[ SECRET POST #3984 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3984 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 09 secrets from Secret Submission Post #570.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

03. https://i.imgur.com/Pa9PvG1.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

IA.

[(Anonymous)]

it does feel that way, but you never know. She's got a lot of life ahead of her, a stylistic u-turn could be in the cards...

[(Anonymous)]

In terms of how successful it was, I agree. Not for reasons to do with being critical of Taylor Swift, but just because the success of 1989 was so utterly massive. It was a phenomenon, and the chances of creating such a massive phenomenon twice are minicsule. Especially because I think that when you set that kind of a high water mark, the public becomes resistent to it happening again. Over-exposure and public burnout begin working against the person, and they actually have to hit a markedly bigger homerun in order to impress/interest/captivate people the way their previous homerun did.

In terms of how good 1989 was, I feel the same way except about Red. It is by far my favorite TS album. It's the album that got me into her in the first place, and it's the album that is most "my kind of music." (Pop generally isn't, so 1989 and Reputation both had an uphill battle to make me like them. I do generally like them both, but not the way I love Red.)

[lovedforaday]

Red's not pop? On what planet?

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

Red is pop to a significant degree but it's not 100% pop the way 1989 was. It still has a fair amount of country stylings and influences, and a musical palate that still draws on a lot of country instrumentation and stuff. It's a transition album. So I can see where OP is coming from. If you listen to songs like Begin Again and Red, those songs are definitely rooted in country song stylings to a greater extent than anything on 1989.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, this is exactly what I meant. Red is far less quintessentially pop than 1989 or Reputation. The popiest tracks on Red are, not surprisingly, the major singles. Begin Again and Red were also singles, but, also not surprisingly, they never became the huge hits that pop jams We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together, 22, and I Knew You Were Trouble became.

Besides those three major hits, I'd say pretty much all the tracks on Red are part country, part pop, and then also a little bit of strummy melodic folk and indie vibes in there too. Or...it's almost like the collision of pop and country in Red created something that felt similar to mildly folk, mildly indie tracks -without actually being folk or indie. I'm not sure quite how to describe it, but I know that 80% of the music I like is folk or indie or both folk and indie, and Red hits a similar spot for me when I listen to it - while still being more accessible and infectious and radio-friendly than most folk/indie.

I do also like the true pop hits off of Red, but not in the way I love All Too Well, Holy Ground, Sad Beautiful Tragic, I Almost Do, or Red. (Or State Of Grace, or Treacherous, or Come Back Be Here. Lol, I just love almost all of Red.)

Possibly not.

[(Anonymous)]

A lot of successful music artists have an album that people consider the peak of their career and it usually isn't the last thing they do. But I figure that's pretty natural for a lot of ongoing artistic endeavors. And that doesn't mean that subsequent projects can't be good, just that they probably won't attain the same status.

Re: Possibly not.

[(Anonymous)]

True. It might be a bummer to peak really early/young, but it's unrealistic to expect everything to surpass what came before (and who knows if this ill actually turn out to have been her peak). Besides, wasn't this album massively successful? That would mean even if she never does this well again, she can still be doing really well.

Re: Possibly not.

[(Anonymous)]

+100000

[(Anonymous)]

God, that's sad.

[(Anonymous)]

Reputation is honestly one of her best albums, though I like 1989 just as equally.

[(Anonymous)]

I loathe EDM, I'm not a fan of hiphop, rap, or dubstep, and pop is not my favorite genre of music either, so Reputation (which is the latter, with aspects of all the former) was an extremely hard sell for me (except for New Year's Day, which was right up my alley). But honestly, I do think it's a really good album. I can't really say whether I think it's one of her best or not, because my subjective tastes just lean way too hard towards the musical style of her Red, and even Speak Now, eras. But Rep is good. It's a solid lineup of interesting, enjoyable, radio-friendly, and even somewhat provocative songs. And the way Taylor has reshaped everything from her self-expression to her vocal range to her melodic tendencies on the album in order to distinguish it from all her previous works shows a lot of finesse.

[(Anonymous)]

This lukewarm ham sandwich is the best thing that I'll ever eat.