You can edit almost every page by Creating an account. Otherwise, see the FAQ.

Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do

From EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki

Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do
Taylor Swift, the subject of the article, in 2023
Author
IllustratorAngie Wang
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
SubjectPerceived LGBT connections between Swift's music and her life
GenreOpinion piece
PublisherThe New York Times
Publication date
January 4, 2024
Media typeNewspaper article
Pages
OCLC1645522
WebsiteOfficial website

"Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" is an opinion piece written by the journalist Anna Marks about the American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift, published in The New York Times on January 4, 2024. The piece argues that "a Sapphic possibility" exists in the music and other works of Swift, who has broadly influenced popular culture and is a ubiquitous topic of coverage and analysis in the mainstream media. Reactions to the article were mostly negative, criticized for promoting "Gaylor" theories and invading Swift's privacy.

Background[edit]

A faction of Swifties known as "Gaylors" have long theorized that the American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift is secretly lesbian, bisexual, or otherwise queer, and hints at this through her musical output.[1] The Michigan Daily journalist Rebecca Smith rejected Gaylor theories as unsubstantiated and disrespecting Swift's right to privacy. She concluded that while Gaylors could fairly interpret Swift's music as representative of them, speculating that Swift herself is secretly LGBT treats her like a fictional character and not "a real human being with a life outside of her musical career."[1]

Anna Marks, the author of "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do", is a former The Atlantic journalist who joined The New York Times as an editorial assistant in 2020. In September 2023, Marks was promoted to the position of staff editor.[2]

Article content[edit]

Marks' thesis in "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" is that "a Sapphic possibility" exists in the work of the titular Swift.[3] Marks traces parts of Swift's career, from the release of her debut "Tim McGraw" single in 2006 through the then-present, and argues that important connections to LGBT topics exist in Swift's work. According to Marks, the music video for "Me!" reflects LGBT imagery and language, Lover features LGBTQ aesthetics, and the lyrics of songs such as "It's Nice to Have a Friend", "Maroon", and "Hits Different" could only be about female muses.[3]

Reception[edit]

Template:Quote tweet Responses to Marks' piece were overwhelmingly negative. Among the first critics of the article were associates of Swift, who told CNN Business that "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" was "invasive, untrue, and inappropriate", also arguing that a similar piece would not be published about male musicians such as Shawn Mendes.[4] PinkNews journalist Asyia Iftikhar panned the piece for promoting a previously niche conspiracy theory.[5] Chris Willman, the chief music critic at Variety, condemned "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" as "the least defensible op-ed I can remember ever seeing the NYT run, made all the worst by the fact that it was written by a staffer, who specializes in these speculations", referencing a 2022 essay by Marks speculating about Harry Styles' sexuality.[6] Lesbian country musician Chely Wright, whose 2006 suicide attempt is discussed in the piece, agreed with Willman and criticized "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" for invading Swift's privacy and inappropriately speculating about her sexuality.[7] By contrast, Xtra Magazine's Frankie de la Cretaz defended Marks' piece, and argued that "When you say that queers are doing harm by reading queerness into someone's art, what you're actually saying is that being seen as gay is a negative thing."[8]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Citations[edit]

Bibliography[edit]


This article "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.