By otakuyassine3@gmail.com 
This past (Cruel) Summer, I had the time of my life with Taylor Swift at her record-breaking Eras Tour. Her second night at Murrayfield Stadium in Edinburgh was my first time at a Taylor Swift concert since discovering her music in 2008, and the whole experience was incredibly surreal and one of the best concerts I’ve ever been to.
I cannot deny, though, that the way the Eras Tour has caused Swift Mania to take over has left me feeling conflicted about how much we idolize celebrities like Taylor Swift, and choose to love them unabashedly without room for nuance. While I enjoy identifying as a fan, I’m reluctant to throw myself into it so wholeheartedly without pause for critical thought.
Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour (Alice’s Version)
There’s nothing quite like live music, particularly pop concerts where the atmosphere is typically one of warmth and acceptance. You unlock a secret layer of euphoria and camaraderie, screaming along to lyrics about terrible exes; drawing eyeliner “sharp enough to kill a man”; exchanging friendship bracelets, and waiting with bated breath to see which surprise song Taylor will play.
I had an amazing time singing every last lyric to my favorite song “All Too Well (10 Minute Version)” with my whole chest, and attempting to nail all the dance moves from the Reputation era. I loved pulling on my cowboy boots, and lived for seeing two of my favorite acts Paramore and Taylor Swift back-to-back like my own personalized music festival. I was one of hundreds of thousands of fans turning out to the Eras Tour to help Taylor break record after record, so I get why it’s difficult not to feel swept up in the feeling that Taylor is some divine, untouchable being.
It’s important to remember, though, that Taylor Swift is in fact a multifaceted, flawed human being. Perhaps more importantly, ‘Taylor Swift’ is also a brand and a business. And there are areas of that business model that leave me feeling icky.
I can’t help but think about the yet-to-be-revealed final figures this tour will make. Predicted to have grossed more than $1.93 billion for 121 of the 149 total Eras Tour stops according to Forbes, that is over four times the amount earned when Taylor last toured in 2018. Although there were 96 more dates on the Eras Tour than her Reputation Tour (which had 53 dates total), when you take into consideration Forbes’ report of the 56 shows Taylor put on in 2023, the Eras Tour grossed $780 million, an increase of 125% from the Reputation Tour’s box office total of $345.7 million. In fact, based on ticket value alone, you can quite literally see Taylor’s popularity grow.
In my experience, though, ticket price increases from tour to tour happens with most artists. Partly because of inflation, but also because of a 34% spike in cost since the pandemic.
We also can’t forget that the Eras Tour was unlike any other, encompassing her entire discography with a setlist that ran for more than 3.5 hours – at least double the time of most headline sets. In this sense, I found it fairly easy to justify the £171.96 I spent on my ticket to Murrayfield (coming under the average ticket price of £206 Barclays reported UK fans would pay). That’s alongside the cost of travel and accommodation, food, and an era conforming outfit, of course. In many ways, it was a once in a lifetime experience for me. It was expensive, but for me it was worth it. The problem I have is with the Taylor Swift business model, which always wants more.
Take the Midnights clock for instance. Four different versions of the album were released, as well as the components to build an actual clock – the only difference being the covers pieced together to make a clock face. And it wasn’t just Midnights. Every release since has come in a variety of vinyl color pressings and “collectable” album covers. The Tortured Poets Department famously offered different exclusive tracks depending on which iteration you chose, with fans obviously wishing to hear every song, encouraging the need to buy more and more. And it’s not dissimilar fans spending more than £400 on VIP packages.
In the UK, the pitch around the stage was general admission. No seats, unlike in the States. That meant VIP ticket holders got early admission, but those with regular GA could still elbow their way to the front having paid half the price. However, while there was plenty of issues with Ticketmaster, particularly in the US, Taylor Swift can be given some credit in her stance not to utilize dynamic pricing as fans entered The Great War of getting Eras Tour tickets.
It’s capitalism and over-consumption to the highest degree, but I also appreciate people can spend their money how they like. It just concerns me that while she has fans of all ages, the rise of Swift Mania has captured the attention of a new and also younger audience who may be more impressionable and feel the pressure buy more merch in order to support a woman who, let’s face it, doesn’t need any more money.
Taylor isn’t forcing us to spend our money, but it cannot be denied she know what she puts down her fans will almost certainly pick up. In the same breath, Taylor’s male equivalents are not bombarded with the same level of scrutiny, and I am reluctant to tear down a woman who is clearly very, very good at what she does, both as a musician and as a businesswoman. Did I mention I feel very conflicted about all of this?
OK, But Is Taylor Swift Actually Patti Smith?
The last few years haven’t just seen Taylor Swift grow in popularity and net worth, but in critical engagement. Numerous college courses around the world task students with dissecting her discography.
In the titular song on her album The Tortured Poets Department, Taylor Swift famously wrote “You’re not Dylan Thomas, I’m not Patti Smith,” – but is that true? I mean, obviously she’s not the pop punk artist who rose to fame in the 1970s. But is she worthy of the same literary intellectual treatment we give to artists like Patti Smith? Or is this another sign of celebrity gone too far?
Dr. Clio Doyle runs a 150 hour module at Queen Mary University of London called “Taylor Swift and Literature”, which asks the question: Is the work of Taylor Swift literature?
When I spoke to Dr. Doyle, of course there was no straight answer to that question – you’d have to take the course to decide for yourself. Asking what it is about Taylor Swift that makes her so widely resonant and worthy of critical investigation compared to her peers, though, Dr. Doyle said:
I think Swift’s work is formally interesting, especially in the way she chooses her words and repeats the same words and metaphors with small differences over time.
They also spoke of the sheer breadth of Swift’s body of work, comparing it to that of William Shakespeare:
If you think about it, if there was only one extant play by Shakespeare, it wouldn’t be as much fun to study him because you couldn’t draw so many connections between the plays and watch how his style changed over time, and Swift has gotten to the point where there is enough of her work to really engage with.
Dr. Doyle also presented me with an interesting idea: while their course isn’t commenting on whether Swift’s work is good or not as a fan might, it’s fair to say fans and naysayers alike spend a lot of time closely analyzing Taylor’s body of work in the same vein one might in a literature classroom, sharing their interpretations. Here Taylor is simply a mechanism in which to invite discussion and critique into what makes a body of work literature.
I want to encourage fans to engage critically with both Taylor Swift the person and Taylor Swift the brand, in the way they engage with her lyrics, but perhaps prestigious institutions weighing in on pop culture goes some way to provide that.
My remaining thought is simply: I wonder if a woman of Taylor Swift’s privilege is the only individual in her industry deserving of study, or if there are other individuals from less represented backgrounds that could also assist in the never-ending discussion of what makes something literature? Much like dynamic pricing, are courses like Dr. Doyle’s meeting a demand and, in turn, pandering to a trend in which we put too much importance on celebrities, or is it actually a clever way of keeping the curriculum fresh and relevant?
Taylor Swift Is Doing It For “Childless Cat Ladies” Everywhere
So what is stopping me from hightailing it out of Swift Mania in a Getaway Car given all my Bad Blood about Taylor Swift’s business model and position in the zeitgeist?
The reality is that there are very few similarities between Taylor Swift and I. I am not a prolific singer-songwriter. I was not a gutsy eleven-year-old who flew to Nashville to deliver demo tapes to record labels. And yet I somehow feel validated by her existence and her experiences.
When she signed off a politically charged Instagram post with ‘Childless Cat Lady’, it dawned on me that Taylor Swift is a symbol for empowered, independent women. A woman in her thirties, Taylor isn’t yet married, she doesn’t have kids, and she loves cats. And that couldn’t be more validating for someone like me who is single, surrounded by friends and family who are married with children – and who also loves cats.
That isn’t to say those women in my life don’t also have killer careers and are in any way lesser for walking a more traditional path. Equally, none of this is to say I don’t want those things, because I do. But this is also where Taylor Swift and I align. While Taylor has dated a bunch, and alluded to “paper rings” and not feeling good enough to be someone’s wife, there are also lyrics like “He wanted a bride, I was making my own name,” that suggest a woman not prepared to dim her light for the sake of settling down into a perceived fairytale ending.
In a world that often feels made for two, incredibly successful women like Taylor Swift remind me I’m capable of excitement and fulfilment with or without those things. Probably, there are other less celebrated, equally talented women out there doing the same thing, but I don’t think it’s wrong to find a piece of myself in that to cling onto. If nothing else, it encourages me that I, too, can make loving cats my whole personality.
Is Taylor Swift Ruining Our Lives?
I think sometimes in the world of fandom, there is a pressure to love without reservation otherwise you’re not a true fan.
When it comes to music, the artists I gravitate towards most are those who write their own songs and pen lyrics that feel painfully familiar, so yeah I’m a big fan of Taylor Swift’s. But there are things about her that I don’t necessarily agree with: the constant streams of merchandise, certain legal action taken, and maybe the fact she doesn’t often speak out about sociopolitical matters.
She is hugely influential, as evident by her ability to get more than 400,000 people to sign up and vote in the latest presidential election. Part of me wishes she would use her platform to speak out more about issues going on around the world. That said, it feels like a sad state of affairs when we need celebrities and individuals with big platforms to be the ones to make us care about important issues.
Equally, beyond the ideals we pin on Taylor Swift and other celebrities, there’s no certainty that our beliefs will always align with hers. As quickly as we may want her to speak out, we may just as fast wish she’d never bothered. Who’s to say?
We want the celebrities we love to have beliefs that align with ours. We want them to meet our expectations, and sometimes they just won’t. I think it’s fun and joyful to be a fan of something or someone, and I can’t wait to see what Taylor Swift will do next. But here’s your reminder that two things can be true at once: you can enjoy someone but that doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything that they do. I love being a fangirl, but I also feel that part of being deeply engaged with an artist is engaging with their flaws, too.