Taylor Swift shilling for the PTB?

[Musicinventor]

Not sure if it is relevant to this discussion, but it indicated to me that there was something different about Taylor Swift’s music compared to everything else out there at the time.

It seems to me that it wouldn’t be difficult to embed inaudible frequencies into the music to manipulate an audience into, obedience, devotion, etc. which could explain her appeal.

 

[Musicinventor]

Taylor Swift seems to have the world (or part of it) in the palm of her hands. A very attractive girl singing relatable songs seemingly. Her audiences seem mesmerised by her power. She is like the head witch of a coven where all the acolytes attach themselves to her every utterance. Some of them appear to be in trance mode. It is quite scary.

I find it interesting that you mentioned "witch" as she has been accused of being a Witch starting sometime in 2023…

 

[Evan]

And just for the record, Elvis didn’t write those hits. Jerry Lieber and Mike Stoller, Otis Blackwell, Aaron Schroeder, and other professional songwriters did the writing, and to his credit Elvis never took any credit himself as a songwriter.

As for the 70s, disco might have ruled the airwaves, but Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, and the Grateful Dead filled the stadiums, and wrote their own songs, with some exceptions, which were always credited to the original artists (yes, Zeppelin did obfuscate the origins of few early blues quotes), but mostly they created more than they copped. And those they “borrowed” were the blues songs they were inspired by.

And then there is Rush, which you either get or don’t, but definitely wrote ambitious and epic creations which were entirely their own.

But I digress. They definitely weren’t shills in any way. Anyhow, apologies for the rambling discourse on my favorite stuff. I do seem to recall the Cs mentioning Pink Floyd in a positive light at some point.

 

[Mari]

She´s a vampire, of course! Therefore, irresistible to humans.

On the more sociological side; it is an interesting phenomena. I know of her sporadically, as any other super-star, and it is interesting to see how she rose up to such a fame. I.e. there is also Miley Cyrus - her father was a famous country singer, her godmother is Dolly Parton, she was famous Hannah Montana on the Disney Channel, so one would think that she has both background and means to be launched to ultra-mega-star. Yet, we have Taylor Swift.

I thought about where do I know Swift from and I remembered an episode from the Big Bang Theory (i.e. here) where Sheldon had a comment in lines with her song. He ended up being a fan of TS. That show was super popular and (maybe? probably?) this kind of things might be planted all over people´s favourite shows, people who usually don´t listen to that kind of music or even follow celebrities, enforcing/programming the idea of "Taylor Swift is awesome".

Here is a video where this guy analysis today´s music trough different angles: changes in the music itself, rhythm and lyrics, creativity, psychological factors like "mere-exposure effect" that is responsible for people eventually liking the song being played all around them, and so on.

I bumped into this video when searching the thought/idea how today´s songs are made to sound (or follow the pattern) like nursery rhymes - for adults. The repeating beat pattern, sparse lyrics with message they want you to be tuned/programmed in, and so on.

 

[BHelmet]

Good call on Katy Perry and Cyrus - the torch gets handed from one to the next; same agenda purpose and function for the Diva class.
And I always thought Dr. Seuss' "Green Eggs and Ham" would have made a great rap/hip hop number. (thick Brooklyn accent - snarling vocal etc)

I guess a question would be - is she shilling because she is an active participant/believer in the agenda (Satanic/NWO fill-in-the-blank) or is she just a sell out who is able to perform the act but is mindlessly following orders? I tend to think it is the former, but who really knows

 

[Veszna]

This thread is the only reason I listened to the first Taylor Swift song in my life.
I don't think there's any point in arguing about taste (in the ancient Greek sense), I can add to the conversation as a European who is completely out of this TS madness, after the first song, that TS is probably a talented composer who is easy to shape. (Personal opinion.)
I prefer to listen to music without lyrics or classic rock music. But I am much more interested in the question of whether TS is a symptom of social consciousness or is she the one who shapes it. I vote for the former. The musical reform of the 60s/70s/80s seems to me much more like a kind of STO influence, while most of today's songs are more a symptom of the collective subconscious.
...
With all due respect, I'll stick with classic rock music.

 

[BHelmet]

Hey Evan! I will ramble on all day with you on this stuff! Next exit, Digression City...

Yeah there was a ton of diversity under the hood of the 70's but I was looking for the primary POP music trend (like Taylor Swift) that seemed to attract similar mindless followers that overshadowed the Pink Floyds* of the world and get rammed down everybody's throats. And that was disco until the later 70's. Disco served the Empire well. I can hardly believe it lasted that long and that YMCA by the Village People is still a thing. OH!, I almost forgot: CHER!! She was almost a proto-Oprah! (this is hysterical, btw. I am imagining we are at a dive in Huntington having this conversation, ready to order another round)

Key takeaway: Never underestimate the stupidity (lack of taste and discernment) of large groups of people. Like knowledge, there is a finite supply of good taste. So any mass aggregation of collective taste is almost necessarily destined to be qualitatively inferior, otherwise it could never be so popular.

And that is another point - the PTB keep trying - Adele (however you spell it) - come and gone with the wind. So it is good to remember that Taylor Swift is not the only Diva - and she is hated and despised by many, my daughter included. Which revisits the idea - how legit is her popularity? Is it all or just a deep fake projection?

*Until Dark Side of the Moon, My recollection is that Floyd was a curiosity band with a limited, if die hard, following. (and I did hear them live 4 times and waited with great anticipation for every album release)

PS, as for Rush... (pause) I couldn't get past that dudes voice. (A hysterical coked-up Gerbil rushing on a too big hit of acid wearing Spiderman underwear 3 sizes too small?) I don't know if he or Robert Plant sounded more like fingernails on a chalk board to me but, the music was another story - that actually sounded good but the singer never shut up for long enough to enjoy their phenomenal tightness and complexity (that's just me. So, no, I never got Rush) LOL - I don't mean to offend you - just being honest in a subjective way that is hopefully humorous too. It's a Socal thing.

 

[EmeraldR]

I was recently visiting family over in the uk and I spoke with two of my grand nieces about Taylor Swift - they are 9 and 11 years old - it was clear that they were ardent TS fans- I asked them what were their reasons for really liking her - they said that in her act she shares here experiences of her life and journey also her generosity for charities etc. my two nieces were inspired to organise a charity event at their local school to raise/donate money to the local food bank and homeless shelter- in itself thats a good thing for them to be doing !Would they have been inspired to do that if TS wasnt around or doing that ?

I am sure the philanthropic side of TS is a well oiled PR job, nevertheless I ve seen much worse things pedalled by pop stars and "VIPs"!

referrring back to the philanthropy aspect thats always been utilised by people like b gates and the masons - the sackler foundation comes to mind here-sales pitch stuff/camoflage for nefarious agendas etc.

as a part time muso her music aint that bad compared to alot of the rubbish that is being pedalled out in these times (eurovison song contest!) and her lyrics are mainly pertaining to her own life experiences ( if that is genuine of course).

is she an STO nordic ? i think not !

I guess more will be revealed in time as to what her position is ...

is her motive STO giving or a STS agenda ?

 

[T.C.]

I've said before in other threads about music that pop music as a genre is basically the audio equivalent of fast food.

Elvis, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones (primarily, though there were plenty of others around early on) inspired young people to form bands and write and make music. And ever since, there have been 1000s of bands and artists who made a living simply by the fact that they were good at what they did.

But marketing and branding is the tendril of the devil, and that tendril creeps into any area of human life where there is the potential to drain energy - whether that's simply money or the energy given over through fanaticism.

If you want to make it in the music industry, then you have to look at your band, or the artist who you are, as a 'brand'. And you and your music are the 'product'. And the big secret, especially when it comes to food and drink, is that you want to make your product as bland as possible in order to appeal to the maximum number of customers. And then, the marketing campaign is actually what the consumer uses to fill in the blanks about how the product tastes. Coca-cola hardly tastes of anything, really. It's just fizzy and sweet.

All areas of business tend towards monopoly. How many fast food chains are there? There are a lot, but McDonald's rules the roost. How many sneaker companies are there? A lot, but Nike and Adidas are at the top.

It's just the same thing with music. People young and old like to eat Big Macs. We could ask, "What is the appeal of the Big Mac, or Coca-cola? How come it's not just fat 20-somthings who like them? How come it's children, adults, old people, black and white, thin and fat, healthy and unhealthy, rich and poor?"

I think it's just the same thing with Taylor Swift.

Also, a bit of perspective is in order also. I don't know how many of you are familiar with the Dave Matthews Band? But I'm guessing there will be many of you who haven't heard of him/them. Or maybe you've heard the name, but you couldn't name a song.

Well, I haven't looked at the numbers, and maybe Taylor Swift might have surpassed them in some ways now, but The Dave Matthews Band have, for many, many years, been the biggest live act in the history of music. When they tour, they do super-mega stadium/bowl type venues that hold up to 100,000 people at a time. And their music is the polar opposite of Taylor Swift. It is complex, long-form, deep, meaningful, and you have to be an expert level musician to be able to play any of the parts of any of their songs.

What does this tell us about the majority of real music fans and their appreciation for good over bad? Well, as with anything, the music of the Dave Matthews Band is not to everyone's taste, and again, he/they are also a brand, with their music being their product, and they are marketed to some degree. But on the whole, their music does the talking, and I think it should go some way to reassure us that there is still musical taste out there, and to a massive degree. Remember, again, they are (or if not, were until recently) the biggest live act in America, and possibly the world.

Now, the $64,000 question from this might be, "How many people who go to see Dave Matthews like the music of Taylor Swift?" I bet it's not a majority of them, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was as high as 20-30%. Why? Because even if you are the type of person who likes to go out to a nice restaurant once a month and pay $100 for a high quality meal, you'll still call at McDonald's every now and again and have a Big Mac.

 

[T.C.]

I was recently visiting family over in the uk and I spoke with two of my grand nieces about Taylor Swift - they are 9 and 11 years old - it was clear that they were ardent TS fans- I asked them what were their reasons for really liking her - they said that in her act she shares here experiences of her life and journey

Now, this is the insidious part, for me. It's the 'corruption of the youth' aspect, and one of the many reasons I wouldn't wish to have kids, having taught many children for periods of years and seen them changed as they become exposed to different aspects of our toxic culture.

Your grand nieces say that the reason they love TS is because she shares the experiences of her life and journey, but the songs of hers I've heard on the radio are all about toxic relationships. Lyrics such as:

"So it's gonna be forever
Or it's gonna go down in flames
You can tell me when it's over, mm
If the high was worth the pain
Got a long list of ex-lovers
They'll tell you I'm insane
'Cause you know I love the players
And you love the game"

And:

"Boys only want love if it's torture
Don't say I didn't, say I didn't warn ya"

9 and 11 years old? Ugh.

 

[sid]

I was in a workplace situation where I had to comfort a relatively young woman in my team who was crying a river because someone was abusive to her at work. I took her into an executive’s office, my manger at the time hoping he would offer some kind words. He said, “I will give you the advice that I give to my own 18 year old daughter that you should just Taylor Swift it and Shake It Off”. She said that she loves Taylor Swift, calmed down and went on her way. He said that he is a huge fan of Swift. He is a 50 years old geezer.

I didn’t figure at the time but have since picked up on the fact that the MSM does promote Taylor a lot. It seems the baton has been passed over from Katy Perry who was perhaps not as polished and also labelled as boobilicious, which can get in the way of subtle programming. They did try hard with the “I kissed a girl..” rubbish. With Taylor, I see less music and more of the rest i.e. look good, play the instruments and dance around with some elegance. Its more showmanship than real talent. I’d also say that they are prepping up Dua Lipa to be the next real big star once the swiftmania begins to die down.

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

On that note, I'm kind of wondering why comparatively, the number of LGBT in celebrities past and present (even if they're closeted) seems to be higher than the rest of the population when you look proportionally. I sometimes wonder if people who are of LGBT orientation are naturally more attracted to the arts and entertainment, just like I feel like women basketball and football seems to attract lesbian/ women who are more masculine.

To a certain extent yes to the last one, many of them like the sense of aesthetics and "refinement" in things, I can understand this perfectly and I can appreciate it too; it's just "creative-feminine" to some extent.
Although as you know and especially in recent times there are many cases in which that artistic sense becomes increasingly grotesque... if you add the "empowerment"-feminism thing to it, you have the perfect cocktail to attract many broken or broken people. who have an individualistic and nihilistic vision-interests of life. (basically what is promoted in LGBT circles currently).

 

[Mark7]

9 and 11 years old? Ugh.

It's sad. Kids are generally sexualized early in the materialistic West. It seems children are missing some spiritual education,
while the focus in school these days is on woke ideology, and... materialism. Meaningful hard work is not promoted to young people, so many have boring lives where pleasure-seeking or worse nihilistic behaviors become ingrained. There's less concept of community responsibility or responsibility to family in the West. Community for many nowadays is the community of imagined victimhood and self-imposed ignorance. Hard times or a cleansing are only a matter of time it seems. In the not-too-distant past, people got married earlier, but they did so to have children, I am not recommending we go back to those times, but it's good to remember what sex is for primarily.

 

[Musicinventor]

And just for the record, Elvis didn’t write those hits. Jerry Lieber and Mike Stoller, Otis Blackwell, Aaron Schroeder, and other professional songwriters did the writing, and to his credit Elvis never took any credit himself as a songwriter.

As for the 70s, disco might have ruled the airwaves, but Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, and the Grateful Dead filled the stadiums, and wrote their own songs, with some exceptions, which were always credited to the original artists (yes, Zeppelin did obfuscate the origins of few early blues quotes), but mostly they created more than they copped. And those they “borrowed” were the blues songs they were inspired by.

And then there is Rush, which you either get or don’t, but definitely wrote ambitious and epic creations which were entirely their own.

But I digress. They definitely weren’t shills in any way. Anyhow, apologies for the rambling discourse on my favorite stuff. I do seem to recall the Cs mentioning Pink Floyd in a positive light at some point.

Let’s not forget the likes of Yes, Genesis, E.LP., Kansas, Jethro Tull… but now I digress. I dig the rant Evan!

 

[Musicinventor]

I was in a workplace situation where I had to comfort a relatively young woman in my team who was crying a river because someone was abusive to her at work. I took her into an executive’s office, my manger at the time hoping he would offer some kind words. He said, “I will give you the advice that I give to my own 18 year old daughter that you should just Taylor Swift it and Shake It Off”. She said that she loves Taylor Swift, calmed down and went on her way. He said that he is a huge fan of Swift. He is a 50 years old geezer.

I didn’t figure at the time but have since picked up on the fact that the MSM does promote Taylor a lot. It seems the baton has been passed over from Katy Perry who was perhaps not as polished and also labelled as boobilicious, which can get in the way of subtle programming. They did try hard with the “I kissed a girl..” rubbish. With Taylor, I see less music and more of the rest i.e. look good, play the instruments and dance around with some elegance. It’s more showmanship than real talent. I’d also say that they are prepping up Dua Lipa to be the next real big star once the swiftmania begins to die down.

Sounds like the difference between entertainment and true art.