Will Taylor's mega-success inspire other pop stars to go bigger?

[Robo Ga 15,033]

This is inspired by many recent threads about Taylor & her current ubiquitousness in pop culture. Do you think that popular artists (Gaga included) will be inspired to expand their output now that Taylor has reached a new level of fame & success?

In other words, do you think Taylor's success will make pop music more competitive? 

I personally think Taylor's current reign at the top will have all the pop stars WORKINGGGG in the studio, and we may see a huge wave of new music / ambitious videos / big tours etc to compete with her current success. Kinda like how when Gaga was at her first peak how allllllll the pop stars started to work in overdrive to keep up. 

Thoughts?

[holy scheisse 21,611]

I don’t think her success is lighting a fire under anybody’s butt to “work harder” it’s clear she’s on a level nobody else is close to commercially right now and I don’t think anybody is going to try and “compete” with her 

Gaga’s peak was different bc people were emulating her sound and image. There’s nothing to emulate with Taylor she just has a successful career that’s matured and spans across generations of listeners and now she’s doing her greatest hits/discography tour to celebrate years of hard work 

[weed 70,932]

I did research and wrote so much originally but my answer is.. idk! She is the music industry! Creating peaks never seen before, whether you like it or not. I think she will inspire future generations, but I can't particularly picture anyone currently relevant ever reaching her level.

and to clarify a bit.. she's giving The Beatles. 

[asfittingasmcqueen 1,871]

Here's my take. The 2010s were fun because it was all about the music, visuals and live performances. It feels as if, with the rise of social media and the effects of the pandemic, most artists started taking a different aproach when it comes to promoting their work, one that's less spectacular and more laid back

While I don't think popstars should overwork themselves anymore, I admire Taylor's drive to keep delivering what the swifties want. Her team clearly knows her fanbase and I wish other artists were as committed as she is to her work

[MessyTop 14,304]

[Werewoof 2,375]

I’m not sure, but I think if anything we’ll see whatever it is she’s doing attempted in some up coming artists. Kind of how like some artists claim Gaga as an inspiration because they grew up listening to her. Should be interesting to see what this decade does for future artists 

[AyeshaErotica 1,421]

1 hour ago, Robo Ga said:

In other words, do you think Taylor's success will make pop music more competitive?

No because there is always someone #1 and her getting #1 now, means other persons are no more #1, thus the rise of someone is always the fall of someone else. Attention is not infinitely increasable. The system is balancing itself and the level of competition remains the same.

If anything, it will rather have the opposite effect: Artists will look out for when Taylor will release sth. and delay their own work to avoid having to rival with her. Taylor is acknowledged to be a very strong #1 which means other artists avoid the direct competition.

 

"I personally think Taylor's current reign at the top will have all the pop stars WORKINGGGG in the studio"

No, I don't think so because the other pop artists are past their prime and beyond their peak and its unrealistic to catch up with Taylor. They absolutely do not feel the need to compete with Taylor. They have other goals/worries now: getting kids, getting partner, thinking about their post-music career, making a fragrance or being a voice actor for a movie or so. It is a fan wish to have their faves be #1, but the artists themselves already are multi-millionaires and are saturated with fame and exposure. When Gaga sees Taylor success she probably briefly thinks " now she is leading the scene. The torch of fame is passed from one artist to another" and goes back to do the things she would have done anyway.

"and we may see a huge wave of new music / ambitious videos / big tours etc to compete with her current success."

The US is leading in technology now, followed by China. Europe tried to catch up, it horribly failed and has no own high technology products and imports everything from US and East Asia, despite being theoretically able to catch up. But that does not mean that US has many technology providers, it has a monopoly. Same applies to pop music industry. There are few western monopolists who dominate the scene. The stronger and more dominated the industry is by few monopolists, the less competition exists, as the market share cake is ruled by a few. So a strong Taylor Swift rather means: less competition because she has much market share.

It also won't lead to new music in the sense of innovative new music. Rather some artists will copy Taylor and try to imitate her fame by doing similair stuff.

 

"Kinda like how when Gaga was at her first peak how allllllll the pop stars started to work in overdrive to keep up."

Was this really the case?

Britney released Femme Fatale back then during BTW era but she would have released it anyway. She did minimum promo. Rihanna continued like always and Katy Perry got big at the same time. I didn't feel like any artist tried to work extra hard to keep up with Gaga: they were doing what they would have done anyway. But I agree with you, that Fame Monster era 2009-2011 was an era where the pop stars in genral on average were more active than today and that it was more fun back then.

 

[Edit: One thing that I suppose that will happen, is that Taylor will inspire a new generation of artists that we dont know yet. Like Britney did inspire Kim Petras. But this isnt part of your question so its in ()() ]

[AyeshaErotica 1,421]

Ah and before I forget: If someone is #1 the biggest pressure is on #1 to remain #1, not on others to catch up. Gaga was super active back then and she competed with.... herself in around 2010! When Britney catapulted herself to mega-stardom in 1999, she worked overnight without breaks and quickly released a follow-up album in 2000. She competed with...herself during her prime time in 1999-2004! Although people claim she competed with Xtina, I never felt that Xtina and Britney perceived themselves as direct competitiors. There was room for both. Britney did the same in 2001, releasing a new album within just 1 year. Then gaps became bigger after that. Taylor Swift is now under immense pressure to keep her level and other artists are maybe even happy to be not in the position as Taylor anymore, thinking about their own #1 time like....other people think about their stress time during bachelor studies time and are happy when its over [not all]. Taylor will be working excessively now, doing masses of interviews, going into every corner of the world, shaking hands until she feels pain in her hands, she will defend her place and do the pop star mega-marathon run for some time - after that she will be totally exhausted and probaby take a longer break and then her peak will be over and the torch of fame will be passed to a next-generation artist. Taylor fans should enjoy these times, they will never come back (Britney fans of 2011 era can tell you one thing or two about it), it is the absolute heyday for anything Taylor.

 

By the way: I learnt a new English vocabulary today thanks to your topic - ubiquitousness, which means the same as omnipresence. This word is kinda rare and sounds somehow fascinating to me, it has an important meaning, it is worth knowing. I will write it three times, so it will go into my long-time memory:

ubiquitousness [jubikitiznes]

ubiquitousness [jubikitiznes]

ubiquitousness [jubikitiznes]

Gagadaily/TheTaylorTimes made me a bit smarter today

[GipJo 2,851]

No. Her business tactics only worked because of her fanbase, nowadays pop stars don't attract fanbase like this big.

[monstertoronto 8,748]

I don’t really think anyone simply putting out more albums is going to be able to replicate what she’s done. Every album she’s put out has broken records for that year or in general. No one else putting out albums has done this except maybe Adele. You can’t just create this type of phenomenal response with hard work. 

[TortureMeOnReplay 5,800]

31 minutes ago, LoliLux said:

No because there is always someone #1 and her getting #1 now, means other persons are no more #1, thus the rise of someone is always the fall of someone else. Attention is not infinitely increasable. The system is balancing itself and the level of competition remains the same.

If anything, it will rather have the opposite effect: Artists will look out for when Taylor will release sth. and delay their own work to avoid having to rival with her. Taylor is acknowledged to be a very strong #1 which means other artists avoid the direct competition.

 

"I personally think Taylor's current reign at the top will have all the pop stars WORKINGGGG in the studio"

No, I don't think so because the other pop artists are past their prime and beyond their peak and its unrealistic to catch up with Taylor. They absolutely do not feel the need to compete with Taylor. They have other goals/worries now: getting kids, getting partner, thinking about their post-music career. It is a fan wish to have their faves be #1, but the artists themselves already are multi-millionaires and are saturated with fame and exposure. When Gaga sees Taylor success she probably briefly thinks " now she is leading the scene. The torch of fame is passed from one artist to another" and goes back to do the things she would have done anyway.

"and we may see a huge wave of new music / ambitious videos / big tours etc to compete with her current success."

The US is leading in technology now, followed by China. Europe tried to catch up, it horribly failed and has no own high technology products and imports everything from US and East Asia, despite being theoretically able to catch up. But that does not mean that US has many technology providers, it has a monopoly. Same applies to pop music industry. There are few western monopolists who dominate the scene. The stronger and more dominated the industry is by few monopolists, the less competition exists, as the market share cake is ruled by a few. So a strong Taylor Swift rather means: less competition because she has much market share.

It also won't lead to new music in the sense of innovative new music. Rather some artists will copy Taylor and try to imitate her fame by doing similair stuff.

 

"Kinda like how when Gaga was at her first peak how allllllll the pop stars started to work in overdrive to keep up."

Was this really the case?

Britney released Femme Fatale back then during BTW era but she would have released it anyway. She did minimum promo. Rihanna continued like always and Katy Perry got big at the same time. I didn't feel like any artist tried to work extra hard to keep up with Gaga: they were doing what they would have done anyway.

 

[Edit: One thing that I suppose that will happen, is that Taylor will inspire a new generation of artists that we dont know yet. Like Britney did inspire Kim Petras. But this isnt part of your question so its in ()() ]

But the system really isn't leveling itself, and competition is increasing. But it won't be from an artistic stance, it will be from a monetary stance. With the shift towards streaming, the industry as a whole has changed. That's why we see so many artists drop one off singles and why the formula for songs has evolved (or really devolved if you look at how artists approach creating music). Back in the day a lot more was invested in artists in order to create long term viability and that's not what we're seeing anymore at this point. Artists have to have a proven track record before a label will sign them. Artists are ditching hooks in favor of shorter verses with ad libs to grab the attention of individuals for 15 seconds (the length of most Tik Tok sounds). Taylor is an enigma in the industry because she's not only bringing in streams but also selling entire bodies of work. That's why we've seen so many variations of physical releases in the industry. Taylor can only re-release as many bodies of work as she's previously released. And she has what, 3 albums left including 1989? There will be a point where she won't be able to keep pace anymore and at that point the industry will balance out a bit more.

Yes Gaga changed the music industry in several ways. She very much revived choreography in music videos and pushed the visual medium to new heights. I would argue that she even had a bit of a hand in the success of Youtube, as MTV's music video programming was deteriorating. After Gaga came out with her flashy visuals we saw a shift in Katy's music videos. California Gurls heavily draws from this, as well as the next few years when shock value became much more dominant. Katy, Nicki, etc. started being absurd in how they present themselves because they saw it worked with Gaga. And this is a bit of a reach, but Beyonce herself got a lot more liberal in her artistic expression following the release of Telephone. Music executives initially did not want to invest in Gaga because they believed her sound would not work in the North American market, despite the success of synthpop and electropop in Europe. Following the success of The Fame, music in the US leaned heavily into electronic music to the point of EDM's domination for several years. We've seen this over and over outside of her "peak", with ARTPOP's increasing popularity, the virality of Bloody Mary, and Chromatica. Gaga has an eye for curation in art, and although she may not always be credited, she's always been steps ahead of others in the industry. 

[PartySick 144,831]

God I hope not. Imagine Gaga rerecording all her old music and slapping any demo she makes onto an album.

I'd rather wait a few years for a moderately successful but amazing body of work that I'll love than stan an artist that churns out unremarkable product that I'll drop within a week of release.

I will say, I hope more artists take after her in one way. I dislike her work, I find her dull and boring, but I respect the hell out of her for taking control of her music. More people need to do that. They're the artist, there's no need to sign over your name to some executive.

She's making MJ level moves as a business woman and we can stan that even if her music sucks 

[AyeshaErotica 1,421]

26 minutes ago, TortureMeOnReplay said:

 Artists are ditching hooks in favor of shorter verses with ad libs to grab the attention of individuals for 15 seconds (the length of most Tik Tok sounds).
 

This is a bad and alarming development, we currently experience a TikToketization of all spheres of our lives, I dread the times when this will be the norm and no one will invest in longer verses  Teachers complain about the shorter attention span of their pupils and they are forced to simplify their exam papers. I recently read that even Nintendo started to simplify their video games because pupil do not want to re-try levels like they did in 1991, instead they immediately want to win with minimum effort. People these days take less time to write, to read and they do not dive deep into literature, average school pupils these days wouldn't be able to comprehend @StrawberryBlonds sophisticated and elaborate posts because TikToketization has shortened their attention span in ways that prevent them from grasping detailed and profound texts. I think it started before TT with the shift from Deskop PCs & keyboards to smartphone screens & keyboards that have shortened the way how people proceed information.

 

"Music executives initially did not want to invest in Gaga because they believed her sound would not work in the North American market, despite the success of synthpop and electropop in Europe. " Good thing, Gaga was finally given a chance.

Btw: Kim Petras wasn't given a chance by German music executives because they believed she sounded too American, although her music is mixing american and European elements, and hardly can one say this fully sounds American or fully European...it is international. That's why she went to LA as she couldnt do it in Europe.

[liquidsunshine 735]

14 minutes ago, PartySick said:

God I hope not. Imagine Gaga rerecording all her old music and slapping any demo she makes onto an album.—

And there goes your answer for Gaga at least why she’ll never big as taylor lolllool her fans are just not as dedicated lol 😂 

[PartySick 144,831]

Just now, liquidsunshine said:

And there goes your answer for Gaga at least why she’ll never big as taylor lolllool her fans are just not as dedicated lol 😂 

Chile I'm a grown adult, I have better things to do with my money than buy all of Gaga's music again

Mother already gets thousands of dollars from me every time she tours, she doesn't need to water down her discography for hits