VoidTerraFirma
Live to wine
For her genre and era, I think TSwift is a pretty solid songwriter.
Taylor Swift is horrible.
- Thread starter jp_nyc
- Start date
Gary Blanchard
beloved, local musician
Linda Rondstadt, to the best of my knowledge, never wrote a song. Is she an artist?
Peen Simmons
Let’s Get Obtuse!
Of course not. She's a ham sandwich.
Modern Saint
Starve your Fear, Feed your Dream!
But we aren't talking about Linda! FWIW, she is a Female Vocalist who practices the art of music, hence artist.
Loved her vocals by the way.
Modern Saint
Starve your Fear, Feed your Dream!
Funny how this thread has more traction than others that are more significant. Prime example of the cog at work. FWIW, you either like, hate or at least know about Taylor or else this discussion wouldn't have taken off this way.
parrotheada1a
Resident Pitmaster
It pains me so that I have to say this..... the same could be said of the Kardtrashian bunch. Yet I would still fork over my hard earned money to see Taylor perform. She is far more enjoyable and entertaining.
Gary Blanchard
beloved, local musician
We are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
Deep Eddy
Argle Bargle or Foofaraw?
Flamencology
You don't deserve koa.
Those do sound like my words, but nothing here that you're saying is convincing me that you understood them.
jp_nyc
Kick Henry Jackassowski
Absolutely. Like Joe Cocker, it’s all in the arrangement and performance.
Flamencology
You don't deserve koa.
We are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
It really isn't a matter of opinion at all. Those are nouns, not descriptors. She is a musician and an artist by virtually any definition of those words, as surely as how a person who has sex for money is a sex worker.
This isn't a case for the etymological detectives. No need for Vlad to rush excitedly into headquarters with an ancient stone tablet proclaiming that he's recovered conclusive evidence for a long-forgotten meaning of the word 'artist', which can now finally take its proper place at the very bottom of the OED entry.
GDSmithTX
Corporate cog
"Taydolf Swiftler"? Do you happen to be a fan of the Hollywood Babylon podcast?
reverend1
Kick Henry Jackassowski
Perhaps
DdBob
Dogue in teh desert
it's not GaryWe are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
( 
) Just as us humans have certain tendencies like collectiing stuff (probably goes back to our evolution from our brothers the squirrels who collect nuts...albeit our collecting is a misguided version of the squirrels colecting nuts for survival....but I digress)...anyway we as humans have an inherent need to judge/compartmentaliz/sort things into a hierarchy...it helps us make sense of our world ...
So one need is to differentiate the mundane and divede. The natural laws of duality, oppossing forces. Artists vs Entertainers fits the bill quite well...so some things that might make one an artist vs an entertainer would be the already mentioned intention of creating a work with no regard for anything other than to get a piece of their soul out into the world and in turn that piece might make others questions things, might make them affirm their own relation the the world around them, etc. Art should be challenging (though provoking) not influenced by commercial interst or money (no sellouts). It should also ideally be idiosyncratic because each individual in their true state is unique.
Entertainment is generally something to pass the time, to amuse oneself or to get lost in briefly. Intent or lack thereof could be applied to Entertainers as well. .
To use authors as example....a Book like Siddhartha by Herman Hesse would be considered art whereas the Book "the Zombie survival guide" by Max Brooks (Mel Brooks' son) would be considered entertainment. I think most people if they were honest with themselves would come to the same conclusion.
Likewise teh Taylor Swift song "shake it off" (minus the twerking of course because that IS art
) is willy nilly entertainmentwhere as the band "Fugazi" created art..there is a certain je ne sais quoi that "just is"...you feel it
I hope this helps clear things up
Modern Saint
Starve your Fear, Feed your Dream!
We are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
You are right on the money regarding opinions. I have no intention of attending a Swift show. I don't listen to her music but I do know that she writes and does her own material. The material have become hits that I do not care for but you gotta respect someone who has continued to redefine herself.
I forgive your sin parrot for mentioning something so crude.
Leave Linda out of this!!!
FWIW, Don Henley, Bernie Leadon, Glenn Frey and Randy Meisner was her backup band in 1971 before they became the Eagles. Linda had already established herself with Stone Ponies (60's) before going solo.
jp_nyc
Kick Henry Jackassowski
Likewise teh Taylor Swift song "shake it off" (minus the twerking of course because that IS art
And then I realized that the 2020 Taylor Swift album will have songs telling off the people who bitch about how she sells tickets.
335clone
Living the dream
We are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
I know, right?
So members of a symphony are musicians, but not artists because they play covers? Are Robert Hunter (as associated with the Dead) & Bernie Taupin artists even if they only wrote the lyrics? What about Elvis? He didn't write many/any of his songs? We need to know
shoeless
Riffin'
The topic is further muddied by her association with Gibson, or lack thereof.We are talking about what makes an artist, and Swift was allowed to be an artist because she wrote songs. I am just trying to understand this odd code that makes some folks artists and others entertainers. If I didn't know any better, I'd think it was all based on people's personal opinions.
