5 ms·

Oopsies. You just claimed that Taylor Swift hasn't ever had a "real job". Taylor's job looks way different than yours or mine, but I'd guarantee you that that g

by aarondf 12y ago

Oopsies. You just claimed that Taylor Swift hasn't ever had a "real job". Taylor's job looks way different than yours or mine, but I'd guarantee you that that girl works, and works hard. Just because she's rich and famous doesn't mean she isn't working.

onedev 12y ago
She probably works harder than any of us here. People vastly underestimate the pressures that surround superstardom and maintaining that level.
- aarondf 12y ago
  Exactly. Also, she's stayed pretty normal. I say this without sarcasm: it appears hard to stay "normal" as a young, up-and-coming superstar.
  - frandroid 12y ago
    I wouldn't call someone who's beaten a Billboard record for most albums that sold 1M+ copies on its first week up and coming anymore. :)
    - aarondf 12y ago
      I agree! I meant to say that she already stayed normal through her up-and-coming phase, which has now passed.
- pessimizer 12y ago
  Let's not overcompensate in the other direction.
  - prawn 12y ago
    Probably worth considering that some of the "hard work" by that point comes from just being dragged along by demand. Your success and then staff schedule shows and other opportunities, and you would end up fulfilling that busy schedule rather than creating it through dogged determination. So the reality is somewhere in between: she's worked hard and continues to put in extreme hours, but there would be an advantage in having a schedule set for you. Definitely unfair for GP to say she hasn't worked for it.
6stringmerc 12y ago
We completely differ on the definition of work then. She calls herself an artist. Art takes labor, but it's not work because you're creating something from nothing using a skill that is inherent to the person within. If you call being "busy all the time" and doing interviews and other things work, okay fine. Realistically she has an army of people to handle affairs and things that I couldn't dream of doing. Why? Because of stuff like this: "according to Music Ally, the first single from that album, ‘Shake It Off’, was likely generating in the region of $84,000 a week from Spotify plays globally at the point it was removed." $84,000 PER WEEK buys a lot of help. It's needed at that level, I get that...but it also only happens due to being part of a system that exists solely to feed itself. Just because she's rich and famous doesn't mean she really works.
- sp332 12y ago
  "Just because she's rich and famous doesn't mean she really works." That's absolutely true, but you seem to think it means that she necessarily doesn't work. Also she mostly seems to do interviews when she's promoting a song or album that's finished already.
- aarondf 12y ago
  > Realistically she has an army of people to handle affairs and things that I couldn't dream of doing. Again, I think you are falling into the trap of defining "work" globally by what you know locally. Just because she's not having to, say, schedule her own meetings, doesn't preclude her from working. > We completely differ on the definition of work then. Undoubtedly we do. Show two people on the internet a word, get three definitions. > Art takes labor, but it's not work because you're creating something from nothing using a skill that is inherent to the person within. I'm a programmer, and I meet the above criteria, yet I still feel like I'm working. But again, our definition or "work" is undoubtedly different. > $84,000 PER WEEK buys a lot of help. It's needed at that level, I get that...but it also only happens due to being part of a system that exists solely to feed itself. Not sure what this has to do with work. I think in the end you're more worried about the purity of the "art" or something like that. I have nothing to say about that, because I don't consider myself an artist. Maybe she's a sell out, maybe she's not. I don't know. I don't care honestly. She's a genius in my book, and a hard freakin worker to have built what she has.

by aarondf 12y ago

onedev 12y ago

She probably works harder than any of us here. People vastly underestimate the pressures that surround superstardom and maintaining that level.

aarondf 12y ago
Exactly. Also, she's stayed pretty normal. I say this without sarcasm: it appears hard to stay "normal" as a young, up-and-coming superstar.
- frandroid 12y ago
  I wouldn't call someone who's beaten a Billboard record for most albums that sold 1M+ copies on its first week up and coming anymore. :)
  - aarondf 12y ago
    I agree! I meant to say that she already stayed normal through her up-and-coming phase, which has now passed.
pessimizer 12y ago
Let's not overcompensate in the other direction.
- prawn 12y ago
  Probably worth considering that some of the "hard work" by that point comes from just being dragged along by demand. Your success and then staff schedule shows and other opportunities, and you would end up fulfilling that busy schedule rather than creating it through dogged determination. So the reality is somewhere in between: she's worked hard and continues to put in extreme hours, but there would be an advantage in having a schedule set for you. Definitely unfair for GP to say she hasn't worked for it.

6stringmerc 12y ago

We completely differ on the definition of work then. She calls herself an artist. Art takes labor, but it's not work because you're creating something from nothing using a skill that is inherent to the person within. If you call being "busy all the time" and doing interviews and other things work, okay fine. Realistically she has an army of people to handle affairs and things that I couldn't dream of doing. Why? Because of stuff like this: "according to Music Ally, the first single from that album, ‘Shake It Off’, was likely generating in the region of $84,000 a week from Spotify plays globally at the point it was removed." $84,000 PER WEEK buys a lot of help. It's needed at that level, I get that...but it also only happens due to being part of a system that exists solely to feed itself. Just because she's rich and famous doesn't mean she really works.

sp332 12y ago
"Just because she's rich and famous doesn't mean she really works." That's absolutely true, but you seem to think it means that she necessarily doesn't work. Also she mostly seems to do interviews when she's promoting a song or album that's finished already.
aarondf 12y ago
> Realistically she has an army of people to handle affairs and things that I couldn't dream of doing. Again, I think you are falling into the trap of defining "work" globally by what you know locally. Just because she's not having to, say, schedule her own meetings, doesn't preclude her from working. > We completely differ on the definition of work then. Undoubtedly we do. Show two people on the internet a word, get three definitions. > Art takes labor, but it's not work because you're creating something from nothing using a skill that is inherent to the person within. I'm a programmer, and I meet the above criteria, yet I still feel like I'm working. But again, our definition or "work" is undoubtedly different. > $84,000 PER WEEK buys a lot of help. It's needed at that level, I get that...but it also only happens due to being part of a system that exists solely to feed itself. Not sure what this has to do with work. I think in the end you're more worried about the purity of the "art" or something like that. I have nothing to say about that, because I don't consider myself an artist. Maybe she's a sell out, maybe she's not. I don't know. I don't care honestly. She's a genius in my book, and a hard freakin worker to have built what she has.