“Let’s Give Taylor Swift Her Due Credit While Celebrating Diversity in the Music Industry”

Have you heard of Queen Mary University of London? Well, guess what? There’s another one, and it’s not even in the UK! The name may sound familiar, but this time it’s at a university in Belgium. They’re offering a new course called Literature: (Taylor’s Version) that’s set to begin this fall. And if that’s not enough, scholars will be meeting in Australia for a “Swiftposium” next February. Exciting stuff!

Meanwhile, in the United States, there is speculation about the political influence of a popular singer. Recently, she used her Instagram account to encourage registration for voting, resulting in 35,000 new registrations in one day. Additionally, many are interested in “Swiftonomics,” which explores how businesses flourish wherever Taylor Swift goes. In fact, just three nights of concerts in Chicago were enough to boost its tourism industry, according to the governor of Illinois. Rumors have also circulated about Swift’s relationship with NFL player Travis Kelce, leading to a 400% increase in sales of his jersey. One online research company president even stated that if Swift were an economy, she would be bigger than 50 countries, as her loyal fan base rivals that of subjects to a royal crown.

The concept of great conquerors captures our imagination. A TikTok trend suggests that men have a seemingly daily fascination with the Roman empire. Meanwhile, a psychiatrist recently shared in the New York Times how her practice has become heavily influenced by Taylor Swift. Patients rely on her assistance to navigate through life’s difficulties and can become emotionally distressed when Swift concerts approach. They often question how they will manage to return to their regular routines when the event concludes.

Similar to Bob Dylan, Taylor Swift is often regarded as a brilliant musician. However, it begs the question: is she truly 50 times more gifted than other up-and-coming musicians whose economic success is limited to their parents’ basements? In comparison, Swift appears as a giant amongst the small: those who possess even a fraction less of her talent or luck may spend their lives barely scraping by on minimum wage. Additionally, there exists a parallel world, perhaps only a step away from our own, where a 33-year-old Swift continues to struggle in country music clubs while another artist reigns as the king or queen of the music industry.

The world of music and arts is highly competitive, with only a few individuals becoming highly successful and wealthy while the majority of artists struggle to make a living. For instance, on Spotify, an artist needs to have six million streams to earn the equivalent of a year’s minimum wage in the UK. Additionally, only one percent of musicians benefit from 90% of the profits. This trend is also evident in gaming and visual arts, making it a global problem that continues to worsen. The absence of a striving middle class exacerbates this issue, as wealth concentration at the top leads to economic instability and a lack of innovation. While established artists like Taylor Swift and the Rolling Stones can remain successful despite a decline in quality, the industry has neglected many revolutionary artists who have been worn out or left without financial support. Ultimately, monocultures are detrimental to the environment, and the same happens in the music and arts industry, where few thrive while others struggle to get recognition for their artistry.

Winning in the fame market has its drawbacks even for those who achieve it. Our evolution has conditioned us to thrive among small groups of 15 to 50, so being at the top of millions can be overwhelming. The desire to both idolize and overthrow people in power cannot be controlled in large numbers, leading to both adoration and abuse for celebrities. Those who pay too much attention to their critics risk not surviving, which is why many celebrities struggle with addiction and mental health issues. On the other hand, those who ignore critics become complacent, leading to a decline in their work. The arts industry faces a unique challenge as luck plays a significant role in determining success. Even experts can’t accurately predict winners, as seen by the rejection of artists such as Elvis Presley and JK Rowling. Public tastes are fickle and influenced by the opinions of others. In a world where superstardom reigns supreme, luck can be the deciding factor. The film Yesterday illustrates this unpredictability, where a struggling musician who performs the Beatles’ songs to no avail serves as a parable on the arbitrary nature of fame.

The story of the script for the movie “Yesterday” has a deeper meaning. The original writer, Jack Barth, lacked the influence to bring his unique idea to fruition. Instead, the script was taken over by Richard Curtis, a more established writer who changed it to feature a Beatles plagiarist who achieves stardom with their songs but ultimately gives it up for a settled life with Lily James. Barth believes that Curtis downplayed his contribution to the script in interviews. This illustrates how the entertainment industry values fame over talent. Barth, an unknown writer, remained unknown while Curtis, already famous, became even more so. Simply being talented is not enough to succeed in this industry.

Scroll to Top