Marilyn Monroe did it, so did Chappell Roan – but what is the point of a stage name?
Loading
Much of this star power doesn't come from the name itself, but the persona behind it. However, some believe that to develop such a star persona, one must begin with the right label. For example, singer Alicia Keys changed her surname to represent her love of music.
'Names are an instrument utilised for identity management. They're a form of strategic branding or even intentional rebranding,' Burgess says.'It could allow for a creative rebirth, helping people enter a different area of specialisation and offering them more legitimacy.'
Certain names can expose stars to new audiences, says RMIT music industry and pop culture lecturer Kat Nelligan. David Bowie (David Robert Jones) not only used a pseudonym, but also a string of other personas including Ziggy Stardust and Aladdin Sane, all of which allowed different demographics to engage with him on various levels.
'Lady Gaga embodied a male alter ego, Jo Calderone, at the 2011 MTV Music Video Awards,' Nelligan says. 'That persona was a way for Gaga to not only express herself artistically, but to also reach queer audiences. It's a way to explore artistry, and to toy with different identities.'
Pseudonyms can also operate as a boundary, she adds. Chappell Roan's name represents her more confident self, and also separates her public and private lives, something the singer has made clear is critical to her.
'In that way, pseudonyms could be tied to mental health and preserving the self,' Nelligan says.
Is it just a Hollywood thing?
No. Pseudonyms are common in other entertainment industries too, including Bollywood and K-Pop.
'It can be quite common for Bollywood actors trying to crack into a Western market. You start to see some of that colonial influence,' Burgess says. 'Stars may anglicize or simplify names to avoid marginalisation. Or perhaps they just want their name to be more memorable, to stand out on a more global level.'
Meanwhile, in the K-Pop realm, Nelligan says adopting a stage name is often part of the transparently commercial process producers and studios go through to create pop stars. Examples include Suga from BTS, whose real name is Min Yoong, and Rosé from Blackpink (Park Chaeyoung).
'K-Pop is an industry built on this idea of a machine. It's curated and very strategic in how a K-Pop star is produced, so it makes sense that pseudonyms are used in that context.'
Sean Redmond, associate dean of media, writing and publishing at RMIT, says many female authors used male pen-names during the 19th century due to misogynistic gender norms.
'George Elliot used a male pseudonym because of gender prejudice in publishing, and because she lived an 'unconventional life' – Mary Ann Evans lived with a man, but they weren't married,' Redmond says.
Similarly, some male actors used pseudonyms to appear more masculine. 'John Wayne was born Marion Robert Morrison, a name deemed too feminine, or even too Italian, for American viewers. The director Raoul Walsh chose the name Wayne, inspired by revolutionary war hero Mad Anthony Wayne.'
Some American-Jewish actors changed their names because of concerns around antisemitism, Redmond adds. For example, Edward G. Robinson's real name was Emanuel Goldenberg, while Kirk Douglas' real name was Issur Danielovitch. Others may even use a pseudonym to protect themselves from the law, such as Banksy, the street artist whose anonymity is a significant part of their appeal.
Authentic or phoney?
Loading
Pseudonyms do not diminish a person's craft, Nelligan says – stage names are often forms of artistic expression.
'People are generally more concerned with whether an entertainer is staying true to their values. Let's say there's an artist who sings about climate change, but then they don't walk that talk. Audiences feel more duped by that … The pseudonym is neither here nor there in that sense.
'The view that a person's real self needs to be embedded in the music or literature is outdated … We still want to trace it to a person, but it doesn't matter if they use a pseudonym.'
Although a lack of transparency around a public figure's name can generate engagement and intrigue, Nelligan says it can also leave fans with nowhere to channel that fascination.
Burgess agrees, noting some pseudonyms could even appear deceptive. For instance, record producer Dr Luke, who was embroiled in a now-resolved legal battle against Kesha, went by the name Tyson Trax on Doja Cat's 2020 song Say So.
'You might see some negativity there because some people may not have supported the work if they had known he was involved. The name carries a lot of weight,' Burgess says.
'Consumers demand transparency and authenticity, but we also have to remember there are people behind these pseudonyms who obviously want some degree of privacy, and often it's not for sinister or deceptive reasons.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Perth Now
a day ago
- Perth Now
YG Entertainment confirms BLACKPINK's new album will arrive in November, 'at the latest'
BLACKPINK's label has confirmed the girl group is aiming to drop a new album by November. YG Entertainment recently responded to a report from My Daily Korea that claimed the mini-album will have a November release date by promising to reveal all at a later date. And now the agency's founder Yang Hyun Suk has vowed the team will "do our best" to get the record out "by November, at the latest". In an update on YG's YouTube channel, he said: 'A lot of fans are curious about BLACKPINK's album. I know that the BLACKPINK members and producers in charge of them are working very hard preparing the album. I'm hoping for BLACKPINK's album to be out by November, at the latest. That's what I'm pushing for – we'll do our best to get BLACKPINK's album out soon." In July, the K-pop group released the Diplo-produced single JUMP. It marked their first music since JENNIE, ROSÉ, LISA and JISOO embarked on successful solo careers. Their last EP was 2019's Kill This Love, with their album Born Pink following in 2022. BLACKPINK - comprising ROSÉ, JENNIE, JISOO and LISA - are currently on their Deadline World Tour, which saw the girls play two nights at London's Wembley Stadium on August 15 and 16. Meanwhile, ROSÉ was left "beyond shocked" and "speechless" over her eight MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs) nominations. The star is in contention for Video of the Year, Song of the Year, Best Collaboration, Best Pop, Best Direction, Best Art Direction and Best Visual Effects for mega-hit APT. featuring Bruno Mars, as well as Best K-pop for Toxic Til the End from her solo LP Rosie. The elated star reacted on her Instagram Stories last week: "So I've just heard that I've received eight VMA nominations. "I am beyond shocked and I just don't know what to say. I'm absolutely speechless! This is a crazy day! Whoa! It's really, really wild! What's happening?!" In the Best K-pop category, the Messy singer will fend off competition from her BLACKPINK bandmates, with JENNIE's like JENNIE, JISOO's earthquake and LISA's Doja Cat and RAYE collaboration Born Again receiving nods. Lady Gaga leads the nominations, having scored an impressive 12 nods. The winners will be unveiled on Sunday, September 7, at the UBS Arena in New York City.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 days ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Musk's ‘Spicy Mode' AI porn generator is not just dumb, it's dangerous
Things are happening fast in the world of generative AI, and in the world of online safety. But where the two collide, particularly in the increasingly concerning regulatory environment of the United States, things seem to have shifted practically overnight. We're approaching a place where major Western governments are blocking access to educational material for young girls to learn about their own bodies, while AI scans images of those bodies without consent to make models for generating salacious material on demand. A place where mentions of homosexuality and transgenderism are scrubbed from scientific documents and pressure campaigns stop artists making money off their original erotic content, but where the world's richest man can sell you deepfakes of Taylor Swift's bare breasts for $45 a month. It's easy to imagine a horror-scenario future for our culture, which is already dominated and regulated by an internet that's increasingly privatised and vulnerable to the whims of governments and tech oligarchs. A scenario where certain kinds of sex – like anything that might empower women or queer people – are deemed woke and get buried. While other kinds – like the ability of men to see any woman they want naked, while she's powerless to do anything about it – are fine. And it's all the easier to imagine as the constant procession of AI grossness and conservative government mandates make us so apathetic that barely anybody seems to point it out any more. Last week, Elon Musk's xAI rolled out a public version of its image-generation platform Grok Imagine, with a marquee feature being its ability to turn any generated image into a short video. But true to form for Musk's 'free speech absolutist' X platform, which has a history of allowing, gestating and amplifying harm towards anyone of a different gender, sexuality, skin colour or belief system to the Tesla founder himself, this is mainstream AI video with a recklessly immature difference: an optional 'Spicy Mode' ensures the video output is suggestive or explicitly sexual in nature. The idea is that the user (and they must be a paying user, with access to Grok Imagine starting at $45 a month), can ask for an image of any person they want in any situation they want, and then hit the Spicy button to turn it into soft porn. X is filled with videos of users celebrating and sharing their creations. As you might expect, almost all the generated videos are of women, with videos commonly showing them removing their tops and shorts to expose their naked bodies, rolling around while ripping at skintight suits, or messily eating ice cream that Grok seems to think should become liquid the second it's touched by anything. The videos are uncanny, with moments of photorealism but also strange physics, impossible behaviour, weird shiny textures and other common AI video oddness, plus awful audio. They're also extremely unimaginative, despite the name of the product.
The Age
3 days ago
- The Age
Musk's ‘Spicy Mode' AI porn generator is not just dumb, it's dangerous
Things are happening fast in the world of generative AI, and in the world of online safety. But where the two collide, particularly in the increasingly concerning regulatory environment of the United States, things seem to have shifted practically overnight. We're approaching a place where major Western governments are blocking access to educational material for young girls to learn about their own bodies, while AI scans images of those bodies without consent to make models for generating salacious material on demand. A place where mentions of homosexuality and transgenderism are scrubbed from scientific documents and pressure campaigns stop artists making money off their original erotic content, but where the world's richest man can sell you deepfakes of Taylor Swift's bare breasts for $45 a month. It's easy to imagine a horror-scenario future for our culture, which is already dominated and regulated by an internet that's increasingly privatised and vulnerable to the whims of governments and tech oligarchs. A scenario where certain kinds of sex – like anything that might empower women or queer people – are deemed woke and get buried. While other kinds – like the ability of men to see any woman they want naked, while she's powerless to do anything about it – are fine. And it's all the easier to imagine as the constant procession of AI grossness and conservative government mandates make us so apathetic that barely anybody seems to point it out any more. Last week, Elon Musk's xAI rolled out a public version of its image-generation platform Grok Imagine, with a marquee feature being its ability to turn any generated image into a short video. But true to form for Musk's 'free speech absolutist' X platform, which has a history of allowing, gestating and amplifying harm towards anyone of a different gender, sexuality, skin colour or belief system to the Tesla founder himself, this is mainstream AI video with a recklessly immature difference: an optional 'Spicy Mode' ensures the video output is suggestive or explicitly sexual in nature. The idea is that the user (and they must be a paying user, with access to Grok Imagine starting at $45 a month), can ask for an image of any person they want in any situation they want, and then hit the Spicy button to turn it into soft porn. X is filled with videos of users celebrating and sharing their creations. As you might expect, almost all the generated videos are of women, with videos commonly showing them removing their tops and shorts to expose their naked bodies, rolling around while ripping at skintight suits, or messily eating ice cream that Grok seems to think should become liquid the second it's touched by anything. The videos are uncanny, with moments of photorealism but also strange physics, impossible behaviour, weird shiny textures and other common AI video oddness, plus awful audio. They're also extremely unimaginative, despite the name of the product.



