"Music is art, and art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for. "
This is what Taylor Swift says in interviews because it sounds as if she's on the side of the angels and not just speaking for herself.
But what does it mean? Some pop music may be art but most of it is just pop music and is neither important nor rare.
We don't pay for things because they're valuable. We pay for things according to how much we value them, which is a different thing.
What she's really saying is,"right now I can get away with charging a premium for my services and I intend to do it while I can."
Nothing wrong with that. Rembrandt would have done the same.
I agree. Not sure what your point is, though. So Swift is maximising her opportunity - er, yeah, fine, I think we get that. Are you saying that she could have articulated her argument better? If so, you know she's a 24 year old Pop artist, right - how many of her peers have even bothered to enter the debate? I'm not a big fan of her music and the Spotify debate has pros and cons on both sides, but if the nuance in her statement is lost in the language she's used, we can at least be thankful someone with her clout is raising the debate's profile.
ReplyDeleteSounds like she's in the early stages of 'Beiber's Disease' in which very famous pop star starts taking what they do far too seriously and consequently piss off both their fans and the professional critics. The only song I know by her is her excellent acoustic version of Rule the World. I hope she's cute and talented enough to survive the inevitable personal and career meltdown that almost invariably follows such a mindset.
ReplyDeleteI think that her credo is 'Pile it high and sell it cheap.'
ReplyDeleteCan't blame the lass.
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/nov/06/taylor-swift-responsible-22-per-cent-sold-us-1989