GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed. Preamble The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This General Public License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Library General Public License instead.) You can apply it to your programs, too. When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things. To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it. For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights. We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software. Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations. Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all. The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification follow. GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION 0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in the term "modification".) Each licensee is addressed as "you". Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does. Why Comparisons Between Kacey Musgraves and Taylor Swift Annoy Me | For The Country Record


Why Comparisons Between Kacey Musgraves and Taylor Swift Annoy Me

taylor swift kacey musgraves

When Kacey Musgraves first released her major label debut ‘Same Trailer Different Park’ back in March 2013, it wasn’t long before I began hearing people compare her to Taylor Swift. The comparisons have continued as Kacey supposedly beat previous favorite Taylor to win Best Country Album at this year’s Grammys, and even though Taylor has officially gone pop now (even she said so herself), their names often remain in the same sentence when mentioned in the press. Now, I know there is plenty of awful press out there that doesn’t know what it’s talking about (for example, a quick Google resulted in a gossip site referring to Kacey as a “teenage country singer”… dated this year. She’s 26, and actually older than 24-year-old Taylor, even though the site referred to Kacey as younger), but these comparisons have occurred enough to get under my skin. Just what makes them so similar?

To throw Ms. Musgraves in the same breath as Ms. Swift is terribly reductive and not at all in mind of what they represent. When Taylor first came on the scene in 2006, freshly 16 years old and penning sweet, sprightly country pop songs about ex-boyfriends and current ones, she was a darling of sorts, a sweet little blonde whose innocence did not hinder her ability to craft great hooks and turns of phrase. As she released ‘Fearless’ and then in turn ‘Speak Now’, she grew ever closer towards pop, featuring bigger production, catchier choruses and less of the twang and folksy simplicity remembered from previous years (‘Mean’ excepted). As ‘Red’ hit stores, along came a grown Swift with descending necklines, pop super-producer collaborators, use of drum loops and dubstep, and an increasing set of high-profile relationships to fuel anticipation for subjects of songs; indeed, as she had grown, so had her list of targets, and it was often made explicitly clear that her lyrics were about real people and real situations. At times, it was harsh, and arguably uncalled for. Although she had technically matured as a songwriter, she was still visiting the same childish topics, and her upcoming album ‘1989’ is no exception. While ‘Shake It Off’ is about sticking out on your own and just having fun, the content has dumbed down dramatically for the pop sphere, and reports of a diss track named ‘Bad Blood’ from the new record (also rumoured to be directed at fellow popstar Katy Perry) does not exactly do her any favors for how people perceive maturity levels as an artist.

Kacey Musgraves, meanwhile, hit radio with the musically gentle, serene (and far more country) song ‘Merry Go Round’, a track which muses on the disappointing but comfortable, cyclical nature of small town life. It didn’t hit listeners full in the face like many of Taylor’s tracks have done, but rather allowed them to come play in her little world and explore the at once glaringly honest, sometimes depressing ideas behind it. It exploded because it touched a nerve rarely tackled with such poetic nuance. Second single ‘Blowin’ Smoke’ used a soft rocker to turn to small town diner waitresses and observed their monotonous life from the first person; featuring sympathy and dry wit, it was sharply written, bringing us to third single ‘Follow Your Arrow’, whose traditional instrumentation supported a funny, clever lyric along the lines of do-what-makes-you-happy but paying special attention to supporting gay rights and soft drug consumption (marijuana). Never has Taylor written about either topic, and certainly she’s never dug into the human condition the way Kacey has, outside of songs about falling in love and broken hearts (on her first album she tackled eating disorders in ‘Tied Together With A Smile’, but that has emerged to be a rarity).

I’m not quite sure why Kacey has seemed to attract such a young teenage audience either. Sure, some of her songs are fun and bouncy (such as ‘My House’ and ‘Stupid’), but often they are slow, laid-back, thoughtful, and never afraid to tackle more adult (or at least not childish) topics such as casual sex (‘It Is What It Is’), nosey neighbors (‘The Trailer Song’) and not being ashamed of life mistakes (new track ‘Cup of Tea’). She’s also continued to write and record songs about marijuana, such as ‘High Time’. In fact, only ‘Step Off’, is in true Taylor style (it’s a diss track about someone who steps on others to get to the top), with a few sad heartbreak songs like ‘I Miss You’, ‘Dandelion’, ‘Keep It To Yourself’ and ‘Back On The Map’, which you could probably find a way to compare to anybody.

Perhaps Kacey came around at a time when Taylor was leaving the format, and people were eager to find who would replace her. Kacey is fairly young, pretty, and writes all her own songs, so perhaps that was where the comparisons began. But she is far more mature as a songwriter, with a far more diverse array of influences along with true country roots than Taylor is, and while the latter clearly wants to be a star, the former seems more interested in just doing her thing and hoping people like it. For me, it was right that ‘Same Trailer Different Park’ won that Grammy and ‘Red’ didn’t. Taylor is courting attention, courting men, courting power and money and sometimes courting artistry. Kacey is just courting music. Perhaps a naïve observation to make, but to me that’s where the differences are the most crystal clear.

About Vickye

I run this joint. Country music blogger extraordinaire, fangirl, coffee drinker, Twitterer, bunny lover and rather too opinionated for her own good. Feminist and equal rights advocate. Has a laugh that you can hear for miles.
This entry was posted in Editorials and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Why Comparisons Between Kacey Musgraves and Taylor Swift Annoy Me

  1. Lauren says:

    I get that there is a business side to the music industry. I also understand that careers evolve. I guess, what I don’t understand is that, well, why would you want to write and play music without a twang? Admittedly, I’m biased. Country music is hands down the greatest genre in the history of music. Taylor Swift while I do love her tunes, beyond the album ‘Red’ I don’t see our lyrical connection lasting. I was not digging ‘Shake it off’! All in all, I choose old Taylor Swift and current and new Kacey Musgraves any day of the week. Kacey’s formed the connection here- sister, don’t sell out!

  2. Ron says:

    All musicans have a ton of songs about realtionships,that’s pretty much the number one topic they write about! You make some great points here,but I think one of the reasons the comparisons exist is because the music itself sounds alike at times,especially music from Swift’s first two albums.Although I like Kacey far better than Taylor, I think she’s a bit overrated at this point. I get reading these blogs by writers I generally respect going on about how she’s basically the new age Loretta Lynn or something and like many others,I just scratch my head and wonder what the hell am I missing here?? Trust me,if Kacey was actually singing country music,those comparisons wouldn’t be there.

    I’ll put it this way- You don’t hear people comparing Brandy Clark to Taylor..Why? Because she sings country friggin music,the REAL way!

Share your voice!