I don’t get it. Her music is sometimes catchy but otherwise unremarkable, from the songs I’ve heard. How does she break all these records and accumulate so much fame and wealth?
She’s pretty, but a lot of singer songwriters are, especially those with makeup and costume people, a support staff.
Is there something else to her that people like?
I’m confused about what makes her so apparently unique or phenomenal.
Update: there are so many things that make swift unique or phenomenal.
I’ve received tons of great answers from people that have helped me understand, like piecing together a jigsaw puzzle, many factors that makes swift different and consequently more successful than her peers.
Clever lyrics, top-tier production, sharing autobiographical and emotional points in her life very directly, apparent honesty with few or no public blemishes, creating a community of fans through Easter eggs and house parties and unconventional, but always personal methods, an early start supported by wealthy parents, she keeps winning against abusers, and her music itself is popular and fun.
Those are just a few of the puzzle pieces contributed here, and a dive into this post is a pretty good explanation of many of the factors that must be contributing to her phenomenal success and recognition, that set her apart from other pop stars, even pop stars who were phenoms in their own right.
This is a very educational post, thank you to everyone who has contributed.
I wanted to chime in, since I’m in the unique situation of not being a “Swiftie” but still having an above-average knowledge of Taylor Swift due to being married to a Swiftie.
For starters, her songs are very relatable for women. Especially in women around her age, she was routinely writing songs that spoke to the emotions during each periods of their lives. My wife, for example, was in middle/high school when Taylor was releasing her romantic country songs, and met me right around when Taylor released Lover. This is all because Taylor is extremely autobiographical with her lyrics and was writing about what she was experiencing at the time. She wrote lovesongs in Speak Now because she was in high school and early college when she produced the album. She wrote Lover because she had met a man who, at the time, she perceived to be a man she could spend the rest of her life with. Since Red, very few of her songs are about hypothetical situations. Almost all of them are about her real experiences as a person and as a woman, with the exception of folklore and Evermore, and that speaks to women in a very strong way. Her lyrics and reasons behinds songs are deep, much deeper than most give her credit for.
Additionally, she is extremely good at marketing. Many of her songs and albums have Easter eggs in them that only true fans will be able to find. She also drops a lot of cryptic hints, which her fans love to dissect and interpret to try and predict major releases or announcements. It’s just good fun for them, and it increases the hype significantly. Also, her concerts are not just live music, they’re a whole show. The Eras concert is 3 hours long, and she is singing and running the entire time. She rarely lip-syncs - I say rarely because I’ve heard claims that she does but I have never seen it - and gives it her all every single concert. Her band and many of her dancers and support staff have been with her for a decade or more now, and they have continued to routinely put on shows to the best of their abilities without fail.
Finally, she is, most Swifties believe, a genuinely good person. The worst thing I’ve ever heard of her doing is loaning her private jet out to her friends and families which caused her to break the news because her jet was causing a lot of emissions. Beyond that, she seems to be a grounded woman who genuinely loves her fans and the people around her.
If you take nothing else away from this post, this is the most important fact: She is relatable to women. She sings about her lived experiences, many of which are relatable to her fans.
Thanks, I really appreciate your perspective.
A lot of what you said rings true and certainly fits in puzzle piece-wise with everything else
My wife has just informed me of the latest Easter egg, to further explain the marketing prowess and give an example.
She has changed her profile picture to black and white, rather than full color. While trivial to non-Swift fans, this is a red alert to her die-hards. I haven’t heard many of the theories yet (my wife often distills them down to the most reasonable for me, thankfully), but her favorite so far is that it is signaling her intent to release the “Taylor’s version” (re-recording) of her album Reputation, which is one of her most popular albums and has a black and white theming. This is the kind of puzzles and theory crafting thst many Swift fans find so enthralling
Ha, okay, so there’s a whole puzzle culture to everything she presents. Yes, that would attract a lot of people as well. Thanks
Think of a dish made by a world class chef, that food is probably exquisitely crafted using unique and fresh ingredients. There probably aren’t that many people out there who truly appreciate it, and probably a lot who just think it’s weird.
Now think of pizza. It’s relatively cheap and broadly appealing. It wouldn’t be put in the same class as the food prepared by the chef, but a lot more of it gets consumed.
Taylor Swift is talented, pretty, affable, has a superior work ethic, and makes music that’s catchy and easily digestible. Like pizza, her music appeals to the broadest group of people.
I like this explanation, but I feel like there are plenty of other artists who fit into that category.
Is it just random that they had to pick one brand of pizza to go crazy over do you think?
The pizza has been carefully crafted by teams of experts to appeal to the largest audience.
As someone who couldn’t name a single Swift song up until a couple of months ago — From what I read she writes the vast majority of her songs, which is exceptionally rare for pop stars; especially from such a young age… The songs may be simplistic and formulaic, but the lyrics are decent for the age they were written at, and the work ethic and genre jumping is impressive. The most admirable thing about her is how she’s screwing venture capitalists by re-recording all the songs she wrote. I hope she starts redistributing all that wealth she’s extracting.
Ok just don’t forget she came from money and had opportunities:
She traveled there with her mother at age eleven to visit record labels
That definitely helps. I think it’s interesting that access to uncommon opportunities is generally presented as a negative thing in Taylor Swift’s case but ignored for Michael Jackson or even contemporaries like Beyonce.
Oh no I’ll happily call out anyone for that.
Dunno any of her new stuff, but I’d be surprised if you’ve never heard any of the following as they were very overplayed, even though they are good:
Teardrops from my guitar
Love story
Our song
Blank space
You belong with me
She is a damn fine businesswoman. She was able to use social media to have a relationship with her followers and build a large audience. That’s one of the main reasons she became famous.
Also, there have been a couple of situations that benefited her fame, such as the Kanye incident
Thanks
“Relationship”… More like getting liked because she is pretty.
Uh oh, someone is upset because a beautiful woman is also good at other things.
You are right - beautiful woman are always good at things. Can’t criticize them because that’s just out of bounds. :)
Cause that’s totally what I said 🤣
Luck and timing are big factors. There are many talented artists out there that work hard and make the kind of music that (in theory) should appeal to a large audience but never make it. Either at all or not to the level of Taylor Swift. If you make the right music at the right time, your chances increase but you still need luck.
Edit: what I’ve heard of Taylor is that she’s very good in making the right music at the right time. The songs fit the trends in music. But I’ve never listened much to her, so I don’t know for sure if its correct
Thanks, someone else compared her to other pop stars like Michael Jackson and Madonna, and all of those people were at the forefront of their particular movement.
I feel like Taylor Swift is just in the middle of all the other pop stars.
Appreciate it, I’m going to try and look into it from that perspective, maybe I just don’t understand the music world at all. I definitely don’t.
I just remembered a big factor as to why artists such as Madonna have a long career: they managed to appeal to the queer crowd, who tend to be fiercely dedicated to anyone who stands up for them.
Don’t forget the money and connections. IIRC her father literally bought(?) or created(?) a label to sign her. There a lot more talented artists out there but she had the money and connections that gave her a very big headstart. Talent can only get you so far in the industry. It’s luck/timing and money/connections that allow you to break through.
My brother is a swiftie and seems to think that her talent is above and beyond a standard artists talent. One thing that is praised is how much range she has covered across her albums.
I’m personally not a fan, and to me she seems overrated, but I also have to recognize the mass following and legitimate consistency in the music quality. She’s not like a Katy Perry recycling the same tune.
So I think she’s like a really nice pizza, appealing but always good quality, always fresh.
A couple people have mentioned her range, but they also only mention her relationship and breakup songs. What else does she sing about that gives her range?
When people talk about her range they are usually talking about musical styles, she has a lot of different sounds. Not all of her songs are about relationships, but probably most of them, they are not all about breakups though. That isn’t too uncommon though, probably one of the most common things people sing about.
Totally agree, relationships breakups probably cover a large percentage of pop music anyway.
Does she have a lot of different sounds just in pop music or does she also delve into completely different genres?
Probably not like Andre 3000 going out and making an ambient album, but there are a lot of differences stylistically. For example her pandemic albums Folklore and Evermore are a lot less traditional pop, and can be more folk sounding. Doing some songs with Bon Iver helped that too.
I think a lot of times people associate her with bubblegum pop from a lot of the singles that came out maybe ten years ago and were heavily played on the radio but that hasn’t been the sound for a while.
Thanks, got it
She might not recycle the same tune, but it kinda seems like she recycles the same themes verbatim. I’d say she’s closer to Papa John’s than a good quality pizza shop. Her music is probably good, but I doubt that it’s usually great.
You have to explore all her albums in order to really form that opinion. People who like that kind of music will do so, and likely decide that she is phenomenal.
But then folks like you and me will not want to take time to ingest all that music that doesn’t appeal to us, so we have to speculate based off what we get exposed to which is generally her pop songs on the radio and such. But we aren’t really getting the full Taylor Swift. So it’s like we’re judging a sample of her stuff (which sounds like a lot of other pop cuz all pop sounds basically the same) and oversimplify what she offers to music.
I’m completely speculating… Like I said we’d have to dive into all those albums and listen to really form a meaningful opinion.
That’s a fair opinion. I usually don’t listen to albums, even for creators I like, so it didn’t really click that her most famous works might not be why people like her.
That being said, there were a few (probably cherrypicked) clips of her concerts where she said something “inspirational” (or quirky?), and her fans go absolutely insane, and to me it just sounds like the most mundane stuff you could say. So until I listen to her stuff I’ll keep my existing impression.
She’s smart and not lazy. A lot of people get fame and money and massively shift their focus. Longevity is probably the toughest part, not going crazy, and remaining relatable to young people while simultaneously having millions of dollars.
And are there not plenty of other popular artists?
There are, and none with so many awards or the same kind of popularity.
Gordon Ramsay isn’t the best chef on the world, still he has the most restaurants by a big margin
A ton of people would say Tswift is their ultimate fantasy fuck even though she isn’t the hottest girl on the planet (she still could be a model probably, being slim and tall)
Being famous always has a certain pull to it and if you do it right you can leverage being famous to become even more famous
Worlds top athletes are overpaid (at least in team sports) would you rather have the #1 player or a team full of top 100 players… Well the #1 player sells a ton of merch, but almost always the team with more depth is winning games (if the budget is equal)
Top athletes are grossly underpaid. Basketball straight up truncates them. Giannis would make at least double on the open market. Football, the best players make the same as second and third tier players at their position, entirely dependent on when they hit FA.
Yeah…I’m not sure what sports we’re talking here. I don’t want to assume an American perspective, so I genuinely don’t know when it comes to soccer, cricket, rugby, etc.
But here Stateside, the best players are often not the most highly paid. Patrick Mahomes - and I understand people can disagree - is not the most highly paid QB. Not for a while. Prior to this season, Travis Kelce had been the top TE in the NFL for a number of years, but his contract hadn’t reflected it for some time.
Even without the salary cap, in a sport like Major League Baseball, one could argue a player like Shohei Otahni is still not being paid what he’s actually worth, despite his record breaking contract. He’s a Hall of Fame pitcher and hitter in one player. The contracts for each of those individually is worth more than what he got.
She’s pretty and blond as well… oh, and white.
It’s like Britney all over again.
But way way bigger and with way more awards. And records.
And smarter, a lot smarter than Britney.
Does this take any effort though?
What, being smart?
Being smarter than Britney.
Smart, pretty, rich parents in positions to boost her early career, generic songs that young women and girls everywhere can project their own issues onto, blonde and white, early career (and again, blonde pretty and white) made her more popular with the country crowd, tons of luck…
Talent can only get you so far.
What is Taylor’s ‘Toxic’ though?
That girl invests in real estate, she’s not stupid enough to make a song like that.
How fucking dare you. That’s an absolute banger.
Just kidding, yeah it’s a good song.
Just like pizza, artist go off after a while. (It just takes longer)
Except for all of the artists who don’t.
And a lot of the artists who do “go off” don’t get 81 awards in a decade and a half.
Those aren’t to many. I can’t name many though that made good music 2 decades ago and still do. Only the Stones spring to mind. I never even heard of Taylor Swift until last year.
I disagree with this. She’s a pretty amazing song writer, which is really uncommon for pop stars. I can see why someone would think she’s more like pizza if you only listen to the hits, but if you actually sit down and listen to a whole album you’ll find that there aren’t many songs that are just flat-out bad. Actually, one my favorites by her is a B side. You can actually track her progress as a musician from fairly generic country artist to someone who has a really unique and uncomplicated sound. I mean, I get why people go for the “simple = easy”, but that’s simply not the case. It’s really difficult to write a song that is as clean and as well put together as she does and still have it be good. To continue your food metaphor, Taylor would be like sushi; there doesn’t have to be a ton of ingredients to be incredibly delicious.
Then you also have to consider that she’s Gen Z, has been doing this for 18 years, and has managed to stay fairly relevant most of that time. Like she really is the only Gen Z pop star who has managed to stay in the limelight without dropping out of being a complete tool (Justin Bieber).
You also have to consider that for a long time she had a carefully crafted public image as a champion of the LGBTQ+ community. Whether she actually is or isn’t doesn’t really matter (I personally think it’s a lot of rainbow-washing) when you have bops like “You Need to Calm Down”. Or the fact that she features a bunch of trans people in the video she directed for “Lavender Haze”.
She’s a pretty amazing song writer, which is really uncommon for pop stars.
Just because you make pizza, doesn’t mean you don’t make great pizza. I’m not saying she’s out here making $0.99 Mr. P’s Pizzas (“fabulous” in their own right).
Then you also have to consider that she’s Gen Z, has been doing this for 18 years, and has managed to stay fairly relevant most of that time.
I’ve considered it, but it’s not true. She may appeal to Gen Z but she was born in '89, making her dead center of being a millennial.
I’ve never said she’s bad, but if you’ve ever listened to more complex music, her’s isn’t that. She’s great at what she does, and seemingly smart and levelheaded, and that’s fantastic. But to say her songs are masterpieces that are like beautifully woven tapestry of lyrics and music, I don’t see it. And, in all fairness, if they were, she’d probably have a fan base 95% smaller.
I meant that she’s a Gen Z staple, not that she herself is Gen Z. She is to a lot of Gen Z folks what a Green Day is to older millennials like myself. She’s been around most of my life.
That being said, I do listen to a lot of complex music. I listen to a huge variety of music. Like when people say “I listen to everything”, I actually mean it. I’ve played with bands that range for noise to country to classical to jazz to metal to industrial to electronica. And I will say there are a lot of people, especially in the rock and metal scenes, that seem to think that more is always better. Like bigger, faster, louder, more technical, harder to play…that somehow that makes better music. It doesn’t. Like I can enjoy some Tim Henson, he’s an amazing guitarist. I love me some Buckethead or Les Claypool. But to say that their music is better music because it’s more technically difficult to play is kind of funny.
Let me give you an example. Most people will tell you that “Stairway to Heaven” is a great song. I would agree. The solo at the beginning is iconic. But it’s also not hard to play.
If you want a great example of Taylor Swift that doesn’t make normal play that will help you understand, I would suggest “Snow on the Beach”. Don’t try to pick apart lyrics or music. Relax, and let the vibe of the music roll over you. Once you get the overall vibe, then pick into the music and the lyrics. What Taylor is a master of isn’t amazing lyrics or technical songwriting. She’s a master of a song emoting. Like she sets a mood better than almost any musician I’ve seen. While it’s a more popular song, “Lavender Haze” is another great example of a song that is amazing at describing in music that feeling of being in a new relationship and just not wanting to leave.
How is she an amazing song writer? What song do you think stands out and is amazing?
I feel like this is kind of a trap question. Everything about this entire thread feels that way - I don’t want it to seem as if I’m attacking you here - and it’s a microcosm of why discussion of Swift is so polarizing. For some reason, she, more than any other artist I can call to mind, is discussed in black and white terminology. There’s almost no middle ground. You need to either love her or hate her.
Does she possess the lyrical genius of, like, Leonard Cohen? I mean, I don’t know. I think she’s pretty great, but back in the day I’d have been stoned to death on r/Music for suggesting they were in the same league.
What I will say is I think she’s as honest as Cohen was, and that’s something the best songwriters all have. I think she writes from an extremely authentic place, and I respect the hell out of that. In recent years, I think co-writing with Jack Antonoff has only further unlocked her potential.
Some examples of hers I think are great - You’re On Your Own Kid, Champagne Problems, and My Tears Ricochet.
Her pop stuff has some great lyricism as well, but pop music as a genre is generally under appreciated for its lyrics. Obviously, not in all cases; there’s a shitload of manufactured garbage out there. But most of the 1989 album is borderline - if not outright - excellent in this regard. It didn’t get any serious attention though until that shitbag Ryan Adams covered the whole thing, and got people to hear the lyrics in a different way.
I understand you feel that way. But this thread made me give her a chance, so I listened to a couple of her albums. They were pretty decent. Catchy music, good car music. So I get it, she is pretty good. I guess I wouldn’t call her amazing but I can see how others may feel that way.
I haven’t looked into her lyrics yet. If she is honest, that sounds great to me.
Thank you. :)
Pretty cool you gave her a chance!
I’m a middle aged guy, and I grew up primarily on a mix of 60s-70s-80s rock that my dad fed me, great folk artists my mom loved, and the music of my own formative years (probably most impactful was the grunge scene and its most famous children).
I don’t identify with much modern music, but she’s someone I’ve always respected for some reason. There are obviously other exceptions as well, she’s just the biggest thing going right now.
The world class chef can only cook for a few at a time. Digital distribution means big voice.
Is she NY style or deep dish?
St. Louis
-Very skilled songwriter. I don’t necessarily like all her stuff but I legitimately think she’s the best songwriter (meaning, composing music and writing lyrics) of her generation. Probably since Bruce Springsteen or Billy Joel.
-Very attractive and a good performer
-Well connected in the music industry let her get an early start/inside track
-obsessed with being popular. I don’t mean that in a negative way, but her primary objective with her music is to please as many people as possible. I think the documentary “Miss Americana” on Netflix explains that very well-at one point she straight up says “I just want people to like me” or something like that. That means her music/career has always focused on mass appeal as opposed to making more… limited-appeal music like most artists do at some point in their career
-she’s kept a remarkably clean image even through being famous for close to two decades. It’s very telling that the worst thing her haters can say about her is “but her plane uses a lot of carbon!” This means parents let kids listen to her, brands love her as a sponsor, nobody boycotts her, etc.
-one last thing, I think people love her songs because they feel like they’re true. Her songs have a very intimate, almost confessional quality that a lot of artists strive for buy often comes off as fake.
She’s just lately a decent songwriter. For most of her career, her songs were written for her by the heavy hitters behind virtually every top 100 hit. Her producer/mixer/writer Jack Antonoff still does most of the heavy lifting.
I am tired of seeing the sentiment that she’s some brilliant songwriter–she really only kind of plays the guitar. The reality is that if anyone is made to be a billionaire, and work with one of the best musical minds of our time (Antonoff), and collaborate with the other top song writers/ghost writers, of course, a decade later, they’ll be able to write songs. It was never some innate talent of hers, or else the songs she truly did write early in her career would have been the hits, instead of the mutually agreed upon worst on the album.
By early in her career do you mean when she was like 18? I’m not saying she hasn’t had a lot of help. But I disagree with the idea that she’s just a figurehead. She is listed as a writer for pretty much all her songs, and you can usually tell a Taylor Swift song just by the sound/lyrics, which isnt something i can say for a lot of pop artists. If it was Antonoff the whole time then Bleachers would be more popular (relative to Swift).
No, she really only started to write with “Lover”. Prior to that, it was Antonoff, and prior to that it was a lot of different writers/ghost writers.
I also don’t think she’s just a figure head. I appreciate everything she’s done to get artists paid more, I think she’s a good role model for girls/women, etc. But, I do not think she’s a talented song writer. She’s not a multi-instrumentalist. And, she is a billionaire, hoarding wealth like all the others.
She is listed as a writer for pretty much all her songs
I don’t know anything about anything in this Taylor Swift conversation but Elvis was listed as a writer on all of his songs but wrote none of them. It was a requirement of his management that if he performed it, he got a writing credit.
your analysis is correct. the commenter you are replying to is like literally lying and i’m making an effort to point that out because they are getting far too many upvotes for someone whose sources contradict their own statements. check out my other comments if interested lol and have a great day 😊
The American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift has written or co-written every song in her discography, with the exception of several cover songs and two guest features, alongside some songs released by other artists
Source?
Co-writing means nothing at the mega-pop industry level, and starts having little meaning far before that. But, if you are genuinely under the impression that it has meaning, I have a bridge to sell you.
The source for my claims of brilliant songwriters writing her entire early career is visible in Genius for everything pre-Lover.
this commenter is lying and the sources they claim to cite contradict their own claims.
i am sick and tired of this misogynistic bile. i do not write this comment for your sake commenter, but for the sake of anyone who might be swayed by your bullshit rhetoric.
let’s break this down:
“sHe ReAlLy only PlAys ThE GUitaR” you can’t even get that factoid right. Taylor Swift plays at least four instruments.
“she doesn’t write her songs herself and the ones she does write are mutually agreed to be the worst”—
outright false:
Many critics selected “Dear John” [on which Swift is credited as the sole songwriter] as Speak Now’s best song for its production and emotional impact. Such critics include Jon Caramanica in The New York Times (lauding the blues production for expanding beyond Swift’s country-music comfort zone),[15] Mikael Wood in Spin (saying it was “epic pop-country poetry”),[17] and Willman in The Hollywood Reporter (underscoring the “chills-inducing climax”). wikipedia
too late for you? Our Song (2006, written solely by Swift) was one of the “Award-Winning Songs” at the 2008 BMI Country Awards, which honors the year’s best songwriters.[35] It featured on Rolling Stone’s 2019 list of the best female country songs from 2000.[36]
“Jack Antonoff does the heavy lifting” Antonoff is a FUCKING incredible artist and I do not deny that, but who sings the songs with a critically acclaimed voice? who performs the music live to meticulous, hours-long choreography? spoiler: not Antonoff, buddy! you might be shocked to hear it was a woman.
Next time you want to just lie on the internet maybe ar least try to find some supporting evidence instead of making empty assertions like a freshman in high school. Like damn. 🗿
deleted by creator
I think people love her songs because they feel like they’re true
Her very first hit was about being a farmer’s daughter.
And Tom Clancy was never a Russian submarine captain or spy
Do people like Tom Clancy novels because “they feel like they’re true”?
Sorry if you missed the point, but what I intended to say is that, artists frequently create pieces that they haven’t actually experienced.
Your point was completely obvious but Tom Clancy was a very poor choice to illustrate that point. Of course some artists produce works that have an essence of truth despite being fiction; perhaps Taylor Swift is such an artist, but Tom Clancy definitely isn’t.
Fair, I was going to say look at “I was only 19” by red gum, but that wouldn’t work for an international audience, so I tried to go with a non fantasy author that is recognisable
Not sure what song that is off the top of my head, but I didn’t mean “true” in the literal sense. More like, people feel like the songs give them a glimpse of the real Taylor swift. That’s particularly true of her more recent albums I feel like. For example, “Folklore” is told largely through stories about other (fictional) people, but it feels like a reflection of emotions and experiences she really has been through. It’s all very parasocial and I’m not sure how much of it is genuine, but my point is it FEELS genuine.
Thanks! Those are all interesting points and I have never heard of that documentary but love documentaries, so I’ll definitely be checking that out.
Especially since you’re the first person who’s mentioned how much she wants to be popular, or how much she is focused on that.
That’s very interesting and obviously seems very relevant, thanks.
Not just that, but Republicans hating her so much made her even more popular.
I used to dislike Taylor Swift along with all other contemporary pop stars. Maybe even a little bit more, because she had the audacity to call herself Country: Spitting in the face of personal heroes like Kristofferson, Nelson, and Cash.
Then I stopped being an edgy teenager, Swift released Shake it Off, and I had to recognize it was a fun song to dance to. In an ironic kind of way of course, but nevertheless.
And then, in 2015, Ryan Adams released his cover album of Swift’s 1989, playing every single song on the album in a folksy way. I dug it. And with it, I had to appreciate that Taylor Swift is one hell of a songwriter: I loved the songs, I just don’t love the sound of pop music all that much. That’s personal taste, not everything I dislike is bad.
Then Ryan Adams fell from grace with metoo, so fuck him. At least it triggered Father John Misty to publish (and later remove) his legendary covers of Swift in the style of the Velvet Underground.
Fast forward to 2020, and Taylor Swift dabbles with music I can actually enjoy listening to with her album folklore. Pretty cool. I actually got my expectations up for her next album, evermore, low-key hoping that it would be musically inspired by the Battle of Evermore. Sadly I was wrong, but again, it’s a matter of personal preferences.
What matters more is the fact that she’s reinventing herself from album to album - she’s successful in one formula, and she just ditches it and moves on to something different. And every time she does it, she seems to be even more successful than the last time. Her growth as an artist is astonishing.
Finally, she’s just cool. Fuck the labels - she’ll just casually re-records her entire discography in order to take back control of her songs. She’s caught up in all kinds of stupid celebrity drama, but it tends to be the rest of the industry falling over like toddlers trying to drag her into shit for PR while she acts like the only adult in the room. She also scores points for casually hanging out with Billy Bragg and encouraging people to vote and shit.
Swift was hardly the downfall of country; the amount of autotuned trash from both sexes now is off the charts. I can’t make myself listen to a country channel for the rare genuine song because I start to rage at the horrid garbage they play the rest of the time.
It’s probably hard to pin it on anyone in particular - the Grand Ole Opry had their heads up their asses long before country music started sucking for real. I guess outlaw country defined itself by not following the rules of the Nashville scene.
I’ve never been to the US, so the closest thing I came to an American country channel was some cassette recordings my dad made in the 80s and that we kept listening to in the car. Obviously learning about contemporary country music was a shock for me once I started spending too much time online.
I’m fine with pop, there are plenty of pop songs I’ve liked, and I can recognize how since of her songs are fun, I’m curious why she receives dozens of rewards.
Your point about successful in one formula, and then ditches it and moved on to something different
Do you think that happens with every album, or is there a specific example you’re thinking about?
Oh I want to add, it’s definitely very cool to re-record your discography.
So I’m not exactly an expert, I just have some friends who are Swifties and I enjoy sometimes hearing people out about what they’re interested in over a beer. But I’ll give a shot at answering based on my limited knowledge.
I don’t think Swift makes a point out of reinventing herself every time. I guess she had her country phase until Red in 2012 (We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together), and perfected pop in 2014 with 1989 and Shake it Off, Blank Space and all that. The following two albums I know nothing about, but Wikipedia lists them as electropop. And then she completely changes her sound in 2020 with folklore, suddenly being more folksy and reaching an audience of middle aged male music reviewers who had previously not shown any interest in her music. Somehow the fans of her older albums loved it as well, so her fan-base only expanded.
Evermore is kind of a continuation of folklore. I find it to be a little bit more poppy at times, but it’s not a huge change of direction, and kind of builds on the same universe (low-key and lower-key). Midnights however, which is her final album to date, is again something completely different: A full blown concept album, and musically again a complete change of direction. A Swiftie friend of mine said she had to give it a couple of spins before she got into it, but that it’s now one of her favourites. As a prog rock fan, that sounds about right to me for a concept album.
Personally I started listening to Midnights for the first time ever while writing this post, and I gotta say the opening tune Lavender Haze has some fun things going on in it. The music is interesting, the songwriting is original, and she’s a talented performer with a likeable persona. I’m not very surprised she receives her awards.
Okay, that’s pretty interesting. I don’t believe you that you are not a swifty, not even at all, but I really appreciate your input because I think it touched on a lot of important things.
I also love just listening to people explain their passion to me over a beer, and I’ve had a couple while this thread has been building, and I’m having a great time trying to understand this phenomenon.
I also want to say that I keep watching or listening to every song that someone has mentioned in the comments so that I can see from their perspective what they’re talking about, and I’m more cinema oriented than music oriented, and she is incredibly talented at the"hidden" glances and whoever her producers and editors are on every music video I’ve seen are just killing it making her appear charming, which cannot be a small part of her appeal.
Okay, I’m going to go listen to this folklore album you’re talking about now and trying to figure out what’s going on there also.
Appreciated, thanks. So this one’s called evermore no wait what f*** Wait folklores the
How do you think she compares to Britney Spears, Madonna, or Beyonce? Like, Taylor Swift has become a pop star. You don’t have to love her music to see she has wide appeal. I don’t really like Madonna but you listen to a song and you are like “yeah I can see why people have danced to this for thirty years”
I feel like with Madonna or beyoncé, either of them are more unique and have more staying power.
I’m not a big pop head, but I can sing a bunch of their singles and I can’t think of a Taylor Swift song except I think the never going to get back together one?
Maybe I’m just perceiving Taylor Swift is more successful and wealthy than all of these other pop stars?
I should probably go look at the numbers to see if the perception she projects is as insanely successful as it seems to me
Why would you think anyone has more staying power than Taylor Swift? At 34 years old she has been in the music industry for 19 years and she’s only growing in popularity. She topped the Country charts for 24 weeks with her debut album at age 17.
Sure, we won’t be able to compare her to Madonna for another 30 years or so, but I don’t exactly see a reason to question her staying power.
Because many other artists created a movement that it seems like Taylor Swift waded into and perpetuated without contributing something significantly new.
I’m interested in your " we won’t be able to compare her to Madonna for another 30 years"， are you agreeing that Swift doesn’t have the sort of staying power that Madonna or other pop stars have achieved?
If so, why has she received so many more awards than anybody else? So many.
I might not understand what you mean by this comment:
“Sure, we won’t be able to compare her to Madonna for another 30 years or so, but I don’t exactly see a reason to question her staying power.”
I just think it’s easy to assess Madonna’s staying power because she’s still around and somewhat relevant, even though she had her biggest hit 40 years ago. It’s not easy to say right now who will be remembered and who will be forgotten in 30 years.
I hear people say that all the time, but Madonna was a pretty radical figure, and so was Michael Jackson and the Beatles, who people keep bringing up?
They were all pioneers of a very clear movement or another, whereas Taylor Swift is just a pop star who sings about relationships and breakups in the middle of a line of pop stars who sing about relationships and breakups?
Well, but I don’t fully understand the amount of award she’s received because she sings well, when there are other artists who sing as well.
I do think that all of your comments are helping bring me closer to a complete picture though, or at least as complete a picture as we can get so early into her career.
Thanks
Okay, yeah so I think it’s the awards that I don’t really understand, since she doesn’t seem that unique to me compared to Ellis, Madonna or beyoncé, but she has the most awards out of them and far more awards than many other pop"stars", like a pretty crazy amount more.
Swift has 81 awards
Beyonce has 96, 31 of which are BET awards, which I do think is significant in this specific list since obviously Taylor Swift isn’t competing in that category.
But then let’s get to other pop stars.
Lady Gaga has 35 awards? The f*** like I can sing tons of her songs.
Adele has 40? Adele. Adele? Taylor Swift has twice as many awards as Adele?
Rihanna has 49 including her 19 BET awards
Billy eyelash like I don’t know whatever, after that it’s all like a dozen awards or a couple dozen each.
Taylor has 81 awards, even without any BET awards?
How does Taylor Swift have twice as many awards as Lady Gaga or other similarly huge artists?
Because they’re not similarly huge.
Taylor Swift is dating Travis Kelce, and the fact that she’s going to be watching (not performing) the Super Bowl is going to add a huge number of eyeballs. To the biggest event in the country.
Lady Gaga has 35 awards? The f*** like I can sing tons of her songs.
Lady Gaga has also put out five studio albums, Taylor Swift ten.
I think that furthers my point if a casual listener remembers several Lady Gaga songs but very few(one) of an artist who has twice as many albums?
Or a top artist having ~twice as many albums explains having ~twice as my awards as some other top artist.
Madonna has 14 albums, Taylor Swift has 10 albums, but Swift has received almost twice as many awards in her career so far.
In a word: marketing. In two words: relentless marketing.
Her dad owned the record company. They are rich. $$$$
Her dad owned 5% of the record company.
Don’t get me wrong, that’s an advantage most will never have, it’s connections, it’s expertise, it’s starting ahead of the pack, and most of all to my mind, it’s certainty that you won’t be wasting your life by focusing on your art, but it’s also just not accurate to pretend that’s all she has going for her when she was richer than her parents after first album.
Best answer in the thread
deleted by creator
I’m personally not a fan. But I am a fan of her making the right-wing nut jobs apoplectic.
That is 100% my favorite part of her career, besides the f*** you record labels, i’m re-recording my entire catalog, which is pretty cool
She also is helping bring down the Ticketmaster monopoly. That’s where she earned my respect.
What has she done, regarding Ticketmaster?
Honestly I don’t remember the details, and when I google “taylor swift ticketmaster” I get fairly predictable results. There was some drama about them screwing her over, and her screwing them over in return or somesuch. I do know that ticketmaster has held a significant monopoly on event ticketing for over a decade now though, and has only recently begun to get investigated.
Sorry I can’t be more use, I’m not a swiftie and I tend to dislike pop culture in general.
No problem, just curious. Thanks
10 points for apoplectic
Note: apoplexy means malding.
The reason is that her dad is quite rich and was a stock broker.
He invested heavily in the label that had his daughter under contract, being able to dictate what the label was focusing on and on top he has thrown another Million on her, to start the journey.
So to sum it up a huge tone of money, contacts and knowledge about how to run a business by her father.
Both of her parents worked in finance and upper middle class, but not “quite rich”. He invested in a 3% stake in the label, approximately $120,000. That is big money for most but not ultra rich money. Even today they are worth the low millions.
Contacts, enough money to launch a career, business acumen, hard work, and luck have been most of it.
Never said ultra rich and by any means someone who is able to take over a million out of their pocket to Kickstart anything is rich.
My parents couldnt afford $1200 to invest in me. Mustve been nice
In what world does investing roughly 3x the median yearly income in the US into your child’s potential music career not count as “quite rich”?
It is difficult to comprehend how staggering wealth inequality is. Minimum wage earners have more in common with her parents, then her parents did with the truly wealthy. I have always liked Pen’s parade (which is about income rather than wealth), but there are other aids. One pixel wealth might work in this context because they provide a marker for median income in the visualization.
Okay, and? Sorry if I have a bit of a snarky tone throughout this comment, but it frankly annoys me when people bring up stuff like this. Yes, richer people exist, and mathematically the Swift family net worth (pre-Taylor’s career) was surely closer to a minimum wage family than to Jeff Bezos. I don’t expect anyone would suggest Mr. and Ms. Swift to be first at the guillotine if the revolution comes. I don’t even begrudge them using their wealth to help their daughter’s career. I bet most would do the same if they had the resources. But…
Minimum wage earners have more in common with her parents than her parents did with the truly wealthy.
Being able to invest anything, let alone 120,000$ into something as unsure as a pop music career, is very foreign to me, a minimum wage earner. From my perspective, the Swift family had a heck of a lot more in common with the elite than with my peers. Sure, they didn’t have “buy-private-islands-and-tickets-to-space-Musk-Bezos” type money, but they clearly had enough money to never need or even want anything.
Comparing this with minimum wage earners is pretty shortsighted, even if mathematically their finances are closer to minimum wage earners than to the 0.0000001% of ultra wealthy. The leap from “closer in net worth mathematically” to minimum wage earners than the ultra wealth to “have more in common” with minimum wage earners than the ultra wealthy is just plain wrong. The math doesn’t represent the reality of these different financial situations. In reality, their lives were much closer to that of the elite than to the poor fucker buying their groceries in quarters at the Dollar Store.
The existence of people who have so much wealth the human mind can’t even conceive of it doesn’t negate the wealth the Swift family clearly had, and it certainly doesn’t mean their economic and social lives are closer to that of minimum wage earners than to the ultra wealthy.
You’re not wrong, but that doesn’t make you entirely right either. The “crabs in a bucket” mentality comes from attacking people who are doing slightly better than you. It might seem like they significant wealth, but they can still be bankrupted by a chronic medical diagnosis or any other of a million things. I choose to focus on the real issue - the 0.0001% and not people making 4 or 5 times the median income.
be bankrupted by a chronic medical diagnosis
That’s where my mind went too
You have a point that there’s a huge difference in the life of a minimum wage family and a family able to invest 6 figures. Context matters though and I think the point was that they didn’t have an overwhelming amount that can force success; we’re talking about a financial-secure and supported start that enables pursuit of things that are unlikely to pan out. Still no small luxury, by any means.
even if mathematically their finances are closer to minimum wage earners than to the 0.0000001% of ultra wealthy.
FWIW 0.1% is already 38 million dollars (net worth, US, 2012 data).
E: Speaking of context, you were specifically talking about commonality between the, idk, bottom 1-10%, top 1-10%, and (whatever is ultra-wealthy). So my point may be the one made out-of-context.
The 120k went into the label, he pumped another million into her directly just for the first album.
btw I tried to find a trustfull source for the claim that it was only 120k. There are different numbers thrown around, while the 120k is the lowest. The source of that number is Wikipedia and the 2 linked “resources” for that don’t mention it. One of the 2 resources is even an article that is not about Tailor Swift but rather one about some Tobey Keith instead.
I don’t think it was disclosed. I couldn’t find any proof about the amount.
She was 14 when “signing” the record label contract.
This is basically the moment where they used that load of money.And everyone who is thinking that she is a self-made anything is blind by choice.
Parents throwing Kids at that age into international careers make me at least sceptical about their motivation. That it seems to have worked out this time, doesn’t change that at all.
The current world in which the median yearly income is basically poverty
Taylor’s dad got her daughter a label to help make her a star, but I think that Taylor might not have done as well if she went through typical music industry channels. Taylor wasn’t a Rebecca Black kind of artist; she wrote a lot of her own music and was able to define her image as herself at a time when that wasn’t common at that time.
Keep in mind she came up around the time the music industry has lost most of its revenue due to streaming. The music industry would have commonly invested in Taylor like artists a decade or two ago, but the economics of doing that wasn’t there. Self promotion and funding also wasn’t that uncommon, a lot of the rap around that time came out under the same model of artists promoting their own work before getting signed; Taylor just had more resources.
But even then, daddy buying an label would explain a one hit wonder, or maybe even a good album or two. It wouldn’t explain Taylor’s sustained success. Money only goes so far.
That explains how she had a headstart in her career, but has nothing to do with her being so popular right now.
Besides the insanely huge help she had on the beginning, the bigger part was for sure the knowledge transfer in terms of how to run a monetary wise successfull business.
And yes she is talented, I’m not saying she isn’t. But the advantage she had, due to this, speak for itself.
They worked mid-level jobs in finance, which pays well compared to most careers, but it’s just on the higher end of middle class. I know several successful people in the music industry and that’s honestly a pretty common story. They all had high end instruments and gear at a young age. One band I know had a dedicated jam space at one of their father’s warehouses. They could leave their gear set up in a secure location and play loud anytime for as long as they liked. Things like that really contribute to success.
The Kid Laroi is another example of it. Both parents were in the industry and he had a development contract at 14. At 17 he was living with Juice Wrld and doing remixes with Miley Cyrus and Justin Bieber. That doesn’t happen by accident.
Oh shnit, I didn’t even know about this. Okay that explains at least a bit.
Thanks.
Label*
You’re right. Ups :P
Two n’s in tonne.
The music industry has been a racket for nearly 100 years. Music doesn’t get popular because people like it, it gets popular because it’s promoted. Way back when, promoters would pay radio stations to play their music to encourage sales. The methods are slightly different now, but it’s still the same kind of old boy’s club telling people what they like.
Taylor Swift understood the industry she was getting into, and was very adept at exploiting it.
This is true, but not everything that gets promoted gets popular. A lot also flunks.
Taylor Swift just happens to hit a sweet spot that appeals to a lot of people.
And music has a self-reinforcing spiral. People listen to music from artists that they like, and which their peers like.
So a popular artist could theoretically release an album without any promotion and it would still become popular, just because people will be curious to listen to the new songs from an artist that they already like (of course, record labels will always heavily promote work from their popular artists to make them even more popular).
She appeals to a lot of people because she followed the script of what has been established as appealing to a lot of people, what people have been trained to like. It’s the same manufactured crap that has always been promoted, the difference is she’s an artist that knows what that is, rather than the artist being directed that way.
Her songs are produced by the CIA and contain subliminal messages that make her irresistible.
Yvan Eht Nioj
CIA are here and down voting you. Stay frosty.
This makes about as much sense to me as the apparent means by which she has become this successful.
He/she is obviously kidding.
Not me, I only speak in serious absolutes.
Why so serious?
Either that or I’m a republican.
See, that comment right there, means you’re probably not.
Don’t really see her as being massively more popular than people like Michael Jackson or Madonna at their peak. She’s like 18 years into her career at this point, like a snowball accumulating more and more fans.
Of course it helps that she had rich parents to be able to grease the wheels in the early stages of her career.
The music is alright. There’s a decent amount of it, and it’s fairly varied. It’s called pop for a reason.
Madonna has 300 million sales over her career, and Taylor Swift has 200 million sales and almost twice as many awards (from the numbers I am finding on websites) at about half her age.
As far as I can find anything, it looks like Madonna sold half as many albums by the time she was in her mid-thirties.
I’m not convinced, especially after some of the answers in this post by other commenters, that just because they’re both pop stars, their success is mutually definable or explained.
You are asking an infinitely difficult question of why she is so incredibly popular, I don’t think I can tell you why she’s more popular than, say, Beyoncé. Except maybe that she is more consistent. That said, I’ll give you my perspective on why I like Taylor Swift.
I’m a dude and my music taste is pretty diverse but I mostly grew up listening to metal and punk. That said, when I left my ex (for the second time). It felt really good to listen to We are never ever getting back together on repeat. Most breakups I’ve had, had songs that have helped me through and leaving a toxic relationship… It just felt really good to repeatedly sing those words over and over.
I don’t know if it’s actually true but I’m a guitarist and I’ve heard the phrase “Taylor Swift is the Beatles of the 21st century” meaning her music releases currently have the largest impact on guitar sales and popularity. If for nothing else, I respect her a lot for performing live with a guitar. She doesn’t do anything crazy but you don’t have to have crazy guitar skills to make good music. I personally enjoy learning her songs every now and then because a) they are relatively straightforward to learn but still encompass nice playful elements, b) I am mostly interested in becoming a better singer nowadays and her songs are definitely challenging for me to sing.
- Both folklore and evermore are really nice albums imo. Very nice and tasteful music. Last year I had a phase where I was having trouble finding music. I was sick of extreme metal, I was sick of hardcore techno, and I listened to so much leftist folk and folk punk that I grew sick of it. All the music I listened to was always fast, intense and challenging. I just wanted nice songs that I can sing along to with real instrumentation. I realised I don’t mind pop music but I like real instruments because they feel more real to me (fwiw lol, please don’t take this as hatred for electronics, I also love techno as stated above). Well folklore and evermore offer just that for me. Nice songs with real instruments and beautiful instrumentation. I prefer folklore for being darker but evermore uses more guitar which I also like. My fav songs out of the 2 albums:
Folklore
- cardigan
- mirrorball
- this is me trying
- invisible string
Evermore
- willow
- champagne problems
- 'tis the damn season
I still want to express that I don’t always like her lyric writing. She uses brand names a bunch and I also feel like there are often references to American things which I just don’t know about.
Also, while I like folklore and evermore, I find them borderline impossible to listen to all the way through. All the songs basically strike the same mood, it’s nice relaxing music, but there’s not a big emotional arc throughout the albums for me. I tend to stop listening to evermore once I reach “no body, no crime”… God that song is awful lol.
Thanks, I’ll check out your recommended songs from folklore and evermore.
I’m not a huge fan or anything, but I think she’s a really talented musician and really good at managing her fame. She keeps a strong relationship with her fans, her music spans numerous genres, and her father is a wealth manager.
Watching her Tiny Desk concert helped me get more into her music so I could enjoy it with my daughter.
Very cool, thanks for the recommendation, I love those tiny desk concerts. I’ll watch it
I’ll sum up some answers that made things click for me
-
She writes songs spanning many emotions.
-
Her albums span multiple genres. (I’ve only heard pop and country, but I’m not a fan.)
-
She is hard working, prolific, and puts on a show.
So with that combination it seems she has something for everyone. Personally, I only know one TS song, but it’s catchy as hell. So there’s no song that I hate that happens to TS song either.
About point 2.: I’m a Paul Simon fan and he spans multiple genres, but I wouldn’t expect non-fans to know that.
I’ve also only heard her pop, although i keep hearing that she spans multiple genre.
I’ll ask the next Swifty that responds that they would recommend in any other genre besides relationship pop, break up pop.
Thanks, and the Paul Simon note is interesting. What do I listen to if I’m curious about listening to unconventional Paul Simon?
The Paul Simon I’m definitely not familiar with.
I’m not a music expert but here goes.
Paul Simon is most identified as folk. The act Simon and Garfunkel is basically pure folk if such a thing exists.
Listen to the opening of Late in the Evening. He’s singing folk, but there is no guitar (to my ear). Instead it’s a bass guitar playing funk. Later some horns come in. They sound like mambo to me.
There are two songs on Graceland that he recorded with a South African band. This was during apartheid. He heard a bootleg tape from this SA group, and had to travel to a part of South Africa that he was banned from doing business in.
Does he make it some powerful statement? No, that would be a stunt. He just wanted to make music with them. “I Know What I Know” is about the insipid-ness of show biz party-networking culture. It’s wild.
Awesome, thanks. Yeah, I only know about him as folk so I’m interested to listen to these.
Don’t get me wrong, he is a folk singer. But listening to what he is singing over can catch you off-guard.
Appreciate it, cool
She started in country music and moved to mostly pop from there, a lot of her original country music is about breakups too but that’s pretty typical for women in country music because they don’t get much freedom of movement for topics there unless they’re hyper famous.
-
great marketing
Peak reddi … I mean lemmy.
Your comment is peak reddit tho
Got me!
-3500. Making more progress!
Imagine stalking someone on the Internet because you don’t like their opinions 🤣
Right noticing some douche keeps reappearing who has -3500 karma – definitely StAlKiNg
Wait, you can see user karma on Lemmy? When I click on a profile it doesn’t appear anywhere. It must be invisible to me since I’m just using the website.
It shows on the profile page in Boost but yeah you’re right, on the web UI it’s not a thing.
Your just keep on showing up in my comments 🤷♂️
I just wanna cheer you on. -4000 here we go!!
Taylor for me is extremely emotional and autobiographical. I connect emotionally with her songs in a way that allows me to feel what she’s feeling. Music is emotional and usually has a message, but for me her music does make me feel more.
Which makes sense, I always loved pink Floyd for their art and what they were trying to say, I usually am an emotional person, and I think for a lot of people that’s why she’s popular.
You have an emotion you’re working through? She’s got a song for it.
Sure didn’t expect her to be compared with Floyd.
Probably because it’s a very weird comparison to make. If I had to pick a polar opposite of pop music in most every way, I would probably pick one of the weirder pink Floyd albums.
Not weird at all. Roger Waters was extremely autobiographical with his music, he sang extensively about the war, family, and what he was going through. The Wall sure but The Final Cut was intense, dude has some emotions to process.
Taylor and him do the same thing, just different life experiences. He is more political but far, but she’s gone political, look at The Man, You Need to Calm Down, and one of her most scathing ones, Miss Americana and the Heartbreak Prince.
For shows as well I’ve never seen more well put on shows, Roger Waters with The Wall and Taylor with Eras, both extremely precise shows, they are both absolute showmen.
Alright I’ll give those songs a listen. I appreciate the response
This hurts.
Thank you for your answer, I’m glad to hear from a fan of hers.
So her songs are making you feel something in a way other female artists who sing about breakups do not?
Does she mostly sing about relationships? I haven’t listened to much of her stuff, just whatever is the popular stuff that I wouldn’t be able to avoid while I’m walking around.
And then the first few songs that pop up when I type in Swift on YouTube because I’m trying to figure out the answer to this question after she breaks like the 12th record of her career
Relationships were a key one in her earlier albums, but there’s a lot more. I think her singing about her experiences is part of the reasons millennials really tend to her especially, we kind of grew up with her
The awkward teenage years, the first loves, the deep friend connections, losing those friends, romantic betrayal, work betrayal, and more.
She also is extremely versatile. She’s played and experimented with different types of music. People like to shoehorn her into pop, but she’s done obviously country, pop, folk, a bit of rock, lover in my mind was a decent synth album, she’s played around with a lot
That’s why we all talk about her Eras, each era in her life she made an album, and that album usually has a different style. Personally my favorite is reputation, which was heavier and more electronic. Synth? Like I said try Lover or Midnights. Folk like Mumford and sons or Lumineers? Try Folklore and Evermore.
One thing for sure is that you don’t have to like everything or anything of hers, but she has such range that it is rare that someone hates every song of hers.
Also I should say I’m a mod of !taylorswift@poptalk.scrubbles.tech and the dozens of us lemmy swifties are always happy to have more members :)
I really like synth and I think they are her least referenced work in this post so far, but I’m very interested in listening to her synth albums.
Thanks
deleted by creator
I don’t think a more wildly different artist to TS could be found than Pink Floyd. Things they have in common: are human. Trolling or what?
Lol nope, I’m a fan of both. People don’t need to be put in buckets where they only like something’s and not others.
I’ve seen Roger Waters twice, watched him build the wall on stage and send out the inflatables, and it kicked ass.
Also saw Eras last year in person, and it was the most precise well thought out concert I’ve seen.
No rules in life saying you can’t like both
I mean that’s cool, I don’t like boxes either. Just a very unexpected comparison
