{"id":5546,"date":"2024-02-08T13:51:24","date_gmt":"2024-02-08T13:51:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.centre.edu\/cento\/?p=5546"},"modified":"2024-02-08T13:51:24","modified_gmt":"2024-02-08T13:51:24","slug":"taylors-version","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/2024\/02\/08\/taylors-version\/","title":{"rendered":"Taylor’s Version"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

by Logan Ward, Staff Writer and Social Media Editor<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I can\u2019t escape Taylor Swift.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019ve been listening to her music for a couple of years, but I feel now more than ever, that it\u2019s hard to go a day without her name coming up in conversation. And, there is plenty<\/em> to talk about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research firm QuestionPro estimates that her Eras Tour generated over $4.6 billion in consumer spending for the U.S. economy. The Federal Reserve\u2019s Beige Book even highlighted the tourism revenue that it generated. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

U.K-based sustainability marketing firm Yard found that between January 1 and July 19, 2022, her private jet emitted 8,293.54 tonnes of carbon (a whopping 1,184.8 times more than the average person\u2019s total <\/em>annual carbon emissions). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

She can\u2019t seem to escape criticism of her past relationship with Matty Healy, who had been in hot water early this year for\u2026 well, being Matty Healy. His overall persona has always generated headlines, but the ones relating to his controversial appearance on The Adam Friedland Show <\/em>have particularly haunted him recently. Swift, through dating him, received a barrage of criticism arguably stronger than anything the 1975 frontman himself ever received. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, it\u2019s fitting that 1989 (Taylor\u2019s Version) <\/em>has caused plenty of conversation itself. It appears to be dividing the fanbase more than her past re-recordings, which hasn\u2019t been uncommon for Swift lately. Last year\u2019s Midnights <\/em>was similarly divisive. But how valid are the criticisms that 1989 (Taylor\u2019s Version) <\/em>has received? Let\u2019s dive in. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To start off, there are a lot of things Swift did well with this re-recording. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWelcome to New York (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u201d is a strong opening that improves upon the original through making its light, crisp, and energetic production even more apparent. \u201cBlank Space (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u201d comes in next just as strong. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOut of the Woods (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u201d, however, is the album\u2019s clear standout re-recording. As with the best tracks on 1989 (Taylor\u2019s Version)<\/em>, Taylor\u2019s \u201cOut of the Woods\u201d re-recording succeeds as it elevates what made the original work. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I also would like to highlight Taylor\u2019s re-recordings of \u201cWildest Dreams\u201d and \u201cThis Love\u201d. They\u2019ve been with us for several years now (with \u201cThis Love\u201d probably being one of my favorite Taylor Swift tracks), but still stand out amongst the rest of the album. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

All of that being said, there are some major missteps that were made with this record. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

An overarching problem on many tracks comes from two things: 1) weird production quirks and 2) an overall lack of energy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The weird \u201cah-ah-ah-ah-ah\u201d vocals on \u201cNew Romantics (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u201d are a good example of what I mean with my first point. As to my second point, I think the issue is more widespread across the entire album, the re-recording of \u201cClean\u201d being a good example.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On \u201cClean (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u201d, Taylor\u2019s vocals are pretty lifeless, a disappointment considering that the original was one of the album\u2019s emotional highs. The original\u2019s minimalist arrangements have been fleshed out a little more, but the re-recording sounds strangely empty. There\u2019s a lot of tracks where, while the problems are not as dramatic as they were on \u201cClean\u201d, I can levy similar criticisms. But that\u2019s not to totally single out her \u201cClean\u201d re-recording. It wasn\u2019t bad, it just pales in comparison to the original. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

If there was any re-recording where my feelings were less cut and dry, it was with \u201cStyle (Taylor\u2019s Version\u201d. It\u2019s another example of Taylor\u2019s vocal performances not matching the power of the original, but that doesn\u2019t mean I dislike it. I don\u2019t like it as much as the original, but I don\u2019t hate all of the decisions that were made with it from an instrumental perspective (the heavier incorporation of the electric guitar passages have sure grown on me). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, onto the vault tracks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIs It Over Now?\u201d is a clear winner for me, having some of her most powerful lyricism yet. Notably, it sounded like it would\u2019ve been at home on Midnights<\/em>, which is a quality held by much of the vault tracks. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

All in all, these tracks were similar, with \u201cNow That We Don\u2019t Talk\u201d and \u201cSay Don\u2019t Go\u201d seeming to borrow cues from each other. But that\u2019s not a bad thing, all were worthy additions to Taylor\u2019s discography, even if they didn\u2019t reach the heights of some of her past vault tracks (such as \u201cWhen Emma Falls in Love\u201d and \u201cI Can See You\u201d from Speak Now (Taylor\u2019s Version)<\/em>). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are some other opinions about this album, though?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Natalie Floyd felt that the album was more similar to the original recording than previous re-recordings. \u201cI think \u2018Bad Blood (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u2019 was better [than the original], that\u2019s my hot take.\u201d, she added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI liked \u2018I Know Places\u2019 when it first came out because it had a little bit of a darker vibe than the rest of her songs\u2026\u201d said Aelwen Iredale. \u201c…and so I think that the new version does it justice because with her mature voice and experience it can hit the mood she was trying to hit in the original a lot better.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c\u2018Clean (Taylor\u2019s Version)\u2019 was just completely unlistenable\u2026\u201d said an anonymous student \u201c…it was a miserable experience\u2026 and I love the original.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, not everyone disliked \u201cClean\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe beat was a little too abstract, but her vocals are good.\u201d said Thiago Pires, after listening to the song for the first time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI didn\u2019t think it was horrifying.\u201d said Margaux Heide \u201cthe new little \u2018ohs\u2019 in the background were weird.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For others, the album made far less of an impression- positive, negative, or otherwise. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI listened to it when I was going up to UIUC for Halloweekend, and I forgot that I listened to it.\u201d said Jazzy Damuluri. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To me, 1989 (Taylor\u2019s Version) <\/em>is probably the weakest of the re-recordings so far. However, there\u2019s still good moments, which fortunately outnumber the missteps. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I give this record three out of five flames. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Logan Ward, Staff Writer and Social Media Editor I can\u2019t escape Taylor Swift. I\u2019ve been listening to her music for a couple of years, but I feel now more than ever, that it\u2019s hard to go a day without her name coming up in conversation. And, there is plenty to talk about. Research firm […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":5547,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[43],"class_list":["post-5546","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-arts-leisure","tag-review"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5546","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5546"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5546\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5547"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5546"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5546"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cento.centre.edu\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}