Taylor Swift is a legend

[ryanripley 86,575]

6 minutes ago, MaryJaneHolland said:

What kind of impact on pop culture did they have? 

My Heart Will Go On is literally one of, if not the most, famous love songs of all time and it's 20 years old  

[GypsyBabe 22,836]

I disagree. Not yet. Will she be memorable in 30 years? Probably not. She’s not innovative. She’s not revolutionary. Sales don’t make you a legend. 

[MaryJaneHolland 77,348]

4 minutes ago, ryanripley said:

My Heart Will Go On is literally one of, if not the most, famous love songs of all time and it's 20 years old  

Oop, I probably forgot about it 

But, then again, what are GGD's standards for a legend? They always seem to flip flop them in order to fit Gaga (who will be a legend btw ).

Taylor: 

Longevity - check (so far, no real flop era, last three album all opened with over 1m sales, 1989 is one of the biggest female era of all time)

Talent - um yes, she sings, writes and plays the guitar

Critical acclaim - check

Commercial success - check

Songs that are shaping up to be classics - You Belong With Me and Shake It Off

Now if we count modern times, she has had viral memes and stuff like that

What is there missing? That was my point with the Whitney/Barbra/Celine comment. None of them have done any extraordinary thing in their careers, because apparently you have to reinvent the wheel to be a legend on GGD. They were talented, had longevity and hits (Barbra had her acting too) and that makes them legends. (lets call them group A)So why wouldn't those thing make Taylor a legend.

Now on the other hand we have Michael, Madonna, Grace, Gaga (group B) and other who were really twisting things up with their music, message and appearance and they are all legends. But, that doesn't degrade the legendary status of the previous ones. 

That's where I was coming from. As 'impact on pop culture' I see the things that group B has done and the way they expressed themselves, rather than group B who were the "safer" ones. Again, that doesn't degrade group A's legendary status and they are on the same level as group B despite reaching their status in a different way.

[Spock 20,290]

Facts ONLY  

the amount of pressed people in this thread, I can’t. Looks like the 1989 salt still hasn’t gone 

[Bradley 59,064]

13 hours ago, Andree said:

all too well alone has better lyrics than half of Gaga's discography. 

I don't agree with this thread, I don't think Taylor Swift is a legend, she's only a pop icon.

BUT she can write better than Gaga. 

if we compare Taylor's repetitive songs to Gaga's repetitive songs Taylor wins.

if we compare their ballads Taylor wins

I mean

All too well lyrics:

  Reveal hidden contents

''Well, maybe we got lost in translation, maybe I asked for too much
But maybe this thing was a masterpiece 'til you tore it all up
Running scared, I was there, I remember it all too well

Hey, you call me up again just to break me like a promise
So casually cruel in the name of being honest
I'm a crumpled up piece of paper lying here
'Cause I remember it all, all, all... too well''

 

 

 

You and I: 

  Reveal hidden contents

On my birthday you sang me a heart of gold
With a guitar humming and no clothes
This time I'm not leaving without you

 

 

We got a whole lot of money, but we still pay rent
'Cause you can't buy a house in heaven
There's only three men that I am a certain my whole life
It's my daddy and Nebraska and Jesus Christ

 

 

1

All too well lyrics are really really good. Gaga is a better performer and a better singer but Taylor Swift can play the piano, and the guitar(better than Gaga) and her songwriting skills are excellent, I don't care if yall think she's a sl*t for writing about her exes, her lyrics are still good.

 

if you want to brag about Gaga's lyrics, brag about come to mama and sinner's prayers(even tho gaga didnt write come to mama) those lyrics are her best and can compete with Taylor's lyrics. You and I's lyrics are not that impressive. 

I don't think you know what songwriting is composed of.

[Bradley 59,064]

10 hours ago, Jake Deyton said:

Dear God, the amount of pressed people in this thread in insane.

At the end of the day, artists are remembered (outside the stan community) because they made good music, not because of perceived cultural impact. Nothing is more impactful than releasing consistently good songs and albums that people relate to and love. The general public doesn't care about Madonna's controversy or Michael's scandals, they care that they delivered bop after timeless bop which Taylor does in spades. 

ANYONE in this thread saying Taylor isn't a strong songwriter is ridiculous. She's consistently recognized by respected music critics for being an extremely talented lyricist. That's why she's endured so well across multiple genres of music. Good writing is timeless and infinitely accessible. 

Girlfriend is one of the most successful and highest selling musicians of all time in an era where music doesn't sell. She's about to have one of the biggest, if not the biggest, female solo tour of all time. She already has more Grammys than many "legends" and she's over a decade into her career and still on top. Stop imposing your insecurities about Gaga's legend status in a thread that has nothing to do with that and recognize Taylor's undeniable accomplishments. 

Bonus: I was a musical theatre major at NYU and I think Taylor's voice is good. No, she's not Whitney, but neither was Madonna. Just because she isn't the greatest vocalist of her generation doesn't mean she can't sing. Besides, there are other markers of great musicianship like her writing all of her music and playing several instruments. 

 

Ok if you think bops are more valued than cultural impact then definitely go listen to Katy Perry or Taylor Swift, Gaga is not for you. So you're asking for Gaga to release more songs like The Cure throughout her career and not take career risks like singing jazz, paying tributes, or even compose songs that are risk-taking in nature such as Judas, ScheiBe, Aura and Bad Romance.

Also songwriting is not just about writing lyrics, it's also about composing the melodies of the song, which a lot of people claim Taylor to be doing it safely and reluctant to take risks. Even Katy Perry has some really unique melodies to her songs whereas Taylor sounds like I dk, everyone else?

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

22 minutes ago, Spock said:

Facts ONLY  

the amount of pressed people in this thread, I can’t. Looks like the 1989 salt still hasn’t gone 

There's a difference between facts and fiction, and 'Taylor Swift is a legend' is fiction 

[Bradley 59,064]

7 hours ago, MaryJaneHolland said:

Oop, I probably forgot about it 

But, then again, what are GGD's standards for a legend? They always seem to flip flop them in order to fit Gaga (who will be a legend btw ).

Taylor: 

Longevity - check (so far, no real flop era, last three album all opened with over 1m sales, 1989 is one of the biggest female era of all time)

Talent - um yes, she sings, writes and plays the guitar

Critical acclaim - check

Commercial success - check

Songs that are shaping up to be classics - You Belong With Me and Shake It Off

Now if we count modern times, she has had viral memes and stuff like that

What is there missing? That was my point with the Whitney/Barbra/Celine comment. None of them have done any extraordinary thing in their careers, because apparently you have to reinvent the wheel to be a legend on GGD. They were talented, had longevity and hits (Barbra had her acting too) and that makes them legends. (lets call them group A)So why wouldn't those thing make Taylor a legend.

Now on the other hand we have Michael, Madonna, Grace, Gaga (group B) and other who were really twisting things up with their music, message and appearance and they are all legends. But, that doesn't degrade the legendary status of the previous ones. 

That's where I was coming from. As 'impact on pop culture' I see the things that group B has done and the way they expressed themselves, rather than group B who were the "safer" ones. Again, that doesn't degrade group A's legendary status and they are on the same level as group B despite reaching their status in a different way.

The reason why Whitney, Barbra and Celine are recognised as legends despite not being theatrically as interesting as Michael/Gaga/Madonna is because they have one hell of a voice. They are some of the most talented vocalists of their generation whereas Taylor has a nice pop voice I guess, but let's not say Taylor is as good a vocalist as the group A artists.

[Whispering 18,865]

7 hours ago, MaryJaneHolland said:

What kind of impact on pop culture did they have? 

Let's start with Barbra Streisand being a legend. She has a career that has spanned six decades which includes two Academy Awards, ten Grammy Awards (including the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award) and (the Grammy Legend Award), five Emmy Awards, a Tony Award, an American Film Institute award, a Kennedy Center Honors prize, four Peabody Awards, nine Golden Globes and the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

She is among a small group of entertainers who have been honored with an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony Award, and is one of only two artists in that group who have also won a Peabody.

Streisand is a legend! 

[Jake D 576]

@Bradley my quote functionality isn't working so I'll reply to you this way. Once again, this thread isn't about Gaga. I think people bringing her up shows more insecurity about your opinion of her songwriting abilities and legendary status when compared to Taylor than anything else. 

Comparing creating consistently great music to Katy Perry is silly. Katy has one strong album and a handful of other good singles. That's not the type of musical impact I'm talking about. People like Madonna, Michael Jackson, and yes, Taylor Swift, have delivered high quality, critically acclaimed albums several times over. Taylor is one of two women ever to win album of the year twice.

Gaga is my #1 fav and I don't feel the need to defend that. I'm on Gagadaily constantly (more of a lurker than a poster) and I have been a dedicated Little Monster since 2009. I hate that I even feel compelled to say this in a thread that has NOTHING to do with Gaga, but I think Gaga outshines Taylor in a number of ways. Gaga's voice blows Taylor out of the water. Gaga is undoubtably a better dancer and performer. In the past, Gaga has released very innovative music and visuals. However, Taylor is undoubtably a better songwriter and musician. You're obviously more than welcome to your own opinion, but professional music critics, awards committees, and the general public seem to agree with me. I think you need to examine your own knowledge of songwriting because it clearly seems to be a bit uninformed. Gaga uses basic 4 chord melodies in the vast majority of her songs just like every other pop star. Almost all of her biggest hits can be playing on the "axis of awesome."

There's no reason why celebrating Taylor's success and talents should detract from Gaga.  Both are terrific artists in their own right. I am annoyed that I even felt the need to directly compare them in my response. 

Final thought: As someone said before, Gagadaily and ATRL's fascination with "cultural impact" is both fascinating and incredibly annoying to me. There is no way to measure cultural impact. Most music listeners don't care or remember what someone wore to an awards show. There is nothing more impactful than releasing lots of good, memorable music. To say that Taylor Swift, one of the most successful and most recognizable musicians of all time, doesn't have cultural impact is truly ridiculous. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,862]

Sure, she's a legend, but only in America. Worldwide, her only big hit album was 1989. There's a reason why she's only doing tour dates in America, Canada, Ireland, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Japan (even less than the 10 country 1989 tour). Because the demand is nowhere near that big in other countries. If there was demand for her in other regions, she'd go there. This isn't to say that she won't be remembered in the future but being remembered isn't the same as being a legend. Talent isn't what makes you a legend either - you can become a legend for negativity as much as positivity.