{"id":1100,"date":"2026-05-11T20:32:21","date_gmt":"2026-05-11T20:32:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/?p=1100"},"modified":"2026-05-11T20:32:21","modified_gmt":"2026-05-11T20:32:21","slug":"hit-me","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/?p=1100","title":{"rendered":"“hit” me"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

One the daily Britannica emails<\/a> told me that that a Britney Spears “hit” was based partly on a misinterpretation of American slang.

Set the way back machine to “late 1990s” and Britney Spears was a “Disney child star” – e.g. she was a cast member of the “Mickey Mouse Club” during the shows 1990s revival

The original “Mickey Mouse Club”<\/a> ran from 1955 to 1959. There was a “syndicated” revival of the show in 1977-79<\/a> and then a third revival in 1989-1996.

That third revival would help launch Ms Spears singing career along with other future “super stars” e.g. Justin Timberlake, Christina Aguilera, Ryan Gosling, JC Chasez (*NSYNC)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Child Stars<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Just in general – the “performance” expectations for “child stars” is different than for “NOT” child stars.

i.e. the “child star” can often get buy with saying their lines and being cute<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Never work with children or animals”<\/p>-W.C. Fields<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Now, I’m not throwing stones at anyone here – just making the observation that a “child prodigy” is often considered “something special” because they are a child, not because they have a high level of ability\/talent.

The genuinely talented “child star” still needs to mature and develop as an artist if they want to be taken seriously as “no longer a child star.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

the Disney Inc factory<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Walt Disney created a sort of “myth of American childhood” that he would describe as being “fun\/entertainment for all ages.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The Wonderful World of Disney<\/a>” was a staple of Sunday night television for most of the second half of the 20th Century – and “Disney” as a brand came to mean “family entertainment.”

Obviously over that long a time “child stars” grow up and new child stars need to be developed. For better of worse, Disney, Inc became a “factory” of sorts – developing and replacing “child stars.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, this fact isn’t inherently good or bad. There are a lot of “child labor” laws that need to be complied with – which can make using REAL children in movies\/television a challenge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, that is often why we have the “25 year old professional” playing a “15 year old” – but that is just the business.

Over that many years and that many people – not everyone is going to have a positive experience. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Part of the “Disney child star” process was controlling their “image” – which means that the “fame” trade off for the “child star” can be a lost childhood of sorts – and then when they are no longer a “child star” they may have trouble adjusting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Re-branding …<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

SO the “child star” that wants to break away from being a “child star” has two options – 1. change career fields. OR 2. re-brand\/re-invent themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1998 Britney Spears “management team” very obviously went with option #2. They re-branded from “squeaky clean Disney star” to “sex kitten.”

\u201c… Baby One More Time\u201d would “hit” #1 and spend 32 weeks on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1999.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The album would go 14x Platinum in the U.S. selling over 10.6 million copies – and 25 to 35 million copies worldwide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SO the Swedish team that wrote \u201c… Baby One More Time\u201d thought that “hit” was American slang for “call.”

Now, if you have seen the video for \u201c… Baby One More Time\u201d there isn’t much doubt on what the “protagonist” is asking for – the song is still an ear worm, but Ms Spears performance isn’t subtle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the record – no, I wasn’t the target audience THEN and don’t have much (any?) 1990s pop music on my play list NOW.

Britney Spears has become a very public “cautionary tale” – hey, she seems like a very nice person, I’m not throwing any stones here – I won’t try to guess what is going on in her head – and we are moving on …<\/p>\n\n\n\n

La Roux<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

If we look at JUST the lyrics for \u201c… Baby One More Time\u201d – we find a sort of “flame song.” The protagonist regrets leaving\/breaking up and wants the “lost love” to respond – so “call me one more time” would be a plausible line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course Ms Spears performance elicits a much more “carnal” interpretation – so “hit me” becomes a euphemism for “sex.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just for fun we can compare and contrast \u201c… Baby One More Time\u201d with Bulletproof<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bulletproof peaked at #8 on the Billboard Hot 100 in the U.S. but would go all the way to #1 in the U.K.

Showing the oddities of awards that have to be voted on – La Roux would win a Grammy for “Best Electronic\/Dance Album” for their (2008) debut album<\/p>\n\n\n\n

fwiw: “La Roux is an English synth-pop act formed in 2008 by singer Elly Jackson and record producer Ben Langmaid.” Thank you wikipedia …\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the protagonist in “On More Time” being younger and less “jaded”\/experienced than the protagonist in “Bulletproof”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The two are separated by 10 years on the Billboard chart – so they could get a sort of “dotted line” thematic connection – “One more time” being the young\/naive protagonist and “Bulletproof” is the older\/jaded\/experienced protagonist …<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One ditch to the other …<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

What differentiates the “great” acts from the “flash in the pan” is the ability to adapt and grow. That doesn’t mean they have totally reinvent themselves – but they need to release something “new” on a regular basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

i.e. if we think of the artists career as a path\/trail\/road then there are “ditches”\/extremes on either side of that road that it will be best practice to avoid. Then staying “on the path” is going to be the long term goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

e.g. If you look at Taylor Swift as a “pop culture” phenomenon she grew and changed along with her audience. There were obvious style changes – but no dramatic changes in “public image.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bing Crosby had a long and distinguished career that lasted 50 years – and still set records for “streaming” around the Holidays.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Frank Sinatra’s career had several distinct phases in a 60 year career – with a very noticeable “fan demographic” shift from “mostly young women” BEFORE WWII to “mostly adult men” AFTER WWII. Maybe he drifted a little more on his path, but he stayed on the metaphorical road.

Elvis Presley still holds “American icon” status – and he had distinct “phases” in his career. The difference between “young Elvis,” “Elvis in Hollywood,” and “Vegas Elvis” probably aren’t as big as they may appear – but he adapted and grew.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course NON of the above were “child stars” – Ms Swift was 16 years old when she released her first album – but it was HER album.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

… meanwhile Britney Spears jumped from one manufactured image ditch (“squeaky clean child star”) to the other manufactured image ditch (“sex kitten”). THEN she went further into the ditch with a series of public meltdowns that ended with a “conservatorship” that started in 2008. She sold a lot of records and made a lot of money – but also acquired a drug and alcohol problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From the outside looking in Miley Cyrus jumped from one ditch to the other. She broke with her “Disney Child Star” image – but that mostly consisted with her being unable to stay fully clothed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Live fast, die young …<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

of course “young and famous” often ends in “died before their time” – I don’t think Britney Spears is somehow worse than any of the above celebrities, just making observations about the “way that seems right” but “leads to death”<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

My candle burns at both ends;
\u00a0 \u00a0 It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends\u2014
\u00a0 \u00a0 It gives a lovely light!<\/p>“First Fig” Edna St. Vincent Millay<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One the daily Britannica emails told me that that a Britney Spears “hit” was based partly on a misinterpretation of American slang. Set the way back machine to “late 1990s” and Britney Spears was a “Disney child star” – e.g. she was a cast member of the “Mickey Mouse Club” during the shows 1990s revival […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,10,11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1100","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-history","category-music","category-philosophy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1100","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1100"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1100\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1101,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1100\/revisions\/1101"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1100"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1100"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.iterudio.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1100"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}