Christina Aguilera: "Dirrty" or "Beautiful"?

Part Two: "Beautiful"

essay by Matthew Webber

December 22, 2002

"Forgive me for hoping Christina Aguilera's next album produces as many hit singles as did her first - if only her singles are the songs written by [Linda] Perry."
--myself, in Erasing Clouds 10, July 2002

"You can't always get what you want. But if you try sometime you just might find you get what you need."
--The Rolling Stones

It's not just a stylistic device: I really did write part one of this essay on November 1, when Christina Aguilera's then-current hit video, "Dirrty," was plaguing MTV. I know the date is correct because I actually turned in the essay as a class assignment that day - except the draft I turned in was documented in MLA style. Also, it was about twice as long. I wrote it after reading an article in Entertainment Weekly and numerous articles on MTV.com about Christina, her "Dirrty" music video, and her new and disapproved of image. I wrote it after I had heard about the Saturday Night Live parody of "Dirrty" in which Christina announced she wanted to be known as an actual ho instead of as just a music industry ho. When I wrote part one, many of her young fans and most music critics agreed with me that Christina's Genie Gone Wild video had gone too far: We all thought she was an actual ho.

Our words couldn't bring her down.

Today, on December 22, the decision to release "Dirrty" as the first single and video from Christina's new album, Stripped, seems strategic rather than mistaken. As one of Christina's enemies, Eminem, is acutely aware, even bad publicity is publicity. The controversy surrounding the "Dirrty" video kept Christina's name in the headlines before, during, and after her album dropped. That the video overshadowed the actual song also helped Christina, since nobody was talking about how unlistenable the Rockwilder-produced Redman rehash was. Although her subsequent appearances on the covers of Rolling Stone and Maxim further scandalized her (the only things she wore for Rolling Stone were boots, her piercings, and a guitar), they also kept her in the news racks. Everybody was talking about Christina, whether or not they were listening to her music.

The saddest thing to me about Christina's prostituting herself is that she can actually sing. Unlike strippers (even the ones with dreams of music stardom tucked among the bills in their g-strings) or Britney "I'm a Slave 4 U" Spears, Christina has a powerful voice. Although Christina is as virginal and whorish as any other millennial pop starlet, it is actually conceivable that somebody signed her to a recording contract because of her singing rather than her mudslinging. This girl can belt it - while Britney sings from somewhere below her hip-hugging belt. Listen to Christina's verse in "Lady Marmalade" and hear her own it - even if there's nothing to own. If abominations such as "What a Girl Wants" and "Come On Over" are something other than execrable, we tolerate their presence on our radios because of how hard she sells them. Some intangible quality of her voice - a note, a wail, a tremble - compels us to linger for a few seconds longer than we would if it were Jessica Simpson shilling us such schlock. What a music fan wants and what a music fan needs are songwriting and performances without use-by dates, but given the current Clear Channel radio monopoly, we too often settle for day-old pop. At least Christina thinks she believes what she's singing, which is preferable to a singer whom we can't believe thinks. But think of how great Christina could she be if she believed in her lyrics like Jesus believed in His Father, or if she chose to sing lyrics that didn't mean "Will you sleep with me?" in French.

Imagine the power of her voice fully clothed.

It is because of Christina's belting that I hoped I'd hear more of her. I hoped a songwriter such as Linda Perry, whose songs helped to reinvent the weaker-voiced Pink, could give Christina some material she could believe in; some words that, when sung, we could believe she believed. Forgive me for wishing on the success of this star, because I guess I was wishing for her video shoots as well. I wished for stripped music; I was granted a stripped Christina. For me to love "Beautiful," I had to loathe "Dirrty." I got what I needed instead of what I wanted - something to opine about, a one-two punch of pop. I wanted to like her voice, but I needed to complain about how seldom she let it speak for her. I'm a music fan who wishes he wasn't such a critic; I'm a music critic who finds it hard to accept some of the music of which he finds himself a fan. If Christina had released "Beautiful" as her first single (and never released "Dirrty" at all), I never would have had this conundrum: After having been dirrtied, I believe "Beautiful" because I need to. I should have been more careful what I wished for from this genie.

…I just spent about ten minutes re-reading the above paragraph, and I'm not sure it makes much sense. Forgive me for that, as well. Some things in the paragraph do make sense to me, of course, because I wrote them. I agree with my sentiments, my love and my hate. I agree that I got what I wished for, what I needed. The problem with the paragraph, and with part two of this essay as a whole, is that I love the Linda Perry-written, Christina Aguilera-sung "Beautiful" much more than I should, which makes me feel guilty for writing part one, which I felt guilty about writing for my assignment in the first place because I am male and therefore part of the hegemony that would strip Christina's clothes, so who am I to disparage her? and wasn't it her choice? but did she really have a choice? and does she really have a voice? and wow, she's got a voice! -and she is beautiful no matter what I say, my words can't bring her down. So don't you bring me down today.

I love "Beautiful" because it is one of only two pop songs this year that made me want to cry the first time I heard them (the other is "I Don't Know Why" by Norah Jones); because of how sappy and pathetic and non-objective and not-like-me-at-all this emotion made me feel; because of how embarrassed I am to be stripping myself in this essay; because of how much I wanted to hate Christina Aguilera for subsuming her voice to her body and for making me feel dirrty for enjoying her "Dirrty" video; because I do know why she released "Beautiful" second - it's a response to her critics, to me, to you, whose words were so shocked and so spiteful and, and, so holy - because I heard it as an anthem, as her declaration of respect, and I knew she would survive; I was afraid and petrified, but I'm telling you what it means to me, her R-E-S-P-E-C-T; because I believed her - I believed she believed. Because she belted it, owned it - her voice was fucking beautiful. She's definitely not Aretha, but neither was Gloria Gaynor. Her voice filled my car and, goddamn it, my heart. No matter what I did, no matter what I said, there was no way her voice could bring me down.

The Jonas Akerlund-directed video is an improvement on "Dirrty" as well. Sure, Christina looks good, but she's wearing loose-fitting black sweats or something. The video's other characters - a transvestite, an anorexic, two gay men making out - are able to find their own beauty as Christina finds hers. Since our words can't bring them down, they smile. It's beautiful.

That was what I wished for when I wished her more hits. That was what I wanted and needed from her. When I heard "Beautiful" for the first time, I was able to forgive Christina for her "Dirrty" debacle. I tried to understand that what one girl wants and needs is more complicated than being either dirrty or beautiful (or wearing a wife-beater and a necktie); because girls, and women, and everyone are both, or neither, or a mixture, or one and then the other, or somewhere in between; and Freud's whores and virgins are more complex than their labels. I understood, in those minutes, that a great pop song is often greater (to the nth degree) than the sum of its parts: a pseudo-slutty singer, a songwriter whose first big hit for her own band did not lead to a second (and whose albums are now sold in bulk in used-CD stores, and she makes money writing songs for people she might not respect), simplistic lyrics, and similar production to that found on your favorite adult contemporary album.

Like all music fans, I need to be moved. Like most music critics, I want to be moved by anybody other than Christina Aguilera. But good pop music moves us, sometimes against our will. Even if nobody else agrees.

"Beautiful" is beautiful - I can't explain it further.

Forgive me for wishing Christina Aguilera another single or two - if only she believes them, if only they are this beautiful. May Linda keep writing. May Christina keep singing. May girls not need to strip for us to hear their voices.

E-mail me your questions, comments, and suggestions at popculturejunkie@hotmail.com.

Issue 12, January 2003 | next article