WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.560 Okay, so let's unpack this. I want you to mentally 00:00:03.560 --> 00:00:06.639 transport yourself back to the year 2010. Oh 00:00:06.639 --> 00:00:10.919 man, what an era. Right. The radio is just absolutely 00:00:10.919 --> 00:00:13.800 dominated by a very specific sound. You have 00:00:13.800 --> 00:00:16.399 Lady Gaga at her absolute peak. David Guetta 00:00:16.399 --> 00:00:19.620 is everywhere. And everything is just, it's high 00:00:19.620 --> 00:00:21.870 energy. Everything is polished to within an inch 00:00:21.870 --> 00:00:24.230 of its life. Oh, heavily polished. The whole 00:00:24.230 --> 00:00:27.210 electropop explosion. Exactly. And then right 00:00:27.210 --> 00:00:28.809 in the middle of all that, this track drops. 00:00:29.070 --> 00:00:30.890 It's got this thumping house beat. It's got these 00:00:30.890 --> 00:00:34.289 incredibly catchy, slightly naughty lyrics, and 00:00:34.289 --> 00:00:36.310 it just takes over the clubs. The song is Dirty 00:00:36.310 --> 00:00:38.850 Talk, and the artist is Winter Gordon. Yeah, 00:00:38.850 --> 00:00:41.030 it was unavoidable that summer. Honestly, if 00:00:41.030 --> 00:00:42.990 you stepped foot in a club or even just turned 00:00:42.990 --> 00:00:44.869 on the radio in Australia or the UK, you heard 00:00:44.869 --> 00:00:48.229 this bass line. It captures that 2010 zeitgeist 00:00:48.229 --> 00:00:50.990 perfectly. It really does. But here is the thing 00:00:50.990 --> 00:00:52.869 that absolutely blows my mind. And it's the entire 00:00:52.869 --> 00:00:55.310 reason we are dedicating a deep dive to this 00:00:55.310 --> 00:00:58.149 specific track today. Yeah. This massive global 00:00:58.149 --> 00:01:00.409 anthem, the song that went triple platinum in 00:01:00.409 --> 00:01:02.189 Australia and topped the U .S. Billboard dance 00:01:02.189 --> 00:01:05.939 charts. it was literally a joke that is the hook 00:01:05.939 --> 00:01:08.099 isn't it that's what makes this so fascinating 00:01:08.099 --> 00:01:10.540 we tend to view the music industry especially 00:01:10.540 --> 00:01:14.739 that era of high gloss pop as this uh this massive 00:01:14.739 --> 00:01:17.340 machine of calculation right like focus groups 00:01:17.340 --> 00:01:20.359 and algorithms exactly we imagine boardrooms 00:01:20.359 --> 00:01:23.379 and teams of swedish songwriters doing actual 00:01:23.379 --> 00:01:26.659 math to find the perfect melody but dirty talk 00:01:26.659 --> 00:01:29.239 is a case study in the complete opposite it is 00:01:29.239 --> 00:01:32.989 a case study in pure unadulterated spontaneity 00:01:32.989 --> 00:01:37.069 it is the ultimate happy accident So today, our 00:01:37.069 --> 00:01:39.590 mission is to figure out exactly how that happened. 00:01:39.650 --> 00:01:42.069 We've got a great setup for you. We're going 00:01:42.069 --> 00:01:43.989 to look at the history, the production notes, 00:01:44.150 --> 00:01:46.569 the chart performance data, and the critical 00:01:46.569 --> 00:01:48.890 reception. All of it. Yeah, all to understand 00:01:48.890 --> 00:01:50.890 how Winter Gordon went from being a behind -the 00:01:50.890 --> 00:01:54.769 -scenes songwriter to a global pop star, basically 00:01:54.769 --> 00:01:56.989 by goofing around. And to really appreciate the 00:01:56.989 --> 00:01:59.049 accident, we have to understand the context of 00:01:59.049 --> 00:02:01.269 who Winter Gordon was before the song dropped. 00:02:01.390 --> 00:02:03.310 Because she wasn't some random person off the 00:02:03.310 --> 00:02:05.569 street. No, not at all. very much entrenched 00:02:05.569 --> 00:02:08.030 in the industry, just not holding the microphone 00:02:08.030 --> 00:02:10.729 herself. Right. She was a songwriter and not 00:02:10.729 --> 00:02:12.909 just trying to make it songwriter. The sources 00:02:12.909 --> 00:02:16.090 show she was writing for heavy hitters. We are 00:02:16.090 --> 00:02:19.580 talking. Mary J. Blige. Which is a huge deal. 00:02:19.819 --> 00:02:22.560 Yeah. Writing for the queen of hip hop soul requires 00:02:22.560 --> 00:02:25.919 a level of emotional depth and seriousness. It 00:02:25.919 --> 00:02:28.159 is not something you do lightly. It's heavy, 00:02:28.259 --> 00:02:30.939 serious R &B. And she also had a feature on Flo 00:02:30.939 --> 00:02:34.259 Rida's track Sugar back in 2009. Which was a 00:02:34.259 --> 00:02:37.379 big song, sure. But being the hook girl on a 00:02:37.379 --> 00:02:39.840 rapper's track is a very specific lane. It's 00:02:39.840 --> 00:02:42.300 a stepping stone. Exactly. It gets your voice 00:02:42.300 --> 00:02:44.400 out there, but it doesn't necessarily tell the 00:02:44.400 --> 00:02:46.300 audience who you are as an individual artist. 00:02:46.740 --> 00:02:49.500 And the source material suggests she was really 00:02:49.500 --> 00:02:51.319 struggling with that. She hadn't found her own 00:02:51.319 --> 00:02:53.099 lane yet. Right. She was bouncing around genres, 00:02:53.400 --> 00:02:55.360 doing the R &B writing, doing the pop features. 00:02:55.500 --> 00:02:58.500 She was searching. Until she walked into a session 00:02:58.500 --> 00:03:00.879 with Nicole Morey. Yeah. And this is where the 00:03:00.879 --> 00:03:03.319 story gets really, really human for me. Oh, totally. 00:03:03.539 --> 00:03:05.650 Because usually when we read about these. breakthrough 00:03:05.650 --> 00:03:08.889 sessions and music biographies, it's framed as 00:03:08.889 --> 00:03:12.110 this moment of intense artistic clarity. You 00:03:12.110 --> 00:03:15.689 know, sweat, tears, a sudden realization of destiny. 00:03:15.969 --> 00:03:20.129 The classic eureka moment. Yes. But this sounds 00:03:20.129 --> 00:03:22.729 like a sleepover. According to the interviews 00:03:22.729 --> 00:03:25.650 Gordon gave later to Atlantic Records, this wasn't 00:03:25.650 --> 00:03:27.270 some high -pressure environment. They weren't 00:03:27.270 --> 00:03:28.750 sitting there stressing about writing a number 00:03:28.750 --> 00:03:30.930 one hit. No, they were literally goofing around. 00:03:31.129 --> 00:03:33.830 Gordon is quoted saying, It came about when my 00:03:33.830 --> 00:03:35.949 friend and I were in the studio just joking, 00:03:36.129 --> 00:03:38.469 laughing, and pulling up words on the computer 00:03:38.469 --> 00:03:40.949 from different sites. Just pause on that image 00:03:40.949 --> 00:03:43.889 for a second. Sure. They are sitting in a professional 00:03:43.889 --> 00:03:46.710 recording studio, which is probably costing a 00:03:46.710 --> 00:03:49.289 fair bit of money per hour. Oh, thousands. Right. 00:03:49.469 --> 00:03:52.229 And they're Googling random words to make each 00:03:52.229 --> 00:03:54.729 other laugh. It sounds like a game, and that 00:03:54.729 --> 00:03:58.550 playful energy is absolutely crucial here. Gordon 00:03:58.550 --> 00:04:01.030 explicitly stated, It was meant to be more of 00:04:01.030 --> 00:04:04.250 a joke than a real song. A joke. And Nicole Morier, 00:04:04.289 --> 00:04:06.250 the co -writer, backed this up in an interview 00:04:06.250 --> 00:04:08.530 with Hit Quarters. She said they were just being 00:04:08.530 --> 00:04:11.210 silly. They set out to simply think of, quote, 00:04:11.389 --> 00:04:14.569 sexy things. But here's where the accident becomes 00:04:14.569 --> 00:04:17.569 art. Even though the intent was silly, the craft 00:04:17.569 --> 00:04:20.670 was still there. Morier noted that despite the 00:04:20.670 --> 00:04:23.110 joking around, she realized the melody they were 00:04:23.110 --> 00:04:25.949 humming was actually really catchy. She explicitly 00:04:25.949 --> 00:04:28.910 said, I love the chorus. That's the magic, isn't 00:04:28.910 --> 00:04:31.230 it? You lower your inhibitions because you're 00:04:31.230 --> 00:04:33.649 just joking, and suddenly you accidentally write 00:04:33.649 --> 00:04:35.689 a killer hook because you aren't overthinking 00:04:35.689 --> 00:04:38.170 every single note. It happens more often than 00:04:38.170 --> 00:04:40.449 you'd think in creative fields. When you remove 00:04:40.449 --> 00:04:42.589 the pressure of having to write serious art, 00:04:42.709 --> 00:04:45.449 you access a totally different part of your creativity. 00:04:45.449 --> 00:04:48.149 You tap into something more primal, more fun. 00:04:48.879 --> 00:04:51.399 And for a club track, fun is the only metric 00:04:51.399 --> 00:04:53.600 that matters. If it's not fun, it doesn't work 00:04:53.600 --> 00:04:56.339 on a dance floor, period. So they have this product 00:04:56.339 --> 00:04:59.980 of goofing around. And the result is dirty talk. 00:05:00.540 --> 00:05:02.579 Let's talk about the song itself. Because if 00:05:02.579 --> 00:05:04.379 you listen to it with this backstory in mind, 00:05:04.459 --> 00:05:06.199 it makes so much more sense. It really does. 00:05:06.379 --> 00:05:08.959 Musically, it's defined as electro pop and dance 00:05:08.959 --> 00:05:12.000 pop. Backed by this driving house beat produced 00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:15.540 by Jupiter Ace. It is very 2010. Extremely, but 00:05:15.540 --> 00:05:18.800 lyrically well. It's a list. It is a literal 00:05:18.800 --> 00:05:21.379 list. It's a list of the Google search terms 00:05:21.379 --> 00:05:23.779 they were probably looking at. I have to read 00:05:23.779 --> 00:05:25.399 some of these because the Digital Spy Review 00:05:25.399 --> 00:05:28.279 called them out specifically. We've got kitten 00:05:28.279 --> 00:05:32.259 heels, lingerie pantyhose, foreplay. It's not 00:05:32.259 --> 00:05:34.819 exactly Shakespeare, is it? But it's rhythmic. 00:05:35.139 --> 00:05:38.160 It is a shopping list for a wild night out. The 00:05:38.160 --> 00:05:40.459 digital spy reviewer, Robert Copsey, gave it 00:05:40.459 --> 00:05:42.800 four out of five stars, by the way. He described 00:05:42.800 --> 00:05:45.899 it as naughty and said she purrs over club beats 00:05:45.899 --> 00:05:48.319 bouncier than a space hopper. That is a very 00:05:48.319 --> 00:05:50.759 British description. A space hopper. I love that 00:05:50.759 --> 00:05:54.060 visual. Space hopper. But my absolute favorite 00:05:54.060 --> 00:05:55.920 part of that review is when he talks about the 00:05:55.920 --> 00:05:58.509 chorus. She's singing, I'm no angel. And then 00:05:58.509 --> 00:06:01.009 she starts requesting things. She wants a blindfold. 00:06:01.230 --> 00:06:03.310 She wants hot wax. It gets quite specific quite 00:06:03.310 --> 00:06:05.930 fast. It does. And the reviewer writes, oh, love, 00:06:05.970 --> 00:06:08.029 we get it. You don't live your life like a nun. 00:06:08.170 --> 00:06:10.769 Which is funny. But it also speaks to exactly 00:06:10.769 --> 00:06:13.250 why the song works. It wasn't subtle. It was 00:06:13.250 --> 00:06:16.449 a straight up club track to quote the About .com 00:06:16.449 --> 00:06:19.370 review. They called it down and dirty and praised 00:06:19.370 --> 00:06:22.269 the production for being fun and bouncy. It did 00:06:22.269 --> 00:06:24.389 a really good job of getting listeners into the 00:06:24.389 --> 00:06:28.120 groove. It knew exactly what it was. However, 00:06:28.120 --> 00:06:30.579 not everyone was ready for exactly what it was. 00:06:30.660 --> 00:06:32.339 And here is where it gets really interesting. 00:06:32.800 --> 00:06:35.540 Because apparently the joke was a little too 00:06:35.540 --> 00:06:37.759 dirty for some people. Did you know there's a 00:06:37.759 --> 00:06:40.620 censored version? The UK edit, yes. This is a 00:06:40.620 --> 00:06:42.579 fascinating detail from the release history. 00:06:42.800 --> 00:06:45.720 So in the United States, we got the song as is, 00:06:45.879 --> 00:06:49.189 hot wax and all. But for the UK release, the 00:06:49.189 --> 00:06:51.610 lyrics actually had to be re -recorded. Because 00:06:51.610 --> 00:06:53.990 the sexual nature was deemed too rude for daytime 00:06:53.990 --> 00:06:56.350 radio. Too rude. They had to go back into the 00:06:56.350 --> 00:06:58.490 vocal booth and clean up the joke because it 00:06:58.490 --> 00:07:00.870 was too effective at being dirty. It shows the 00:07:00.870 --> 00:07:02.870 different standards in different markets, certainly. 00:07:03.529 --> 00:07:06.290 But it also shows the label, Big Beat, knew they 00:07:06.290 --> 00:07:08.629 had a massive hit on their hands. Oh, for sure. 00:07:08.850 --> 00:07:11.329 You don't bother paying for studio time to re 00:07:11.329 --> 00:07:13.410 -record vocals for a song you're going to bury. 00:07:13.810 --> 00:07:16.250 They wanted this on daytime radio in the UK. 00:07:16.350 --> 00:07:19.029 They wanted it playing on BBC Radio 1 while people 00:07:19.029 --> 00:07:21.370 were driving to work. Absolutely. They saw the 00:07:21.370 --> 00:07:23.269 potential. And speaking of the label pushing 00:07:23.269 --> 00:07:25.870 it, we have to talk about the visuals. Because 00:07:25.870 --> 00:07:29.410 for a song that started as a studio prank, they 00:07:29.410 --> 00:07:31.589 eventually put some serious budget behind the 00:07:31.589 --> 00:07:34.259 imagery. There were actually two videos, which 00:07:34.259 --> 00:07:36.759 is another sign of the label trying to figure 00:07:36.759 --> 00:07:39.360 out how to market this unexpected hit. Right. 00:07:39.439 --> 00:07:43.720 The first one premiered in July 2010. It was 00:07:43.720 --> 00:07:46.819 directed by Armin Jirahian. The source material 00:07:46.819 --> 00:07:49.259 describes it as having a magical fairy tale theme. 00:07:49.439 --> 00:07:52.500 Which is a... Choice. Yeah. Considering the lyrics 00:07:52.500 --> 00:07:54.899 are literally about lingerie and blindfolds, 00:07:54.899 --> 00:07:56.779 a fairy tale seems like a massive disconnect. 00:07:57.060 --> 00:07:59.319 Maybe a very specific, weird kind of fairy tale. 00:07:59.500 --> 00:08:02.560 But clearly, the team felt they needed a course 00:08:02.560 --> 00:08:05.180 correction. Because in November, we get the official 00:08:05.180 --> 00:08:07.420 video. This is the one that I think most people 00:08:07.420 --> 00:08:09.379 remember when they think of the song. It really 00:08:09.379 --> 00:08:11.500 established her look. This is where we see the 00:08:11.500 --> 00:08:14.040 pop star packaging in full force. We see Gordon 00:08:14.040 --> 00:08:16.540 in various costumes, lots of dramatic makeup, 00:08:16.680 --> 00:08:19.360 and a really heavy rotation of wigs. The wigs 00:08:19.360 --> 00:08:21.259 were iconic. There's the look with the two short 00:08:21.259 --> 00:08:23.899 pigtails. Then there's the long black wig with 00:08:23.899 --> 00:08:26.079 the reddish purple bangs. And then the switch 00:08:26.079 --> 00:08:28.079 to the yellow dress with the yellow bangs. It's 00:08:28.079 --> 00:08:30.899 very visual, very high energy. It matches that 00:08:30.899 --> 00:08:33.740 electropop vibe perfectly. It signals to the 00:08:33.740 --> 00:08:36.179 viewer, I am not an acoustic songwriter holding 00:08:36.179 --> 00:08:38.679 a guitar. I am a dance artist. But there is one 00:08:38.679 --> 00:08:40.529 scene in that second video. that definitely got 00:08:40.529 --> 00:08:44.269 people talking. The bridge scene. Yes. The video 00:08:44.269 --> 00:08:46.850 cuts to Gordon and she appears to be completely 00:08:46.850 --> 00:08:50.570 naked with short, uncut hair. It was a bold move. 00:08:50.730 --> 00:08:54.289 It's vulnerable, but also extremely provocative. 00:08:54.590 --> 00:08:56.899 And effective. The video on her official channel 00:08:56.899 --> 00:09:00.539 has over 11 million views. And there's a re -upload 00:09:00.539 --> 00:09:03.220 by a channel called TV Neon that has over 13 00:09:03.220 --> 00:09:05.519 million views. So people were definitely watching. 00:09:05.639 --> 00:09:08.480 It did its job. Exactly. That image helped shed 00:09:08.480 --> 00:09:11.259 the songwriter for Mary J. Blige persona and 00:09:11.259 --> 00:09:14.059 replace it with Winter Gordon, the solo star. 00:09:14.240 --> 00:09:16.320 So we have the happy accident song. We have the 00:09:16.320 --> 00:09:18.460 controversial lyrics that need censoring. We 00:09:18.460 --> 00:09:21.000 have the high concept video with the wigs. Now 00:09:21.000 --> 00:09:23.470 we have to ask. What does this all mean for her 00:09:23.470 --> 00:09:25.470 career? How did it actually perform? Because 00:09:25.470 --> 00:09:27.210 you can have all the bows in the world, but did 00:09:27.210 --> 00:09:30.330 it sell? It was a massive success, but the geography 00:09:30.330 --> 00:09:32.549 of that success is really interesting to look 00:09:32.549 --> 00:09:36.330 at. In the U .S., it hit number one on the Billboard 00:09:36.330 --> 00:09:39.850 Hot Dance Club Songs chart in July 2010. Number 00:09:39.850 --> 00:09:43.730 one. That is the pinnacle for a dance track in 00:09:43.730 --> 00:09:46.049 the States. It took the top spot from Alexis 00:09:46.049 --> 00:09:48.509 Jordan and was eventually succeeded by Goldfrapp. 00:09:48.629 --> 00:09:50.950 That is incredibly good company to be in for 00:09:50.950 --> 00:09:53.110 a debut dance single. But if we look internationally, 00:09:53.509 --> 00:09:57.389 it goes from club hit to actual cultural phenomenon. 00:09:57.629 --> 00:09:59.870 Specifically in Australia. Australia absolutely 00:09:59.870 --> 00:10:01.669 loved this song. Walk us through that because 00:10:01.669 --> 00:10:04.649 the trajectory there is wild. So it wasn't an 00:10:04.649 --> 00:10:06.889 instant smashed out of the gate. It debuted at 00:10:06.889 --> 00:10:09.970 number 77 on the ARIA chart in December 2010. 00:10:10.830 --> 00:10:13.029 slow start but then the club started playing 00:10:13.029 --> 00:10:15.129 it the word of mouth kicked in over four weeks 00:10:15.129 --> 00:10:17.789 it just kept climbing slow and steady right it 00:10:17.789 --> 00:10:21.049 cracked the top 10 and by january 2011 it hit 00:10:21.049 --> 00:10:23.509 number one number one in the entire country and 00:10:23.509 --> 00:10:25.629 it stayed there for three weeks it was eventually 00:10:25.629 --> 00:10:29.049 certified 3x platinum that represents shipments 00:10:29.049 --> 00:10:33.129 of over 210 000 units for a debut solo single 00:10:33.129 --> 00:10:35.470 that started as a studio joke that is incredible 00:10:35.470 --> 00:10:38.809 that is wild what about the uk we know they had 00:10:38.809 --> 00:10:40.899 the censored daytime radio version. Did that 00:10:40.899 --> 00:10:43.299 actually help? It certainly didn't hurt. It peaked 00:10:43.299 --> 00:10:45.700 at number 25 on the singles chart, which is a 00:10:45.700 --> 00:10:49.039 solid top 40 hit. But on the UK dance chart, 00:10:49.240 --> 00:10:52.019 it hit number six. And the sources note that 00:10:52.019 --> 00:10:54.700 it remains a popular anthem in Britain's nightclubs. 00:10:54.740 --> 00:10:56.919 It was certified gold there. So it had real staying 00:10:56.919 --> 00:10:59.779 power. It did. And in Ireland, it rose from number 00:10:59.779 --> 00:11:02.240 30 all the way to number eight. So it was a legitimate 00:11:02.240 --> 00:11:04.740 European hit as well. One thing I noticed in 00:11:04.740 --> 00:11:07.059 the production notes was the sheer volume of 00:11:07.059 --> 00:11:10.139 remixes. It felt like every DJ Under the Sun 00:11:10.139 --> 00:11:12.700 took a crack at this song. That was a deliberate 00:11:12.700 --> 00:11:15.620 strategy by the label. Big beat. And it's a really 00:11:15.620 --> 00:11:17.480 smart one for this genre. You look at the list 00:11:17.480 --> 00:11:20.600 of producers, Laidback Luke, Chufu, Kim Faye, 00:11:20.840 --> 00:11:23.500 Hagenar, and Albrecht. I saw a Dirty Talk remix's 00:11:23.500 --> 00:11:26.759 EP part one and a part two. Exactly. By flooding 00:11:26.759 --> 00:11:29.059 the market with high -quality remixes from respected 00:11:29.059 --> 00:11:31.879 DJs, you ensure the song stays in rotation in 00:11:31.879 --> 00:11:34.360 the clubs. If the original mix is getting a little 00:11:34.360 --> 00:11:36.980 stale, the Laidback Luke remix gives it a second 00:11:36.980 --> 00:11:39.379 wind. It keeps the song on the dance floor for 00:11:39.379 --> 00:11:41.720 months, which drives those sales and streams. 00:11:42.159 --> 00:11:43.940 It's so interesting to think about the contrast 00:11:43.940 --> 00:11:47.000 between the joke of the creation and the machine 00:11:47.000 --> 00:11:49.399 of the distribution. Like, Winter and Nicole 00:11:49.399 --> 00:11:51.940 are laughing about hot wax in the studio, and 00:11:51.940 --> 00:11:54.080 then a few months later, there's a highly strategic 00:11:54.080 --> 00:11:57.299 rollout with nine different remixes and a gold 00:11:57.299 --> 00:11:59.940 certification in the UK. It connects back to 00:11:59.940 --> 00:12:02.379 what Digital Spy said in their review. They compared 00:12:02.379 --> 00:12:05.679 her to Robin S. and Ultronate. These are absolute 00:12:05.679 --> 00:12:08.279 legends in the dance world. Oh, yeah. Show Me 00:12:08.279 --> 00:12:12.409 Love by Robin S. is iconic. To be compared to 00:12:12.409 --> 00:12:15.029 that on your debut. It suggests that even though 00:12:15.029 --> 00:12:17.070 they were just goofing around, they tapped into 00:12:17.070 --> 00:12:20.470 the fundamental DNA of house music. The high 00:12:20.470 --> 00:12:23.370 -energy chorus, as the review called it, is timeless. 00:12:23.669 --> 00:12:25.850 It doesn't actually matter if you wrote it seriously 00:12:25.850 --> 00:12:28.730 or not. If it makes people move, it works. It 00:12:28.730 --> 00:12:31.029 clearly worked. It's funny, looking back at the 00:12:31.029 --> 00:12:33.070 critical reception, it was almost universally 00:12:33.070 --> 00:12:36.070 positive regarding the fun factor. Nobody was 00:12:36.070 --> 00:12:38.110 analyzing it for deep philosophical meaning, 00:12:38.230 --> 00:12:40.309 but everyone agreed it was a total banger. About 00:12:40.309 --> 00:12:42.919 .com said, it gets you into the groove. That 00:12:42.919 --> 00:12:44.779 is the mission statement of a song like this. 00:12:44.899 --> 00:12:47.340 If it achieves that, it's a success. I want to 00:12:47.340 --> 00:12:48.820 circle back to something you mentioned earlier 00:12:48.820 --> 00:12:51.960 about finding her lane. The source material mentions 00:12:51.960 --> 00:12:54.580 she had been writing genre -varied songs before 00:12:54.580 --> 00:12:58.399 this, but with Dirty Talk, she felt she had finally 00:12:58.399 --> 00:13:01.460 found her lane in dance music. That is a key 00:13:01.460 --> 00:13:03.559 takeaway from all of this. Sometimes artists 00:13:03.559 --> 00:13:05.399 struggle because they are trying to fit into 00:13:05.399 --> 00:13:07.580 a mold that isn't quite right, or they are being 00:13:07.580 --> 00:13:10.440 too versatile. By letting go and just having 00:13:10.440 --> 00:13:13.139 fun with a dance track, Gordon discovered that 00:13:13.139 --> 00:13:15.940 this was where her voice truly shone. She actually 00:13:15.940 --> 00:13:17.460 mentions that there's nothing like having your 00:13:17.460 --> 00:13:19.360 own song compared to just being a feature on 00:13:19.360 --> 00:13:21.879 a Flo Rida track. It must be such a vindication. 00:13:22.139 --> 00:13:25.399 You spend years writing for Mary J. Blige, which 00:13:25.399 --> 00:13:27.700 is an honor, obviously. But to have your own 00:13:27.700 --> 00:13:30.080 voice, singing your own silly lyrics, screaming 00:13:30.080 --> 00:13:32.639 from the radio in Australia, that has to feel 00:13:32.639 --> 00:13:35.120 completely different. And to have it be the song 00:13:35.120 --> 00:13:37.580 that defines your breakout, it set the tone for 00:13:37.580 --> 00:13:40.580 her album With the Music I Die. It signaled to 00:13:40.580 --> 00:13:43.240 the industry, I am a dance artist now. So when 00:13:43.240 --> 00:13:45.379 we look at Dirty Talk by Winter Gordon, we're 00:13:45.379 --> 00:13:47.340 not just looking at a catchy song about lingerie. 00:13:47.340 --> 00:13:49.820 We're looking at the power of play. I think that's 00:13:49.820 --> 00:13:52.799 the headline here. Creativity is a strange beast. 00:13:53.340 --> 00:13:56.379 Sometimes trying too hard actually kills the 00:13:56.379 --> 00:13:59.519 vibe. Yeah. You can overthink a song into oblivion. 00:13:59.580 --> 00:14:01.980 Right. You stifle it. You polish all the edges 00:14:01.980 --> 00:14:04.580 off until it's boring. Exactly. But when you 00:14:04.580 --> 00:14:07.559 allow yourself to play, to be silly, to pull 00:14:07.559 --> 00:14:09.659 up random words on a computer just to make your 00:14:09.659 --> 00:14:12.700 friend laugh, you bypass your internal critic. 00:14:13.289 --> 00:14:16.230 You access something authentic. And in this case, 00:14:16.250 --> 00:14:18.669 that authenticity resonated with millions of 00:14:18.669 --> 00:14:21.049 people around the world. From a studio joke to 00:14:21.049 --> 00:14:23.490 a triple platinum record. It is a pretty good 00:14:23.490 --> 00:14:25.450 trajectory. It raises a provocative question 00:14:25.450 --> 00:14:27.090 for me, though, that I think is worth chewing 00:14:27.090 --> 00:14:30.389 on. Weigh it on us. If we accept that this massive 00:14:30.389 --> 00:14:32.870 hit was effectively an accident, a byproduct 00:14:32.870 --> 00:14:35.450 of goofing around, how much of the other art 00:14:35.450 --> 00:14:38.149 we consume and revere was also just a happy accident? 00:14:38.330 --> 00:14:42.000 Oh, wow. That's a good one. Right. We ascribe 00:14:42.000 --> 00:14:45.840 so much intent to artists. We analyze their lyrics. 00:14:45.879 --> 00:14:47.960 We write essays on their choices. We dissect 00:14:47.960 --> 00:14:51.019 the deeper meanings of their work. But what if, 00:14:51.039 --> 00:14:53.919 more often than we think, they were just having 00:14:53.919 --> 00:14:56.100 a laugh in the studio? What if the deep meaning 00:14:56.100 --> 00:14:58.779 we find is something we put there, not something 00:14:58.779 --> 00:15:01.600 they actually intended? That is something to 00:15:01.600 --> 00:15:04.659 chew on. Next time you are listening to your 00:15:04.659 --> 00:15:06.539 favorite song or looking at a piece of abstract 00:15:06.539 --> 00:15:09.850 art, you have to ask yourself, Was this a master 00:15:09.850 --> 00:15:11.970 plan or were they just Googling words and having 00:15:11.970 --> 00:15:13.610 a really good time? It might be better if it 00:15:13.610 --> 00:15:15.909 was the latter. I think I agree. Sometimes the 00:15:15.909 --> 00:15:17.669 best things happen when you aren't trying quite 00:15:17.669 --> 00:15:20.789 so hard. Well, that is all we have for this deep 00:15:20.789 --> 00:15:22.990 dive into Dirty Talk. Hopefully this encourages 00:15:22.990 --> 00:15:25.090 you to go out and find your own happy accidents. 00:15:25.549 --> 00:15:26.330 Thanks for listening.