Gen Xers - Do you find Taylor Swift’s music bland?

[Anonymous]

It seems like there are 2 issues at play in these last few pages and people are talking past each other:

1) Taylor's talents and qualities as a lyricist aka her ''songwriting' as it is considered colloquially.

and

2) How much she contributes to the music that accompanies her lyrics. The drummers and musicians on this thread take issue with the credit she does or doesn't give these collaborators/songwriters.

What we do know: she does puts narcotics in all of her songs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her songs do not all sound the same, people. She has more variety in her music than most other artists.

I wouldn't say Taylor Swift has more variety than most. That's an exaggeration.

Hmm. Maybe the problem with the lack of variety is the whole pop scene. We're in a period of young female singers with talky/yell-y singing and synth backbeats. Or a lower, talky confessional sound.

And the whispery voices! So much tremblng air.

Taylor wouldn't be knocked for lack of variety if more artists were bringing strong offerings to the table. In that world, Taylor could stay in her lane writing lyrics about First Love for the next 20 years. No one would care. But we need some palette cleansers!

So maybe we can catch a break on the male pop scene? It's a WASTELAND there. Even less interest.

Not a ton of artists have a range of country/pop/folk albums and songs. And again, the (willful, IMO) ignorance about her range of songwriting themes abound, although love and lost love is probably the biggest inspiration for most songwriting in general.

As a fan of Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Patsy Cline, and Merle Haggard, I just wouldn't call anything that Taylor Swift has ever done as "country." Though I'd say the same about Jelly Roll.

You're identifying “country” as 4 artists born on average about 100 years ago. The fanbase has changed.

Her first album was considered country and she won multiple Country Music Awards. About four years into her career, her mother went onstage at a country music awards show and thanked the country music community for "taking care" of Taylor. It was a goodbye message to country music and the beginning of her entry to pop.

Taylor came up in country at a time when it had greatly distanced itself from it's origins -- most of the top country acts at the time had very little twang and eschewed a lot of the traditional country instrumentations. It was a smoother and more mainstream version of country music. What made it country was the storytelling aspect of the music and lyrics and some references to classic country music in the melodies and compositions. And the fact that it came out of Nashville. A song like Romeo & Juliet is pretty quintessentially country of that era even though to my ear it doesn't sound like "country music." It's what a lot of artists out of Nashville were doing at the time.

That's part of what helped Taylor make the leap to mainstream pop so easily -- she was already essentially making pop music and she decided to just liberate herself of the requirements of the Nashville market (including especially in how she marketed her persona -- the country music scene can be incredibly limiting for women).

In 2024 that first album still sounds country to me but I think the scene has shifted enough that I'm not sure that's where she'd be categorized now. I think she might have ended up in indie rock which is a really expansive category that can include acts like Waxahatchee as well as people like Father John misty or Lana Del Ray. It's just super broad. But there is a lot of classical country and bluegrass influence in a lot of it. The reason I think she'd wind up there now is because of her emphasis on lyrics which make her unusual in the pop world (most major pop acts like Charlie XCX or Dua Lipa have much more simplistic lyrics and the focus is on hooks and dance beats). It's actually sort of anomalous that Taylor wound up a pop act and I think the result of (1) her look which had pop producers excited because she was so appealing to key pop demographics and (2) her and her family's ambitions which I think would have viewed a more indie rock type of career as too low level and not lucrative enough. Indie rock bands generally make most of their money off of touring as opposed to album sales unless they hit a level of fame where they can license their music which can be lucrative. Taylor of course now makes a ton of music off touring but early in her career her success was based off of studio albums and especially because of her age an inexperience on stage that was pretty essential for her -- it allowed her to cultivate a stage presence more slowly while relying on her songwriting and studio ability. And take a ton of music and dance lessons (she's never been a virtuosic musician or singer and she's well known to be a mediocre dancer). Turning Taylor Swift into Taylor Swift took a lot of work and she wasn't like some of these Disney pop grads who are ready to hop on an arena stage and wow a crowd at age 15 because she did not have that kind of performance ability at that age. She was still sitting down at the piano or with her guitar and tenderly singing songs from her journal at that age (even if she was writing at a high level and selling a ton of music for someone that age -- her songwriting skill was virtuosic but that doesn't mean she was performance ready).

I agree with most of what you said, except about her songwriting skills.

She isn’t a virtuoso at all at songwriting, and the evidence of that is that she very rarely writes her melodies or instrumentation.

She does producer-led music. Her producer—whether it’s Jack Antonoff, Max Martin, or Aaron Dessner—sends her backing tracks with the instrumentation and sometimes the melody already done. She adds lyrics.

That’s why she has so many songwriting credits on her songs. It’s also why she’s able to tour and make albums almost at the same time. Other people do most of the work.

Rick Beato (a producer and expert on the music industry) discusses this. The video about it is also about the Beatles, so if you don’t care about that part, skip to 2:30.

https://youtu.be/DxrwjJHXPlQ?si=kGYdhegizkkLebHj

It’s true Dessner sent her the music for his folklore/evermore tracks and she wrote the melody and lyrics. Taylor and Dessner have spoken about their process for those albums. And she of course doesn’t play every instrument on her master recordings.

However she does write the music for many songs (alone or with a producer). There are videos and demo tracks proving this. In those cases, the producer fleshes out the music. I think the songs on TTPD are good lyrically but the production is meh.

She has said that her process is always HER coming up with the melody first on either guitar or piano and of course, writing all the lyrics. Then her producers take HER melody and “produce” it into what becomes the finished product - all with her input. And she always, always credits her producers, on every single song.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her songs do not all sound the same, people. She has more variety in her music than most other artists.

I wouldn't say Taylor Swift has more variety than most. That's an exaggeration.

Hmm. Maybe the problem with the lack of variety is the whole pop scene. We're in a period of young female singers with talky/yell-y singing and synth backbeats. Or a lower, talky confessional sound.

And the whispery voices! So much tremblng air.

Taylor wouldn't be knocked for lack of variety if more artists were bringing strong offerings to the table. In that world, Taylor could stay in her lane writing lyrics about First Love for the next 20 years. No one would care. But we need some palette cleansers!

So maybe we can catch a break on the male pop scene? It's a WASTELAND there. Even less interest.

Not a ton of artists have a range of country/pop/folk albums and songs. And again, the (willful, IMO) ignorance about her range of songwriting themes abound, although love and lost love is probably the biggest inspiration for most songwriting in general.

As a fan of Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Patsy Cline, and Merle Haggard, I just wouldn't call anything that Taylor Swift has ever done as "country." Though I'd say the same about Jelly Roll.

You're identifying “country” as 4 artists born on average about 100 years ago. The fanbase has changed.

Her first album was considered country and she won multiple Country Music Awards. About four years into her career, her mother went onstage at a country music awards show and thanked the country music community for "taking care" of Taylor. It was a goodbye message to country music and the beginning of her entry to pop.

Taylor came up in country at a time when it had greatly distanced itself from it's origins -- most of the top country acts at the time had very little twang and eschewed a lot of the traditional country instrumentations. It was a smoother and more mainstream version of country music. What made it country was the storytelling aspect of the music and lyrics and some references to classic country music in the melodies and compositions. And the fact that it came out of Nashville. A song like Romeo & Juliet is pretty quintessentially country of that era even though to my ear it doesn't sound like "country music." It's what a lot of artists out of Nashville were doing at the time.

That's part of what helped Taylor make the leap to mainstream pop so easily -- she was already essentially making pop music and she decided to just liberate herself of the requirements of the Nashville market (including especially in how she marketed her persona -- the country music scene can be incredibly limiting for women).

In 2024 that first album still sounds country to me but I think the scene has shifted enough that I'm not sure that's where she'd be categorized now. I think she might have ended up in indie rock which is a really expansive category that can include acts like Waxahatchee as well as people like Father John misty or Lana Del Ray. It's just super broad. But there is a lot of classical country and bluegrass influence in a lot of it. The reason I think she'd wind up there now is because of her emphasis on lyrics which make her unusual in the pop world (most major pop acts like Charlie XCX or Dua Lipa have much more simplistic lyrics and the focus is on hooks and dance beats). It's actually sort of anomalous that Taylor wound up a pop act and I think the result of (1) her look which had pop producers excited because she was so appealing to key pop demographics and (2) her and her family's ambitions which I think would have viewed a more indie rock type of career as too low level and not lucrative enough. Indie rock bands generally make most of their money off of touring as opposed to album sales unless they hit a level of fame where they can license their music which can be lucrative. Taylor of course now makes a ton of music off touring but early in her career her success was based off of studio albums and especially because of her age an inexperience on stage that was pretty essential for her -- it allowed her to cultivate a stage presence more slowly while relying on her songwriting and studio ability. And take a ton of music and dance lessons (she's never been a virtuosic musician or singer and she's well known to be a mediocre dancer). Turning Taylor Swift into Taylor Swift took a lot of work and she wasn't like some of these Disney pop grads who are ready to hop on an arena stage and wow a crowd at age 15 because she did not have that kind of performance ability at that age. She was still sitting down at the piano or with her guitar and tenderly singing songs from her journal at that age (even if she was writing at a high level and selling a ton of music for someone that age -- her songwriting skill was virtuosic but that doesn't mean she was performance ready).

I agree with most of what you said, except about her songwriting skills.

She isn’t a virtuoso at all at songwriting, and the evidence of that is that she very rarely writes her melodies or instrumentation.

She does producer-led music. Her producer—whether it’s Jack Antonoff, Max Martin, or Aaron Dessner—sends her backing tracks with the instrumentation and sometimes the melody already done. She adds lyrics.

That’s why she has so many songwriting credits on her songs. It’s also why she’s able to tour and make albums almost at the same time. Other people do most of the work.

Rick Beato (a producer and expert on the music industry) discusses this. The video about it is also about the Beatles, so if you don’t care about that part, skip to 2:30.

https://youtu.be/DxrwjJHXPlQ?si=kGYdhegizkkLebHj

It’s true Dessner sent her the music for his folklore/evermore tracks and she wrote the melody and lyrics. Taylor and Dessner have spoken about their process for those albums. And she of course doesn’t play every instrument on her master recordings.

However she does write the music for many songs (alone or with a producer). There are videos and demo tracks proving this. In those cases, the producer fleshes out the music. I think the songs on TTPD are good lyrically but the production is meh.

She has very few songs that are credited to only her. Look at the breakdown in terms of who actually does most of the work.

As Rick Beato points out, her 12 number one hits have something like 20 different songwriting credits.

DP. Huh. I knew a lot of people were involved in the songwriting stage, but this level is surprising considering how the narrative goes for TS songs.

She crafts a narrative as a songwriter, but the term really barely applies.

Rick is very reliable and did a wonderful job breaking this down.

DP. Except she *does* write her own lyrics. She might have a co-writer on some songs, but she is the main lyric writer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her songs do not all sound the same, people. She has more variety in her music than most other artists.

But, they do to me. Absolutely she has this pattern where there are some chords and she talk sings a line and then holds out the note and the end and will sometimes glide the note up at the end of the line. Or whisper sing at three lines in the same patterns and at ‘the same volume and bust out withI want to kill you.

It is to the point where I feel honestly browbeaten for having this opinion, but they sound the same to me.

I’m a fan and found the songs on the newest album to be similar. I think the issue is not with Taylor but with Antonoff’s production (and Dessner now, to a lesser extent). Red and Folklore are considered two of her best albums in part because she shifted sound. I thought Midnights was going to have a 70s vibe based on early promotional materials and was disappointed the album was more Antonoff.

I wasn’t a Taylor Swift fan before, but I loved the music that Jack Antonoff produced for her.

+1
I started becoming interested in her music when Antonoff started working with her. I love their work and I also love Aaron Dessner. Both have their own distinctive sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her songs do not all sound the same, people. She has more variety in her music than most other artists.

I wouldn't say Taylor Swift has more variety than most. That's an exaggeration.

Hmm. Maybe the problem with the lack of variety is the whole pop scene. We're in a period of young female singers with talky/yell-y singing and synth backbeats. Or a lower, talky confessional sound.

And the whispery voices! So much tremblng air.

Taylor wouldn't be knocked for lack of variety if more artists were bringing strong offerings to the table. In that world, Taylor could stay in her lane writing lyrics about First Love for the next 20 years. No one would care. But we need some palette cleansers!

So maybe we can catch a break on the male pop scene? It's a WASTELAND there. Even less interest.

Not a ton of artists have a range of country/pop/folk albums and songs. And again, the (willful, IMO) ignorance about her range of songwriting themes abound, although love and lost love is probably the biggest inspiration for most songwriting in general.

As a fan of Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Patsy Cline, and Merle Haggard, I just wouldn't call anything that Taylor Swift has ever done as "country." Though I'd say the same about Jelly Roll.

You're identifying “country” as 4 artists born on average about 100 years ago. The fanbase has changed.

Her first album was considered country and she won multiple Country Music Awards. About four years into her career, her mother went onstage at a country music awards show and thanked the country music community for "taking care" of Taylor. It was a goodbye message to country music and the beginning of her entry to pop.

Taylor came up in country at a time when it had greatly distanced itself from it's origins -- most of the top country acts at the time had very little twang and eschewed a lot of the traditional country instrumentations. It was a smoother and more mainstream version of country music. What made it country was the storytelling aspect of the music and lyrics and some references to classic country music in the melodies and compositions. And the fact that it came out of Nashville. A song like Romeo & Juliet is pretty quintessentially country of that era even though to my ear it doesn't sound like "country music." It's what a lot of artists out of Nashville were doing at the time.

That's part of what helped Taylor make the leap to mainstream pop so easily -- she was already essentially making pop music and she decided to just liberate herself of the requirements of the Nashville market (including especially in how she marketed her persona -- the country music scene can be incredibly limiting for women).

In 2024 that first album still sounds country to me but I think the scene has shifted enough that I'm not sure that's where she'd be categorized now. I think she might have ended up in indie rock which is a really expansive category that can include acts like Waxahatchee as well as people like Father John misty or Lana Del Ray. It's just super broad. But there is a lot of classical country and bluegrass influence in a lot of it. The reason I think she'd wind up there now is because of her emphasis on lyrics which make her unusual in the pop world (most major pop acts like Charlie XCX or Dua Lipa have much more simplistic lyrics and the focus is on hooks and dance beats). It's actually sort of anomalous that Taylor wound up a pop act and I think the result of (1) her look which had pop producers excited because she was so appealing to key pop demographics and (2) her and her family's ambitions which I think would have viewed a more indie rock type of career as too low level and not lucrative enough. Indie rock bands generally make most of their money off of touring as opposed to album sales unless they hit a level of fame where they can license their music which can be lucrative. Taylor of course now makes a ton of music off touring but early in her career her success was based off of studio albums and especially because of her age an inexperience on stage that was pretty essential for her -- it allowed her to cultivate a stage presence more slowly while relying on her songwriting and studio ability. And take a ton of music and dance lessons (she's never been a virtuosic musician or singer and she's well known to be a mediocre dancer). Turning Taylor Swift into Taylor Swift took a lot of work and she wasn't like some of these Disney pop grads who are ready to hop on an arena stage and wow a crowd at age 15 because she did not have that kind of performance ability at that age. She was still sitting down at the piano or with her guitar and tenderly singing songs from her journal at that age (even if she was writing at a high level and selling a ton of music for someone that age -- her songwriting skill was virtuosic but that doesn't mean she was performance ready).

I agree with most of what you said, except about her songwriting skills.

She isn’t a virtuoso at all at songwriting, and the evidence of that is that she very rarely writes her melodies or instrumentation.

She does producer-led music. Her producer—whether it’s Jack Antonoff, Max Martin, or Aaron Dessner—sends her backing tracks with the instrumentation and sometimes the melody already done. She adds lyrics.

That’s why she has so many songwriting credits on her songs. It’s also why she’s able to tour and make albums almost at the same time. Other people do most of the work.

Rick Beato (a producer and expert on the music industry) discusses this. The video about it is also about the Beatles, so if you don’t care about that part, skip to 2:30.

https://youtu.be/DxrwjJHXPlQ?si=kGYdhegizkkLebHj

It’s true Dessner sent her the music for his folklore/evermore tracks and she wrote the melody and lyrics. Taylor and Dessner have spoken about their process for those albums. And she of course doesn’t play every instrument on her master recordings.

However she does write the music for many songs (alone or with a producer). There are videos and demo tracks proving this. In those cases, the producer fleshes out the music. I think the songs on TTPD are good lyrically but the production is meh.

She has very few songs that are credited to only her. Look at the breakdown in terms of who actually does most of the work.

As Rick Beato points out, her 12 number one hits have something like 20 different songwriting credits.

DP. Huh. I knew a lot of people were involved in the songwriting stage, but this level is surprising considering how the narrative goes for TS songs.

She crafts a narrative as a songwriter, but the term really barely applies.

Rick is very reliable and did a wonderful job breaking this down.

DP. Except she *does* write her own lyrics. She might have a co-writer on some songs, but she is the main lyric writer.

Yes. She writes her lyrics. She does not write the music.

She has 1-3 co-writers on 99% of her songs after she switched to pop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll give you all an example: we are never getting back together.

It’s credited to Taylor Swift, Max Martin, and Shellback. Max Martin wrote the boy band songs in the 90s. These guys aren’t just producers; they’re songwriter-producers.

If you look at the personnel breakdown, you’ll see Taylor did the vocals, but those 2 guys did everything else.

She does not write her guitar parts, with very very few exceptions. She does essentially none of the arranging.

This isn’t unique to her. This is how most pop is done.

NP. Agree that it's not unique to Taylor Swift--or even to pop music--but I disagree to the extent that it's somehow a knock against her. Stevie Nicks has said numerous times over the years that she would write the lyrics to her songs and rely on Lindsay Buckingham or the whole band to add the music. She occasionally wrote parts of the melodies but has admitted she has no knowledge of chords or what to do beyond coming up with a few notes that she'd pluck out on a piano or guitar. That doesn't detract from her being known as a prolific songwriter or from all of the Fleetwood Mac and solo hits she is credited for.

I am middle-of-the-road on Taylor Swift and her music, but I don't think these arguments about her songwriting process or limitations are a legit criticism. Musicians who truly do it all are rare (RIP Prince!).

There’s a difference. Stevie Nicks and Lindsay Buckingham were in the band together. They were artistic collaborators.

I don’t see Taylor Swift acknowledging Max Martin or Shellback or Aaron Dessner as being artistic collaborators.

She claims to write her songs by herself.

DP. Of course she does! Have you ever watched “The Long Pond Studio Sessions”? It’s just TS, Antonoff, and Dessner in a documentary about the making of Folklore. She absolutely credits them on all of her songs, as well as any other collaborators. But she does indeed write her own lyrics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll give you all an example: we are never getting back together.

It’s credited to Taylor Swift, Max Martin, and Shellback. Max Martin wrote the boy band songs in the 90s. These guys aren’t just producers; they’re songwriter-producers.

If you look at the personnel breakdown, you’ll see Taylor did the vocals, but those 2 guys did everything else.

She does not write her guitar parts, with very very few exceptions. She does essentially none of the arranging.

This isn’t unique to her. This is how most pop is done.

NP. Agree that it's not unique to Taylor Swift--or even to pop music--but I disagree to the extent that it's somehow a knock against her. Stevie Nicks has said numerous times over the years that she would write the lyrics to her songs and rely on Lindsay Buckingham or the whole band to add the music. She occasionally wrote parts of the melodies but has admitted she has no knowledge of chords or what to do beyond coming up with a few notes that she'd pluck out on a piano or guitar. That doesn't detract from her being known as a prolific songwriter or from all of the Fleetwood Mac and solo hits she is credited for.

I am middle-of-the-road on Taylor Swift and her music, but I don't think these arguments about her songwriting process or limitations are a legit criticism. Musicians who truly do it all are rare (RIP Prince!).

There’s a difference. Stevie Nicks and Lindsay Buckingham were in the band together. They were artistic collaborators.

I don’t see Taylor Swift acknowledging Max Martin or Shellback or Aaron Dessner as being artistic collaborators.

She claims to write her songs by herself.

Are you joking?

+1
Right? It’s so clear the people saying nonsense like that have never taken a look at her album notes and credits. Or listened to her talking very openly about the whole process!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll give you all an example: we are never getting back together.

It’s credited to Taylor Swift, Max Martin, and Shellback. Max Martin wrote the boy band songs in the 90s. These guys aren’t just producers; they’re songwriter-producers.

If you look at the personnel breakdown, you’ll see Taylor did the vocals, but those 2 guys did everything else.

She does not write her guitar parts, with very very few exceptions. She does essentially none of the arranging.

This isn’t unique to her. This is how most pop is done.

NP. Agree that it's not unique to Taylor Swift--or even to pop music--but I disagree to the extent that it's somehow a knock against her. Stevie Nicks has said numerous times over the years that she would write the lyrics to her songs and rely on Lindsay Buckingham or the whole band to add the music. She occasionally wrote parts of the melodies but has admitted she has no knowledge of chords or what to do beyond coming up with a few notes that she'd pluck out on a piano or guitar. That doesn't detract from her being known as a prolific songwriter or from all of the Fleetwood Mac and solo hits she is credited for.

I am middle-of-the-road on Taylor Swift and her music, but I don't think these arguments about her songwriting process or limitations are a legit criticism. Musicians who truly do it all are rare (RIP Prince!).

There’s a difference. Stevie Nicks and Lindsay Buckingham were in the band together. They were artistic collaborators.

I don’t see Taylor Swift acknowledging Max Martin or Shellback or Aaron Dessner as being artistic collaborators.

She claims to write her songs by herself.

DP. Of course she does! Have you ever watched “The Long Pond Studio Sessions”? It’s just TS, Antonoff, and Dessner in a documentary about the making of Folklore. She absolutely credits them on all of her songs, as well as any other collaborators. But she does indeed write her own lyrics.

Right? This person is being deliberately obtuse. She talks about her collaborators all the time. I posted earlier a clip of her playing Max Martin songs in her acoustic and talking about them in her Sweden show earlier this summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll give you all an example: we are never getting back together.

It’s credited to Taylor Swift, Max Martin, and Shellback. Max Martin wrote the boy band songs in the 90s. These guys aren’t just producers; they’re songwriter-producers.

If you look at the personnel breakdown, you’ll see Taylor did the vocals, but those 2 guys did everything else.

She does not write her guitar parts, with very very few exceptions. She does essentially none of the arranging.

This isn’t unique to her. This is how most pop is done.

NP. Agree that it's not unique to Taylor Swift--or even to pop music--but I disagree to the extent that it's somehow a knock against her. Stevie Nicks has said numerous times over the years that she would write the lyrics to her songs and rely on Lindsay Buckingham or the whole band to add the music. She occasionally wrote parts of the melodies but has admitted she has no knowledge of chords or what to do beyond coming up with a few notes that she'd pluck out on a piano or guitar. That doesn't detract from her being known as a prolific songwriter or from all of the Fleetwood Mac and solo hits she is credited for.

I am middle-of-the-road on Taylor Swift and her music, but I don't think these arguments about her songwriting process or limitations are a legit criticism. Musicians who truly do it all are rare (RIP Prince!).

There’s a difference. Stevie Nicks and Lindsay Buckingham were in the band together. They were artistic collaborators.

I don’t see Taylor Swift acknowledging Max Martin or Shellback or Aaron Dessner as being artistic collaborators.

She claims to write her songs by herself.

Are you joking?

Then why do the Swifties act like she’s the next coming of Paul McCartney?

Do they? I think they just like her for who she is and what she does and the talents she has.

+1
Imagine that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born in 1977, and I did not like her music until Folklore/Evermore. But TTPD is one of the greatest breakup rock albums of our time. Seriously. You cannot credibly say that she is not a singer-songwriter - and she plays two instruments. It is what I choose to listen to every day? Is she Liz Phair? Rivers Cuomo? No. She is not jaded enough (or sarcastic enough) to be GenX - but she is talented and prolific - and so much of the criticism of her has a JDVance-esque sexism to it that cannot be ignored.

Yes she is a songwriter.

But she gets an enormous amount of help from her songwriter/producers.

And please stop calling me sexist for saying it.

I have dealt with so much crap as a female rock musician. I am not in the least bit sexist towards her.

She is the first to say this. And you are certainly minimizing her.

+1
When has she ever *not* said this? The PP seems to just want to argue. TS is known as a hugely generous person who always gives credit when it’s due and always builds up other people. Having producers doesn’t take away from the fact that she is, indeed, a songwriter.

[Anonymous]

Video of her writing songs for Reputation

[youtube] https://youtu.be/I4WlSnWtkt8?si=qLuNSbPTC7A772Du[/youtube]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born in 1977, and I did not like her music until Folklore/Evermore. But TTPD is one of the greatest breakup rock albums of our time. Seriously. You cannot credibly say that she is not a singer-songwriter - and she plays two instruments. It is what I choose to listen to every day? Is she Liz Phair? Rivers Cuomo? No. She is not jaded enough (or sarcastic enough) to be GenX - but she is talented and prolific - and so much of the criticism of her has a JDVance-esque sexism to it that cannot be ignored.

Yes she is a songwriter.

But she gets an enormous amount of help from her songwriter/producers.

And please stop calling me sexist for saying it.

I have dealt with so much crap as a female rock musician. I am not in the least bit sexist towards her.

She is the first to say this. And you are certainly minimizing her.

+1
When has she ever *not* said this? The PP seems to just want to argue. TS is known as a hugely generous person who always gives credit when it’s due and always builds up other people. Having producers doesn’t take away from the fact that she is, indeed, a songwriter.

Oh come on. She’s no more generous than she legally needs to be. She’d be stupid to give up money.

This is my problem. You all act like she’s mother Theresa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born in 1977, and I did not like her music until Folklore/Evermore. But TTPD is one of the greatest breakup rock albums of our time. Seriously. You cannot credibly say that she is not a singer-songwriter - and she plays two instruments. It is what I choose to listen to every day? Is she Liz Phair? Rivers Cuomo? No. She is not jaded enough (or sarcastic enough) to be GenX - but she is talented and prolific - and so much of the criticism of her has a JDVance-esque sexism to it that cannot be ignored.

Yes she is a songwriter.

But she gets an enormous amount of help from her songwriter/producers.

And please stop calling me sexist for saying it.

I have dealt with so much crap as a female rock musician. I am not in the least bit sexist towards her.

She is the first to say this. And you are certainly minimizing her.

+1
When has she ever *not* said this? The PP seems to just want to argue. TS is known as a hugely generous person who always gives credit when it’s due and always builds up other people. Having producers doesn’t take away from the fact that she is, indeed, a songwriter.

Oh come on. She’s no more generous than she legally needs to be. She’d be stupid to give up money.

This is my problem. You all act like she’s mother Theresa.

Not in the least. We just know when someone is making assumptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Born in 1977, and I did not like her music until Folklore/Evermore. But TTPD is one of the greatest breakup rock albums of our time. Seriously. You cannot credibly say that she is not a singer-songwriter - and she plays two instruments. It is what I choose to listen to every day? Is she Liz Phair? Rivers Cuomo? No. She is not jaded enough (or sarcastic enough) to be GenX - but she is talented and prolific - and so much of the criticism of her has a JDVance-esque sexism to it that cannot be ignored.

Yes she is a songwriter.

But she gets an enormous amount of help from her songwriter/producers.

And please stop calling me sexist for saying it.

I have dealt with so much crap as a female rock musician. I am not in the least bit sexist towards her.

She is the first to say this. And you are certainly minimizing her.

+1
When has she ever *not* said this? The PP seems to just want to argue. TS is known as a hugely generous person who always gives credit when it’s due and always builds up other people. Having producers doesn’t take away from the fact that she is, indeed, a songwriter.

Oh come on. She’s no more generous than she legally needs to be. She’d be stupid to give up money.

This is my problem. You all act like she’s mother Theresa.

Not in the least. We just know when someone is making assumptions.

You literally told us she gives credit where it’s due because she’s SO generous.

No honey — it’s because she legally has to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a Gen Xer o find her music refreshing in that she actually writes it. I like that she is a singer/ songwriter in the vein of the musicians I heard first at home. I like that she’s business savvy, tells her story, makes no apologies for being female and doing exactly no one else’s bidding anymore. I like that she explores different genres of music for herself and has been successful in doing so.

I like that she is a good role model for my daughter by giving zero fs about what people like you think and doing it anyway, and becoming one of the most influential people while doing it.

And as you’re apparently gen X - don’t you remember your parents and grandparents lamenting the loss of all the best music while you were listening to Michael Jackson and Depeche Mode in your room? Every generation thinks the music that formed them was the best music.

She writes the lyrics. Not the music itself.

All of her songs start off with her picking out the melody on either the guitar or piano. Then they get more “fleshed out” in the studio - but she is absolutely the writer on them, whether entirely by herself or with credited collaborators.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-63233361
https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/taylor-swift-slams-claim-doesnt-write-songs-false-damaging-rcna13381