I wonder how different her PR/media hype is from Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra, Elvis, Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Michael Jackson, & Bruce Springsteen…
@loomisjohnson The “she’s a role model” thing you said so many of her fans said when asked what was so appealing about Taylor Swift…I find that unfortunate.
This notion of a celebrity being a “role model.” That dog won’t hunt.
Just another person, like the rest of us. Flawed like the rest of us.
MLK? Jesus? Okay, if someone chose people like that as role models, I could dig it.
A celebrity? That is kind of sad. For this idea to still be so rampant is indicative of a sick society. We seem to expect celebrities (from whatever occupation) to be “role models” more than we expect actual good-deed-doers to be role models.
Remember that ‘90s commercial with Charles Barkley where he said, “I am not a role model. Parents should be role models. Just because I can dunk a basketball doesn’t mean I should raise your kids.” Yup, that pretty much sums it up.
The idea that a cliche-spewing, milquetoast, 1950s idea of what a “good role model is, a ‘non-controversial’ (controversy?!?! Oh no!! Using your brain for five seconds?!!? Oh no!! Saying things that challenge inane conformity?!?! Oh no!!! We can’t have our kids learning about such things!!) person?
Wow. That is really sad and does not bode well for our future if we are so fearful of something “different” and so crave mindless conformity.
Scary.
i have no strong feelings on swift's music, which seems competent but unremarkable. her ungodly popularity, however is fascinating. last time she was in town for a concert we asked a bunch of her fans what her big appeal was and they all answered with some variation of "she's a good role model because she's noncontroversial and has never committed any crimes." which, when you think about it, is setting the bar pretty low.
Threads that warn our fellow Forum members about fraudulent websites and threads that say negative things about companies that spend big advertising dollars with Audiogon get SHUT DOWN BY THE MOD CZARS....yet a thread about a less than mediocre talent whose rich Hedge Fund daddy greased the wheels of a label and a staff of hundreds "created" an auto-tuned, politically geared media sensation complete with the full backing of the NFL, the DNC, Ticketmaster, and every other think wrong with music today.....and the discussion about the Cult of Swifty goes on for almost 4 pages on this site.
@wesheadley
Yup.
I remember roughly a decade ago seeing pics of Jack Antonoff with Lena Dunham.
Not knowing he was involved with that wretched song “We Are Young” by fun. (ugh…that ‘lower-case letters’ thing…compounded, in this case, by the juvenile, cutesy/quirky addition of the period (.) at the end…ugh…) I just saw him as Lena Dunham’s boyfriend. I’m not proud of this, but my visceral experience upon seeing those pics was, “ew, that’s a punchable face.” But, in my ignorance, I just thought he was Lena Dunham’s boyfriend (as opposed to a big pop star) and didn’t think much of it and promptly forgot about him.
Fast-forward roughly a decade later, as I mentioned, I realized he was the common denominator in one of my fave current artists’ last two bland/lame/disappointing LPs. After researching this Jack Antonoff character, I realized a lot of things that caused me to conclude he sucks.
After this conclusion, I felt a little less guilty about having the instant reaction upon seeing pictures of him of, “ew…that’s a punchable face.”
I’ve slowly, very slowly, come to the conclusion you have come to about Antonoff. He HAS made Lana more bland and I keep hoping she’ll find a new producer, or go back to one like Dan Auerbach. Her writing I think remains strong... but the music has become increasingly bland. I’ve checked out his band the Bleachers and found them to sound highly derivative and mediocre-- like a bad Bruce Springsteen tribute band.
I have not give St. Vincent much of a chance, but bought Daddy’s Home and was not too thrilled about what I heard-- may try listening to some of her older material.
Antonoff does seem to be a kind of a vampire that sucks the life out of many of the artists he produces. Had high hopes for Lorde’s last couple of albums-- but the last one in particular was a real snooze-- just went and checked who produced it-- Jack Antonoff, again!
@wesheadley Unlike her previous LP, Lust For Life, which had no less than 17 different writing credits on it, Norman Fucking Rockwell! was another Jack Antonoff job.
I don’t dislike Lana Del Rey. Not my fave, but she’s alright.
Jack Antonoff…that’s another story.
His role, as I see it, is to take artists with talent and find a way to bland them up for mass consumption.
He must have good social skills or something. He’s curried the favor of many a top-selling artist (including Swift) and receives good words from each. I find the music he has worked on in a producer/co-writer capacity as well as his own stuff (whatever outfit that may be, Bleachers, solo, whatever) to largely be bland and lame. It seems he’s found a way to be considered some kind of svengali who somehow retains at least a modicum of street cred while making lame music that people with no taste think is good.
One of my favorite current artists, Annie Clark (St. Vincent) had made 4 knockout LPs (I consider two of them, Actor and St. Vincent, to be classics) before ’17’s Masseduction. I thought that one was a letdown. Whatever. A great artist is entitled to have a so-so one after four straight killers. The next one, ‘21’s Daddy’s Home, was another disappointment. This time, I did some research. Found the common denominator: Jack Antonoff. I then did some research on this Jack Antonoff character. Came to the conclusion he sucks.
I don’t have much skin in the game with the other artists he’s produced.
I was just listening to early ‘10s Lana and was reminded that it’s pretty good. It’s not like I’m gonna be pissed if her music starts to be lame. I don’t like it enough to be bothered. St. Vincent was different; once I realized he, based on his track record, may have largely been the reason St. Vincent’s music became more bland and lame, I was indeed pissed.
I really hope her next LP is Antonoff-free and returns to pre-Antonoff quality.
Ha! You're right! I should not make that distinction unless asked to.
Regarding Lana Del Rey -- have you listed to her album "Norman Fucking Rockwell"? She's an exceptional songwriter. She does not write by committee like say, Beyonce'. Check it out here.
I will say that there is nowhere near the volume of exceptional work being released these past couple of decades like there was during the 60's or 70's, or even the 80's - 90's. Especially when you consider the lyrics, which usually range from the trite to the unbearably bad (with exceptions!).
@wesheadleyYou say, “…the fake divide between male and female artists…” yet you also say, “For female pop artists I’d put Lana Del Rey...”
Further, if we actually entertained such dumb sexism in this way (comparing ‘female artists’), and then took your assertion that Lana Del Rey’s oeuvre could be placed “among the best,” “in any era,” we’d still be walkin’ on reeeeaaaal thin ice.
If we looked at the songwriting output in the era of mid-‘60s-through-mid-‘70s by the likes of Carole King, Ellie Greenwich, Cynthia Weil, Nina Simone, Dolly Parton, Valerie Simpson, Aretha Franklin, Loretta Lynn, Nico, Bobbie Gentry, Joni Mitchell, and Betty Davis, and then looked at Lana Del Rey’s oeuvre, and then said hers could be “put up there with any of them,”…um…uh…yyyyeeaahh, no.
If we threw her oeuvre into the mix of ‘90s artists like The Breeders, Aimee Mann, Björk, Lauryn Hill, Sinead O’Connor, Liz Phair, Iris Dement, Sleater-Kinney, Gillian Welch, PJ Harvey, Lucinda Williams, and Fiona Apple…um…uh…yyyeeeaaahh, no.
Throw Lana (or Taylor for that matter) into a room with either of those eras’ artists in their primes (we could do it with other eras…mid-‘70s-through-mid-‘80s, for example…same result) and she’d likely pull a Wayne’s World-esque, bowing-on-her-knees-on-the-floor, “We are not worthy! We are not worthy!” (in this case, the ‘we’ being her two-dozen-odd different co-writers the last decade)
@erik_squiresI think you’re confusing Taylor Swift with Britney Spears.
Britney Spears was tied to a conservatorship that she got out of recently, not Taylor Swift.
A talented and self-aware, confident songwriter who had enough faith in her artistry to convince her conservative banker father to move to Nashville and help his daughter establish herself there. Plays the business beautifully and it’s a pleasure to watch her songwriting grow throughout the years. Compare the promise of "Tim McGraw" (2006) with 2022’s well-realized "Anti-hero".
Though not yet on a Dolly Parton level of philanthropy, she gives back to her communities and has single-handedly inspired a generation of females to dive into music and musicianship.
@gpgr4bluMadonna said she was a fan of Swift’s production skills. This says a lot seeing as how Madonna was a perfectionist when it came to her songs’ sound and space.
Her style may not be your aesthetic, but calling her "vapid and talentless" is simply ignorant.
@wesheadleyI just discovered Hurray For The Riff Raff by simply browsing through Tidal's new releases in Folk/Americana. Good artist with some catchy progressions!
@tylermunnsYou’ll get no argument from me regarding the fake divide between male and female artists. When I ask myself what am I in the mood to listen to, I don’t think I’ve ever thought about it in terms of ’male’ or ’female’ artist. I think more about the style, sound, or overall vibe of the music and then I make my choices.
It’s like when people assume that since most of the great chefs that they can think of or name are male, that therefore males must make better chefs. I think BS! What’s happened is that males got most of the "opportunities" over the decades so it isn’t surprising there’s more of them in this or that category. I really do believe that this is changing, but like most things, it feels like its taking forever!
There are now more females in PHD programs in the U.S. than there are males for example. There are definitely more females in music these days than ever before as well. Change is always hard and the status quo is always very sticky.
@wesheadleyI’m with you 100% on the repulsion from algorithmic dominance in the dissemination of music today.
I hate to beat a dead horse, but I really chafe at the “female artist” bit.
No one ever says, “you should check out (insert male artist). When I’m in the mood for male artist music, he really hits the spot.”
If someone said that to you, you would furrow your brow and say, “what? ‘Male artist?’ What the hell are you talking about?”
Yet, for some reason, even in 2024, we constantly hear this bit of, “if you like female artists, you should check out (insert female artist),” or, as is rampantly the case in this very thread, instead of discussing Taylor Swift and her music, an inexplicable choice of saying stuff like, “nah, listen to (Joni, Aretha, Whitney, Adele, Beyoncé, blah, blah, blah…) instead,” as if it’s automatically assumed that because two different artists are female, they are automatically alike.
If someone said to you, “don’t listen to Justin Bieber, listen to Cecil Taylor,” that would be a very strange comment; where the hell does Cecil Taylor fit into a Justin Bieber conversation? Well, they’re two male artists, so, that’s why.
WTF?!?!
@toro3I don’t believe in most maxims either, especially when it comes to our own minds, but these observations that you listed are good things to consider and think about.
Even as a kid there were albums that didn’t grab me right off, but there was something in them that made listen again, and eventually, in some cases, I’d "get it".
It took me literally forever to start really loving jazz. I had so little exposure to it as a kid that, as an adult, I had to do a lot of listening to begin to start loving it. For me, jazz is a whole new world that I’m just now getting to explore and I’m having a lot of fun doing just that!
@tylermunns"Perhaps what you’re saying is, “there is great potential for personal growth in exposing oneself to stuff they typically assume to be crap, as one may surprise oneself and avoid a certain stagnation of musical awareness,” or, as Werner Herzog likes to say, “the poet must not close his eyes.”
These things I can appreciate."
That is pretty much what I'm saying, and the reason I linked to my Discogs collection was so that you could see that. I buy a mix of old and new releases.
For female pop artists I'd put Lana Del Rey up there with the very best of them-- from any era. There just isn't as much of it -- and algorithms now often drive artistic and production decisions, whether we realize it or not, and that very idea kind of repulses me.
There is still incredible music being released today-- but it's at a much lower volume and pace than say the 70s, 80s, or 90s I'd generally say.
Newish releases that I'm liking a lot are:
Real Estate - Daniel
MGMT - Loss of Life
Hurray For The Riff Raff – The Past Is Still Alive
Woods – Perennial
The Smile – Wall Of Eyes
J Mascis – What Do We Do Now
Peter Gabriel – I/O (Dark-Side Mixes)
DC Gore – All These Things
Waxahatchee -- Tigers Blood
You have to try new things all the time if you're really into music IMO, or you just silo yourself into a comfortable, but eventually boring and too safe little world.
I stumbled upon an interesting article a few months back that may explain some of this: Why Do We Stop Exploring New Music as We Get Older? I feel like I’m guilty of this, especially with my Ed Sheeran and Justin Beiber Spotify Playlist that’s been on constant rotation for the past two years :) Some interesting parts:
A major 2013 study involving more than 250,000 participants confirmed these changing behaviours. It also showed that the significance we ascribe to music after adolescence declines, and the amount of music we listen to reduces from a high point of 20% of our waking time during adolescence, to 13% in adulthood.
These same researchers point to age-related changes to hearing acuity – specifically a lowering tolerance for loud and high-frequency sound – as one cause for a reduced interest in new music for some people.
There is consensus that people are highly likely to have their taste shaped by the music they first encounter in adolescence.
Adolescence shapes musical taste firstly because our brains are developed to the point where we can fully process what we’re hearing, and secondly because the heightened emotions of puberty create strong and lasting bonds of memory.
What we think of as our “taste” is simply a dopamine reaction arising from patterns our brain recognises which create the expectation of pleasure based on pleasures past. When we stop actively listening to new or unfamiliar music the link between the musical pattern and pleasure is severed.
It may take a decade or two to get there, but the result is, eventually, “young people’s music” will alienate and bring no pleasure.
I don’t necessarily believe in absolutes; I’m sure there’s quite a bit of variability between the lines above. I found it interesting nonetheless.
@wesheadleyPerhaps what you’re saying is, “there is great potential for personal growth in exposing oneself to stuff they typically assume to be crap, as one may surprise oneself and avoid a certain stagnation of musical awareness,” or, as Werner Herzog likes to say, “the poet must not close his eyes.”
These things I can appreciate.
@wesheadleyAgain, this is very interesting stuff.
You’re describing current popular music as, “boring,” “lazy writing,” “absent of melody,” “dull,” “narcissistic,” “lazy,” and “sounding like it came more out of a corporate boardroom than an artist’s imagination” while also saying you “you have to try new popular music all the time,” and that you’ll “never give up” on the stuff.
Why?
If modern popular music is all of these very negative things, then why would you “have to” “keep trying?”
“Have to”?
Why?
Where is the net gain in subjecting yourself to some cumulative 10-20 hours/year or whatever undertaking self-punishment for such little gain?
There’s waaaaaay too much good music as it is from, say, the early 18th century (as just one example of one period of music) to deeply engage with in a single lifetime, let alone the 19th century, the early 20th century, the ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘90s, etc., etc., etc….
If I consider an experience to not only be so dreadfully inefficient but also so incredibly punishing (personally, not I’m merely non-plussed by 21 Savage, Taylor Swift, Ed Sheeran, Bad Bunny, Justin Bieber, Morgan Wallen, I feel almost violently assaulted by the awfulness of that music), then I would not undertake such a task. It would yield a very disadvantageous cost-benefit ratio.
A singer will never influence me politically. I will never make decision based on the opinions of thespians, musicians, or the talking heads in the MSM. I am a free thinker with deductive reasoning and critical thinking skills.
I'm able to appreciate songcraft without always being interested in what the writing is about (and I'm far from literate with Taylor's full catalog). There are many pop artists that I've sampled where I would never buy an album because I just don't like what I've heard at all-- Brittany Spears, Lizza, Kate Perry, Miley Cyrus, Beyonce' all come to mind. A lot of that stuff feels like it came more out of a corporate boardroom than an artist's or a band's imagination.
You have to try new things all the time if you're really into music IMO, or you just silo yourself into a comfortable, but eventually boring and too safe little world. I've been buying a lot of music since I was a small kid. There has always been great music being released, but at present far too much of it is just a weak hack on better stuff, really boing loops and samples based stuff, bad singing coated with equally bad excess auto-tune, lazy writing, lazy of fully absent melody, ect. That's most of today's pop/rock/hip-hop -- yet truly amazing stuff still happens-- just not as frequently as when I was a kid. I think that's pretty obvious to anyone that been listening to the musical and genre arcs of the last 60 years or so.
We live in strange and objectively sad times-- this often triggers waves of intense artistic creativity and shines some light into that darkness-- so I never give up on music despite the dullness, narcissism, and laziness of what tends to make the charts today.
@wesheadleyYou say, “She is clearly a talented songwriter…but what she mostly writes about…isn’t very interesting to me.”
So…she’s simultaneously “not very interesting,” and “clearly a talented songwriter.”
Now THAT is interesting.
Ms. Swift is a lovely, talented singer/songwriter that puts it all out there for her audience. I’m really trying to like her music but haven’t discovered that magical moment that fully resonate with me. I’ll keep trying.
The Swift/Kelce bond has been good for business. They have successfully leveraged their careers and images, once again reminding us that 1 + 1 CAN be greater than 2. Their individual fortunes are better for it, as well as financial benefits to the NFL and drug companies. Whether this is a good thing, or a bad thing depends on your viewpoints of the NFL and the pharmaceutical industries.
Starting to see some conspiracy theorists here which is kind of sad.
Anyone who says she’s talentless doesn’t understand creative talent. True that her voice isn’t the best, but she’s the most prolific songwriter of our time.
Not really, at least for me. I heard Evermore was good so I picked that up. Also 1987, and the other folky one -- Folklore. They all good, but it doesn’t really speak to me-- and I’m not really into the whole Easter Egg kind of fan thing that’s a big part of her appeal from what I’ve read. My tates do run all over the place.
You can check out my record collection here on Discogs. Don’t have everything curated yet, but this is about three quarters worth. I’ve got multiple copies of many releases. Nothings for sale, but you’ll probably see why it would be natural for me to give Taylor Swift a try. Not ruling out buying future releases from her either.
Huge numbers of people love her and I think that's just fine. I do not happen to be one of them. She is clearly a talented songwriter-- I have several of her records -- but what she mostly writes about -- her social life -- isn't very interesting to me. She's more entertainer than artist-- but if you want to grant her the latter then I would hope that her interests eventually goes beyond creating well-crafted songs about boyfriends, breakups, and the trials and tribulations of being rich and famous-- it just bores given the many many other female pop-artists out there that explore more interesting veins of introspection and what's going on in our times besides who you're dating. She seems pretty cool in all other regards and I wish her continued success.
Wasn't she a country star? She seems to be a chameleon, whatever the producers want her to be to be a successful commodity. I thought her outfits on the last tour; a majorette, a playboy bunny in cowboy boots from the movie "Apocalypse Now" looked silly, actually embarrassing to look at. Her next album could be a series of crowds stomping in place to her in the majorette outfit, seeing if they could be measured on a Richter scale. And the music award for the loudest crowd stomping category goes to Taylor Swift. I can hear the accolades now.
Definitely! Saw her in Philly with friends and family and loved it. I own most of her albums on vinyl and four on CD. I have pre-ordered her latest. I love how her music helps bridge the gap between me and my Gen Z relatives and friends.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
