WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.759 The Deep Dive, unpacking Kiss Me by Sixpence 00:00:02.759 --> 00:00:05.639 None the Richer 90s pop music history. Join us 00:00:05.639 --> 00:00:07.860 for a deep dive into the surprising history and 00:00:07.860 --> 00:00:10.660 massive cultural footprint of the ultimate 90s 00:00:10.660 --> 00:00:13.339 alternative rock ballad, Kiss Me by Sixpence 00:00:13.339 --> 00:00:15.939 None the Richer. We're tracing the track's evolution 00:00:15.939 --> 00:00:18.300 from a hastily written draft in a Dutch motel 00:00:18.300 --> 00:00:20.940 room to a Grammy -nominated global phenomenon. 00:00:21.550 --> 00:00:23.589 Discover how it conquered pop culture through 00:00:23.589 --> 00:00:25.910 teen classics like She's All That and Dawson's 00:00:25.910 --> 00:00:28.250 Creek, became the very first song Taylor Swift 00:00:28.250 --> 00:00:30.769 learned on guitar, and recently found a second 00:00:30.769 --> 00:00:33.729 life as a new disco dance pop hit by Lisa of 00:00:33.729 --> 00:00:36.399 Blackpink. Whether you're a 90s nostalgia fan, 00:00:36.520 --> 00:00:38.960 a music history buff, or just insanely curious 00:00:38.960 --> 00:00:41.420 about how a song becomes a timeless hit, this 00:00:41.420 --> 00:00:43.560 deep dive is your shortcut to being well -informed. 00:00:43.820 --> 00:00:46.119 Keywords, six -tenths none the richer, kiss me, 00:00:46.200 --> 00:00:48.880 90s pop music history, alternative rock ballad, 00:00:48.880 --> 00:00:51.140 she's all that soundtrack, Dawson's Creek, Taylor 00:00:51.140 --> 00:00:54.039 Swift guitar, Blackpink Lisa Moonlit Floor, hit 00:00:54.039 --> 00:00:56.439 song origins, pop culture. Welcome to the deep 00:00:56.439 --> 00:00:59.460 dive. We are taking a single comprehensive source 00:00:59.460 --> 00:01:01.560 today. It's this incredibly detailed Wikipedia 00:01:01.560 --> 00:01:04.170 article. Yeah, a real deep cut. Exactly. And 00:01:04.170 --> 00:01:07.129 we're using it to uncover the just layered journey 00:01:07.129 --> 00:01:10.269 of a song that basically became the definitive 00:01:10.269 --> 00:01:12.810 soundtrack of a generation. Oh, absolutely. We 00:01:12.810 --> 00:01:15.129 are looking at Kiss Me by Sixpence None the Richer. 00:01:15.189 --> 00:01:18.629 And we're going to trace how a track that started 00:01:18.629 --> 00:01:22.549 as as the scribbled, somewhat reluctant draft 00:01:22.549 --> 00:01:25.670 in a random Dutch motel room somehow evolved 00:01:25.670 --> 00:01:28.549 into a foundational text for Taylor Swift's guitar 00:01:28.549 --> 00:01:31.569 playing. Right. And eventually a 2024 K -pop 00:01:31.569 --> 00:01:34.879 new disco hit. Okay, let's unpack this. It really 00:01:34.879 --> 00:01:38.659 is a fascinating study in pop culture endurance. 00:01:39.079 --> 00:01:41.459 When you examine the timeline and the various 00:01:41.459 --> 00:01:44.319 lives this single piece of music has lived, it 00:01:44.319 --> 00:01:46.620 totally defies the standard life cycle of a pop 00:01:46.620 --> 00:01:48.430 hit. Yeah, it doesn't follow the rules at all. 00:01:48.530 --> 00:01:50.969 Not even a little. To really understand the friction 00:01:50.969 --> 00:01:53.269 at the genesis of this song, you have to look 00:01:53.269 --> 00:01:54.930 at where Sixpence None the Richer was positioned 00:01:54.930 --> 00:01:57.129 in the mid -90s. Which was not the mainstream 00:01:57.129 --> 00:01:59.450 pop world. No, they were fundamentally an alternative 00:01:59.450 --> 00:02:02.670 rock band. They had deep roots in the Christian 00:02:02.670 --> 00:02:04.530 alt -rock scene, which at the time was defined 00:02:04.530 --> 00:02:07.909 by a much moodier, ethereal, almost melancholic 00:02:07.909 --> 00:02:10.129 sound. Right, very atmospheric. Exactly. They 00:02:10.129 --> 00:02:12.090 were definitely not aiming for the top 40. Which 00:02:12.090 --> 00:02:15.370 makes the origin of Kiss Me such a massive anomaly. 00:02:15.750 --> 00:02:19.000 I mean... Matt Slocum, the band's primary songwriter 00:02:19.000 --> 00:02:21.120 and guitarist, is sitting in his room at a Dutch 00:02:21.120 --> 00:02:23.680 motel while the band is on tour. Just hanging 00:02:23.680 --> 00:02:27.219 out. Right. And he essentially conjures this 00:02:27.219 --> 00:02:30.460 light, breezy song out of thin air. He picks 00:02:30.460 --> 00:02:32.960 up the phone calls and asks her to come down 00:02:32.960 --> 00:02:35.860 to his room. And she learns the entire vocal 00:02:35.860 --> 00:02:38.199 arrangement right there. Within an hour. Yeah. 00:02:38.280 --> 00:02:41.039 The immediacy of that creative process is just 00:02:41.039 --> 00:02:43.319 striking. I mean, they actually had a show scheduled 00:02:43.319 --> 00:02:45.879 for that very night at the Flevo Festival. Wow. 00:02:46.219 --> 00:02:48.120 So she learned the melody in an hour and they 00:02:48.120 --> 00:02:50.599 performed it live for an audience that same evening. 00:02:50.680 --> 00:02:53.860 That is wild. And Nash has noted that it was 00:02:53.860 --> 00:02:57.139 an instant hit with the crowd. But the band's 00:02:57.139 --> 00:02:58.860 own internal reaction was completely different. 00:02:59.060 --> 00:03:01.000 They hated it. Well, they were highly skeptical 00:03:01.000 --> 00:03:02.780 of it. Yeah. I mean, I guess that makes sense. 00:03:02.900 --> 00:03:05.689 That is a massive tonal shift for them. If you're 00:03:05.689 --> 00:03:07.909 an indie -leaning alt -rock band who has spent 00:03:07.909 --> 00:03:10.610 years cultivating a specific moody aesthetic, 00:03:10.930 --> 00:03:13.509 dropping a bouncy track about silver moons is 00:03:13.509 --> 00:03:15.870 incredibly risky. Oh, yeah. You're towing the 00:03:15.870 --> 00:03:19.210 line of alienating the exact fan base that got 00:03:19.210 --> 00:03:20.849 you your record deal in the first place. Right. 00:03:20.969 --> 00:03:23.289 So it makes total sense that they were reluctant 00:03:23.289 --> 00:03:26.550 to include it on their 1997 self -titled third 00:03:26.550 --> 00:03:29.729 album. They absolutely resisted it. It took their 00:03:29.729 --> 00:03:32.990 producer Steve Taylor stepping in. and forcefully 00:03:32.990 --> 00:03:35.129 persuading them to reconsider the track list. 00:03:35.289 --> 00:03:37.650 He had to fight for it. He really did. He heard 00:03:37.650 --> 00:03:39.810 the underlying pop mechanics of the song and 00:03:39.810 --> 00:03:42.509 knew it was undeniable. And it's worth noting 00:03:42.509 --> 00:03:45.069 that the song almost had a very different, slightly 00:03:45.069 --> 00:03:47.650 grittier vibe. Oh, you mean the lyrics? Yes. 00:03:48.370 --> 00:03:51.110 Slocum's original draft featured the line, cigarette 00:03:51.110 --> 00:03:54.229 sparkling, rather than the iconic silver moon 00:03:54.229 --> 00:03:56.750 sparkling. Oh, wow. Which completely changes 00:03:56.750 --> 00:03:58.349 the visual language of the track. It totally 00:03:58.349 --> 00:04:00.349 changes it. Cigarette Sparkling gives you this 00:04:00.349 --> 00:04:03.090 late night indie rock pavement outside a club 00:04:03.090 --> 00:04:05.930 kind of visual. It feels anchored in that 90s 00:04:05.930 --> 00:04:08.800 grunge hangover. But changing it to Silver Moon 00:04:08.800 --> 00:04:12.120 Sparkling instantly lifts the song out of that 00:04:12.120 --> 00:04:15.080 gritty reality and places it into a timeless, 00:04:15.259 --> 00:04:19.079 swoony, fairy tale romance. It just softens the 00:04:19.079 --> 00:04:21.439 entire composition. What's fascinating here is 00:04:21.439 --> 00:04:23.839 how often a creator's biggest, most defining 00:04:23.839 --> 00:04:26.939 success comes from stepping outside their established 00:04:26.939 --> 00:04:29.600 comfort zone and trusting an external ear. Yeah, 00:04:29.660 --> 00:04:31.740 trusting the producer. Right. The band didn't 00:04:31.740 --> 00:04:34.680 want to be a mainstream pop act. They actively 00:04:34.680 --> 00:04:36.800 pushed back against the very song. that would 00:04:36.800 --> 00:04:39.620 define their entire legacy really speaks to the 00:04:39.620 --> 00:04:41.680 value of a producer who can see the forest for 00:04:41.680 --> 00:04:44.100 the trees and steer an artist toward a broader 00:04:44.100 --> 00:04:47.100 audience. And that broader audience arrived like 00:04:47.100 --> 00:04:50.139 a tidal wave in 1999. The song had been out in 00:04:50.139 --> 00:04:51.920 the world for a bit, but then it hit the absolute 00:04:51.920 --> 00:04:54.879 jackpot of late 90s cinematic synergy. With the 00:04:54.879 --> 00:04:58.160 movie Boom. Yes. Miramax licensed Kiss Me as 00:04:58.160 --> 00:04:59.939 the central theme song for their teen romantic 00:04:59.939 --> 00:05:02.579 comedy. She's called that. And almost simultaneously 00:05:02.579 --> 00:05:05.240 in April of 1999, it was featured on the very 00:05:05.240 --> 00:05:07.620 first soundtrack for the television show Dawson's 00:05:07.620 --> 00:05:10.639 Creek. Which is huge. If we connect this to the 00:05:10.639 --> 00:05:13.300 bigger picture. You have to understand the sheer 00:05:13.300 --> 00:05:16.339 economic and cultural power of the teen media 00:05:16.339 --> 00:05:19.319 industrial complex at the ends of the 20th century. 00:05:19.439 --> 00:05:22.680 It was a juggernaut. It really was. Before streaming 00:05:22.680 --> 00:05:25.379 algorithms dictated hits, a feature spot on a 00:05:25.379 --> 00:05:28.240 massive teen movie soundtrack was the ultimate 00:05:28.240 --> 00:05:31.629 kingmaker. The makeover reveal trope was a staple 00:05:31.629 --> 00:05:34.589 of 90s cinema. Oh, taking off the glasses and 00:05:34.589 --> 00:05:36.970 suddenly she's beautiful. Exactly. And Kiss Me 00:05:36.970 --> 00:05:40.029 essentially became the auditory shorthand for 00:05:40.029 --> 00:05:42.689 that specific cinematic moment. When the protagonist 00:05:42.689 --> 00:05:45.230 walks down the stairs in the new dress, this 00:05:45.230 --> 00:05:47.029 is the song playing in the collective memory 00:05:47.029 --> 00:05:49.889 of an entire generation. It was so deeply ingrained 00:05:49.889 --> 00:05:52.310 in the DNA of that specific film that when She's 00:05:52.310 --> 00:05:55.009 All That was released in Italy, the distributors 00:05:55.009 --> 00:05:58.170 literally retitled the movie Kiss Me. No way. 00:05:58.310 --> 00:06:00.970 Yes. They bypassed translating the idiom she's 00:06:00.970 --> 00:06:03.410 all that entirely because the song itself was 00:06:03.410 --> 00:06:05.509 the strongest marketing tool they had. That is 00:06:05.509 --> 00:06:08.089 a staggering level of cultural saturation. And 00:06:08.089 --> 00:06:10.649 the global chart data totally reflects that dominance. 00:06:10.730 --> 00:06:13.709 The numbers are massive. In the United States, 00:06:13.709 --> 00:06:15.689 it peaked at number two on the Billboard Hot 00:06:15.689 --> 00:06:18.990 100. And it ultimately became the country's sixth 00:06:18.990 --> 00:06:23.139 best -selling single of 1999. Wow. Internationally, 00:06:23.139 --> 00:06:25.220 it went to number one in Australia and Canada. 00:06:25.379 --> 00:06:28.560 It cracked the top 10 in 16 different countries. 00:06:29.019 --> 00:06:33.259 Austria, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Norway, the 00:06:33.259 --> 00:06:36.759 UK. It was a true global phenomenon. And it eventually 00:06:36.759 --> 00:06:39.259 earned the McGrammy nomination for Best Pop Performance 00:06:39.259 --> 00:06:42.259 by a duo or group with vocals. Right. And to 00:06:42.259 --> 00:06:44.839 support a hit of that magnitude, the record label's 00:06:44.839 --> 00:06:47.129 strategy was pretty fascinating. They didn't 00:06:47.129 --> 00:06:49.870 just fund one music video. They produced three 00:06:49.870 --> 00:06:53.370 distinct music videos. Three. Yes. This perfectly 00:06:53.370 --> 00:06:55.329 illustrates the tension between the band's artistic 00:06:55.329 --> 00:06:57.910 identity and the commercial demands of a pop 00:06:57.910 --> 00:07:00.519 hit. Which also highlights the absolute absurdity 00:07:00.519 --> 00:07:03.579 of 90s record label budgets. Three separate videos 00:07:03.579 --> 00:07:05.920 for one single is practically unheard of today. 00:07:06.019 --> 00:07:07.819 Oh, for sure. So the original video was directed 00:07:07.819 --> 00:07:10.279 by their producer, Steve Taylor, who shone Paris 00:07:10.279 --> 00:07:12.560 entirely in black and white and was a direct 00:07:12.560 --> 00:07:15.680 shot for shot homage to Francois Truffaut's French 00:07:15.680 --> 00:07:18.660 new wave classic Jewels and Gem. OK. That is 00:07:18.660 --> 00:07:21.439 the ultimate defense mechanism for an alternative 00:07:21.439 --> 00:07:24.259 band grappling with a pop hit. Right. It's like, 00:07:24.279 --> 00:07:27.259 we wrote a mainstream pop song, so we are going 00:07:27.259 --> 00:07:30.720 to make the video as esoteric and fringe as humanly 00:07:30.720 --> 00:07:34.259 possible to maintain our indie credibility. Exactly. 00:07:34.279 --> 00:07:36.699 They were trying to anchor it in high art. But 00:07:36.699 --> 00:07:40.519 as the song became inseparable from MTV's Total 00:07:40.519 --> 00:07:44.500 Request Live and the teen movie boom, the label 00:07:44.500 --> 00:07:46.279 required a pivot. They needed something more 00:07:46.279 --> 00:07:48.579 commercial. Yeah. They brought in director Randy 00:07:48.579 --> 00:07:51.819 St. Nicholas to shoot two alternate highly commercial 00:07:51.819 --> 00:07:54.920 versions. These featured the band sitting on 00:07:54.920 --> 00:07:57.199 a park bench performing the song while watching 00:07:57.199 --> 00:07:59.120 a portable television. Oh, I remember this. Yeah, 00:07:59.139 --> 00:08:01.420 depending on which version aired, the TV either 00:08:01.420 --> 00:08:03.500 played scenes from She's All That or scenes from 00:08:03.500 --> 00:08:05.399 Dawson's Creek. And that pivot worked flawlessly. 00:08:05.600 --> 00:08:08.319 The Dawson's Creek version actually became VH1's 00:08:08.319 --> 00:08:11.480 number one video of May 1999. Incredible. But 00:08:11.480 --> 00:08:13.100 the crucial thing to remember for you listening 00:08:13.100 --> 00:08:15.100 is that this wasn't just a commercial cash grab 00:08:15.100 --> 00:08:17.250 that critics hated. The critical establishment 00:08:17.250 --> 00:08:19.910 genuinely loved this composition. They really 00:08:19.910 --> 00:08:22.230 did. Looking back at the reviews from that era, 00:08:22.290 --> 00:08:25.490 the praise is incredibly high. All music described 00:08:25.490 --> 00:08:29.110 it as an unruly, irresistible slice of swoony 00:08:29.110 --> 00:08:32.090 guitar pop. And when, as far as to suggest, it 00:08:32.090 --> 00:08:34.009 had the potential to be that generation's, I 00:08:34.009 --> 00:08:37.049 want to hold your hand. Comparing a mid -90s 00:08:37.049 --> 00:08:39.309 alt -rock ballad to the Beatles is high praise. 00:08:39.490 --> 00:08:43.389 But analytically, it tracks. Yeah. Critics consistently 00:08:43.389 --> 00:08:46.600 drew parallels between sixpence. None the richer 00:08:46.600 --> 00:08:49.299 sound on this record, and highly respected English 00:08:49.299 --> 00:08:52.100 alternative bands like the Sundays. Billboard 00:08:52.100 --> 00:08:54.559 magazine called it admirably well -written and 00:08:54.559 --> 00:08:57.600 brightly produced, comparing its jangle pop sensibilities 00:08:57.600 --> 00:09:01.340 to 10 ,000 maniacs. That's a great comparison. 00:09:01.720 --> 00:09:03.940 A British columnist even described it as a blend 00:09:03.940 --> 00:09:06.240 of a mellow cranberries track and a wonderful 00:09:06.240 --> 00:09:09.000 tapestry of jangling guitars. A wonderful tapestry 00:09:09.000 --> 00:09:11.799 of jangling guitars perfectly captures that late 00:09:11.799 --> 00:09:14.519 90s aesthetic. And for those interested in the 00:09:14.519 --> 00:09:16.659 actual music, musical architecture of the track, 00:09:16.820 --> 00:09:18.960 the breakdown is really revealing. According 00:09:18.960 --> 00:09:21.240 to the sheet music data, the song is composed 00:09:21.240 --> 00:09:24.519 in E -flat major. It operates at a moderate tempo 00:09:24.519 --> 00:09:28.019 of 96 beats per minute in common time. And Lay 00:09:28.019 --> 00:09:30.720 Nash's lead vocal range sits intimately between 00:09:30.720 --> 00:09:33.740 a B -flat 3 and a B -flat 4. Which is a brilliant 00:09:33.740 --> 00:09:35.860 piece of pop craftsmanship. When you look at 00:09:35.860 --> 00:09:38.549 the 96 beats per minute tempo, That is not an 00:09:38.549 --> 00:09:41.090 arbitrary number. No. No. That tempo closely 00:09:41.090 --> 00:09:44.470 mimics a slightly elevated yet relaxed resting 00:09:44.470 --> 00:09:46.730 human heart rate. Oh, wow. It subconsciously 00:09:46.730 --> 00:09:48.789 puts the listener into a state of physical ease, 00:09:49.009 --> 00:09:51.769 perfectly matching the romantic floating lyrical 00:09:51.769 --> 00:09:54.730 content. Billboard's Larry Flick described it 00:09:54.730 --> 00:09:58.149 as a refreshing summertime tune with airy production, 00:09:58.330 --> 00:10:00.809 and that tempo is the engine behind that feeling. 00:10:01.129 --> 00:10:03.470 And that B flat three to B flat four vocal range 00:10:03.470 --> 00:10:05.750 is vital, too. It's an incredibly conversational 00:10:05.750 --> 00:10:08.230 register. Nash isn't belting or straining the 00:10:08.230 --> 00:10:10.090 ear. She sounds like she is speaking directly 00:10:10.090 --> 00:10:12.450 and intimately to the listener. Yeah, it creates 00:10:12.450 --> 00:10:15.009 a warmth that makes the song instantly accessible. 00:10:15.250 --> 00:10:17.009 It's the musical equivalent of a deep breath. 00:10:17.169 --> 00:10:19.350 I love that. But the story doesn't end in the 00:10:19.350 --> 00:10:21.570 90s. Here's where it gets really interesting. 00:10:21.809 --> 00:10:24.950 The multigenerational legacy of this track. goes 00:10:24.950 --> 00:10:27.750 far beyond simple nostalgia. Oh, for sure. It 00:10:27.750 --> 00:10:30.470 became embedded in our collective visual language. 00:10:30.809 --> 00:10:34.049 If you jump forward to 2003, it's utilized perfectly 00:10:34.049 --> 00:10:36.389 in the rom -com How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. 00:10:36.629 --> 00:10:38.470 Right during the Knicks game. Exactly. Specifically 00:10:38.470 --> 00:10:41.129 during the pivotal kiss cam scene at a New York 00:10:41.129 --> 00:10:43.629 Knicks game. It continued to be the definitive 00:10:43.629 --> 00:10:46.870 auditory cue for on -screen romance. And beyond 00:10:46.870 --> 00:10:49.509 licensing, the sheer diversity of artists who 00:10:49.509 --> 00:10:51.789 have covered the track proves the structural 00:10:51.789 --> 00:10:54.710 integrity of Slocum's original composition. A 00:10:54.710 --> 00:10:57.570 great melody is genre agnostic. Totally. We saw 00:10:57.570 --> 00:11:00.009 a pop -punk translation by Newfound Glory, which 00:11:00.009 --> 00:11:02.149 was successful enough to be released as a standalone 00:11:02.149 --> 00:11:05.370 single in 2007. We've seen R &B interpretations, 00:11:05.450 --> 00:11:08.269 including a notable festival performance by SCA 00:11:08.269 --> 00:11:12.450 in 2019. SCA's cover is so good. It is. And in 00:11:12.450 --> 00:11:15.669 2021, the artist Sin recorded a modernized cover 00:11:15.669 --> 00:11:18.129 specifically for the Netflix film He's All That, 00:11:18.330 --> 00:11:20.669 which was a gender -swapped update of the original 00:11:20.669 --> 00:11:23.659 90s film. A complete full circle moment. The 00:11:23.659 --> 00:11:26.080 television comedy Ghosts even did a brilliant 00:11:26.080 --> 00:11:28.940 homage in 2022. Oh yeah, the prom scene. Yeah, 00:11:29.019 --> 00:11:30.960 they threw a prom for the ghosts in the house, 00:11:31.100 --> 00:11:33.460 and the sequence ends with a character descending 00:11:33.460 --> 00:11:37.139 the stairs to kiss me, openly acknowledging the 00:11:37.139 --> 00:11:40.419 power of that original 90s cinematic trope. That's 00:11:40.419 --> 00:11:43.340 great. But sometimes the song's legacy takes 00:11:43.340 --> 00:11:47.179 a completely surreal, decentralized turn. We 00:11:47.179 --> 00:11:49.580 have to talk about the 2006 viral moment in the 00:11:49.580 --> 00:11:52.039 Philippines. Oh, this is a perfect example of 00:11:52.039 --> 00:11:54.580 Internet culture breathing new life into a track. 00:11:54.679 --> 00:11:57.840 Yeah. In 2006, a former actress named Alyssa 00:11:57.840 --> 00:12:00.679 Alano performed the song on television. Her delivery 00:12:00.679 --> 00:12:03.320 was highly phonetic and heavily accented, which 00:12:03.320 --> 00:12:05.700 led to a fascinating phenomenon when the clip 00:12:05.700 --> 00:12:08.519 hit early YouTube. Users started adding subtitle 00:12:08.519 --> 00:12:10.860 tracks to the video, spelling out exactly what 00:12:10.860 --> 00:12:12.700 it sounded like she was saying rather than the 00:12:12.700 --> 00:12:15.179 actual lyrics. Right. And this introduces a great 00:12:15.179 --> 00:12:18.240 linguistic concept known. as a mondegreen a mondegreen 00:12:18.240 --> 00:12:22.100 yes a mondegreen is a misheard word or phrase 00:12:22.100 --> 00:12:25.860 resulting from near homophony usually in poetry 00:12:25.860 --> 00:12:28.919 or music because of her specific pronunciation 00:12:28.919 --> 00:12:31.820 the internet collectively dubbed her version 00:12:31.820 --> 00:12:35.360 keys me instead of kiss me it became an absolute 00:12:35.360 --> 00:12:38.279 sensation, a classic early internet meme where 00:12:38.279 --> 00:12:40.740 the song is celebrated and shared millions of 00:12:40.740 --> 00:12:43.179 times through a lens of affectionate humor. It's 00:12:43.179 --> 00:12:45.440 a completely organic form of cultural endurance. 00:12:45.759 --> 00:12:48.700 It really is. But if we are talking about bringing 00:12:48.700 --> 00:12:51.299 the song into the modern era, the most significant 00:12:51.299 --> 00:12:54.799 evolution happened just recently in 2024. This 00:12:54.799 --> 00:12:57.340 is where the track's malleability is truly showcased. 00:12:57.460 --> 00:13:00.679 Lisa from the global K -pop group Blackpink released 00:13:00.679 --> 00:13:04.019 a single titled Moonlit Floor Kiss Me. Oh, yeah. 00:13:04.399 --> 00:13:06.360 She didn't just sample the original audio. She 00:13:06.360 --> 00:13:09.179 utilized a technique called interpolation. And 00:13:09.179 --> 00:13:11.120 for those who might mix those two up, sampling 00:13:11.120 --> 00:13:13.379 is taking the literal audio recording of the 00:13:13.379 --> 00:13:16.779 1997 track and pasting it into a new beat. Interpolation 00:13:16.779 --> 00:13:18.779 is different. Exactly. Interpolation is when 00:13:18.779 --> 00:13:21.019 an artist takes the underlying melody and re 00:13:21.019 --> 00:13:23.159 -records it, often altering the lyrics or the 00:13:23.159 --> 00:13:25.539 rhythm to fit a completely new genre. So she 00:13:25.539 --> 00:13:28.500 completely rebuilt it. She did. Lisa took that 00:13:28.500 --> 00:13:31.320 airy alternative rock chorus and transformed 00:13:31.320 --> 00:13:34.259 it into a driving new disco dance pop track. 00:13:34.819 --> 00:13:36.980 She changed the lyrics to fit her narrative, 00:13:37.200 --> 00:13:40.899 but the melodic hook? The DNA of Slocum's motel 00:13:40.899 --> 00:13:43.960 room draft remains entirely intact and recognizable. 00:13:44.340 --> 00:13:46.980 It's incredible from a grunge adjacent alt rock 00:13:46.980 --> 00:13:50.320 band in the mid 90s to a K -pop superstar's new 00:13:50.320 --> 00:13:53.799 disco club track nearly 30 years later. But there 00:13:53.799 --> 00:13:56.620 is one more piece of the song's legacy that might 00:13:56.620 --> 00:13:58.840 be its most historically significant contribution 00:13:58.840 --> 00:14:00.580 to modern music. You're talking about the Taylor 00:14:00.580 --> 00:14:03.019 Swift connection. I am. Taylor Swift has stated 00:14:03.019 --> 00:14:05.159 on the record that Kiss Me was the very first 00:14:05.159 --> 00:14:07.179 song she ever learned to play on the guitar back 00:14:07.179 --> 00:14:09.610 when she was 12 years old. which is a profound 00:14:09.610 --> 00:14:12.389 piece of musical lineage. When you analyze why 00:14:12.389 --> 00:14:14.590 this song is perfect for a beginner guitarist, 00:14:14.649 --> 00:14:16.830 it makes perfect sense. Why is that? It relies 00:14:16.830 --> 00:14:19.190 on a highly accessible open chord progression 00:14:19.190 --> 00:14:22.570 that forms the absolute bedrock of modern country 00:14:22.570 --> 00:14:25.610 and pop music. Oh, interesting. Yeah, by learning 00:14:25.610 --> 00:14:28.080 Kiss Me. A 12 -year -old Taylor Swift wasn't 00:14:28.080 --> 00:14:30.659 just learning a song. She was absorbing the foundational 00:14:30.659 --> 00:14:33.840 mechanics of a perfect pop hook. You can trace 00:14:33.840 --> 00:14:36.899 a direct line from the jangling, swoony acoustic 00:14:36.899 --> 00:14:39.720 guitars of Sixpence Dunderricher to the architecture 00:14:39.720 --> 00:14:42.840 of Swift's early country pop records. It's the 00:14:42.840 --> 00:14:45.480 butterfly effect of pop music. One guy writes 00:14:45.480 --> 00:14:47.879 a song in a motel and a few years later it serves 00:14:47.879 --> 00:14:50.460 as the training manual for the defining pop star 00:14:50.460 --> 00:14:52.960 of the 21st century. It really is. And the commercial 00:14:52.960 --> 00:14:55.259 viability of the track hasn't slowed down at 00:14:55.259 --> 00:14:59.139 all. The NHL recently used it in a 2023 broadcast 00:14:59.139 --> 00:15:01.399 commercial for the Stanley Cup playoffs. Because 00:15:01.399 --> 00:15:03.940 why not mix professional hockey with 90s fairytale 00:15:03.940 --> 00:15:06.779 romance? Exactly. Furthermore, the physical media 00:15:06.779 --> 00:15:10.320 market is still demanding it. In February 2026, 00:15:10.580 --> 00:15:13.360 just weeks ago, the label Flatiron released a 00:15:13.360 --> 00:15:17.080 brand new limited edition seven inch vinyl pressing 00:15:17.080 --> 00:15:19.440 of the single. The demand is clearly permanent. 00:15:19.639 --> 00:15:22.080 So looking back at all of this from the initial 00:15:22.080 --> 00:15:24.120 reluctance of the band, the cinematic explosion, 00:15:24.320 --> 00:15:26.820 the diverse covers, the Mondegreens, the K -pop 00:15:26.820 --> 00:15:28.919 interpolations and the Taylor Swift origin story. 00:15:29.799 --> 00:15:32.320 What does this all mean for you listening? It 00:15:32.320 --> 00:15:34.899 proves that a truly beautifully crafted melody. 00:15:35.529 --> 00:15:38.409 Right. It can outlast its original genre. It 00:15:38.409 --> 00:15:40.950 can outlast the formats it was released on. And 00:15:40.950 --> 00:15:43.210 it can continually adapt to whatever the current 00:15:43.210 --> 00:15:45.610 cultural moment requires. It certainly proves 00:15:45.610 --> 00:15:48.409 the durability of the composition. But this raises 00:15:48.409 --> 00:15:50.509 an important question, especially when you dig 00:15:50.509 --> 00:15:53.750 into the granular chart data from 1998 and 1999. 00:15:54.269 --> 00:15:57.990 Oh, the timeline. Yes. Consider the incredibly 00:15:57.990 --> 00:16:00.549 slow fragmented timeline of this song's success. 00:16:01.129 --> 00:16:02.850 It was written a full year and a half before 00:16:02.850 --> 00:16:05.350 the band even agreed to record it. When it finally 00:16:05.350 --> 00:16:07.490 debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 in November 00:16:07.490 --> 00:16:11.309 of 1998, it entered at number 90. The very next 00:16:11.309 --> 00:16:14.279 week, it fell completely off the chart. It vanished. 00:16:14.379 --> 00:16:16.879 Completely gone. It took three full months until 00:16:16.879 --> 00:16:19.379 February of 1999 for it to reenter the chart 00:16:19.379 --> 00:16:21.779 at number 91. And from there, it took another 00:16:21.779 --> 00:16:24.500 11 weeks of slowly grinding its way up to finally 00:16:24.500 --> 00:16:27.240 peak at number two in May of 1999, eventually 00:16:27.240 --> 00:16:29.580 spending 33 weeks on the chart. That is a long 00:16:29.580 --> 00:16:32.659 climb. Exactly. So here's the thought I want 00:16:32.659 --> 00:16:36.460 you to consider. In today's hyper -accelerated 00:16:36.460 --> 00:16:39.009 instant gratification streaming culture, Where 00:16:39.009 --> 00:16:41.590 an artist's success is judged by first -day Spotify 00:16:41.590 --> 00:16:44.669 streams and immediate viral TikTok traction, 00:16:45.029 --> 00:16:47.450 would a song like Kiss Me be given that kind 00:16:47.450 --> 00:16:49.769 of grace period? That's a great question. Would 00:16:49.769 --> 00:16:52.210 a modern label allow a track to fail -breathe 00:16:52.210 --> 00:16:54.529 for three months and slowly climb back up to 00:16:54.529 --> 00:16:57.480 become a generational anthem? or would Kiss Me 00:16:57.480 --> 00:17:00.039 have been entirely discarded after it fell off 00:17:00.039 --> 00:17:02.220 the charts in its second week? That is a fascinating 00:17:02.220 --> 00:17:04.240 thought to leave you with today. Thank you for 00:17:04.240 --> 00:17:06.180 joining us as we unpack the incredible journey 00:17:06.180 --> 00:17:08.160 of this track. Until next time, stay curious, 00:17:08.200 --> 00:17:10.299 and we will catch you on the next deep dive.