Taylor Swift: A Very Busy Poet?
Editing, Rushed Creativity, Emos, and Colson Whitehead
From a literary perspective there are many ways to approach the latest episode in our final saga of monoculture: Taylor Swift’s new album The Tortured Poets Department. From a literary perspective we could talk about her literary references (Dylan Thomas, Patti Smith, etc, etc.) or what aesthetic non-poets think “tortured poet” is (all you need to know is that there’s a song called “So High School” and the whole color scheme of the album is black and white—sorry to the legit poets out there).
But the general consensus of music critics (and the literary community) is summed up by the New York Times review headlined: “Taylor Swift Could Use an Editor.” The album clocks in at the music equivalent to a Martin Scorsese film at over two hours and 31 songs. In addition to its length, common critiques are that many of the songs sound similar to each other and to previous albums. Taylor Swift is the master of cliches, but the “tortured poets” theme has also unleashed her tendency for cheesiness, odd lyrics, and predictable rhymes (My favorite strange lyric is: “I wanna hire a priest to exorcize my demons”. The metaphor is meh, but I love the idea of someone as famous as Taylor Swift googling how to hire a priest).
Regardless if Swift diehards will still champion this album — they will — it is pretty clear, from the first listen, that Swift hasn’t hit a home run swing (or should we follow her lead and say thrown a 60-yard touchdown?) with this album. With Swift’s last album Midnights (2022), there were immediate, undeniable pop hits that propelled her from a superstar to the biggest musician of a lifetime. That The Tortured Poets Department has broken all sorts of records in streaming and sales in its first week is a testament to how big the tent has become on the strength of her last album and subsequent Eras tour. But it’s also clear that while the numbers are huge something is off: Swift is oddly posting the good reviews of the album, superfans are posting ludicrously defensive tweets, and it just seems like the majority of fans who like Taylor Swift are talking themselves into liking the album rather than falling instantly in love.
This is all predictable: isn’t there is only one direction to go when you’ve reached the absolute pinnacle?
Is Editing the Answer?
Taylor Swift does not need an editor. Or not in the way that the New York Times critic and many others have suggested. It’s quite obvious to look at something that is long and say “this is too long.” However, the symptom of this uneven album is probably different than one that just requires an editor’s trimming, sharpening and focusing. A smart editor is humble enough to realize you can’t red pen your way to a classic.
There is a simple answer to why this album doesn’t quite work and it is a problem that has plagued musicians from decades of rock and pop music. Even though this is her 11th (!) album, Swift is suffering from what is known as Sophomore Album Touring Syndrome. As the name implies, this is usually what happens to artists after they crush a first album, become mega famous and then go on tour.
The albums that follow lightning-in-a-bottle successes are typically letdowns. Some say this is due to pressure, and that’s one logical explanation. But especially in Swift’s case — who clearly feels no pressure, creatively at least — it’s more glaringly obvious to me what the cause is: time. Performing is probably fun and cool and all, but a large portion of Swift’s life for these past two years has been dedicated to the same tedium of preparing for shows, traveling to and from shows, doing a 4-hour show, and recovering from shows. Two years to write and make an album by her own standards is enough time, but in the context of the last two years it is not surprising that some of the ideas on this album are thin, mixed, or lean heavily on previous lyrical tricks, melodies, production choices, and themes.
It is kind of remarkable that Sophomore Album Touring Syndrome hasn’t happened to Swift until this many albums in. Like Michael Jordan, Taylor Swift has had the uncanny ability to always have a chip on her shoulder that drives her to seek more, even in the long stretches of her life where she was beloved, worshipped, and had achieved so much that an ordinarily-wired person would take their foot off the gas. Whether it’s exes, critics, bad friends, betrayal, isolation, love, Swift generally finds some slight or a point to prove in order to lock in and perform her best.
At the start of a new relationship, crushing a world tour, becoming a billionaire, and winning her fourth best album Grammy, for the first time it seems like Taylor Swift doesn’t quite have the same edge even if the mood of the album is ostensibly poet-emo. The majority of the album pulls from her tumultuous month-long relationship with rock star Matty Healy and six-month-old relationship with football player Travis Kelce. Two short relationships and a hectic schedule add to that Sophomore Album Touring Syndrome feeling of forcing it.
This all at least makes her latest album interesting. Swift has had to deal with a lot of personal stuff, to put it mildly, and it has fueled all of her art, but basically never a lukewarm album. Even her most mixed album previously had high highs and low lows. But if there’s only one way to go from the top, I’m also reminded of one of my favorite rap lyrics from the illustrious One Be Lo: “When you hit the bottom, bounce”.
Creativity Takes Time
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Colson Whitehead gave an interview a few years ago saying he basically has a dozen novel ideas ready to write but it will take a long while to get to them all. That’s because Whitehead prepares for the process of writing a novel seriously and takes 2-3 years, generally, to research and write each one. He knows, like most editors do who have witnessed a number of drafts come in on different timelines, that it takes a certain amount of time to write a good novel or full-length book. It can be done quicker. But when a writer says they’re going to hand in something in six months, you know the quality is going to be capped in the vast majority of cases. Same goes for revision: if a writer responds to an edit in a couple of days it’s pretty easy to guess they haven’t dug extremely deep and changed their book drastically.
Swift, to put it mildly, is overflowing with music and creativity. She could release an album every year if she wanted to (and pretty much has been doing that if you count her re-recording her older albums). So, the editorial advice would not be to cut the album down to fifteen songs or hack away at the individual elements of the songs on The Tortured Poets Department. It would be to wait. Even for the greatest artists, trying to create a masterpiece under certain conditions—say two years with 152 shows scheduled— just isn’t going to happen very often, if ever.
No, a good editor wouldn’t have fixed the album, but there is a lot of fun to be had chopping up The Tortured Poets Department and making your own version. I’m sure everyone’s 12-18 songs in this exercise would be wildly different. Mine features the adequate amount of tortured poetry: 13 tracks, 53 minutes. Even a creative project that feels rushed or like it didn’t tap into the artist’s full capabilities can still have good parts.
i can't believe the black dog didn't make your poet's dept