All Infantilized Up: Taylor Swift's "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" Music Video

Let's get one thing straight. I love Taylor Swift, or at least the idea of her. I mean, look at her.

If this young woman isn't America's sweetheart, I don't know who is. But I think, perhaps, that classic white, pure, blonde, country-girl look and character can only go so far. Recent history tells all the story that there is. Over the past two years, Taylor has made a transition from a teen with a country twang to a more poppy, bubbly sound in stardom (though she still manages wins CMA's galore regardless of an obvious change in style from "our song is the slamming screen door" to "Why you gotta be so mean?").  And even while her nonthreatening image sells, we know exactly what we buy; a generic, clear message of sweetness and heart unsullied by our multicultural and shades-of-gray reality. Score one for the white right, I suppose. 

That's all acceptable, for the most part -- I can stomach it, if barely. After all, we need some happy-go-lucky music once in a while, and even I will attempt to stop short of taking the joy out of everything. Apart from pandering to very particular country and celebrity "sellable" image, there really isn't that much harm being done by T-Swizzle.

Until it comes to Taylor's latest music video for "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together," which does its best to infantilize adult issues, water down an adult Taylor's relationship story into a fifties-in-fashion parade that drives home the song's typical country and pop undertones of feminine subordination and immaturity.

Swift's music video opens right where we should expect it to, based on the opening lyrics of the song:

"I remember when we broke up the first time / Saying, 'This is it, I've had enough,' 'cause like / We hadn't seen each other in a month / When you said you needed space

And we see Swift wearing cute fifties cover-up pajamas while in the background the apparent neer-do-well boyfriend ("How dare you break Taylor Swift's heart?") drifts about looking uncannily (and I mean creepily) like Adam Levine a la "Misery" and mouthing vague protestations to the camera. 

And, once again, look at her. She doesn't look like an adult capable of a relationship, she looks like she's put on her hipster frames to pretend to read along to her own bedtime story.

What's wrong with that, you ask? I mean, what's the harm in looking so sweet and innocent? Ask yourself if she could be the heroine of the music video without looking so sweet and innocent. That innocent cute look is what makes us root for her -- because who would hurt this innocent beauty. She must be in the right.

Now take a look at the band, whose appearance will certainly haunt my nightmares:

They're dressed up as happy stuffed animals.
Look at the headline to this blog post. Look back at this picture. Do I need to explain any more?

Thus, not only is celebrity Hollywood unwilling to sacrifice their token of white purity that is Taylor Swift -- even when she is singing breakup songs clearly indicating she's been in relationships, even when those songs have a more mature tone hidden in their lyrics. Don't believe me about the "more mature meaning" claim? Remember the line of Taylor Swift's "Mean": "Someday I'll be big enough so you won't hit me"? You probably don't, because in the music video, we only see Taylor singing the line once, after a big glitzy costume change, and in the very last minute. The other two times, it's sung with Swift off-camera; the first time we hear the line, a young fashionista is bullied by football players, and the second time, Swift's voice is again background music to the unhappiness of a elementary schooler's exclusion during recess.

Whatever you do, don't think of abuse when you look at this picture.

Suuuuure, but what does "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" have of substance in its lyrics that its video imagery dismisses? 

It's a tale of love addiction, a relationship gone truly bad: "I say, I hate you, we break up, you call me, I love you."

Swift, however, has been made so craftily small and diminutive in her surroundings that we feel she's childlike, which forces any evidence of her obvious maturity, mostly that betrayed by song lyrics, to the back burner of our consciousness . Look at the size of that table, the chair, the cups, even the big-leaved wallpaper. Note that Swift is 5'11", a veritable amazon woman to today's other wispy starlets). 

Not convincing? How about: "I'm really gonna miss you picking fights / and me, falling for it screaming that I'm right."

I would do an in-depth analysis of those lyrics, but I don't really think it's necessary. It should be obvious by now. Your eyes aren't deceiving you, unlike music videos and doctored photos: Swift is a woman. She has the capability to sing about real issues, regardless of the too often whitewashed nature of pop music, particularly county music, and all the other young stardom she has attained. Unfortunately, whatever voice she could have is lost in her music videos' collective whirlwinds of infantilization, a deeper message lost behind the blinding light of her purity.

The New Normal and the Acceptance of Bigotry

Lately, it seems like everything producer and writer Ryan Murphy touches turns to gold, spanning the range from the thrilling (Glee) to the seriously chilling (American Horror Story). But could his latest series, The New Normal, tarnish that stunning record of success? Unlike Glee, the show only takes stabs around funny -- though most similar to Glee as a situation comedy of sorts, the New Normal is not based around a group of basically immature highschoolers punchily belting out pop hits, and since the characters of the New Normal are left without the props of song-and-dance numbers to boost their charm, Murphy's forced them to rely solely upon their dialogue. And with just dialogue, it's easy to see a couple things more subtly disguised in Murphy's Glee: a legitimization of racism and homophobia, with no backdrop of show tunes to lighten the mood.

Let's take it from the top. The New Normal, in case you haven't watched the Pilot episode or read all of the press, is about an Ohio mother, Goldie, who realizes, through a series of conversations with her caustic mother Jane and an unfortunate walk-in on a cheating boyfriend, that she wants more out of life for herself and her daughter. Thus, she impulsively moves to California. With no high school or college degree to speak of, Goldie comes to the conclusion that the one thing she's good at, and can make quick money at, is reproducing (let's not even get into an analysis of how demeaning that is to similarly disadvantaged women everywhere... yet).

Goldie, played by Georgia King, decides to become a surrogate mother
after an attempt to "drive to Honolulu" on half a tank of gas. 

A few sentences ago, I mentioned a caustic (grand)mother, Jane. Here's a sample of  the racist, homophobic, and generally bigoted dialogue that Jane provides to the episode:

"Would you look at that. Just strutting down the middle of Buckeye Road in broad daylight, proud as gay peacocks." (While gazing at a pair of lesbians)

"I happen to love the gays. I could never get my hair to look this good without them."

"Oh, and now with the PDA? Those ass-campers have some nerve."

"I am extremely tolerant to all peoples! When they opened that Chipotle here, I was the first of my friends to go. And that is Spanish food." (After her granddaughter says she's 'unfriending' her on Facebook due to her bigotry).

"You people are so darned good with computers. And thanks for helping build the railroads." (to a young woman of Asian descent).

"Oh, no. You are not growing one of her kind of eggs in my granddaughter." (referring to the eggs of NeNe Leaks).

"I feel like I ate a black and gay stew right before falling asleep. This is a nightmare."

"I never could stand going into that store. Leon gave every hamster some queer name from a Broadway musical."

None of this inflammatory language is truly taken seriously by the other characters, and Jane's bigotry is accepted as merely part of her character, an integral piece of her identity that cannot be helped -- and is forgivable because of its darkly humorous content. But the fact is, this behavior is unacceptable no matter the age, race, or gender of the person it comes from.
Now, we could take the approach that by presenting such a character, especially in such a humorous light, Ryan Murphy is attempting to weaken the strength of such views, which, if never spoken, in theory become all the more dangerous and damaging. Read: if those hurtful and hateful view centered around homphobia and racism are never presented, they can never be challenged, and opinions can never be changed.
But if this is indeed what Murphy is attempting to do, it's a decidedly lackluster effort -- Jane's character,  which spins hate in as much a laughable way as Glee's Sue Sylvester, is never seriously admonished by a main character of the show. Her relationships to her family are never threatened, neither her daughter nor her granddaughter, who present to her the legitimacy of being white and are assumed to be compulsorily heterosexual to boot, say "enough is enough" to Jane's behavior.

Everybody just sit as you are and keep being backhandedly funny. Let's not actually approach the frankly life-threatening issues of homophobia and racism in a mature and thoughtful way. We might offend people if we did that. 

Just because Jane's character is meant to be humorous and just because her behavior is tongue in cheek and is meant to be interpreted by viewers as inappropriate, it doesn't mean that the other character's reactions to her, the legitimization of her homophobia and racism, is acceptable in any way. And as viewers, I would go so far as to say that we should not accept it, that we should demand more than a humorous approach and humorous admonitions to very serious issues.