bop or flop?

Are We Sluts for Taylor Swift’s ‘Slut!’?

To have a vault, and to periodically release treasures from therein, is one of the most esteemed and rarefied positions you can hold. Do you know who gets to have a vault? Walt Disney gets to have a vault, and so does Taylor Swift, whose fandom also approaches Disney levels in vastness, religious fervor, and box office. Since Swift began re-recording her albums, she has packaged each one with “vault tracks,†songs that didn’t make the cut the first time around. As she sends the entire internet back to 1989, we’re taking a good hard look at the first vault offering from the release, titled, promisingly, “Slut!†Is this a playful gem or a C-tier track that doesn’t earn its exclamation point? A music writer and a normal person debate.

Rebecca Alter: I’m honored to be having this convo with someone on Tree Paine’s actual mailing list. Not only that, but you allegedly like this song?

Justin Curto: Yes! I was so pleasantly surprised when I clicked play on the 1989 vault tracks and heard something that sounded like Swift’s later, dreamier pop songs: “False God†meets “Midnight Rain,†with a sprinkle of “mirrorball.†It’s just so pretty, which I don’t think anybody was expecting from that title. But wait, did you actually want Taylor Swift to make some sex-positive dirty-pop banger? Were you coming into this expecting, like, a Kim Petras song? Because that thought actively horrifies me.

RA: Hahaha, of course not, but a Reputation-era song called “Slut!†would have been a delight. Or like a “Bad Bloodâ€â€“type B-side from the vault. Something fun! Taylor can’t do slutpop, but she can occasionally do comedy. I think I would have liked this to be more in that mode. I agree with you that she’s defying expectations with this song’s title, but I think the issue here is I’m just not as down for the dreamy, hazy side of Taylor. Of all the songs outta the 1989 vault, this is one of the least hooky. It just sort of meanders and ambles and doesn’t build up to any high point or reach down for anything deep. If this really was from the 1989 era and not just retroactively written for the assignment, it should have been closer to “Wildest Dreams†— that woozy airiness cut through with one of those syncopated hooks she does so well. Also, the aaaah-aaaah tag. Although this does have a really fun “ah!†in it. What would you call that? Is this translating in writing?

JC: I don’t know what to call it, but I do love a good old Taylor Swift “ah!†You’re right that “Slut!†is nowhere near as dynamic as the other vault songs on 1989 (it’s not even my favorite), but that makes the little moments hit so much harder. When the drums cut out for a second on “In a world of boys, he’s a … gentleman� Ugh! I melt! I want to meet this guy! (Is it Harry Styles? Conor Kennedy?) It’s just such a sweet, charming song — and more fun than “Wildest Dreams,†which is an absolute snooze. I do think a huge part of why the vibe of the song works for me comes down to the lyrics, which are a little cheeky, a little tender, and extremely Swift. “Slut!†doesn’t quite reach the in-on-the-joke brilliance of “Blank Space,†but leave it to Taylor Swift to spin criticism of her dating life into one of the most beautiful love songs she’s made in a minute.

RA: Noo! I feel bad yucking anyone’s yum, but “In a world of boys, he’s a gentleman†is so Lover-coded, by which I mean it made me cringe. I also really wish the melody was sweeter! I sadly wasn’t picking up on the same sweetness you were. Like so much middle-of-the-road pop nowadays, I thought it sounded sort of Xanned out, a little dull. There were some lyrics that truly leapt out, though: “Got lovesick all over my bed†(nasty!!) and “Lovethorns all over this rose†(what the fuck!!). At least I’m glad to see she’s expanded her vocabulary of color words here. “Flamingo pink� “Aquamarine� “Tangerine� Someone’s mommy bought them the big Crayola box for back-to-school.

JC: Okay, the much funnier thing is that Swift splits that line to make it sound like she’s just saying, “Taking your time in the tangerine.†I’m not big on Swiftian Color Theory, but I’ve just kind of accepted that the rainbow (no Gaylor intended) comes with the territory of her songwriting. As I said about Midnights, you’ve got to lean into the cringe a bit with this girl. Some of the sillier lines here (I, too, don’t want to know what getting lovesick all over her bed means) fit really well with the song’s cutesy, singsongy melody. It’s a great moment where what Swift wants to do and what she’s capable of doing really align.

RA: Totally fair. I’ll say I laughed out loud at the final chorus, where it’s almost call-and-response whisper-shouting the word “slut!†Silly! Anyway, I’m sure I’ll be in the minority here and people will like the track, because it does what all her buzziest do, which is comment on her own fame and persona. Anyway, it doesn’t matter, because the new Taylor song I’ll be playing all weekend is this:

@finessir

Also if she made a song out Matty 😂How Taylor Swift sounds to non-Taylor Swift fans. Beat made by The Chivers Beat Company #taylorswift #erastour #1989

♬ original sound - FODÉ

JC: The 1975 … now there’s a band I want to hear make a song called “Slut!â€

Are We Sluts for Taylor Swift’s ‘Slut!’?