Taylor Swift - Folklore Album Review

 Harry Mcilroy

Taylor Swift - Folklore

7/10

Genre - Chamber Pop, Folktronica, Indie Folk

Taylor Swift is- look, is it really necessary for me to tell you who Taylor Swift is? She became world-famous at the age of 17, somehow selling over 200 million albums in a time when they are barely a respected art form. Trying to place her in a historical and genre context is quite an interesting task, as I have quite literally grown up with Taylor Swift in the background. For as long as I've been conscious, some Swift songs have been on the billboard charts. Even typing her name out sounds more like referencing a brand than a human being.

That being said, Taylor has always been kind of an anomaly in the mainstream pop game. She’s always had a slight air of authenticity, yet doesn’t really elicit many strong opinions. She’s no Madonna or Britney Spears, where theatrics are key, or on the other side of the spectrum she doesn't exactly fit into the Fiona Apples or Kate Bushs, where poetic lyricism and complex song structures are expected. 

She firmly lies in the middling generation of pop stars who build a following through the means of radio and music video, mediums that are becoming less relevant by the second. So what is an artist to do when her primary audience is almost gone? What usually happens at this point in an artist's career is one of two things. They either continue to ride the dying wave of billboard and music videos, doomed to fall into obscurity (Katy Perry, Pink, Adam Levine, etc) or attempt some quasi reinvention, or at least a return to what made them so popular all those years ago. 

Taylor Swift belongs to the latter camp. After literal years of controversy and label issues, Taylor seems to be returning to her roots. The difference here is that it’s like we're in some kind of an alternate reality where Taylor Swift attempts to appeal to the indie kids instead of the country or pop crowd. Instead of naive focus-grouped country-tinged pop songs, they’re slightly more authentic folk-tinged pop songs. The structures are basically the same, but this is not a big thing. People love Taylor Swift for a reason. She has produced countless hits, so although this particular type of pop isn’t exactly what I’d throw on after a long day at college, I definitely believe she has an objectively effective formula for songwriting. 113 singles in the Billboard top 200 proves as much. The problem arises when you look at her career post country when she abandoned what she was good at and tried to cultivate a sort of mature edgy vibe. This did not particularly work out.

Comparing Folklore to another Swift album from just the year prior, Lover, is like comparing night and day. Literally from the opener, I Forgot That You Existed, you can sense that she seems to be riding the aforementioned wave of lowest risk / highest possible appeal that is just not relevant anymore. With it’s muted, ridiculously basic piano chord progression, weird Drake reference, and super limited instrumental palette involving heavy bass and synths, it seems like a song, and album, with almost no vision or conceptual depth. And a little vision goes a long way.

This is where folklore comes in. A very welcome and more authentic change of pace. There are no over the top tasteless choruses, no weird out of place rap verses (I'm looking at you, Kendrick Lamar), and very luckily no tracks in which they act as nothing but an egotistical failed attempts at going edgy (looking at you, Look What You Made Me Do). Taylor is at her best when her lyrics veer into that vague yet emotionally resonant metaphorical relationship-based songwriting she built her career on.

As an aside, I am aware that I'm being somewhat harsh toward Taylor Swift. It is embedded in my DNA to always be somewhat of a contrarian, something I've probably always been a bit smug about. I do understand that music crafted for maximum chart success, especially in the 2000s, is a completely different beast to my preference of indie and alternative sounds, usually born from a singular vision. But if I don't hold these songs to high scrutiny, then we may never get another truly interesting and innovative mainstream music scene. And though I'm never one to whine about how I “live in the wrong generation”, I would like to at least witness one creatively innovative and unprecedented mainstream scene emerge. Something like psychedelic rock in the 1960s, grunge in the 90s, or even the rap-rock of the 2000s. Even though I wouldn't exactly describe most of it as amazing, I can at least attest to its strangeness. And I'd choose strangeness over the predictably average any day of the week. 

Anyways, back to the album. As a close follower of the alternative music scene, I saw this album gain some legitimate traction, otherwise known as ”indie cred”. For a brief moment, she was in the same realm as women like Charli XCX, Carly Rae Jepson, or post 2019 Lana Del Rey, pop stars that somehow beat the system entirely and somehow hold both mainstream appeal and indie credibility. Trendy genre tags like “electro-folk” and “chamber pop” are used to describe her music. This is quite the departure from the previous records “pop/synthpop” label. So my primary question is as follows. Is this just an attempt at appealing to a new more relevant crowd, or is this actually a sincere reinvention? Let's dive right in and see if we can figure this out.

Though it’s not exactly reinventing the wheel, Folklore is, at its core, a very admirable effort.  The minimalist, less in your face instrumentation gives the lyrics a much stronger focus, which are also a definite improvement. In an interview with Paul McCartney (yes, that Paul McCartney), she discusses how she decided to ignore radio pop standards and start using "bigger, flowerier, prettier words" such as "epiphany", "elegies" and "divorcée". This is a bit laughable but at the same time quite an interesting insight into how radio pop works. It seems to quite patronisingly assume that a general audience won’t understand or react well to any form of complexity. I think this is the root of the reason why billboard is becoming less relevant by the day. If you assume your audience is made up of dumb naive kids, and attempt to appeal solely to this constructed audience, then it’s only a matter of time until you’re going to fade into obscurity. People like being challenged, people like to take risks, and only appealing to the lowest common denominator won't leave you with much staying power. 

Folklore gets points for its sincerity. The more subtle and dynamic instrumental palette, the concept songs, even the cover art, it all culminates to build a much more natural project, a set of songs in which Taylor is in her element. In the past, I would describe Taylor's vocals as inoffensively innocent and bland, the type of vocals that are objectively “good” yet lack any real flavour. The difference this time around is that there seems to actually be some personality and life experience behind the vocals here. They seem to be somewhat influenced by Lana Del Rey, which makes sense as Taylor herself referred to Lana as “the most influential artist of the 2010s” during an award show speech. As a huge Lana fan, this can only be a great thing. Lyrically, this influence is also recognizable. I found myself appreciating Taylors writing a lot more than I have done in the past. The interpersonal metaphors, the big multi-song concepts, she seems to have definitely used the worldwide lockdown to refine her songwriting.

In terms of the music itself, I find myself really enjoying the instrumental landscape Taylor and her collaborators paint here. The two additions to her music I find myself most attracted to are the subtle electronic flourishes and the strings. Although this is no Age of Adz or 22, a Million, the electronic elements are just prominent enough to add some effective texture to the record. While she has obviously used synthetic instrumentation in her previous records, the garish and over the top synth chord progressions are replaced with very subtle and classy synth flourishes. Big difference. The aforementioned strings are also a huge plus, adding a surprising amount of depth to whatever track in which they are featured.

This changeup can be best heard in the album's third track, the last great american dynasty. The song is introduced with softly played powerful piano notes, which slowly become decorated with a vaguely IDM style synth progression, a progression on which the song is constructed. As the chorus hits, subtly affecting string sections begin to glide across the song. It all culminates into a softly busy musical experience, one that is genuinely admirable. The lyrical content is also intriguing, a concept involving Taylor subtly comparing herself to eccentric mid-century patron of the arts, Rebekah Harkness. And while this track involves Taylor referencing her controversies and public image, it's not as obvious and self-serving as, say, look what you made me do. Another highlight to demonstrate this synth/strings dichotomy is the album's big single, Cardigan. It is one of the most Lana influenced tracks, with its vaguely dejected vocal delivery and beautiful inflections. It is another track with an electronic undercurrent, detailed with piano and string sections. 

And though it is really pretty in this instance, the similarities between these two tracks kind of demonstrates the crux of the album. There isn’t much in terms of versatility. I have a suspicion that without the strings and electronics, we would be left with quite a bland project. And although obviously removing an albums best features will make it worse, a solid foundation is very important to overall quality. I would say this album is somewhat bloated, stretching the reinvention novelty a bit thin. A few tracks, such as mirrorball or this is me trying, are very conceptually random and don’t really go anywhere interesting. I do understand why artists are drawn to very long albums, with more tracks equating to a higher possibility of algorithmic success on streaming surfaces. I’ll accept it as a business decision, but not as an artistic one. 

One final gripe I'll mention is exile, the album's sole feature. This is a really uninteresting song, and obviously only exists for the Bon Iver feature. Who needs quality songwriting and interesting lyrics concepts, when you have that sweet sweet indie cred? It sounds exactly the same as every single mid-2000s overblown piano-based duet. Even lyrically, there are no interesting metaphors or concepts to grasp. It’s ultimately forgettable, which is the worst offence a song can commit. 

So in the end, has this reinvention been successful? I would have to go with yes, it was. Although the tracklist could have been cut down a fair bit, and the aesthetic choices were a bit on the nose, (all lower case tracklist, black and white cover, this isn't an Adrianne Lenker album Taylor)  I do think that this is Taylor Swift's best ever batch of songs. It has the initial innocence and charm of her earlier records, with the added experience and production elements that you’ll get with over 15 years of making music. I for one am impressed that even with all this time as a superstar, Taylor can still come across as sincere. And that is no easy task.