Taylor Swift - Speak Now (Oct 2010) - hype, anticipation &c

Since the last arena show I saw with props and skits was in support of Neil Young's underwhelming Greendale, it's possible that I'd agree with you! Like J0rdan though I just had a problem with the assumptions of your first couple of posts.

At least in Greendale the stuff was directly in support of a concept album. This one, per your Dylan example, would have literally featured a busy dance routine to "Cowgirl in the Sand" consisting of cowgirls and cowboys dancing in the sand.

i think the hoedown version of "mean" adds something to a pretty slight song

It adds a goat.

would love to see cortez the killer staged

At least in Greendale the stuff was directly in support of a concept album. This one, per your Dylan example, would have literally featured a busy dance routine to "Cowgirl in the Sand" consisting of cowgirls and cowboys dancing in the sand.

haha so?

Are there certain kinds of spectacle you do accept from great singer-songwriters, Josh? What about fireworks and costume changes in a Prince show?

Is his objection just the literalness of the stage show, in relation to the ostensible subject-matter of the songs?

Because I wonder if that's an object to a particular kind of songwriting, which I gather was Alfred's point earlier.

er "objection" not "object"

would love to see cortez the killer staged

― buzza, Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:40 PM

would love to see "fuckin up" staged

I'm not at all spectacle averse! But if the songwriter in question is indeed dealing in narrative, the visuals should support the song, not supplant it. In Prince's case, the man himself is something of a spectacle, so given that he's innately OTT, it's hard for him to go further OTT. My problem with the Swift show is that I think one of her prime attributes is the simplicity of both her songs and her storytelling (as such). When I listen to those songs, they don't scream out spectacle the way the usual top 40 suspects do. Yet live she showed absolutely no faith in the ability of the songs to stand on their own, despite boasting one of the most loyal audiences on the planet. Alas, the Shania is strong in this one.

Anyway, I'm still shocked that any of you could watch those ridiculous clips I posted and think, yeah, this is right up my alley. I can defend it as the stuff a 12-year girl would love, but nothing beyond that.

Interesting take. I dug the spectacle, but 1.) I probably don't love all the songs as much as you do, and 2.) I didn't feel she was overwhelmed by it at all. I'd never seen her perform, and I came away remembering her above all else. Plus I really felt like I was hearing a band, not a canned production.

I did review it in order to take my niece, who performs in and loves musicals. Maybe there's a "bored parent" aspect to the overkill.

official sparks fly video came out earlier today:

http://vimeo.com/27548153

liveblog with my roommate:

"slow motion dress wave"

"everyone is twirling"

"this is a really weird concert video"

"this is a better concert video than 'fearless'"

"taylor swift looks like she has the best most fun tours ever"

yeah, seriously -- must be surreal to have that be your life

Just to give Josh in Chicago a little bit of support, I wouldn't have really enjoyed the costume changes/set pieces. As per markdawg's video, does someone really drop out of a giant bell when she sings "drop everything now"? Oh, "drop", I get it.

I enjoy T. Swift's music a lot and it looks like she has enough innate stage presence to carry the show by herself. And the truth is, you don't need to make your set look like a Broadway production to do a big arena show, and it's especially jarring working within the properties of country, which you expect to be, you know, rough-hewn and bare-bones and shit.

On the other hand, I find it helpful to remember that T. Swift is music for 12-year-old girls and so whatever.

and thirtysomething rock critics

Tbh, I'm not really a fan of Taylor Swift - at least, I don't listen to her for pleasure - but I can see their appeal, for sure, and I have nothing bad to say about her as a live singer/performer. She's got presence and charisma to spare. But everything around her was ridiculous and relentless. And so Taylor Swift comes to the crossroads and decides which path to take next: the safe, lucrative path that's the equivalent of playing girls birthday parties for the rest of her life (granted, 13,000 girls at a time), or something with potentially more risk and less reward.

Even by the standards of modern country, btw - and I've seen Reba, and Martina, and Shania, and Garth - there was virtually nothing country about this show. Nary a Telecaster in sight, barely much fiddle, banjo made an appearance, yes, but so did the ukulele, which Taylor used to cover Fall Out Boy. At other points she referenced Train's "Hey Soul Sister" and OneRepublic's "Apologize."

See, I was totally thinking about like "What Would Reba Do?" when I was looking at those clips. The only live Shania video I've seen had a keytar player.

And I think she was wearing a wetsuit. Shania isn't exactly the platonic ideal of country either, is what I'm saying.

Oh wait, maybe it's a karate uniform. I can't fucking tell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnn4CjJaLWo

Which is what I'm getting at, I guess. Taylor has the potential to amount to more than Shania. That is, she can be more than jut a revenue generator, if she wants. It's really her choice, but she'd have to choose to put the toys away and ignore the call of the catwalk. We'll see.

Taylor had the totally de rigueur big budget country sideman, btw, the vaguely Asian guitar wiz with a funny haircut, which has supplanted the Asian violin prodigy with a mohawk.

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/1441792931/Grant_Mickelson_65_reasonably_small.jpg

HI, I PLAZ COUNTRY NOW!

You're selling her very short, Josh. Have you listened to her records? Putting aside the fact that she's barely out of her teens, she's acquired a massive audience, not all of which is teen girls (and, to be honest, you write this with distaste even though you've tried not to), because she's a sharp observer, an excellent melodist, and some singer.

And so Taylor Swift comes to the crossroads and decides which path to take next: the safe, lucrative path that's the equivalent of playing girls birthday parties for the rest of her life (granted, 13,000 girls at a time), or something with potentially more risk and less reward.

I can understand recoiling from her live shows, but what's wrong with regarding the Live Experience as a discrete one requiring costume changes, banjos, and ponies? T

She's had the same band from the very first shows, with only a few variations. It's funny how the two guys with Hot Topic 'dos haven't let fame and money affect their poor taste in hair fashion. Seem like a nice gang, though.

there was virtually nothing country about this show. Nary a Telecaster in sight

I . . . just . . .

Instruments and arrangements don't make a song "country."

It's not my style to attack posters on here, but Josh's view of Swift the artist (not just the live shows) is retrograde and disheartening in a critic in 2011.

Sorry you feel that way. I have no prob. with Swift the artist. I have a problem with Swift the performer, who aimed entirely for teen girls (who also composed the vast majority of the crowd that I saw). If someone else digs it, that's cool, but basing a show's success on its appeal to teens is a conversation killer to me. I judge her on the standards by which I judge anything. A good show is a good book is a good meal. The "good" is the important part.

Alfred, if you can think of a more overt country signifier than a Tele twang, I'm all ears. I don't truck with that "barely out of her teens" stuff, though, which is what truly sells her short. I mean, Adele is "barely out of her teens" (for example; not saying that she's better or worse than Taylor). Johnny Marr was "barely out of his teens" when the Smiths debuted. And so on.

because she's a sharp observer, an excellent melodist, and some singer.

Is exactly my point. Those attributes are important enough, and real enough, that she simply didn't need the overkill. I wanted to see Taylor Swift the sharp observer, the excellent melodist, the singer, not Taylor Swift the cast member.

I've become less of a genre fetishist as I've aged. "Country" to me is "telling stories" -- dispatches from the middle and lower middle class. It's got nothing to do with instruments.

Teles are fucking badass though alfred. Question that probably won't get answered here: do country guys always buy Fender teles, or do some of them go for G&L ASATs?

Alfred, if you can think of a more overt country signifier than a Tele twang, I'm all ears.

Banjo? Dobro? Mandolin? Pedal fucking steel?

I mean, just because Brad Paisley is all popular and shit doesn't mean Tele=country.

http://www.sweetslyrics.com/images/img_gal/11684_prince_l.jpg

Or even that country=Tele.

Shit, man, a lot of people play Teles. But not a lot of country music lacks a Tele.

Jon, I think a lot of them actually have custom guitars that are often based on Teles - like, Tele shapes but not really Teles. So it's not the brand so much as the shape/sound/electronics.

Alfred, is there anything "middle and lower middle class" about Swift's stories?

Phil, I'll totally give you pedal steel as a more overt signifier.

how come whenever everyone else does a comedy display name people get the joke, but when I do one, everyone just calls me jon. toss this.

Alfred, is there anything "middle and lower middle class" about Swift's stories?

Yes, I would say so.

Hmm, I'd say her songs are more universal than that, which I don't think is the same as defaulting lower middle class, which is just sort of patronizing.

But not a lot of country music lacks a Tele.

A certain type of country played by a certain type of performer? Yes. "Country music," categorically? No. When I look at live shots of the top-selling country acts of the last few years I see a few Teles, a few Gretsches, a few Les Pauls, a couple of PRSs, a Strat or two . . . "Tele" as a country music signifier is currently limited, as far as I can see it, to solo male singer/songwriter types -- Dierks Bentley, Brad Paisley, occasionally Ricky Skaggs, etc.

many xps

Vince Gill and Rodney Crowell too, right?

Yeah, maybe it's a dude thing these days, I guess.

anyway, way back when I threw it in there because someone called Taylor Swift country, and I guess to my ears there's almost nothing country about her. But I didn't take into account the apparent shifting definition of country, assuming it can be defined at all. I do, I suppose, still like genres, especially those rooted in such long and storied traditions. Can reggae be reggae without many of the things we think of as reggae?

http://forward.com/workspace/assets/images/articles/blog-matisyahu-022211.jpg

Ha, for a second there I wasn't sure if that was a David Allen Coe joke or a Matisyahu joke. I'm still not sure?