NO

If Katy released 1989 and Taylor released Prism, Taylor would still get more acclaim.

Yup. Probably even more respected, because people would be very pleasantly surprised to hear such a great album from her.

That's assuming Katy released the same exact album though. It would never happen. Katy doesn't really have a specific media presence to engage with in her songs, which is partially what makes stuff like SIO and Blank Space so great.

No because Taylor's ability to connect with her songs is really based on the fact that she is such a key figure in the writing process. Katy is a bit more distant from the lyrics she sings.

I stan for Taylor as well but lbr, if Katy released 1989...

Shake It Off will be critically panned for being basic and childish. The critics will say that the lyrics are stale and uninspired.

Out of the Woods will be criticised for its weak and repetitive chorus.

WTNY, AYHTDWS and HYGTG will be termed as trashy generic pop songs.

This Love and I Wish You Would will be called boring fillers.

Bad Blood will be an immature cringeworthy song.

No. Katy can not write songs as well as Taylor.

no cos taylor is a "critics darling" & katy isnt
Prism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
i love 1989 but its not nearly as "amazing & groundbreaking" as critics pretend it is

In what way are they too advanced for her?

It's so strange how in the 90s, bublegum pop songs were seen as cute for the audience it was marketed to, but not anything of real substance. But now Taylor can release songs Britney easily could have pulled off in the 90s and people act like it's Kate Bush level of work.

She would be dragged. ATRL would hate her even more.

People on ATRL are soooo blinded by chart numbers and sales, their opinion is entirely dictated on if something is successful or not.

If 1989 flopped, everyone on here would've hated on it and dragged her to the pits.

Now because it's doing so well, people exaggerate it's quality to the max.

No.

Talking as if 1989 had some kind of impressive lyrics. It's the SAME or even WORSE than PRISM, stop overrating your favorite songwriting "talent" to the pits. She's not the second coming.

To be honest - a lot of it boils down to the fact that Taylor Swift is a better songwriter. I'm not claiming that TS is one of the best lyricists in all of music, but her pop songs are better written (and seem to reflect who she really is) far more than Katy's bops (catchy sure, but lyrically generic). Therefore, I don't see Katy releasing something exactly the same as 1989. Because 1989 has Taylor's personality all over it.

I don't think so. Katy is incapable of telling a story as well as Taylor, which is a major reason behind her acclaim.

Even though it sounds like your average Katy Perry album, I don't think it would.
But congrats to Taylor. She is getting her first acclaimed album, one which is likely to appear on acclaimedmusic.net (at the moment she has nada).
It also looks like she will get her first decently acclaimed song too (her current best showing is barely in the Top 3000).


This. Personally I don't know anyone else with songwriting as basic as Taylor's. It has "14-year-old-girl" written all over it.

If you put a different cover around a book or a different border around a painting, a lot of people are tricked into believing that it's much better.

It indeed comes down the branding/packaging/marketing. Katy doesn't play along with what every artist is striving for (acclaim, high end, sophisticated, peer/industry approval,...) and swims against the current.

Because the only thing the industry told her is that she was expired before she even got started and that she should be manufactered into an Avril, a Kelly Clarkson,... It's the crowds that told her to continue doing her own thing and she kept going because of the fans/crowds.

No, because critics don't focus on the music itself now but more on the preconceived notions they have when it comes to the artist.