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.

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

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."

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.

Originally Posted by Christian Wagner

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

I don't have a problem with him having a subscription letter to whine and moan to fans of his. Heck, if it were an artist I didn't like, like say he gave Gaga this treatment, maybe I'd agree. But I'd agree on unfounded claims. Because I don't know Gaga's story, or anything about her aside from her singles. I'd believe whatever he says because I'm openly ignorant to Gaga's rise to fame. Lefsetz and I would be in that same boat, given that situation. Here's he's ignorant to Swift's rise to fame. He doesn't know what made her huge. He doesn't know her following. He views her fans as fly by the night and vapid music fans, when she's won over anyone from AP users to teenage girls. She could afford to lose a quarter of her fan base and she'd still be one of the biggest names in music. It just annoys me that not only does he not respect her, but he disrespects her fans, too.

It's just that I know, and Swift's fans know more about her career than him. So when he rants claims that are unfounded, it makes me question his legitimacy. And then to end it with "If you don't agree with my unfounded and unresearched criticism, then you're not thinking" is the total definition of irony.

Originally Posted by Craig Manning

All of this. And it doesn't even really sound like he really listened to the album. He mentions one of three Max Martin singles, one of which actually has some country twang to it, and all of which only represent a very small cross section of the genres Swift tackles throughout Red. The "core country fanbase," even if they don't like her pure pop songs (which is unlikely, since "Love Story" and "You Belong With Me" were both considerably closer to pop than to country), there's plenty more for them to sink their teeth into here, and the idea that this fanbase isn't going to eat up something like "Treacherous" or "All Too Well" or "I Almost Do" or "Begin Again" is kind of laughable.

I can definitely see some people thinking that she went too far into the pop realm here, but she didn't become the biggest country artist of all time for nothing. She won't always be this big, but he's acting like there's some possibility that she could still be a flash in the pan, which is kind of ridiculous.

If I were a country fan, I'd undoubtedly be upset that she's moved away from country. But like you said, I'd delve into the little tastes of country she gives here and there. There have been tons of bands I once liked and have moved away from their sound and I couldn't get into the new stuff. Gone on to do both bigger and better things, or disbanded, or whatever. Lefsetz is making it like she's the first person to ever do crossover country-pop.

The fact he's suggesting a million selling album first week could be a detriment to any musician's career, let alone one of Swift's current stature, is absurd. He's making it all about numbers. What does it matter if she sells less and less each week? Millions already have the album. You can't expect it to put up amazing numbers each and every week. People won't re-purchase the record (unless it's added content or something). So for him to say she's better off selling 600k first week and likewise numbers for the rest of the year.. it's six one way, half dozen the other. If millions have your album, you're going to be a big deal either way.

Are we really going to consider this album a failure if it's not on Billboard a year from now like Taylor Swift and Fearless were? Those albums only sold so well posthumously because people were catching up on Swift. With Red, there is no "catching up" to do. To expect Red to replicate the sustained sales of those albums is setting oneself up for failure and disappointment. Those albums only did well because people wanted to hear her early material as they were jumping on the bandwagon.

This could be true of almost any market. Keurig's probably sold amazing last Christmas, because they were new/hot items.. but did the sales sustain themselves year round? No. Because everyone already had one. What's it matter if they spike the sales around Christmas time or later on in July? Either way they're buying it

Originally Posted by Craig Manning

Yeah, sales "holds" are kind of irrelevant anyway, and how the thing sustains its success ultimately depends on how many ubiquitous singles she can knock to the top of the charts (a la Adele).

Exactly. I would determine the success of an album by how many songs chart on Billboard, not by sales of the album. Taylor could release a rap album and it'd probably sell a million (sayin nothin on the track). She has a strong buyers market. The fact this sold a million copies plus first week doesn't make it a "good" album, so much as it would if it had 5 or 6 Number One singles.

Originally Posted by Evan123

I stopped reading when you compared T Swift and The Beatles. I must ask you one simple question...

Are you fucked?

Do yourself a favor and read the last paragraph then. Ignorance isn't bliss.