…and Disney shares up 8% this morning.
Though that might also have something to do with their newly announced relationship with Epic Games.
They reported a very strong quarter overnight, but it was an amusing coincidence, perhaps something else to taunt the MAGA idiots with.
I’m all in favor of that!
A wedding chapel just off the Vegas Strip, which has hosted the nuptuals of such names as Dennis Rodman and John Holmes (not to each other), will be performing free marriages on Sunday for couples named Taylor and Travis.
I apologize that I have not read the entire thread. Has there been a discussion of TS’s current motivations for leading her lifestyle as she currently does?
I’m not criticizing her in any way. But as I see it, she is probably the highest profile celebrity in the world, with her every word/action treated as “news.” She is wealthy and successful enough that she could afford to conduct herself pretty much however she wishes. So, in large part, ISTM that she has chosen to conduct herself in a manner that results in her being as high profile as she is.
So my question - again, not intended as critical in any way - is what are her motivations for continuing to lead such a high profile existence? Does she love the constant attention? Is the attention good for her “brand”? Is she trying to maximize her wealth? If so, with what end goal? Is she just doing exactly what she wishes to do?
I acknowledge that she has a legitimate desire to make music and share it with the public. But if she wanted to, I suspect she could do so in a more low-key manner. And there are probably a couple of fellas she could date who are slightly lower profile than a repeat superbowl player.
Simply saying that this is the lifestyle she prefers if plenty for me. And I’ve never heard of her complaining of the attention she receives. Having never been in such a situation, I find it a little difficult to think living in such a constant spotlight would be - um - enjoyable.
I wouldn’t think so either, but a lot of the rich and powerful seem to, not just TS.
She’s probably used to the spotlight by now. You grow up in hot weather, you get used to it.
Meh, I don’t really see it. Anything she does is going to be high profile, regardless of whether or not her boyfriend is Travis Kelce, Donald Trump Jr., or Stan the butcher down the street. She has very successfully connected to a particular zeitgeist of the era, and is very popular because she easily translates ordinary experiences into popular music for her fans. Frankly, I think that if she attempted to live a more “normal” life, she might even become MORE high profile.
It’s important to note that celebrity is not entirely a personal choice. Taylor Swift will get attention no matter what she does, because media makes money selling “news” of her. She can’t withdraw completely from the public because she wants to perform concerts. And that generates enough interest in her that media will always publish about her.
Also, when you’re famous, you meet other famous people. At least other famous people will understand your pressures and lifestyle.
I have listened some to her music. And while it’s pleasant and competently executed, I must say I can’t see what distinguishes it from other, less successful music of the same genre.
Others in this thread have mentioned lyrics, and I am rarely moved by lyrics. So that may be why I don’t “get it”.
I offer by way of illustration an example of how I would reply to someone who doesn’t “get” why the Beatles’ music was/is so popular:
The Beatles had distinctive looks and performance traits that helped grab their target audience’s attention when they first emerged. But this is separate from their music, and doesn’t have anything to do with why it’s still so popular.
The Beatles had a wide range of influences. A major one was British Dance Hall music, which has a lot in common with American Tin Pan Alley music. Both are characterized by sophisticated, catchy chord progressions and melodies. The Beatles blended this with American rock and roll and R&B. Examples of this include “Things We Said Today” and “Hard Day’s Night”, and later, “In My Life” and “Penny Lane”.
This sound stood out from most music that was popular when the Beatles emerged. Buddy Holly had been starting to do this, but he died young. The Beatles took it further.
That is a brief summary of why I think the Beatles’ music caught on initially, and is still popular.
I would welcome a similar analysis of the music of Taylor Swift. As I said, lyrics don’t usually move me much.
PS: I have not read the entire thread, so if someone has already done this, please point me to it.
Thanks for the comments. I understand all this. My wife just read a bio of Salinger, and I thought it somewhat inconsistent that he wanted to support himself with his writing but did not want any of the celebrity. If he TRULY wanted to be left alone, he could wash dishes somewhere…
Yeah, it is weird when a celeb is with a regular Joe/Jane - like Liz Taylor’s one husband. But there are a ton of celebs/jet setters/wealthy people who are WAY less in the spotlight than TS. It seems I regularly see of famous actors/models who marry super wealthy folk, and then basically drop off the radar (my radar at least.) If she wanted to buy some huge spread up in Montana, she surely could.
I’m occasionally taken aback when I happen to see a clip of some celeb just walking from a car to their home and there are multiple paps with flashes going. Really seems offensive, and I (mildly) wish there were some way to restrict it.
I think you’ve answered your own question. If you look at the links to tracks upthread, you’ll see that they are almost all links to situations where slick production or flashy video or dramatic live performance are stripped away or much less prominent, where you can hear her unadorned songwriting and singing. If you aren’t interested in what a songwriter is communicating verbally, she’s not for you. I assume that Dylan doesn’t do much for you either.
Oh, I’m sure the celeb does too. Paps are annoying and IMHO a toxic part of the media ecosystem. They’re probably very irritating. Acting is just a job, you know? Sometimes a famous, good-looking person just wants to shlub around in sweatpants and go to the grocery store.
It’s the endpoint of the pathological people pleaser (her own words) who is talented enough to succeed beyond their wildest dreams in their quest for success as measured by public approval.
She became huge very young, experienced young female fans literally worshipping her, ambition driving her to push herself further into the musical mainstream and even more massive approval, starving herself because she thought people needed her to look like a supermodel, withdrawing into depression when the internet hates her… and I guess eventually figuring out that the only way to survive is to go into this tricky superposition of caring a lot about what people think (as a personality type and from a business perspective) while not caring what people think.
She’s a kind and honest person, and for an artist with her fame relatively unpretentious, so the “not giving a shit about what people think” aspect usually isn’t too bad a look. You can look at the way she behaved at the Grammies and see someone being a bit of a jerk behaving disrespectfully to others with the spotlight constantly on her, or you can see someone a bit drunk having fun.
She obviously enjoys all aspects of making music and the part of the public attention that goes with that, and I think at this point she can’t avoid massive media attention and being surrounded by an army of security in her personal life whatever she does, so the incremental effect of dating Kelce is barely noticeable. I think Swift-Kelce is sufficiently explained by the fact that they like each other, and that Kelce is already accustomed to a lot of media attention (and right wing trolling) and is less likely than most to find it impossible to deal with.
Here’s an overly-long discussion I posted earlier in the thread.
The music is extremely competent, but not all that out of the ordinary. She doesn’t really push boundaries there - though she does occasionally blur some genre boundaries between pop/folk/country. While there are more interesting things on the musical side of Swift’s work than there are in many/most pop acts, that’s not where she most stands out.
The lyrics are the thing. She is a poet, and her fans are, I believe, primarily fans of the poetry. Asking for a musical analysis of Taylor Swift to explain her popularity is a bit like asking for a set design analysis of Shakespeare to explain his popularity, though obviously not quite to that extreme.
Taylor Swift:
'Cause the players gonna play, play, play, play, play
And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate
Baby, I’m just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake
I shake it off, I shake it off
I’ve compared her several times to Dylan, something that only became apparent to me with folklore, although looking back now I can appreciate the same poetic art throughout her earlier work - even when she’s singing a catchy pop tune about a boy who broke her heart in high school. The fact that she’s a lot more versatile than Dylan (he didn’t look great in a sequined body suit) can be a distraction that makes people overlook her. I’m certainly one who paid very little attention to her early on, because of frankly sexist assumptions (with a dose of musical snobbishness) that an incurably romantic young woman who writes a lot about the emotional drama of relationships couldn’t be a seriously talented songwriter and musician.
Not all lyrics can be appreciated without the music, these example hold up pretty well as pure poetry.
For comparison, one of Dylan’s greatest, lyrics only:
Bob Dylan – Tangled Up in Blue Lyrics | Genius Lyrics
A Swift folklore track, lyrics only:
Taylor Swift – my tears ricochet Lyrics | Genius Lyrics
I wouldn’t want to pick between them, but can anyone honestly say that they think she’s a less talented lyricist than Dylan?