The Pop Corporation

Gracie Abrams has opened a can of worms this week, and that’s fine. Pop stars are supposed to run their mouths occasionally, and everyone else in turn, gets to run theirs. That’s the way pop culture works – it’s a contact sport.

Speaking about Taylor Swift, she said: “There’s also nothing that comes close to what she has done. People will still gaslight her and her capabilities and all this shit. But please point me to one man who has come close to defining pop culture in this way. There is nothing! But people are not ready for that conversation.”

Naturally, the Michael Jackson fans have come out of the woodwork, because any mention of anyone doing anything remotely special on their own terms will see a Michael Jackson fan appear, like Candyman, to tell you that he did it better. They’ll refer to him as ‘Michael’ like they know him too.

As is always the way with fandoms, there’s a competitive edge between them which focus on cold, hard stats, awards, platinum discs and the like. They’re basically sports fans, but with glitter and G&Ts. However, defining pop culture goes way beyond simple success. If it was simply about the size of income made from a tour, or the amount of streaming numbers they get, then you’d argue that some one-hit wonder had more cultural impact than the person who invented the blues scale that was used by most rock musicians for the past century.

Taylor Swift – and make no mistake here – has been hugely popular and outstripped many of her peers and those that have gone before her. She’s entered a rarified section of pop that is populated by the likes of Michael Jackson, The Beatles, Beyonce, Madonna and scant few others.

If Gracie Abrams said ‘there’s no man around at the moment who gets near Taylor Swift’, you’d be hard pressed to think of anyone in her orbit. But has Taylor changed anything? Has she re-routed pop and the way it sounds?

There’s an obvious link to the boom in singer-songwriters that has happened in the wake of her success, and you have to argue that even if it’s by osmosis, the resurgence of country music worldwide. However, that’s not a definite. Ed Sheeran was equally responsible for the amount of young pop singers picking up acoustic guitars, and country music was due a boom given the cyclical nature of music (after a hip hop spike, country tends to follow in the States).

Looking at a group like Kraftwerk, they almost single-handedly spurred everyone in pop to buy a synthesiser and drum machines, and the lineage from them, through to Moroder, to Hi NRG, to synthpop, to techno, is clear and obvious. Can you say the same about Swift? Is it even a relevant comparison? The Beatles, for example, completely turned rock music upside down when they grew moustaches and started taking acid. The Beatles are a unique case of still selling dizzying amounts of records while being experimental.

Of course, we all know the impact of The Beatles and, like Taylor’s popularity, it’s divisive and boring to many and will everyone stop going on about it already! However, the fact that Swift and The Beatles are so often spoken about in the same breath is an incredible thing. Taylor’s been given the Paul McCartney co-sign, so even the most strident Beatle nut has to pipe down if they’re coming for Taylor.

The debate about cultural impact between, say, Elvis and Little Richard is a fascinating one because one was a phenomena, and the other basically invented rock ‘n’ roll as a popular form of music. Taylor, it feels is more in the Elvis Presley camp – not so much an innovator, but an all-round sensation that seemingly can’t fail. It seems like Swift has already outstripped Presley, by virtue of the fact she’s toured outside of the States and hasn’t started to disintegrate on Vegas stages before our eyes.

One thing that Swift has innovated in, is reclaiming her own music, by re-recording her albums and taking it away from the labels and people who controlled her beforehand. There’s a sense now, that pop stars want more control over their music if they’re not getting paid for people streaming it. Swift’s business savvy is second to none, and her marketing nous is unparalleled, leaving breadcrumbs for feverish fans to follow before the announcement of new music.

Will she stand the test of time? Almost certainly – lesser artists have endured, and so calculated is Swift, that she’s not likely to blow her lead any time soon. The fact that she’s continually in these conversations only proves that Swift is an important artist, whether you like her music or not. She is, it is clear, undeniable.