I see this opinion often enough, so I have to ask. How much money do you think Swift’s parents put into her career? How big do you think a parental college fund should be to give their kids a solid leg up? How does that initial financial backing discredit her as she continues writing a massive catalog of successful songs?
So I have no issues with parents setting their kids up for success. The problem is that almost every wealthy person that was “born on third base” acts like they came from middle class or lower. Good example is that video where the David Beckham meme came from. His wife comes from generations of royalty, and during an interview she said she came from a middle class family who had to drive her to school because the bus wouldn’t come to her house.
The bus couldn’t come because she lived in a fucking castle and her dad drove her to school a Bentley.
I don’t think anyone is discrediting her continued success. People are just pointing out that she wouldn’t have been able to do that in the first place without the financial backing she had to get into the industry. IIRC (and I’m happy to be corrected), her dad literally created a record label to sign her. How many people get that luxury? There are a lot of artists who got big (either by accident, by money, or pure luck) but were never able to sustain it, so her being able to continue making “successful” songs isn’t a criticism. There are many great artists and musicians with wonderful music that never make the light of the day because they never got the opportunity to showcase it. In the current industry, talent can only get you so far. A lot of luck and/or money is needed to break through. Not to mention how greedy the record labels are. Look at how Taylor herself had to fight to get back the rights to her own songs. A smaller artist won’t have the resources to do that.
Scott Swift didn’t create Big Machine Records. The guy who did, approached Taylor playing in a venue as he was starting the label. The supposed sequence of events is Scott invested after she was signed, resulting in less than a 3% stake. When BM was sold, Scott sold his stake for $15mil. I would think his initial investment, before Taylor had a few albums under her belt, was somewhere around what middle-class parents provide for college tuition.
So, priveleged with 2 parents, a relocation to her dad’s Nashville branch, and a normal middle class financial backing? Sure. Art is incredibly hard to be successful in. But still, I never see these comments portraying it as $50-100k. They come across as $30mil+.
And no, I’m not a swifty. I can’t stand her music. It’s not for me. Country and pop are boring to me and her melodies are too happy. I can’t stand the fan base for treating her like god. I kinda enjoy drawing parallels between her lyrics and those of Slipknot because they’re both singing for the unloved outsider and then watching the brainwash meltdown. It’s like Tool for women.
It just seems weird to me to only ever see her get bashed for such a priveleged upbringing when 1. We can agree it’s the only way to make it and 2. It’s thousands, not millions that propped her up.
The line of reasoning that I have is this: there are many artists, entrepreneurs, scientists, etc out there, but few of them have the financial security and connections via their wealthy family to chase those careers that someone like Taylor Swift had growing up. Financial security in this case being a family there for you that can fully support you if your life goes sideways.
The issue that I see when we put people like Taylor Swift on the success pedestal, and they don’t acknowledge the privilege and luck that it took to get there, it feels disingenuous.
I see this opinion often enough, so I have to ask. How much money do you think Swift’s parents put into her career? How big do you think a parental college fund should be to give their kids a solid leg up? How does that initial financial backing discredit her as she continues writing a massive catalog of successful songs?
So I have no issues with parents setting their kids up for success. The problem is that almost every wealthy person that was “born on third base” acts like they came from middle class or lower. Good example is that video where the David Beckham meme came from. His wife comes from generations of royalty, and during an interview she said she came from a middle class family who had to drive her to school because the bus wouldn’t come to her house.
The bus couldn’t come because she lived in a fucking castle and her dad drove her to school a Bentley.
I don’t think anyone is discrediting her continued success. People are just pointing out that she wouldn’t have been able to do that in the first place without the financial backing she had to get into the industry. IIRC (and I’m happy to be corrected), her dad literally created a record label to sign her. How many people get that luxury? There are a lot of artists who got big (either by accident, by money, or pure luck) but were never able to sustain it, so her being able to continue making “successful” songs isn’t a criticism. There are many great artists and musicians with wonderful music that never make the light of the day because they never got the opportunity to showcase it. In the current industry, talent can only get you so far. A lot of luck and/or money is needed to break through. Not to mention how greedy the record labels are. Look at how Taylor herself had to fight to get back the rights to her own songs. A smaller artist won’t have the resources to do that.
Scott Swift didn’t create Big Machine Records. The guy who did, approached Taylor playing in a venue as he was starting the label. The supposed sequence of events is Scott invested after she was signed, resulting in less than a 3% stake. When BM was sold, Scott sold his stake for $15mil. I would think his initial investment, before Taylor had a few albums under her belt, was somewhere around what middle-class parents provide for college tuition.
So, priveleged with 2 parents, a relocation to her dad’s Nashville branch, and a normal middle class financial backing? Sure. Art is incredibly hard to be successful in. But still, I never see these comments portraying it as $50-100k. They come across as $30mil+.
And no, I’m not a swifty. I can’t stand her music. It’s not for me. Country and pop are boring to me and her melodies are too happy. I can’t stand the fan base for treating her like god. I kinda enjoy drawing parallels between her lyrics and those of Slipknot because they’re both singing for the unloved outsider and then watching the brainwash meltdown. It’s like Tool for women.
It just seems weird to me to only ever see her get bashed for such a priveleged upbringing when 1. We can agree it’s the only way to make it and 2. It’s thousands, not millions that propped her up.
The line of reasoning that I have is this: there are many artists, entrepreneurs, scientists, etc out there, but few of them have the financial security and connections via their wealthy family to chase those careers that someone like Taylor Swift had growing up. Financial security in this case being a family there for you that can fully support you if your life goes sideways.
The issue that I see when we put people like Taylor Swift on the success pedestal, and they don’t acknowledge the privilege and luck that it took to get there, it feels disingenuous.
You guys got money from your parents to pay for college?