ReportWire

Tag: pop culture icons

  • Taylor Gets “Imma Let You Finish’d” Again With Accusation of Her Being Unworthy for Time Person of the Year

    Taylor Gets “Imma Let You Finish’d” Again With Accusation of Her Being Unworthy for Time Person of the Year

    [ad_1]

    Once again, Taylor Swift has dominated the conversation and, once again, a large part of that conversation is whether or not she “deserves” something. In this instance, being Time’s Person of the Year, a still respected and aspired to cover in a world where print journalism (and most other forms of print) has effectively gone the way of the dodo. The ones calling out the tone deafness of her appearance on the 2023 cover (for perspective, fellow “influencers” shortlisted for the latest edition included Barbie and Vladimir Putin—yes, you read that right) are not just her usual detractors, though. They also happen to be Swifties themselves…arguing that, instead, the masses should be seeing Palestinian journalists on the cover. 

    This was highlighted recently by the hit-or-miss stylings of Saint Hoax, who extracted a number of comments from fans that included such sentiments as, “Big Taylor Swift fan and she’s absolutely had one of the biggest years of her entire career but hey actually maybe there are ongoing world events that could’ve been highlighted with this piece” and “As a Swiftie I’m incredibly proud of her but the real heroes are the journalists documenting the genocide happening in Palestine.” To get slightly meta, the comments about the comments themselves were more divided, with one user agreeing, “Taylor and Beyoncé: nothing more than money machines this year. The world is falling apart and they haven’t said a single thing,” while another said, “Oooomggg stop trying to take this away from her. A young woman makes it to ‘Person of the Year’ on Time magazine and what about these other people who are more deserving?? I’m not even a Swiftie but this is perverse.” Then there was the glib assessment, “Sounds about White.” 

    While the hype and praise around Swift has often made this listener repeat the Heath Ledger as Patrick Verona phrase, “What is it with this chick? She have beer-flavored nipples or something?” it does seem telling that, for the second most obvious time, her proverbial “trophy” is being denigrated/taken away. In fact, in the article itself she alludes to the years-long beef with Ye that started back at the 2009 VMAs when he was still Kanye West. And yes, it also involved fellow 2023 touring powerhouse (complete with theatrical release of said tour) Beyoncé. On that front, one supposes it’s comforting that the cast of characters in the mainstream hasn’t changed too much (mainly because Gen Z has produced a paucity of “stars”). And Swift wants to remind people of that by rehashing some well-marinated beef that started in 2016 (years after everyone thought it had all “calmed down” between Swift and West). With a little song called “Famous,” wherein the erstwhile West asserts, “I made that bitch famous.” The implication being that, thanks to his hijacking of her acceptance speech for Best Female Video of the Year at the VMAs, Swift’s star began to shine a lot brighter afterward. Barring the fact that this is one of the key examples that speaks to West’s narcissism, it’s a flat-out fallacy. No one got Swift to her position except for Swift (and, to reiterate, winning the birth lottery by being born to affluent parents willing to support what many other progenitors would balk at as a pipe dream). 

    Being that Swift is something of the queen of dredging up old material these days (what with rerecording all her previously released albums from Big Machine), it makes sense that she has an innate ability to catalog and recall every “era” of her life. And this was the era that spawned her Reputation phase, one that embraced being the “bad guy” à la Billie Eilish before the latter even really entered the collective consciousness (but insisted before Taylor on “Anti-Hero,” “I’m the problem“). Of course, there was nothing all that “bad” in what Kim Kardashian (then known, foolishly, as Kim Kardashian West) manipulated the media and the masses into thinking: that Swift had consented to Ye rapping, “I feel like me and Taylor might still have sex/Why?/I made that bitch famous.” When the song came out, however, Swift reacted negatively, rightfully condemning the reference to her as misogynistic and unsanctioned. This prompted Kim K to release select portions of the phone conversation Ye had with Swift about the song that made it seem like she whole-heartedly approved. Never mind that no one bothered to ask her how she felt about the accompanying video, which was even more crass as it paraded naked wax figures (that look just like “the real thing”) of Kanye West, Taylor Swift, Kim Kardashian, George W. Bush (of all people), Donald Trump, Anna Wintour, Rihanna, Chris Brown, Ray J, Amber Rose, Caitlyn Jenner and Bill Cosby (again, weird choice) lying in bed together. 

    With Kardashian’s damning “evidence,” Swift was fed to the media and internet dogs, branded with that damning word again: “calculated.” And, newly, “snake.” This betrayal and backlash is a moment in her life that is called out again and again in the Time article as a reason for why she is where she is now after the heartache of that treachery. For, despite the “pain” of being painted as the villain, Lansky notes, “Getting to this place of harmony with her past took work; there’s a dramatic irony, she explains, to the success of the tour. ‘It’s not lost on me that the two great catalysts for this happening were two horrendous things that happened to me,’ Swift says, and this is where the story takes a turn. ‘The first was getting canceled within an inch of my life and sanity,’ she says plainly. ‘The second was having my life’s work taken away from me by someone who hates me.’” Cue the lyric from Reputation’s “End Game” that goes, “I swear I don’t love the drama, it loves me.”

    That drama came first when Kardashian initially released the edited conversation Swift had with West and, second, when the complete recording was leaked in 2020 (a year when people had plenty of extra time to analyze such things). So it is that Swift can look back now and candidly say, “​​You have a fully manufactured frame job, in an illegally recorded phone call, which Kim Kardashian edited and then put out to say to everyone that I was a liar. That took me down psychologically to a place I’ve never been before. I moved to a foreign country. I didn’t leave a rental house for a year. I was afraid to get on phone calls. I pushed away most people in my life because I didn’t trust anyone anymore. I went down really, really hard.” Yet they say what makes a successful person—a hero, even—is someone who doesn’t stay knocked down (though, this is the sort of cheeseball line that, as usual, totally overlooks the many benefits of privilege). Having been part of the fame game for so long at this point, and weathering the many so-called controversies of it (though never anything even remotely as interesting as dancing in front of burning crosses or getting pleasured amid gender-fluid patrons in a The Night Porter-inspired hotel), Swift has learned to take the bad with the good. What choice does she have, after all, if she wants to remain in the spotlight? Which she very patently does.

    As she tells Time, “Nothing is permanent. So I’m very careful to be grateful every second that I get to be doing this at this level, because I’ve had it taken away from me before.” This, to be clear, is her subjective response to being discredited, and has little bearing on the actual album sales that occurred after Kardashian and West attempted to disparage her reputation. Lansky remarks on this as well, coming to the conclusion that if Swift felt canceled, then it’s valid. Life being so much more about feelings than objectivity these days. 

    And what Swift feels now is that her “response to anything that happens, good or bad, is to keep making things. Keep making art.” She then adds, in a moment of pettiness that can’t help but overtake her, “But I’ve also learned there’s no point in actively trying to quote unquote defeat your enemies. Trash takes itself out every single time.” More direct shade against not just West and Kardashian (still somehow raking in her millions as “a girl with no talent”), but also Scooter Braun. 

    As for those who call Swift’s decision to talk trash about that trash in what is theoretically a “classy article,” well, it’s obvious why she would more than “casually” “hint” at the feud that ignited the material on Reputation: she’s about to rerelease that album next, and it’s always good to prime the masses for the narrative that was going on during the period in Swift’s life when an album was initially unleashed. And she’s, needless to say, very much ready to take back that narrative (you know, the “one that [she] never asked to be a part of, since 2009”). It being one of the only examples of a time when she wasn’t totally in control of it. Of rerecording this album, Swift muses, “The upcoming vault tracks for Reputation will be ‘fire.’ The rerecordings project feels like a mythical quest to her. ‘I’m collecting horcruxes. I’m collecting infinity stones. Gandalf’s voice is in my head every time I put out a new one. For me, it is a movie now.” As it has been for everyone else watching the drama unfold all along. Just as they’re watching a repeat of what West did to Swift at the VMAs by witnessing the internet insist that someone else (multiple someone elses) is more deserving of what she was honored with. Clearly, in this context, the “competitor” is literally in another playing field. Nay, battlefield. Making it difficult for anyone who doesn’t want to offend to argue that Swift being attacked for accepting her place on the cover has nothing to do with Palestine.

    To be even more direct, in America, no one gives as much of a fuck about Palestinian journalists as they do about Taylor Swift. And that’s just the cruel, pure honesty that has ruffled so many feathers. In this regard, the editors of Time actually did do their part to assess “the individual who most shaped the headlines over the previous twelve months, for better or for worse.” Considering the latest Israel-Palestine conflict didn’t even pop off until October, that alone gives Swift a more competitive edge for the cover, as she’s been making headlines from day one of 2023, most notably when the world was “shocked” to learn of her breakup with Joe Alwyn and then appalled by her decision to go for Matty Healy as a rebound. Is it bleak and unfortunate that celebrity culture is more influential and headline-shaping than the everyperson risking their lives to report on unspeakable atrocities? Of course. Is it new? No. Is it worth diminishing Swift’s record-breaking accomplishments in 2023? Not really. Unless one is fond of the symmetry that brings us back to the very moment that Swift says sparked it all for her to work harder, better, faster, stronger (a song Kanye has sampled, yes): being publicly shamed and told that someone else should have gotten her recognition. Recognition that, at this juncture, is almost comical in its absurd reverence. Case in point, at another moment in the article, Lansky pronounces, “As a pop star, she sits in rarefied company, alongside Elvis Presley, Michael Jackson, and Madonna; as a songwriter, she has been compared to Bob Dylan, Paul McCartney, and Joni Mitchell.”

    All of these are extremely grandiose, over-the-top comparisons that give Swift a lot more credit than she’s due (ironically, the crux of the argument for why Palestinian journalists should be on the cover instead). Not because she hasn’t “earned her stripes” (even if it’s not as challenging to do so when, again, you have emotionally and financially supportive parents), but because, well, she’s just so vanilla compared to the aforementioned legends she’s being compared to. Even so, maybe it’s time that some people should just “let Taylor finish.” Like she said (despite being fined multiple times for not taking trash out), “Trash takes itself out every time.” Or, in this case, hyper-overrated pop stars doomed to “age out” of popularity do (at least when they’re a woman). Something Swift herself has openly admitted to waiting for, thus taking advantage of the spotlight while the world is fully committed to letting her bask in it. Genocide be damned.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Amid Comparisons to Madonna and Michael Jackson, It’s Worth Reminding That Taylor Has Never “Ate”

    Amid Comparisons to Madonna and Michael Jackson, It’s Worth Reminding That Taylor Has Never “Ate”

    [ad_1]

    As Taylor Swift continues to dominate the global conversation thanks to the Eras Tour (still not as record-shattering as the Renaissance Tour though), the comparison that keeps being brought up is that she is somehow the Madonna and Michael Jackson of our time. As for the latter, it’s difficult to make such a comparison for many reasons, not just because he was a Black man (at the start), but because he never had the squeaky clean image that Swift does (even before the pedophilia was publicized). Nor did (/does) Madonna. In fact, part of the reason both performers were so controversial was because of the sexually-charged manner in which they took the stage. And yes, Madonna grafted the crotch-grabbing maneuver from Jackson—yet another case in point of her tendency to appropriate from (gay-leaning) men of color. 

    As for Swift, who is being treated by this nation as though she has, to quote Patrick Verona (Heath Ledger) in 10 Things I Hate About You, “beer-flavored nipples” or something, she doesn’t ever get political enough to be as “dangerous” or retroactively controversial (let alone controversial in the moment). Madonna, for example, is currently being compared to Lizzo for possessing the same bullying nature toward her dancers from the Blond Ambition Tour. Famously encapsulated by her asking of one dancer, “Does anybody give a shit?” after he expressed an opinion. While those who “have a fuckin’ sense of humor,” as Madonna said during her August 5th Blond Ambition show in Nice, might be better able to understand that it’s all coming from a place of irony (and that everyone needs to stop being so fucking literal), there’s not much room for that “brand” of humor anymore. Instead, such forms of “jocularity” are doomed to be written off as a form of white privilege that’s no longer tenable. And yet, talking of irony, that brings us to Swift, whose own white privilege is rarely ever acknowledged in discussing her road to success. 

    As is the case with many white women who end up famous (including Billie Eilish), Swift had ample parental support. Hers was not just emotional, however. Having a father like Scott Swift, the founder of The Swift Group (part of Merrill Lynch Wealth Management) certainly helped her with the encouragement to “pursue her dream.” After all, there was no worry that Taylor might end up homeless or anything if the whole “music thing” didn’t pan out. Because, as Pulp noted, “‘Cause when you’re laid in bed at night/Watching roaches climb the wall/If you called your dad he could stop it all, yeah.” And who knows what Mr. Swift might have helped stop (and start) along the way for his eldest child (with Swift’s only other sibling being her younger brother, Austin)? 

    Madonna, in contrast, had neither emotional nor financial support from her father when she set off to New York. This after already scandalizing Tony Ciccone by dropping out of college (Swift didn’t bother with that form of education at all). Specifically, giving up the dance scholarship she had earned to attend the University of Michigan. Because, in her mind, she was destined to truly make something out of herself. Not to be molded by the proverbial machine. Swift, comically enough, signed with a record label called Big Machine. And while Swift was growing up on an idyllic Christmas tree farm (as immortalized in her 2019 song of the same name), Madonna was mourning the loss of her mother and dressing in hand-me-downs or clothes she despised that were sewn by her stepmother, Joan. In fact, part of the reason she despised them is because Joan would sew the same exact outfit for all of her female siblings, prompting Madonna to rebel/differentiate herself by mismatching her socks. At least it was something.

    Sometimes, “divine” intervention would occur to keep Madonna from having to wear one of her stepmother’s “bespoke” ensembles. Like the time Joan slapped her and Madonna’s nose bled onto the dress she might have had to wear to church were it not for the physical lashing. Madonna wasn’t upset, though. Quite the contrary. As she told Carrie Fisher in a 1991 Rolling Stone interview, “I was thrilled about it because my nose bled all over an outfit that she made me wear for Easter. I really hated it, and I didn’t want to wear it to church.”

    So yeah, Madonna had it rough compared to Swift’s idyllic, nurturing, largely trauma-free childhood—complete with a mother, summering in Cape May and traveling frequently to New York for her vocal and acting lessons (the latter of which didn’t much pay off in Valentine’s Day). And, talking of a mother schlepping her daughter to the big city, Britney Spears’ mom, Lynne, did the same thing. Only she didn’t actually have the money to do it. She (along with Herr Jamie Spears) was merely banking on Brit’s success in the long-run by betting everything they had on her in the moment. This still included “borrow[ing] money from friends to pay for gas to get her to auditions.”

    Despite the reward of Britney landing her role on The All-New Mickey Mouse Club (after getting rejected the first time at age ten), Lynne was certain to tout, “It cost a lot to send Britney to classes and competitions, and by the time she made it to The Mickey Mouse Club, what she made barely paid for the apartment we stayed in.” Even if that were true, continuing to gamble it all on Spears’ talent resulted in an irrefutable major payday later on (enhanced, of course, by that needless conservatorship). All of this is to say that perhaps there is something to the idea of women (and men) who struggle to become famous actually having the ability to be described as someone who “ate” after every performance. Because every performance is like a reliving of that time when they were fighting to prove themselves, to claw their way to the top. And yeah, it probably makes a difference in one’s eventual performance effect when their key formative influence was David Bowie instead of Faith Hill and Shania Twain (as for Britney, her key influence was Madonna).

    That said, Swift can put on all the sequined gowns and other assorted styles of sequined clothing she wants for the Eras Tour, but it doesn’t blind one to the fact that she is not giving (said in drag queen voice) the way a Madonna or a Spears can. She is not at that level of fierceness. Maybe it’s her surfboard body, or her inherent commitment to (as opposed to rebellion against) Christian values, or a refusal to address anything other than romance (instead of sex) and its demise in her lyrics. Whatever the reason, Swift is not the performer she’s being made out to be by overly ass-licking media just because she’s breaking records for album and tour sales. It doesn’t alter the reality that, when it comes to transcendent performance and actually pushing boundaries, Swift plays it entirely safe—in general and during the Eras Tour. Starting with the costumes that scream “generic pop star.”

    Take, for instance, her opening number ensemble: a Versace sequined leotard and shimmering Louboutin knee-high boots. This decidedly “prototype” look and style has not only been done to death by the average pop star, but it was helmed by Madonna in the 80s, starting with her “Open Your Heart” bustier paired with fishnet tights, worn for the Who’s That Girl Tour. The leotard/bustier aesthetic would come to define Madonna’s tours over the years, right up to a modified version of it for 2019’s Madame X Tour

    If that weren’t enough, Swift cops tour looks from many others, ranging from Tina Turner (with the fringe dress she wears during her “Fearless Era” section) to Florence + the Machine (with the flowy, feminine, witchy frocks she wears for the “Evermore Era” and “Folklore Era” sections). Elsewhere, things on the costume front get especially basic bitch for the “Speak Now, Red, 1989 and Midnights Era” sections. The supposedly “most original”/“cutting edge” ensemble she wears (during the “Reputation Era” section), an asymmetrical bodysuit with snakes (that look more like sperm) crawling up the side that actually has a pant leg, doesn’t say much about her ability to shake up fashion trends. It damn sure ain’t a fuckin’ cone bra. 

    This isn’t to blast Swift’s talents entirely. No one wants to undercut a woman who’s “killin’ it” in the music industry, but it bears noting that, clearly, the definition of “killin’ it” has grown decidedly soft in the present. And it’s kind of insulting to those who do still have a higher standard of what an envelope-pushing entertainer can achieve to be told that Swift is this era’s answer to someone like Madonna or Michael Jackson. Or even Britney. Granted, it was the increasingly absurd New York Times that sparked this debate by remarking on how Swift has “a level of white-hot demand and media saturation not seen since the 1980s heyday of Michael Jackson and Madonna.”

    As one person commented of the comparison, “Michael and Madonna both brought something new and leveled up the game. Taylor is simply not. She may have the same success level but she definitely doesn’t have the stage presence required to compete with those legends.” And it’s true. To put it even more succinctly, “Taylor Swift is literally immune from slaying. Living proof that you can be the number one recording artist of all time and never once serve.” Of course, that assessment was met with plenty of vitriolic pushback on the platform now called “X,” but it’s completely accurate.

    [ad_2]

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link