Oh Taylor …
While her team of snakey lawyers and overbearing PR directors continually try and shade reality, it’s not a huge secret that Taylor Swift Inc. isn’t exactly the perfect archetype of generosity and glitter-speckled goodness everyone thinks she is.
There we said it; so shoot us …
Sure, she sends money to kids with cancer and posts cute videos of herself sending shit to fans on Christmas — but the habitual theme anywhere online is that she constantly has to have a god damn campaign with video proof hovering around everything she does. It’s insincere. The attention-grabbing marketability is exactly why we think it’s all for the likes and hearts. No soul. There’s no soul behind Mrs. Swift's behavior.
And her tight grasp on the ubiquitous brand? It ruins things sometimes, like beautiful weddings and whatnot.
Recently, her penchant for strict rules against anyone using anything that she's a part of interrupted a vlogger couple’s wedding video — for a few days, at least. In the clip, Rose Ellen Dix and her wife Rosie Spaughton danced — briefly — to one of Swift’s songs, a completely unprofitable venture for the duo, during their first dance. The pop star’s team of buzz-kills swiftly moved in and placed a block on the audio of the video where Swift’s song was featured.
After a successful campaign from the newlywed’s own fans, the two brides managed to get through to someone in the shadows of Hollywood, because a few days after the block was placed, the audio returned to normal and no other restrictions have been put on the ceremony. All is good now.
Which is fine, whatever, but should something that unnecessary have happened in the first place? Here we are, celebrating two women getting married who wanted to share it with the world, then the two having to take the time to try and fix restrictions that some greedy artist puts in place because of whatever reasoning. Kudos to the team for doing the right thing eventually (likely in the face of disapproval from fans), but what have things come to when a couple has to defend why they used a particular song (they both say that it actually means a lot to the both of them and their relationship).
Isn’t that exactly the point of becoming an artist: To share with the world your creativity, hoping one day it means something to someone else, that it means something so much so that they dance to it at their wedding? This is what art is, connection through stimulation, and yet a team of lawyers will swoop in and direct the value of it to a monetary one instead.
So what, Swift and her team eventually did the right thing — she’s still part of an over-reaching gang that’s devaluing the emotion of art.
And her songs suck too … there, we said it. Shoot us.