The Beatles,Elvis and ...............TAYLOR!?

Right now, in real time, it sure appears that Taylor is approaching Beatlemania level as much as any other artist over the past decade. I've never been to one of her concerts and don't really care to but just from the news coverage and some of the reports from friends that have gone I think she does have that level of hype in the moment.

That doesn't mean she will have anywhere near the staying power of the Beatles and I don't take the original quote as even comparing her and them as far as talent goes. From a pure hype and zeitgeist standpoint I think she is probably the only act that comes close at the moment. Coldplay is probably in (distant) second place and the same thing goes for them. Will they still be as popular and relevant in 50 years? Time will tell.
 
Right now, in real time, it sure appears that Taylor is approaching Beatlemania level as much as any other artist over the past decade. I've never been to one of her concerts and don't really care to but just from the news coverage and some of the reports from friends that have gone I think she does have that level of hype in the moment.

That doesn't mean she will have anywhere near the staying power of the Beatles and I don't take the original quote as even comparing her and them as far as talent goes. From a pure hype and zeitgeist standpoint I think she is probably the only act that comes close at the moment. Coldplay is probably in (distant) second place and the same thing goes for them. Will they still be as popular and relevant in 50 years? Time will tell.
People are excited about Coldplay?
 
I’m not a “fan” but I think any artist that delivers a 3-hour+ concert in a torrential downpour deserves some respect. My daughters were lucky enough to catch the show at Gillette and never had as much fun in the rain as that night…
I was there, too!

I could write essays on Taylor Swift, pop culture, teenage girl fandom, etc. etc. (Where's the person teaching the class? I would get an A+). But I won't. Here's some thoughts.

At 18 I started listening to Taylor Swift. I'm 33. It all holds up. I've seen her live on every tour, including twice at the Eras tour and I'll be seeing her in Vancouver in December of 2024. She has gotten better and better and I don't see the tides changing.

When the Beatles hit the scene, their primary fanbase was young women. Very often young women are the first to discover an artist and that artist is often dismissed because of the young female fanbase. We see it with Taylor, with boy bands like One Direction, with certain film/tv franchises. But then the fanbase expands and suddenly it gains legitimacy. It's time more people start listening to teenage girls.

I think Taylor will stand the test of time. My 7 year old niece is a TS fan and I took her to see the movie. We see her influence on new artists (Olivia Rodrigo. Sabrina Carpenter. Gracie Abrams). And some of her openers have gone on to pretty big careers (I saw Justin Bieber open for Taylor at Gillette Stadium. Ed Sheeran, too) and I'm sure more will go on to have that success.

Impact on the industry? Apple Music changed its policy for paying artists royalties during their free trial period for new users because she called them out for not paying artists for streams. She re-recorded her masters because she believes artists should own their work and record labels HATE it but artists can now use it as leverage to control their work.

We'll see. I'm confident.
 
When the Beatles hit the scene, their primary fanbase was young women. Very often young women are the first to discover an artist and that artist is often dismissed because of the young female fanbase. We see it with Taylor, with boy bands like One Direction, with certain film/tv franchises. But then the fanbase expands and suddenly it gains legitimacy. It's time more people start listening to teenage girls.
This! It makes me so sad that our society loves to degrade and make fun of whatever girls and young women enjoy. I see it happen with young men to an extent but not with the vitriol directed towards women and girls. It can be anything too - pumpkin spice lattes, ugg boots, leggings, Taylor Swift, the list goes on and on. You're labeled "basic" if you like anything that *gasp* other women like too. Guess what, other women are pretty great and I don't care if that makes me basic.
 
I could write essays on Taylor Swift, pop culture, teenage girl fandom, etc. etc. (Where's the person teaching the class? I would get an A+). But I won't. Here's some thoughts.
It's too bad you're no longer in college (I assume) as I am teaching a course on Taylor next fall due to student demand. And in fact, there is SUCH demand that I may need to create TWO courses; one for freshmen and one for more advanced kids.
 
It's too bad you're no longer in college (I assume) as I am teaching a course on Taylor next fall due to student demand. And in fact, there is SUCH demand that I may need to create TWO courses; one for freshmen and one for more advanced kids.
Correct! Long out of college and grad school now. This sounds incredible. I took a class on arts & entertainment writing and our final article was a cultural criticism piece and I did an article on the evolution of boy bands.
 
Were the Beatles or Elvis ever Time’s Person of the Year?
In the time of Elvis & The Beatles, Time magazine was far too serious of a news source to name a rock n roll musician "Man Of The Year." In 2023, "Person of the year" is about as relevant as "Sexiest Man Alive" it's good for a day or two of light chat. It will, however, move a boatload of hard copy mags that Time hasn't seen since...maybe in its history.

Taylor Swift's popularity is phenomenal and well-deserved, I'm by no means a hater, but I don't think the POTY adds much to her resume.

Without Googling: Who was POTY last year? I guessed and got it right, but 2021? Would not have guessed.
 
TIME is now picking people that make it relevant, rather than the other way. Its sad but so is the publication industry these days.
 
TIME is now picking people that make it relevant, rather than the other way
I'm not certain where I'd find a hard copy of Time magazine. I know it used to be all over the place, like the grocery store, but I don't recall seeing it any time recently. I guess Barnes & Noble would carry it. I do see the "Commemorative Editions" issues like for the Stones and Led Zeppelin or the Beatles. That is an indicator of the demographic that still purchases magazines.
 
So she is now sharing an honor with...checks 1938 edition... Adolph Hitler. I'm not sure what that proves other than she is poplar in the moment which I don't think anyone is disputing.
I looked up Time Magazine's naming of Hitler as Man of the Year and this is what they had to say about it in an article on Hitler as an evil icon, from their issue "The Science of Good and Evil:"

"Hitler appeared on the cover of TIME on multiple occasions — most famously perhaps on Jan. 2, 1939, when he was named Man of the Year. That choice abided by the dictum of TIME founder Henry Luce, who decreed that the Man of the Year — now Person of the Year — was not an honor but instead should be a distinction applied to the newsmaker who most influenced world events for better or worse. In case that second criterion was lost on readers, the issue that named Hitler dispensed with the portrait treatment that cover subjects typically got. Instead he was depicted as a tiny figure with his back to the viewer, playing a massive organ with his murdered victims spinning on a St. Catherine’s wheel. Underneath the stark, black-and-white illustration was the caption, “From the unholy organist, a hymn of hate.”"
 
This! It makes me so sad that our society loves to degrade and make fun of whatever girls and young women enjoy. I see it happen with young men to an extent but not with the vitriol directed towards women and girls. It can be anything too - pumpkin spice lattes, ugg boots, leggings, Taylor Swift, the list goes on and on. You're labeled "basic" if you like anything that *gasp* other women like too. Guess what, other women are pretty great and I don't care if that makes me basic.
I’m a full fledged non apologetic, no need to qualify feminist.

I don’t care about Ms. Swift’s looks, body weight and how many people of whatever age and/or sex admire, or scream hysterically at her performance.

Can the woman write a song for the ages?
Can she stand tall or is she worshipping at the feet of Joni (putting her first cuz she’s blonde and thin and why that’s really important…), Aretha, Linda, Carly, Souixie, Carole, Patsy, k.d., and other talented females?

I suspect the latter at best and nothing wrong with that but as I said earlier time will tell.
 
Last edited:
Can the woman write a song for the ages?
Can she stand tall or is she worshipping at the feet of Joni (putting her first cuz she’s blonde and thin and why that’s really important…), Aretha, Linda, Carly, Souixie, Carole, Patsy, k.d., and other talented females?

In addition to being a singer, Taylor is also a songwriter. So, she does have something in common with some of the women on your list - but Aretha, Linda, and Patsy are primarily known as interpreters of songs rather than songwriters. Taylor has 7 nominations for the Song of the Year Grammy, more than any other artist.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top