The Life of a Showgirl Meets the Life of a Bar Examinee

On Wednesday, Taylor Swift revealed the track list for her upcoming album The Life of a Showgirl during her boyfriend Travis Kelce’s appearance on the New Heights podcast. The album is brimming with intriguing song titles that invite interpretation. Without hearing a note, we can still draw meaning from each name—and use it to anchor a substantive legal principle or bar prep strategy. Just as a well-constructed bar exam outline distills complex law into precise, purposeful headings, each of Swift’s track titles is intentional and packed with meaning. Whether you’re revealing a future chart-topping album or preparing for the bar exam, success comes from knowing your material and delivering it with style.

1. "The Fate of Ophelia"

The title conjures the image of Shakespeare’s tragic heroine, whose downfall resulted from a complex web of events. It suggests inevitability, fragility, and the sometimes-unseen forces that lead to a final outcome. In life—and in litigation—“fate” is rarely random. It’s shaped by preceding actions and choices.

Torts: In tort law, proximate causation (sometimes called legal causation) limits liability to harms that are the foreseeable result of a defendant’s conduct. On the bar exam, you’ll be asked to identify whether an intervening event cuts off liability. If the harm to the plaintiff was within the scope of foreseeable risk, the defendant remains liable. If an unforeseeable superseding cause intervened, liability may be broken. Just like Ophelia’s story, your analysis should follow the chain of events step-by-step, identifying where the legal connection ends.

2. "Elizabeth Taylor"

The name instantly recalls glamour, stardom, and a famously complex marital history. Elizabeth Taylor’s multiple marriages speak to deep relationships, changing alliances, and the public scrutiny of private matters. The title hints at the importance of communication, trust, and who gets to tell the story.

Evidence: In evidence law, marital privileges protect certain communications between spouses. The marital communications privilege shields confidential communications made during a valid marriage, while the testimonial privilege allows a spouse to refuse to testify against the other in certain proceedings (in federal courts, criminal cases only). The bar exam may test exceptions (e.g., when spouses are co-defendants or in litigation against each other). As with Taylor’s public and private life, context matters, and the rules shift depending on the relationship’s status at the time of the communication or testimony.

3. "Opalite"

Opalite is a semi-precious gemstone, known for its adaptability and calming appearance. The name suggests flexibility, transformation, and finding beauty in subtle shifts. It’s about working with what you have and refining it into something of value.

Contracts: In contract law, modification rules depend on the governing body of law. Under common law, a contract modification generally requires new consideration (e.g., some fresh exchange of value) to be enforceable. Under the U.C.C., however, a good-faith modification needs no additional consideration. On the bar exam, knowing which rule applies is crucial. Like opalite shaped into jewelry, modifications must be carefully crafted to fit the existing structure without shattering it.

4. "Father Figure"

The phrase “father figure” evokes not just guidance and authority, but also the legal recognition of a parent-child relationship. In family law, determining paternity is critical because it affects custody, visitation, child support, and inheritance rights.

Family Law: Most state statutes provide that any child is the lawful child of their mother. For the father, the law may recognize paternity if one of several conditions is met:

• Marriage after birth: The parents marry after the child’s birth.

• Holding out: The father openly treats the child as his biological child.

• Birth certificate: The father consents to be named on the birth certificate.

• Acknowledgment: The father formally acknowledges paternity.

• Judicial decree: A court issues an order establishing paternity.

On the bar exam, watch for fact patterns where these statutory criteria are embedded in the narrative. Identifying which pathway to paternity applies—and whether any challenges or rebuttals are allowed—is essential for full credit.

5. "Eldest Daughter"

Being the eldest often means inheriting responsibility, leadership, and sometimes privilege. The title evokes family hierarchy and the expectation that children — especially the firstborn — will be provided for in some way. But the law also protects those who arrive later, ensuring they are not left out due to timing.

Wills: A pretermitted child is one born or adopted after the execution of a testator’s will who isn’t provided for in that will. Most jurisdictions presume the omission was unintentional and grant the child a share of the estate equal to what they would have received under intestacy, unless: (i) the will itself shows the omission was intentional; (ii) the testator left substantially all of the estate to the child’s other parent; or (iii) the testator provided for the child outside the will. On the bar exam, look for the interplay between the timing of the will, the child’s birth or adoption, and any clear intent by the testator to disinherit. Like an eldest daughter in a family, the law presumes that each child deserves their rightful place unless the parent unmistakably decides otherwise.

6. "Ruin the Friendship"

The title “Ruin the Friendship” instantly calls to mind the lasting damage that words can cause. A single careless comment, a thoughtless rumor, or a public accusation can shatter trust that took years to build. Friendships, like reputations, are fragile. Once broken, they can be difficult, if not impossible, to repair.

Torts: In common law tort defamation, a plaintiff must show: (i) a defamatory statement, (ii) of or concerning the plaintiff, (iii) publication to a third party, (iv) fault amounting at least to negligence, and (v) damages. Certain categories, like statements accusing someone of committing a crime, having a loathsome disease, engaging in professional misconduct, or imputing serious sexual misconduct, are considered defamation per se, where damages may be presumed. Even so, some situations protect the speaker through absolute (e.g., legislative proceedings, judicial proceedings) or qualified (e.g., employment references made in good faith) privileges.

Constitutional Law: In constitutional defamation, the First Amendment adds extra layers of protection, especially in matters involving public officials or public figures. In these cases, the plaintiff must prove actual malice, meaning the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth, as established in New York Times v. Sullivan. For private figures in matters of public concern, states may set the fault standard (often negligence), but they may not impose liability without some proof of fault.

On the bar exam, be ready to separate common law defamation from constitutional requirements depending on the plaintiff’s status and the subject matter of the statement. Just as not all harsh words “ruin” a friendship, not all harmful statements lead to legal liability. Knowing where the legal lines are drawn can be the difference between winning and losing a defamation claim.

7. "Actually Romantic"

“Actually romantic” implies something genuine and heartfelt, perhaps a promise made not for practical gain, but because it matters deeply. It’s about commitment without conditions.

Contracts: Promissory estoppel enforces certain promises even without traditional consideration, if reliance was reasonable and enforcement is necessary to prevent injustice. On the bar exam, look for a clear promise, foreseeable reliance, and detriment. Like a sincere romantic gesture, promissory estoppel is about the trust and change in position that a promise inspires.

8. "Wi$h Li$t"

A wish list is about goals and priorities. But, in in court, you don’t always get everything you want. This title suggests desire, valuation, and the limits on what can be demanded.

Civil Procedure: For diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1332, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. Aggregation rules matter:

• A single plaintiff can aggregate all claims against a single defendant.

• Multiple plaintiffs generally cannot aggregate their separate and distinct claims against the same defendant or against multiple defendants, unless they share a common, undivided interest in the claim.

• A single plaintiff suing multiple defendants can aggregate only if the defendants are jointly liable on the claim.

On the bar exam, however, this often overlaps with supplemental jurisdiction under §1367. Supplemental jurisdiction lets federal courts hear additional claims forming part of the same case or controversy as a claim with an independent jurisdictional basis. But in diversity-only cases, §1367(b) bars certain claims by plaintiffs against parties joined under Rules 14, 19, 20, or 24 if doing so would destroy diversity or circumvent the amount-in-controversy requirement.

Think of it like your wish list: You can add on smaller items (claims) if they fit within the court’s “budget” (jurisdictional rules), but you can’t sneak in something that breaks the rules just because it’s related. Knowing both the amount-in-controversy rules and the supplemental jurisdiction limits ensures your case— and your bar exam response—stays within bounds.

9. "Wood"

Wood immediately brings to mind the beams, floors, and framing of a home—all combustible, all vulnerable to fire. The title conjures images of dwellings engulfed in flames, intentional acts of destruction, and the devastation that follows. It’s a reminder that something built over time can be reduced to ashes in moments.

Criminal Law: On the bar exam, arson at common law is the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. “Malice” means intent or extreme recklessness regarding the burning. The “burning” element traditionally requires charring of the structure itself, not just smoke damage or scorching of furniture. Thus, the wood of the building must be affected. Modern statutes often broaden arson to include any structure, vehicle, or personal property, and may remove the “of another” requirement. Be prepared to distinguish between common law and statutory definitions, and to analyze related crimes like burglary if entry was involved. Just as wood is the framework of a dwelling, these core elements form the framework of your arson analysis.

10. "CANCELLED!"

Some cancellations are planned; others happen in the heat of the moment. The track “Cancelled!” can signal both a deliberate end to something—like a show pulled from the lineup—and a spontaneous reaction to unexpected news. In bar exam terms, this title invites two very different but testable legal angles.

Contracts: “Cancelled!” implies finality—an end to an arrangement, whether by choice, necessity, or external force. In contract law, rescission terminates the agreement and discharges the parties from further performance. This can happen by mutual agreement, by operation of law (impossibility, frustration of purpose), or due to material breach. On the bar exam, distinguish between rescission (undoing the contract) and termination for breach (ending obligations but allowing damages). Like a cancelled event, the reasons and timing matter.

Evidence: That exclamation point could be a clue. In an evidence question, “Cancelled!” might be offered in court as a statement. If it’s an excited, spontaneous reaction to a startling event, it might qualify as an excited utterance under the hearsay exceptions. On the bar exam, always ask: Was it a “statement”? Was it made out of court? Is it being offered for the truth of the matter asserted? If so, look for exceptions like present sense impression or excited utterance. Sometimes, punctuation in a fact pattern is your first clue to the right answer.

11. "Honey"

Honey is sweet, tempting, and hard to resist, just like certain dangerous conditions are to children. The title suggests allure, curiosity, and the need for extra caution when young, inexperienced visitors are involved.

Torts: The attractive nuisance doctrine imposes liability on landowners for injuries to children trespassing due to an artificial condition on the property if certain requirements are met. Most jurisdictions require:

• A dangerous artificial condition exists on the land.

• The landowner knows or should know that children are likely to trespass near the condition.

• The landowner knows or should know the condition poses an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to children.

• The children, because of their youth, do not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in coming into the area or interacting with it.

• The utility of maintaining the condition and the burden of eliminating it are slight compared to the risk to children.

• The landowner fails to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger or protect the children.

On the bar exam, look for fact patterns with something artificial and enticing (e.g., a swimming pool, a junkyard with stacked cars, an abandoned refrigerator) and a child who likely could not appreciate the danger. Just as honey draws bees, the law recognizes that some hazards are irresistibly attractive, and property owners must take reasonable steps to guard against the harm.

12. "The Life of a Showgirl" (feat. Sabrina Carpenter)

A showgirl’s life is about preparation, sparkle, and delivering when the curtain rises, but this track also features Sabrina Carpenter, whose collaboration adds a layer of chemistry and coordination. Carpenter’s role reminds us that sometimes the best performances are the ones shared, where each performer complements the other while holding their own. In the legal world, that kind of collaboration has a procedural parallel.

Civil Procedure: Joinder of parties allows multiple people to participate in one case when their claims or defenses arise out of the same transaction or occurrence and share common questions of law or fact. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 20 governs permissive joinder, while Rule 19 addresses compulsory joinder when a party is necessary for just adjudication. On the bar exam, you must spot whether parties can or must be joined, and whether their inclusion affects jurisdiction.

Bar Preparation: From a bar prep perspective, this track is also about performance under pressure. Just as Taylor and Sabrina must know their parts cold before hitting the stage together, bar examinees should rehearse under timed conditions, work through full-length practice exams, and coordinate their substantive knowledge with time management. The spotlight is intense, but with the right preparation and the right “co-stars” in your study routine, you can deliver your best performance when it matters most.