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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

I never said they don't or that the schools aren't offering them because they interest students. Of course colleges need to have classes that interest students. You are inferring there is no academic value in Swift-focused classes, however, I posit that there is. You also asserted before that your sister speaks for all professors who offer Swift classes and that they secretly think she sucks, and I am skeptical of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That course is a "student initiated course" and not about teaching her lyrics. It was initiated by and co-taught by a college sophomore. It's about using literary analysis tools on Taylor's lyrics to gain insight. You could do the same with Dan Brown novels or the text of celebrity interviews in fashion magazines.

That course?

https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/these-colleges-have-taylor-swift-classes/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

Oh, but you know - the PP only listens to “the voice as an instrument.” She is so far above Taylor Swift, in every sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You’ve got to be a troll at this point. First you complain that she never credits her collaborators - and then when we prove what a flat-out liar you are, you sniffy insist that she only credits them because she has to. Goodbye, troll.

No. I took issue with you saying she credits them on the records out of her generosity.

She not only credits them on her albums, she calls them out during concerts and plays the songs they helped her produce. She heaps praise on every single person who helps her in any way. This seems to be a foreign concept to you.

[Anonymous]

Just listener to 1989, I love it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

OML. The pretentiousness is just over-the-top with you. You clearly think so highly of yourself that you felt compelled to stick around and make sure to tell us. I assure you, the people you’re lecturing no doubt know far more than you about many things, including academia.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

OML. The pretentiousness is just over-the-top with you. You clearly think so highly of yourself that you felt compelled to stick around and make sure to tell us. I assure you, the people you’re lecturing no doubt know far more than you about many things, including academia.
DP

With all the evidence you’ve given me of how much you know about academia, how can I doubt it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That course is a "student initiated course" and not about teaching her lyrics. It was initiated by and co-taught by a college sophomore. It's about using literary analysis tools on Taylor's lyrics to gain insight. You could do the same with Dan Brown novels or the text of celebrity interviews in fashion magazines.

DP. Classes about Taylor Swift’s songwriting are being taught at other schools now too. By professors. Were you not aware?

It’s not just songwriters who have noticed the music of Taylor Swift is a good teaching tool. Across the river at Harvard University, English professor Stephanie Burt teaches a popular undergraduate lecture class called “Taylor Swift and her World.”

“Maybe 10 or 12 years ago, I noticed that among the songs that you just hear in public places, in CVS, in airports … there was one that was just a much stronger piece of songwriting than everything else,” Burt recalled.

Burt’s class treats Swift’s music as worthy of study and analysis, like any piece of literature. The curriculum pairs different Taylor Swift albums with literary works like Willa Cather's novel "Song of the Lark" and the poem "Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot" by Alexander Pope, which Burt calls Pope's version of "Shake It Off."

https://www.wbur.org/news/2024/03/19/taylor-swift-college-classes#

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

I never said they don't or that the schools aren't offering them because they interest students. Of course colleges need to have classes that interest students. You are inferring there is no academic value in Swift-focused classes, however, I posit that there is. You also asserted before that your sister speaks for all professors who offer Swift classes and that they secretly think she sucks, and I am skeptical of that.

+1
The PP seems like she might be living under a rock. That, or she is just so full of disdain for Taylor Swift that she’s going to continue making up things to argue about. It’s kind of pathetic that she’s spending so much time trying to tear down this person, for no apparent reason. Jealousy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

I never said they don't or that the schools aren't offering them because they interest students. Of course colleges need to have classes that interest students. You are inferring there is no academic value in Swift-focused classes, however, I posit that there is. You also asserted before that your sister speaks for all professors who offer Swift classes and that they secretly think she sucks, and I am skeptical of that.

+1
The PP seems like she might be living under a rock. That, or she is just so full of disdain for Taylor Swift that she’s going to continue making up things to argue about. It’s kind of pathetic that she’s spending so much time trying to tear down this person, for no apparent reason. Jealousy?

I’m only conveying what I know to be true from knowing a lot of humanities professors. If you don’t like it that’s not my problem.

[Anonymous]

One of her best stories/songs is “The Last Great American Dynasty.” I don’t think I was much of a fan until I heard that one.
Other favorites:
Invisible String
The Bolter
The Albatross
Peter
Robin
Willow
August

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

I never said they don't or that the schools aren't offering them because they interest students. Of course colleges need to have classes that interest students. You are inferring there is no academic value in Swift-focused classes, however, I posit that there is. You also asserted before that your sister speaks for all professors who offer Swift classes and that they secretly think she sucks, and I am skeptical of that.

+1
The PP seems like she might be living under a rock. That, or she is just so full of disdain for Taylor Swift that she’s going to continue making up things to argue about. It’s kind of pathetic that she’s spending so much time trying to tear down this person, for no apparent reason. Jealousy?

I’m only conveying what I know to be true from knowing a lot of humanities professors. If you don’t like it that’s not my problem.

And yet, humanities professors all over the country, in some of the best universities, have decided to teach classes about her and her songwriting - as posted by a PP. Seems you really don’t know “a lot” of humanities profs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

That’s bc professors need to offer classes kids will sign up for.

Trust me. My sister is a musicologist and teaches undergrads. It’s all about butts in seats.

Yes you said this already. Some of the classes are English and Lit too though, not music. But it is all fluff, I am sure, and kids get nothing from it.

If you don’t realize humanities departments in general are worried about funding cuts and offer classes they think kids will sign up for, then you just don’t know anything about academia.

I never said they don't or that the schools aren't offering them because they interest students. Of course colleges need to have classes that interest students. You are inferring there is no academic value in Swift-focused classes, however, I posit that there is. You also asserted before that your sister speaks for all professors who offer Swift classes and that they secretly think she sucks, and I am skeptical of that.

+1
The PP seems like she might be living under a rock. That, or she is just so full of disdain for Taylor Swift that she’s going to continue making up things to argue about. It’s kind of pathetic that she’s spending so much time trying to tear down this person, for no apparent reason. Jealousy?

I’m only conveying what I know to be true from knowing a lot of humanities professors. If you don’t like it that’s not my problem.

And yet, humanities professors all over the country, in some of the best universities, have decided to teach classes about her and her songwriting - as posted by a PP. Seems you really don’t know “a lot” of humanities profs.

Do I have to repeat myself again about how course development works in humanities departments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s nothing there musically, very mundane. I guess it’s about the lyrics, but I don’t listen to lyrics, just the voice as an instrument. It seems to be the same with a lot of artists. I don’t get Billy Eilish either, same reason. I like musicianship mostly, but there’s not much to be had with these types of artists. It seems to be largely about angst.

This is a truly hilarious critique. Swift's lyrics are literally being taught in college level literary courses but you don't "listen to lyrics" yet believe she's "largely about angst".

Oh, but you know - the PP only listens to “the voice as an instrument.” She is so far above Taylor Swift, in every sense.

I am the PP but I am not far above her in any way. I think she’s great as a person. She seems super sweet and good person, and I am not a she. I am happy for her success and am glad that she brings happiness to her fans. The music is just not for me.

[Anonymous]

Gen X women think hating Taylor Swift is a personality and I will never understand