Ariana Had Taylor Shook to Release 1989

[Buddy 5,686]

On 7/5/2017 at 10:02 AM, Lanius said:

If Ariana music is so great why is she not winning Grammy's or significant awards outside of Teen choice awards? Also, 1989 and Dangerous Donut had the same metacritic scores despite Taylor have wayyyyy more reviews. Also, 1989 made way more year end list for best album than Donut Woman.

Taylor makes pretty solid pop music, and I'd say her and Ariana's pop music are equal in quality. But the Grammy's are not indicative of quality AT ALL, please don't use them as a receipt. Meghan Trainor has a Grammy and even Iggy has been nominated 

[JeffSwift 314]

Taylor stays winning. Hasn't released an album in nearly three years and has been in hiding for MONTHS. Still has the highest selling single for a female artist in 2017...

[alestevens 118]

11 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I mean there's a clear split between upbeat poppy Taylor and more acoustic-led Taylor. All You Had To Do Was Stay, I Wish You Would, How You Get The Girl, This Love, I Know Places and Clean sound like songs from her previous albums. Even Wildest Dreams has a touch of that. Hardly a full-on transformation like her fans claim. Not surprising that the most un-Taylor tracks became singles, then, to fool casual listeners into thinking she'd made an entire album like this? And most pop albums don't have this many slow songs on them. Pop is by definition, mostly upbeat.

The only slow songs of the ones you mentioned are Wildest Dreams and This Love. And using guitars doesn't make the others "less pop" or acoustic. By the way:

...Baby One More Time's slow songs: I Will Still Love You, Email My Heart, From The Bottom Of My Broken Heart.

Last time i checked that one is considered to be a pop album

[Spock 20,290]

1 hour ago, JeffSwift said:

Taylor stays winning. Hasn't released an album in nearly three years and has been in hiding for MONTHS. Still has the highest selling single for a female artist in 2017...

and is still making ha haters fume 

 

[StrawberryBlond 14,907]

20 hours ago, alestevens said:

The only slow songs of the ones you mentioned are Wildest Dreams and This Love. And using guitars doesn't make the others "less pop" or acoustic. By the way:

...Baby One More Time's slow songs: I Will Still Love You, Email My Heart, From The Bottom Of My Broken Heart.

Last time i checked that one is considered to be a pop album

There's different kinds of slow. I know it sounds like I'm nit-picking now, but it's true. For example, Katy Perry's Firework is what I'd call an "uptempo ballad," which is different from her properly slow ballads. That's the kind of distinction I'm talking about. And like I said, it's not just the slowness of it, it's the fact that these songs sound like something from her previous albums, so it's hardly the biggest of genre crossovers.

3 slow songs on a pop album are standard. And in the 90's, they were wild for those lovestruck ballads and RnB vocals, people were trying to be Mariah Carey and suchlike. So, plenty of slow songs were par for the course. But after dance took over, multiple ballads are becoming less and less common on pop albums.

[gagaisitalian 3,573]

But 1989 still went on to sell more than any Ariana album.

Not to mention 1989 single sells vs Ariana single sells.

Ariana did not "win", don't be delulu.

[gagaisitalian 3,573]

21 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

She's always taken a "my music comes from the heart" stance. Her early country image with acoustic guitar, writing heartbreak songs all by herself was testament to that. In amongst her poppy tunes, there's songs like that on every album. All to help people to see that she's a delicate little flower who wants to be loved and keeps falling for the wrong guy. Songs not for the charts. But then she releases a super generic pop song that sounds like it was written by a completely different artist and you wonder what's going on. I can't fathom how, for example, Shake It Off and This Love are on the same album. She can't decide who she wants to be - the pop princess or the acoustic indie artist, so she tries to have the best of both worlds, to ensure maximum sales. It's like she's only maintaining some element of her old style to keep her longtime fans, so that no one can say that she's truly sold out. But it just makes her artistic intentions all the more problematic. It's not like artists want their work to go unnoticed but to go to #1 isn't necessary to have a hit or to be relevant. A true artist won't care about the numbers. Remember Taylor said she cried after Red failed to win AOTY because through losing, it implied to her that this wasn't her best work? See, measuring your work according to how many Grammys its won isn't artistic integrity. That's being a spoiled brat who favours materialism and is used to always being the best. The fact she expected her album to debut with 1 million only enriches my point as opposed to debunking it.

Replying to each bolded point below:

1. Her music does come from her heart, she writes all of her songs and is in the studio producing them and coming up with the sound. If she wants to write a catchy-pop song like Shake It Off, she is allowed to. Especially when she writes it and relates it to her own life. 

2. That's such a tired stance. Find something else to pick on instead of her heartbreak songs. Every ****ing artist writes heartbreak songs, but the media decided to blow hers up. How are those songs not for the charts. Please take a look at the history of Billboard and count how many heartbreak songs have made it on there.

3. Because albums are supposed to have variety. Like, are you kidding? You have Lana in your profile picture and you and I both know that High By The Beach is nothing like Terrence Loves You, or Video Games is nothing like Off to the Races, or Florida Kilos is nothing like Black Beauty, or Body Electric is nothing like Blue Velvet. So that statement of yours makes absolutely no sense.

4. 1989 is a pop album through and through. Don't even try it.

5. I've been a fan for a while and the sounds of 1989 is nothing like her previous albums. She has similar writing material but who the hell cares.

6. Calling a grown woman a brat simply because she learned from an experience and wanted to grow and become a better artist is extremely problematic on your part and very anti-feminist. What she went through with the Grammys is like a woman at a law firm missing a promotion even though she thought she had done her best all year. She can go home and cry and then come back better and stronger.

 

[StrawberryBlond 14,907]

2 minutes ago, LDR said:

Replying to each bolded point below:

1. Her music does come from her heart, she writes all of her songs and is in the studio producing them and coming up with the sound. If she wants to write a catchy-pop song like Shake It Off, she is allowed to. Especially when she writes it and relates it to her own life. 

2. That's such a tired stance. Find something else to pick on instead of her heartbreak songs. Every ****ing artist writes heartbreak songs, but the media decided to blow hers up. How are those songs not for the charts. Please take a look at the history of Billboard and count how many heartbreak songs have made it on there.

3. Because albums are supposed to have variety. Like, are you kidding? You have Lana in your profile picture and you and I both know that High By The Beach is nothing like Terrence Loves You, or Video Games is nothing like Off to the Races, or Florida Kilos is nothing like Black Beauty, or Body Electric is nothing like Blue Velvet. So that statement of yours makes absolutely no sense.

4. 1989 is a pop album through and through. Don't even try it.

5. I've been a fan for a while and the sounds of 1989 is nothing like her previous albums. She has similar writing material but who the hell cares.

6. Calling a grown woman a brat simply because she learned from an experience and wanted to grow and become a better artist is extremely problematic on your part and very anti-feminist. What she went through with the Grammys is like a woman at a law firm missing a promotion even though she thought she had done her best all year. She can go home and cry and then come back better and stronger.

Basically everything I could respond with is stuff I already said to the last person I replied to, so just read them. There's not much else to say.

But I will say that Taylor didn't get her first Billboard #1 until she went properly pop. That's what I mean when I say here previous songs weren't really for the charts, per se. They did well on the country charts but not in general and certainly not worldwide. But even if she wants successful singles now, she doesn't want to truly let down the fans that have always been there so she has to maintain some element of her old style to keep them happy. And I didn't say heartbreak songs can't make the charts, it's just that her particular brand of them were never that big.

I can call anyone a brat, male or female. Don't call me anti-feminist, I know what I'm talking about. That's a tired response to anyone who says something you don't like about a woman. Being feminist doesn't mean you blindly support women. It's about treating women fairly, not better. The brat comment was a reference to how she grew up a spoiled child, making her parents move state to help her music career is testament to that. Her parents have clearly raised her to believe that she's amazing, so she's shocked when she doesn't always gets her way. Overreacting over Katy using her dancers is a prime example of that. She's used to having her own things and everything working out the way she likes. Considering she's already won AOTY before, the arrogance to assume that she was going to win again when that is a very rare thing to do, is also evidence of spoiling.

[Chuckles 2,549]

On 4/7/2017 at 6:35 PM, Yuuri said:

This should teach Taylor to not doubt herself. She slayed 2014 and 2015, with Shake It Off, Bad Blood, Style, And Wildest Dreams, and spawned two more singles that did well with no promo. And managed to pick herself up AOTY. 

If you're coming her way, just don't.

Do you really think 1989 was worth AOTY?

[Chuckles 2,549]

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I can call anyone a brat, male or female. Don't call me anti-feminist, I know what I'm talking about.

[JeffSwift 314]

4 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Basically everything I could respond with is stuff I already said to the last person I replied to, so just read them. There's not much else to say.

But I will say that Taylor didn't get her first Billboard #1 until she went properly pop. That's what I mean when I say here previous songs weren't really for the charts, per se. They did well on the country charts but not in general and certainly not worldwide. But even if she wants successful singles now, she doesn't want to truly let down the fans that have always been there so she has to maintain some element of her old style to keep them happy. And I didn't say heartbreak songs can't make the charts, it's just that her particular brand of them were never that big.

I can call anyone a brat, male or female. Don't call me anti-feminist, I know what I'm talking about. That's a tired response to anyone who says something you don't like about a woman. Being feminist doesn't mean you blindly support women. It's about treating women fairly, not better. The brat comment was a reference to how she grew up a spoiled child, making her parents move state to help her music career is testament to that. Her parents have clearly raised her to believe that she's amazing, so she's shocked when she doesn't always gets her way. Overreacting over Katy using her dancers is a prime example of that. She's used to having her own things and everything working out the way she likes. Considering she's already won AOTY before, the arrogance to assume that she was going to win again when that is a very rare thing to do, is also evidence of spoiling.

Everytime I read your comments, all I can think about is how you spend so much time dissecting something (someone) you don't like... Not for nothing but why don't go be negative somewhere else.... It's tiresome having walls of a texts in a thread continuously. We get it. You don't like Taylor. Keep it moving. 

[Versace 7,979]

Taylor has always released during Q4 though to get those Holiday sales, not really sure about her being shook by Ariana's august album which opened with less than 300K surely maybe even less than 200K can't remember while all of Taylor's previous albums have been certified platinum from the get-go. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,907]

16 hours ago, JeffSwift said:

Everytime I read your comments, all I can think about is how you spend so much time dissecting something (someone) you don't like... Not for nothing but why don't go be negative somewhere else.... It's tiresome having walls of a texts in a thread continuously. We get it. You don't like Taylor. Keep it moving. 

Researching someone you don't like is hardly pathetic. It's possible to be fascinated by someone you dislike and want to have an informed dislike of them. I'd rather people disliked somebody with good reason as opposed to blind hate. Wait a minute, you're saying I can be negative, just somewhere else? But what if this somewhere else doesn't want me to be negative either? This is not a Taylor fansite, therefore, there is nothing wrong with me being critical of her. If you don't like what I have to say, just don't read it. Just as you have the freedom of speech to praise Taylor, I have the same right to criticise her. I have never told a Taylor fan: "We get it, you like Taylor, keep it moving." Why? Because I respect the concept of free speech, even if it's an opinion I don't like. A bit of mutual respect wouldn't go amiss. And you know what's even more tiresome than reading walls of text? Reading complaints about walls of texts. This argument is old and I've explained over and over that I just have a lot to say and if I miss parts of it out, my theories won't make sense. I won't stifle my intelligence and research just because some people are intimidated by it.

[n0ne 13,105]

7 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Researching someone you don't like is hardly pathetic. It's possible to be fascinated by someone you dislike and want to have an informed dislike of them. I'd rather people disliked somebody with good reason as opposed to blind hate. Wait a minute, you're saying I can be negative, just somewhere else? But what if this somewhere else doesn't want me to be negative either? This is not a Taylor fansite, therefore, there is nothing wrong with me being critical of her. If you don't like what I have to say, just don't read it. Just as you have the freedom of speech to praise Taylor, I have the same right to criticise her. I have never told a Taylor fan: "We get it, you like Taylor, keep it moving." Why? Because I respect the concept of free speech, even if it's an opinion I don't like. A bit of mutual respect wouldn't go amiss. And you know what's even more tiresome than reading walls of text? Reading complaints about walls of texts. This argument is old and I've explained over and over that I just have a lot to say and if I miss parts of it out, my theories won't make sense. I won't stifle my intelligence and research just because some people are intimidated by it.

I honestly really enjoy reading your posts, because like you said, it shows you took the time and knowledge to write them. And you make a lot of valid points and are well spoken.

[JeffSwift 314]

6 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Researching someone you don't like is hardly pathetic. It's possible to be fascinated by someone you dislike and want to have an informed dislike of them. I'd rather people disliked somebody with good reason as opposed to blind hate. Wait a minute, you're saying I can be negative, just somewhere else? But what if this somewhere else doesn't want me to be negative either? This is not a Taylor fansite, therefore, there is nothing wrong with me being critical of her. If you don't like what I have to say, just don't read it. Just as you have the freedom of speech to praise Taylor, I have the same right to criticise her. I have never told a Taylor fan: "We get it, you like Taylor, keep it moving." Why? Because I respect the concept of free speech, even if it's an opinion I don't like. A bit of mutual respect wouldn't go amiss. And you know what's even more tiresome than reading walls of text? Reading complaints about walls of texts. This argument is old and I've explained over and over that I just have a lot to say and if I miss parts of it out, my theories won't make sense. I won't stifle my intelligence and research just because some people are intimidated by it.

No one is intimidated by you lmao - and I never said you were pathetic.. I just for the life of me cannot fathom why you spend so much time on something you dislike. It's a warped concept to me. When I dislike something I simply ignore it