on contemporary culture. "I also see her as waging semiotic warfare, working with certain strategies to upend stable categories of sexuality and gender. In popular culture Madonna serves as a vehicle to open up issues of gay sexuality, of race, of power and desire." Madonna's reaction to the Madonna-studies industry? "I laugh. It's amusing," she says. "It's flattering because obviously I'm on a lot of people's minds. But I read about all of these things, and I read what I meant by things, and I just think, all of this comes from my subconscious or my unconscious, I don't even think about it.

• 1997 from Rick Ross (presided by Vanity Fair). Note: Well, may be serves of somewhat.

• Book: Madonna as Postmodern Myth: How One Star's Self-Construction Rewrites Sex by Georges Claude Guilbert (here talk -also- about the Musicology department entitled Madonna: The Music and the Phenomenon; and in other contexts, according to Quien magazine, the Seven Sisters (colleges) taught courses by her influence on culture)

• Book: The Madonna Companion: Two Decades of Commentary by Allan Metz and C. Benson. "Despite this new tendency to sentimentalize popular culture and exaggerate its subversive content, Madonna Studies in fact represent the ultimate act of cultural imperialism in the sense that Madonna simply provides a lift into the saddle for ..."

• Book: Media and Cultural Theory " Indeed, David Gauntlett uses the term 'Madonna Studies' ..." (110)

• Book: Beauty And Misogyny: Harmful Cultural Practices In The West  Very good

• Book: From Hegel to Madonna: Towards a General Economy of "commodity Fetishism" ([1])  Very good

These are only a few references. Actually apart from the comments of many authors for this term, were written several essays or thesis, may be Madonnarama: Essays on Sex and Popular Culture is a example (And is need to create Bibliography about Madonna because is a relevant article). With this and more, well you can create a section called "Context" and / or "Critics about this term / phenomenon".

Best regards, Apoxyomenus (talk) 03:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Umm, just wow Chris, wow. Bow down bitches!!! You are amazing for resources. This article can surely be kept since it can be expanded a zillion times. AGain, bow down. Removing the merge tag. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Madonna Studies

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Madonna Studies's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Newitz":

• From Bibliography of works on Madonna: Annalee Newitz (November 1993). "Madonna's Revenge: What Madonna has given to American culture, and culture throughout the world, is not a collection of songs; rather, it is a collection of images" (Issue #9). Bad Subjects. EServer.org. Retrieved February 23, 2015.
• From Cultural impact of Madonna: Annalee, Newitz (November 1993). "Madonna's Revenge". EServer.org. Retrieved June 17, 2015.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 14:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Refs

• "Madonnology"

--Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Madonna revistapelo 1985.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Badly written

A lot of this article has been written (or copied and auto-translated) by someone who is clearly not an English-language speaker. Such as this from the opening paragraph of 'criticisms':

"The Madonna studies generated a great amount of criticisms among scholars and others commentators. Internationally, it also raised disapproval and an editor commented that "was a laugh hear of Madonna studies" for many overseas..."

This is complete gibberish. 86.87.191.180 (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

It is. However, you can help to improve grammar, connectors and more. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 17:54, 19 August 2023 (UTC)