Support NeoGAF

[StrongBlackVine]

Taylor Swift deserves every award she gets...and every award she didn't get.

 

[LeroyPantwether]

it's amazing

it's great

Okay this is just getting silly now .

 

[IrishNinja]

that was well written and frank was right, especially on TPAB (didn't know he'd bought back his masters as well, that's really cool to hear)

what sucks is even if they read it, it's still the grammys. they're still shit.

Okay this is just getting silly now .

it's really good tho

 

[Sparrowhawk]

Why do rich people get so salty about cheap trophies?

 

[Doctor Decimate]

To Pimp a Butterfly is both a future classic and incredibly socially relevant in our current political climate.

1989 was a decent collection of singles that got blown away by Grimes and Carly Rae Jepsen, and the Grammys looked fucking foolish for giving it the award.

The Grammys are always foolish, however, and they're foolish with such a depressing regularity that they barely seem to matter. Like, you can't even really make the argument I often make about the Academy Awards that they're highlighting some stuff people otherwise wouldn't hear about (my boy Sturgill Simpson this year notwithstanding) because it is such a blatant popularity contest, even more than basically any awards show is a popularity contest. The idea that they're introducing people to new music by nominating or awarding something is crazy because it's just not happening based on what they choose to recognize. Nobody is just now discovering Adele. I think people toss around the idea of awards shows being irrelevant too often but man are the Grammys actually completely irrelevant.

I've seen the sentiment that maybe it'd have helped legitimize rap music or something but rap music doesn't need this shit anyway.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

Why do rich people get so salty about cheap trophies?

Ego

 

[jett]

Why this guy isn't full of himself at all.

The Grammys do suck balls though. They don't even have good performances there most of the time.

 

[Erv]

Taylor Swift deserves every award she gets...and every award she didn't get.

I hope you're joking. Some tswift fans are really this delusional so I don't even know anymore.

 

[LeroyPantwether]

To Pimp a Butterfly is both a future classic and incredibly socially relevant in our current political climate.

1989 was a decent collection of singles that got blown away by Grimes and Carly Rae Jepsen, and the Grammys looked fucking foolish for giving it the award.

The Grammys are always foolish, however, and they're foolish with such a depressing regularity that they barely seem to matter. Like, you can't even really make the argument I often make about the Academy Awards that they're highlighting some stuff people otherwise wouldn't hear about (my boy Sturgill Simpson this year notwithstanding) because it is such a blatant popularity contest, even more than basically any awards show is a popularity contest. The idea that they're introducing people to new music by nominating or awarding something is crazy because it's just not happening based on what they nominate. Nobody is just now discovering Adele. I think people toss around the idea of awards shows being irrelevant too often but man are the Grammys actually completely irrelevant.

I've seen the sentiment that maybe it'd have helped legitimize rap music or something but rap music doesn't need this shit anyway.

Why is it a future classic ?

 

[Glazed]

Okay this is just getting silly now .

have you listened to the album

 

[LionPride]

Why do people like TPAB so much?

It's one of the best albums ever

 

[LeroyPantwether]

have you listened to the album

Yes, several times ( because of the praise it gets )

 

[Glazed]

Yes, several times ( because of the praise it gets )

so what don't you get

 

[nocturnalis]

The fact that you assume I am a Swift fan is telling.

I simply noted the level of derision that Gaf has towards any music, movies, books, or related media whose primary audience is women. Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown.

You can talk yourself into believing that there is no sexism involved if it really makes you feel better.

This is actually true.

I don't like 1989, but it didn't have to better that any other album to win last year. Alabama Shakes and Chris Stapleton's votes cancelled each other out in voting while The Weeknd and Kendrick Lamar's votes cancelled each other out. Since Taylor Swift had the only pop album, she probably easily won.

 

[LeroyPantwether]

so what don't you get

I don't get why people like TPAB so much.

 

[LotusHD]

Okay this is just getting silly now .

I mean, I don't know what to tell you. People think it's a really good album, a classic, a masterpiece, etc. etc. There's load of articles out there that do a far better job of articulating exactly why people feel that way. If you don't feel the same, then despite the snarky comments, that's ultimately fine. If it hasn't clicked for you despite listening to it several times, then it probably never will.

Which, once again, is fine.

 

[border]

Like, you can't even really make the argument I often make about the Academy Awards that they're highlighting some stuff people otherwise wouldn't hear about (my boy Sturgill Simpson this year notwithstanding) because it is such a blatant popularity contest, even more than basically any awards show is a popularity contest. The idea that they're introducing people to new music by nominating or awarding something is crazy because it's just not happening based on what they nominate. Nobody is just now discovering Adele. I think people toss around the idea of awards shows being irrelevant too often but man are the Grammys actually completely irrelevant.

This is only a recent trend in the last 5-7 years though. As noted previously, they have handed out Album of the Year to people like Herbie Hancock, Norah Jones, O Brother Where Art Thou soundtrack, Beck, Plant/Krauss, etc. Most of those albums probably didn't even go gold prior to winning, and the awards probably did introduce those albums to a wider audience. The trend towards awarding best-selling artists is actually fairly recent. Even then, Beck won in 2014/2015 with an album that only cleared 300K copies in the USA. To call it a blatant popularity contest seems short-sighted.

At the same time, you have people arguing that the Grammys are "out of touch" or "irrelevant" because this or that popular album in this or that popular genre didn't get top honors. So what is it that people want? Quality or popularity? Obscure artists who deserve a spotlight or popular artists? Apparently it's an atrocity if Beck beats out the far-more-popular Beyonce.....but also an atrocity if super-popular Taylor Swift beats out the less popular Kendrick Lamar. Nobody will ever be happy.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

I hope you're joking. Some tswift fans are really this delusional so I don't even know anymore.

Why not? I'm a big Swift fan, I think these awards are meaningless and artists that complain about her winning are generally assholes. The jealousy and envy that other celebrities have for her is fascinating.

 

[blame space]

remember when arcade fire won best album and they brought bmx dudes on stage.

that was at least ten years ago, right?

 

[OG Shaka Zulu]

Why do people like TPAB so much?

Listen to the album while checking out rap genius. Album is deep.

 

[Doctor Decimate]

This is only a recent trend in the last 5-7 years though. As noted previously, they have handed out Album of the Year to people like Herbie Hancock, Norah Jones, O Brother Where Art Thou soundtrack, Beck, Plant/Krauss, etc. Most of those albums probably didn't even go gold prior to winning, and the awards probably did introduce those albums to a wider audience. The trend towards awarding best-selling artists is actually fairly recent. Even then, Beck won in 2014/2015 with an album that only cleared 300K copies in the USA. To call it a blatant popularity contest seems short-sighted.

At the same time, you have people arguing that the Grammys are "out of touch" or "irrelevant" because this or that popular album in this or that popular genre didn't get top honors. So what is it that people want? Quality or popularity? Obscure artists who deserve a spotlight or popular artists? Apparently it's an atrocity if Beck beats out the far-more-popular Beyonce.....but also an atrocity if super-popular Taylor Swift beats out the less popular Kendrick Lamar. Nobody will ever be happy.

5-7 years (I'd argue 10-11 with a few exceptions, which is still I guess a trend but long enough to just seem like the general direction of the whole thing in a modern context) is short in terms of how long the Grammys have actually been around but in terms of where the music industry has gone in that period and how much has changed, it's a really long time. It only takes a couple off years to flip public opinion and make the pedigree pretty much meaningless.

As far as a popularity contest goes, it's not even just about the top prize. It's the nominations in general. Like, when Arcade Fire won, their competition was Lady Gaga (which is fine I guess compared to these others), Lady Antebellum, Katy Perry, and modern Eminem.

Really the only argument I can see at this point is that if it's not a popularity contest, it's some deeper sort of incompetence. People do not look to the Grammys to get an idea of what's actually relevant in modern music, and that's been going on for a long time.

 

[torre_avenue]

The fact that you assume I am a Swift fan is telling.

I simply noted the level of derision that Gaf has towards any music, movies, books, or related media whose primary audience is women. Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown.

You can talk yourself into believing that there is no sexism involved if it really makes you feel better.

Fair, but can you name a single piece of media whose audience is say.... 60-70%+ women that Gaf has anything better than derision for? The best case scenario is that gaf ignores them.

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

 

[Glazed]

I don't get why people like TPAB so much.

it's great

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

 

[LionPride]

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

Preach

 

[Alandrus]

I really hate being reminded Taylor Swift beat Kendrick. One of the biggest snubs I've ever seen.

 

[Cesare Borgia]

But this assumes that there is some consensus that Beyonce's album is better than Adele. Both artists are great and either one winning over the other shouldn't get people mad.

Oh I don't think Beyoncé's album is noteworthy, personally. But when she loses to Adele there will be a racial narrative alongside others about why she deserved to win. When in reality it shouldn't be hard to understand why a Grammy voter would prefer Adele's simple, conventional album to Beyoncé's more modern attempt. These are older people predominantly from the simple pop songwriting world who don't give a fuck about multiple genres (rock, metal, jazz, rap, etc). Formation is probably incomprehensible to them.

It's about old people voting, and ratings and sales. Adele is the bigger seller with a bigger audience, just as Swift was bigger than Kendrick Lamar.

 

[TheOddOne]

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

Fucking yes.

FUCKING YES.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

He sounds super salty. It's like the Grammies burnt down his house, murdered his family, and now he wants to save their honor.

 

[Discotheque]

Someone asked who's doing the Prince tribute at the Grammys.

Mehhhhh, so corny. I think bruno mars has talent but it would be better if they got Miguel and Lenny Kravitz for that song.

 

[ngff02]

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

 

[Majmun]

Beck's Morning Phase winning over Beyoncé's self-titled album is the real stinker here.

Beck's album was NOWHERE near commercially successful, wasn't as critically acclaimed and didn't have any cultural impact like Beyoncé's record did. Who is going to remember Beck's album in a few years? Beyoncé's surprise release shook the industry and its impact can still be felt.

It was like the elections: everyone expected Hilary to win, but Trump won!

If Lemonade doesn't win AOTY this year I'm going to protest.

 

[gdt]

Blonde AOTY brehs.

 

[ngff02]

Beck's Morning Phase winning over Beyoncé's self-titled album is the real stinker here.

Beck's album was NOWHERE near commercially successful, wasn't as critically acclaimed and didn't have any cultural impact like Beyoncé's record did. Who is going to remember Beck's album in a few years? Beyoncé's surprise release shook the industry and its impact can still be felt.

It was like the elections: everyone expected Hilary to win, but Trump won!

If Lemonade doesn't win AOTY this year I'm going to protest.

that feel when solange wins an award and beyonce doesn't.

deal with it

 

[deefol]

lol he's petty af. 1989 deserved AOTY. This isn't one of those situations

 

[deefol]

that feel when solange wins an award and beyonce doesn't.

deal with it

Beyonce is one of the most Grammy awarded artists of all time, she'll be good

 

[Goldboy]

MBDTF not even being nominated for AOTY was what made me realize how lame the Grammys are.

 

[NHarmonic.]

My point is that Taylor Swift, while a perfectly reasonable thing to enjoy, is not the greatest "artist" of the year.

You can say that is subjective, but I put forth artistic intent as compelling merit. She is manufactured pop music and her music is pretty vapid.

You sound ignorant af with this. Taylor Swift pretty much wrote herself every song until red, when she brought in people, but still did the work herself. Same with composing. Trying to take away her merit based on lack of artistic intent is really stupid, the girl released a pretty important album in 1989 in terms of pop.

This always devolves into macho talk about how rock and hip hop are better than "trashy/shitty" feminine pop music that don't appeal to them.

 

[solarus]

Yeezy taught him well whewwww

 

[El Topo]

He just sounds incredibly salty and petty, sorry.

 

[Mesousa]

Taylor has the uncanny ability to bring out the pettiness in people. 1989 was iconic and deserved to win based on that simple fact. Today I couldnt tell you a single song off of TPAB. If we are going off what was the best Album in that category too the Alabama Shakes would have won.

 

[jrush64]

Taylor has the uncanny ability to bring out the pettiness in people. 1989 was iconic and deserved to win based on that simple fact. Today I couldnt tell you a single song off of TPAB. If we are going off what was the best Album in that category too the Alabama Shakes would have won.

Iconic in what way? Why to TSwift fans keep saying this? What is iconic about it?

 

[Auctopus]

Taylor has the uncanny ability to bring out the pettiness in people. 1989 was iconic and deserved to win based on that simple fact. Today I couldnt tell you a single song off of TPAB. If we are going off what was the best Album in that category too the Alabama Shakes would have won.

This is an incredibly weak argument due to how subjective it is. Who cares that you can't?

I can't remember more than two tracks off 1989 despite enjoying it but I can name the TPAB track list back to front and recite some of my favourite, most impactful in full.

 

[Mr. X]

I don't get why people like TPAB so much.

It's a deep nuanced concept album that perfectly captures the current climate in the USA

 

[ItIsOkBro]

tswift is music for women as a defense for the music just might actually be offensive to women tbh.

 

[SummitAve]

Going after the Grammys is purely attention seeking at this point. Everybody already knows they are shit and meaningless. Just ignore them and stop putting them on the pedestal that you think they shouldn't be on.

 

[Mesousa]

Iconic in what way? Why to TSwift fans keep saying this? What is iconic about it?

It invaded all parts of American life. You didnt have to search for it to hear it. It had an almost Thriller like presence

This is an incredibly weak argument due to how subjective it is. Who cares that you can't?

I can't remember more than two tracks off 1989 despite enjoying it but I can name the TPAB track list back to front and recite some of my favourite, most impactful in full.

1989 sold like 10x as much. That is an objective fact.

 

[highrider]

As others have said, he just sounds like a petulant brat who is detached from the real world.

 

[Timedog]

I'm also one of the best alive

 

[HotHamBoy]

You sound ignorant af with this. Taylor Swift pretty much wrote herself every song until red, when she brought in people, but still did the work herself. Same with composing. Trying to take away her merit based on lack of artistic intent is really stupid, the girl released a pretty important album in 1989 in terms of pop.

This always devolves into macho talk about how rock and hip hop are better than "trashy/shitty" feminine pop music that don't appeal to them.

First off, cut the bullshit patronizing tone.

Secondly, I would say that derision exists towards artists whom people don't exemplify artistry. Take Taylor, for example. Taylor isn't someone who I would claim is an artist, rather a brand manager who can sing what is written for her or what she herself writes over beats made by someone else. None of her albums contain deeper interpretations, nuanced themes, narratives other than the ones boosting her personal brand, or complexity to them. She's an artist in so far as she knows what to create to keep her image perfect. Compare her to someone like Grimes, someone who I consider an artist because Grimes tries. She tries to create narratives with weird shit in them, she tries her hand and self-production, at finding new talent, at design, and she largely succeeds. Grimes or Charli XCX or FKA Twigs or Jenny Hval are all artists because they try to push the boundaries of their genre instead of complacently churn out songs that pander to their audience's expectations. Even taking Taylor's music in a vacuum away from her personal life, her music is more vapid than something like a Grimes or Twigs or a Tinashe, because her subject matter is confined to her relationships, romantic or otherwise. In short, Taylor Swift is an artist because she lacks the genre-pushing ambition her fellow artists seem to do so well.

Thirdly, your implied belief that GAF is inherently misogynistic in the way it treats media is horseshit. There are people on this forum who enjoy largely female media as are there people on this forum who will shout their love of waifus, abusers, and jiggle physics from the mountain tops. I honestly don't know the breakdowns for artists and which have primarily female audiences and which ones do. In terms of pop music, I know people on this forum like the work of the aforementioned Grimes, FKA Twigs, ANOHNI, Jenny Hval, Charli XCX, Bjork, Kate Bush, Fiona Apple, and very likely more. Going into electronic, you have the Black Madonna, Jlin, Fatima Al Qadiri, Elysia Crampton, Uniiqu3, Suzanne Ciani, Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith, GFOTY and so much more. These are all artists that people on this forum most certainly like, but can't exactly create a topic about because no one would respond to them. Unfortunately, the controversy and bullshit will always rise to the top. Take the OT for Bat For Lashes' new album, 12 posts total because no one else cared to actually go in and listen to it.

Fourthly, "Yes, it is completely valid to think Kanye releases better music than Taylor, however, the moment someone has the reverse opinion it is considered blasphemous. Hell, Taylor could be substituted for ANY artist whose primary audience is women and the same level of bile would have been thrown." In this statement, the reason the opposite gets derision is because people don't equate Kanye and Taylor to be on the same level of artistry. I don't because I don't see Taylor's music as anything greater than pop songs meant to light up the charts while reinforcing her status as music's number one heartbreaker feminist. At least in Kanye's music, you can dig deeper and find themes and nuance. I don't think you can for 1989, unless "Style" is actually about Taylor's continual fear at being left alone as her life becomes defined by her breakup headlines. As for the second part, replace "Taylor Swift" with "Bjork" or "Kate Bush" or "Fiona Apple" or "Sleater Kinney" or "Grouper" or "Missy Elliot" or whomever, and you have people who will more than likely pick the females over Kanye because their music has earned that artistic respect.

Finally and to wrap this monologue up, "1989" beat "TPaB" on one metric alone; sales. On every other conceivable level, "To Pimp A Butterfly" exceeded "1989"; on artistry exhibited, on themes & nuances, on issues touched upon, on cultural relevance to events outside of your daily commute, on communicating someone else's larger struggles to the world. Time is going to be a lot more favorable to "TPaB" than "Taylor Swift Gets Her Heart Broken Vol. 5".

Very well said. Much better than I could do.

 

[messiaen]

I didn't know Frank's ego got inflated like this. Maybe that's why Blonde was a typical sophomore album.