Has Taylor Swift Jumped the Shark?

AbsolutePunk.net (http://www.absolutepunk.net/forum.php)

- News (http://www.absolutepunk.net/forumdisplay.php?f=165)

- Has Taylor Swift Jumped the Shark? (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=2940972)

Has Taylor Swift Jumped the Shark?

Industry insider Bob Lefsetz has some pointed criticism for Taylor Swift. Head to the replies to read the lengthy, but hermetic diatribe. Do you agree with Lefsetz?

The Smackdown Has she jumped the shark?

By playing to everybody has she undermined her core country audience?

Don't trust the media. The media is there to be manipulated, it likes a story. Ergo, the election. If there's no horse race, there's no ratings. If everybody else is doing a story on Taylor Swift, then you should too, even if you're the "New York Times."

So the media crowns you superstar of the month, but does it last?

It's not like we haven't seen this movie before. With Peter Frampton. Credible rock artist triumphs amongst mainstream and promptly plays to his newfound fans and is abandoned by his core and is ultimately kicked to the curb by everybody. Of course it was not that simple, but "I'm In You" sold prodigiously upon release. And then went straight into the dumper. Is this what's gonna happen with Taylor Swift?

First there's the single, "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together," one of Max Martin and Shellback's best. They want to get paid, they're saving their A material for superstars. The only problem is country radio wouldn't play it, not for long. It wasn't made for them but Top Forty radio. But Top Forty radio is fickle, loyalty does not exist, if callout research is less than stellar, they drop your track, no matter who you are. "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" may have set sales records, but it seems to have the shelf life of a cup of yogurt. Well, not that short, but in a world where some tracks fester in the public consciousness for the better part of a year, like Cee Lo's "Forget You," "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" seems more like a flare than a lasting light.

Then there's the Papa John's tie-in. It sold few copies of the album, but those on Taylor's team would talk about the publicity factor. As if the target audience, as if those who don't even care, were unaware. But it became an internet meme. People kept forwarding it to others, essentially saying "Can you believe this? Does the woman have no shame?" Of course it wasn't Taylor herself, but when you're the star, you bear the brunt of all criticism. Your handlers can find another act, you're saddled with being you.

And then there was last night's CMAs. Where not only did Taylor get shut out, going 0 for 3, they made jokes about her love life from the stage.

You can't manage affairs of the heart. If she fell in love with Conor Kennedy, so be it. But suddenly Taylor looked bad, robbing the cradle for a high school student after abusing John Mayer for taking advantage of her when she was young.

And suddenly Taylor Swift is no longer so young. And there's a distinct backlash going on. Now people are pointing at her, saying she's the problem as opposed to those she's writing songs about, attacking.

In other words, Taylor Swift was not satisfied with being the queen of country. She needed to be the queen of EVERYTHING! As if anyone's gonna remember she sold a million copies of "Red" last week. It's ultimately a meaningless statistic, only the music matters.

And too much of the music is not country. And now, more than ever since before the Beatles, pop music is seen as disposable. It's country music that lasts. It's country acts that last. Taylor Swift could have been the new coal miner's daughter, er, financial advisor's daughter, you get my point, she could have been Loretta Lynn. Dolly Parton even. Who never forgot her country fans but did sacrifice country airplay when she went mainstream, became a movie star. Then again, to equate Taylor Swift's talents with those of Dolly Parton is to believe Snooki can play outfield for the Mets. Then again, with the season they had!

The harder the sell, the bigger the turn-off. Remember when Jewel was the biggest star of the land, with new singles seemingly every week and incessant appearances on TV? Today Jewel can't get arrested, she's a trivia question, people have a bad taste in their mouth. Furthermore, once upon a time, Jewel was a folkie, before the label remixed her tracks to be hits. The label made its money, it's Jewel who's left holding the bag.

Just because someone says they'll promote you that does not mean you should tie in with them. Pearl Jam won't tie in with anybody, but they do great live business to this day, despite having almost no radio hits since "Ten." Pearl Jam knows if you don't stand for something, you stand for nothing. And saying you owe it all to your fans is not lip service, you have to make decisions with them in mind, not only put them first, but make sure they can get the good concert tickets, because when the mania's done, they're the only ones who'll remain.

I'm not saying Taylor Swift is going to fade into oblivion by Christmas. Hell, she might survive this overhype and continue to triumph. Then again, today albums of pop and country stars are single dependent. If Top Forty abandons her and country gives her the cold shoulder, "Red" could have a very short shelf life. Better slow and steady than to be a rocket ship that burns out. Better to be Mumford & Sons and sell for a year than be number one and then fall off the chart, or languish at the bottom.

It's tough being number one. Everybody's gunning for you. Instead of going on this premature victory lap, Taylor Swift should have employed the soft sell. Will the hard sell come back and bite her?

Expect ticket sales to be good.

Then again, the Dixie Chicks sold out arenas and today can barely get arrested. They pissed off their country audience.

Those Max Martin/Dr. Luke singles are trifles, usually with short shelf lives. Taylor Swift built her career by revealing her inner truth, by relating to the outcasts, the thinkers, everybody but the cheerleaders and football captains. But now she's playing the role of winner herself. She's subtly gone from the sidelines to homecoming queen. And that comes with a price. It's kind of like that old teen movie "Can't Buy Me Love," abandon your friends for a better crowd and when they dump you, your old buddies can't be found, you're nowhere.

Taylor Swift can work until she dies. She's had that many hits.

But somehow, with the overhype and move to the middle, she's torn away some of her underpinnings, she's become unmoored, we're no longer exactly sure who she is.

And if we don't know who you are, it's hard to stay in love with you.

The little girls may scream, ticket sales may be rampant. But if you don't see it my way, if you don't think her career now has more questions than answers, you're not thinking at all.

I subscribe to Bob. His newsletter is great and don't always agree with him but he makes you definitely form an opinion one way or the other.

There are some good points in this article. Few artists can cross genres and successfully survive and maintain a core audience.

He just wants another song written about him.

But it's annoying to me that he's making it like she's crossed genres for sales, rather than just desire to do different music. All out abandoning your core, country audience is one thing, but she hasn't done that. The country community still openly embraces her with open arms, and on Red there's enough country leanings to keep them satisfied. But it sounds as if he thinks an artist shouldn't extend beyond the realm they've broken out of.

I think T Swift is past her prime.

Interesting article, but a little harsh. You could replace "Taylor Swift" in this article for almost any other big top-40 artist, except the parts where he refers to starting as country and shifting to pure-pop.

Just re-reading the end, I realize how clueless he is of her career as a whole. It's so obvious he's doing this to be the dissident voice.

Quote:

But somehow, with the overhype and move to the middle, she's torn away some of her underpinnings, she's become unmoored, we're no longer exactly sure who she is.

Overhype is subjective. Underpinnings are not torn away. And not being sure who she is? What does that even mean? Did Brand New fans sail them down the river when The Devil And God came out and sounded nothing like YFW? No, the fans loved it, and in fact multiplied, because it was better. Likewise with Swift, her crossover has kept the fans around, while the newer style of songs and arguable lyrical shift has won over some critics. Why can't it be so that she wanted to make more pop music than country? Why does it have to be for sales? If he knew anything about her, it'd be that she isn't in it for sales. Does breaking records and making millions hurt? No, I'm sure she loves it. But if she were in it for the money, she'd have never walked away from a multi-million dollar deal with Sony at age 14 to sign with her current indie label.

Quote:

And if we don't know who you are, it's hard to stay in love with you.

Yeah, because everyone got Sgt. Peppers on first listen :rolleyes:

Quote:

The little girls may scream, ticket sales may be rampant. But if you don't see it my way, if you don't think her career now has more questions than answers, you're not thinking at all.

Awfully vapid ending. More questions than answers? What's that even mean? I think it's a good thing to always keep your fans guessing. People like him make it so that she cannot win. They complained that Speak Now was too much like Fearless and that she should broaden her horizons, and she does with Red, and now she's alienating fans too much and keeping them guessing too much.

Edit: And before anyone flips, not likening Swift to BN or The Beatles. Just pointing out they had many points where they took different directions and didn't so much as lose fans, nearly as much as it solidified their careers and made them "staples" in their own ways. Change is good. Lefsetz ought to realize that, being an "industry insider."

Well, if this album fails here next album can be full of "why does everyone hate me?" And "just like boys the industry forgot me" songs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christian Wagner (Post 114941142)

I subscribe to Bob. His newsletter is great and don't always agree with him but he makes you definitely form an opinion one way or the other.

He makes my day worth it with his insight. Always. Regardless if I agree or not. Love being a subscriber. Going on five years now. And counting.

I don't agree with the article. I really don't see her fading anytime soon...

Perhaps she should be more like Mumford and Sons and have sales like the music itself: slow and steady, always the same, with as little change as possible.

Today I learned the words hermetic and diatribe existed. I love new words. I also love Taylor Swift.

"As if anyone is going to remember she sold a million copies of Red last week."

...really? Because I feel like a lot of people are going to remember that.

This guy needs to calm his tits, Taylor is awesome and if you follow her tag on tumblr, you can read all these crazy fans who are DIE HARD for her. She probably won't be this big forever, but she will probably have a very dedicated fan base for a long long time. Little girls are growing up with this music and it means a lot to them, just like a lot of us probably feel about blink-182. I'll be Taylor Swift fan forever if she keeps putting out music like she has for the last 3 albums, and I'm certainly not part of her target demographic.

This part absolutely floored me, how fuckin' narcissistic can you get? "If you don't see it my way... you're not thinking at all."

Totally lost ANY credibility when he said that. My way or the highway 'journalism' can fuck right off, what a childish and awful way to end a pretty bad and pointless article.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuck_yeah_dude (Post 114941502)

It's not journalism. It's his newsletter where he normally rants and says what's on his mind.

yeah I'm not sure I buy this...

1) The guy's arguing that Taylor's movement of physical media is basically irrelevant because the music is what's important. Maybe in a perfect world, Bob. Her sales mean she's doing something right and I firmly believe that if people buy something they are probably only going to like it more over time.

Note: the peter framptom comparison cant work because Peter Frampton wasnt in the same situation as Taylor. People still bought CDs regularly in the 80s.

2) His whole argument is focused on the single. Sounds like he hasnt listened to the album, which is ironic since he's all about the quality of the songs (?)

3) From a career standpoint, it makes sense that T.Swift would try to reach a larger audience. Though Country has a huge fanbase, to take that and add Top 40 listeners would either increase her own fanbase or maintain it (if some of the country fans stray away then they're replaced by Top 40, i doubt enough people would jump ship to decrease it)

4) Taylor Swift hasn't been 'Country' since Fearless really anyways so this conversation is about 2-3 years too late.