0 comments
Both Miley Cyrus and Charli XCX have defended their shorter concerts and limited dates after backlash. Does this reflect a changing social contract between performers and their audiences?
In the last few years, a pop star’s success has come to be measured in miles. The bigger the album, the bigger the tour; the bigger the tour, the more convincing the evidence that an artist has made it.
A world tour was once a victory lap and an opportunity to convert listeners into fans. But big-budget, three-hour-long arena shows by stars like Taylor Swift have redefined them. Now a tour serves as a kind of proof that the original function of said tour has already been met.
The goalposts have moved and so have our expectations. Now, anything shorter than two hours might be sniffed at by fans – as was the case for Lily Allen, who faced significant criticism when her West End Girl show was revealed to run for only 45 minutes.
Charli XCX was the latest victim of a disappointed fan base when she announced six dates for the UK and European leg of her Music, Fashion, Film tour.
The singer responded on Instagram that touring was ‘really emotionally and physically hard’ for her. She respected artists capable of performing at an ‘intense, lengthy and high-octane level’, she explained, but did not consider herself one of them. ‘Perhaps one day I will be built for the kind of touring you expect from me,’ she wrote, ‘but right now I am not.’
Charli’s admission was striking partly because it contradicted a familiar narrative about contemporary pop. Following the enormous success of Brat, her 2024 album, she had essentially become a cultural fixture.
But Charli’s subsequent touring schedule sent a clear message that commercial momentum doesn’t necessarily translate into an appetite for life on the road nor an acceptance that artists should succumb to pressure in order to outsource more material – particularly if that undermines the creative process that found them such success in the first instance.
It’s refreshing to see performers take a stance against what have become, frankly, outlandish industry expectations. And Charli isn’t the only one. Miley Cyrus also spoke out after comments surrounding her latest tour.
At two Hollywood Bowl performances in October, her first major live shows in years, some viewers criticised her for not singing every lyric to familiar hits, including ‘Party in the U.S.A.’ and ‘Flowers’. At her second show, Cyrus pushed back against what she described as clickbait, insisting that she put her heart into performing.
She also acknowledged that getting onstage didn’t come as naturally to her as it once had. She had nearly abandoned the second performance, she told the audience, but couldn’t bear to leave them without a show.
Live performance has become central to the business of being a musician, particularly in an era when recorded music is consumed through streaming services that offer listeners access to almost everything for a monthly subscription.
Concerts provide a more immediate connection between artist and audience, as well as an opportunity to sell tickets, merchandise, and premium experiences. But the machinery required to mount a major pop production is considerable.
Cyrus has spoken publicly about her sobriety journey and explained how a stringent self-care routine is central to her health. Establishing boundaries between work and protecting that lifestyle is fundamental to any person’s wellbeing. So it’s nice to see high-profile figures promoting it. What a good message to send younger fans: burning yourself out for the purposes of churning out money isn’t beneficial to anyone, least of all yourself.
Sure, Gen Z is sometimes disregarded as a ‘snowflake’ generation, but the world in which young people live and work is not the same world their parents or grandparents knew. Digital pressures, financial strains and environmental disasters are an accepted part of daily life, and advocating for one’s own mental and physical health is arguably more important than ever.
This does not mean that shorter tours are necessarily a new industry-wide norm. Six European dates, or two concerts at an iconic venue, cannot establish a trend on their own. Nor should every decision to scale back be interpreted as an act of artistic rebellion.
