With “Lover” Taylor Swift Says Goodbye

Imperfect and authentic, “Lover” is an album for a new era of Swift.

Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On October 24, 2006, Taylor Swift, all of 16 years old, released her debut album, Taylor Swift. The album peaked on the Billboard 200 at No. 5—a worthy spot for a debut album—and was eventually certified as seven-times platinum by RIAA. Since then, every single Swift album has peaked at No. 1 on the Billboard 200. For 13 years Taylor Swift has been a constant in our lives, and over the past decade, millions of people have devotedly listened to every track, religiously bought her every album, and dissected every aspect of her life.

But as Swift drops her seventh LP, Lover, you can’t help but notice something’s different: It’s a goodbye.

This is not Swift’s final album. It’s not a goodbye to her fans or to the music industry. Rather, it’s a goodbye to an era. By effectively returning to the sounds and storytelling that made her the chart-topping teenager millions fell in love with 13 years ago, Lover is a reintroduction to a Swift we’ve ultimately forgotten.

Swift’s career is best looked at in parts. There’s the country-heavy, young-lust–filled first act of her early three albums, Taylor Swift, Fearless, and Speak Now. Then there’s the mainstream second half of her body of work that saw a new legion of fans join the Swiftdom: Red, 1989, and Reputation. (Red serves as the dividing point of her arc, representing the awkward—but still banging—era in which she was transitioning from “country” to “pop.”) Looking at Swift’s career in these two parts, a larger picture begins to form: Act 1, a tale of young love and an exciting world told with bright eyes and an innocent heart. Then comes Act 2, a tale of a young adult finding her identity in a nastier world, struggling to understand what mature love looks like among feuds and heartbreaks.

Like Red before it, Lover is Swift’s awkward goodbye to an era of her work that exemplifies a period of learning, loss, and love.

Lover, as a whole, showcases Swift’s unmatchable talent of using specificity to evoke the familiar emotions that come with searching for love, finding love, and moving on once that love has been lost. There’s “Cornelia Street,” which speaks of the inability to return to spaces that stir up, as Swift puts it, “the kinda heartbreak time could never mend.” “Death by a Thousand Cuts” takes the simple, yet excruciating familiar pain of a cut and righteously equates it to the pain of fresh heartbreak. And “Soon You’ll Get Better” is the Dixie Chicks-assisted letter to her mom, Andrea, who’s currently in a battle with cancer. The Dixie Chicks’ background vocals reinforce the emotion of Swift struggling with the idea she’s centering herself—a common criticism that even we’ve reinforced at times—as she fears losing her mom. “And I hate to make this all about me/But who am I supposed to talk to?/What am I supposed to do?/If there’s no you,” she sings.

Swift doesn’t lose her power among the 18 tracks. “Paper Rings” is yet another Swift/Antonoff production that conjures the similar sporadic energy that made Kesha’s Rainbow come to life. (Special shoutout to “It’s Nice to Have a Friend” and “False God” that elicit a similar odd energy.) “The Man” borders on tiresome, but what is a Taylor Swift album without at least one song about the way the world views her? It’d be boring, that’s what.

1989 and Reputation, while both excellent, came with expectations. 1989 could only be consumed as Taylor Swift’s “first official pop album.” Reputation was designed to be listened to with an entire multi-year feud in mind. Lover can be seen only through the prism of Swift’s entire 13-year arc. It’s a summing up and an augur of what’s to come.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate