Do Lyrics Even Matter?

[Jack Russell]

Thanks. That is a neat song, plus it has a nice tuning. It doesn't ring a bell; i.e., I'm not familiar with it. The lyrics do get right to the point and tell the story very well.

There is also Lightfoot's "The Wreck of the Edmond Fitzgerald" to consider. Although there was no talk of raising it. [BTW: Some people say he ripped off Ringo's "It Don't Come Easy", but I don't think so myself.]

I do have a bit of a theme problem, though, in that the idea of raising an entire U-boat wreck is pretty far-fetched and unlikely. In particular one of hundreds of WWII wolfpack wrecks with a completely destroyed middle section.

I think I'll work more toward the angle of the redemption of the souls on board rather than the actual raising of the ship, but this is a good metaphor.

Apl would have a field day on me. Writing a song about raising a spirit to redemption. Uh-oh!!

Back to it.....thanks again.

 

[Jack Russell]

really like that second verse.actually thought it was written with something very particular in mind.
Maybe the difference between a good song and a great song comes down to lyrics?

Yep, I agree with that. Great songs do have to have great lyrics, whatever you perceive to be 'great'. A simple song straigtforward about a guy losing his girl might be 'great' to someone who just lost his girlfriend though.

"lonely days, lonely nights
where would I be without my woman?"

At this point 'greatness' is pretty far beyond the horizon for me and my lyrics above. I'm just trying to take a convoluted mess and change into even a mediocre song! haha!

 

[Autist]

Yep, I agree with that. Great songs do have to have great lyrics, whatever you perceive to be 'great'. A simple song straigtforward about a guy losing his girl might be 'great' to someone who just lost his girlfriend though.

"lonely days, lonely nights
where would I be without my woman?"

At this point 'greatness' is pretty far beyond the horizon for me and my lyrics above. I'm just trying to take a convoluted mess and change into even a mediocre song! haha!

With some refinement it could probably be a very good song, maybe not great, but since the ratio of great songs compared to actual number of songs written is not in favor of greatness then try to get the most you can out of it and you may be surprised.

 

[HapiCmpur]

I can think of numerous songs where the lyrics are very basic but it doesnt matter one bit. Take 'I Want to Hold your Hand' by the Beatles...What a song. I dont doubt John and Pauls resolve on that tune for a minute. The song just rocks your balls off.

Great example, Ben. That song is pure, love-struck, bee-bop joy. It has a great, upbeat rythm, happy harmonies, and it begs the listener to sing along. It doesn't much matter what the lyrics are about, as long as they're not about dead puppies, suicide, or something completely incongruous.

But having said that it can work both ways. If the Stones had not sung 'I cant get no Satisfaction' but instead - 'I cant get no sleep at night' (!? you get the idea...) then would it have had the same impact?

You're right, it probably wouldn't have had the same impact. But that doesn't mean that Mick had control over how listeners were (and are) interpreting his "meaning." Consider Bob Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" for a moment. Let me be the first to say that this song is brimming with amazing lyrics. It is also one of Dylan's most popular songs. Still, is there any agreement at all over what that song "means?" And I don't think it bothers Dylan at all whether there is or isn't. (I pity the fool that would dare to ask him, too.)

And consider this from Dylan's "Visions of Johanna:"

"The ghost of electricity howls in the bones of her face
and these visions of Johanna have now taken my place."

I don't know if that line grabs other people the way it grabbed me the first time I heard it. But grab me it did. I do not know what Dylan intended to "mean" by it, but it causes me anguish (in a good way) and it generates a powerful visual image in my head at the same time. I don't really want to know what Dylan had in mind when he wrote it. It's not his anymore; it's mine.

 

[HapiCmpur]

if I as a writer, wish to communicate a certain feeling or event, it is incumbent on me to write in such a way that people have the potential to understand, provided my goal is to communicate to a listener other than myself.

Right, but here's where it gets dicey. (And perhaps I'm just splitting hairs.) What is it that we, as songwriters, are communicating? Is it "meaning?" I don't think so. I think we're communicating feelings. When I say a song is "about" something, I'm just saying that the song is asking the listener to feel a certain set of emotions (anger, remorse, melancholy, etc.) about a certain general topic (inequality, loss, mortality, etc.) The details are up to the listener, the interpreter.

I think all I'm saying is that a songwriter who tries to communicate anything more direct and prescriptive than that is in for disappointment. (And as an aside, I find that those kinds of writers tend to blame their audience, rather than themselves, when the audience takes from the song some "meaning" that the writer didn't intend to put there.)

By the way, Folkie, I think I know why you mentioned Prokofiev. I've been thinking about him in this thread, too, because he wrote Peter and the Wolf -- a piece of music based on a very specific story. The story is so specific, in fact, that Prokofiev felt obliged to have someone narrate it during the performance.

 

[HapiCmpur]

Jack, thanks for starting this thread. I'm just getting back to writing lyrics after a long break from it, and this discussion has helped stoke the fires and get me thinking again.

 

[Jack Russell]

Jack, thanks for starting this thread. I'm just getting back to writing lyrics after a long break from it, and this discussion has helped stoke the fires and get me thinking again.

You're welcome. It's been on my mind a lot lately.

There are some cases where the meaning of the song is truly the meat of its content. For example: "Abraham, Martin, and John" is a tune that always hits a chords with me. The song, from the 60s, is about assassinations of Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and John and Robert Kennedy. It is a cheesy recording with marginal musicians. The singer isn't that good (IMHO). Heck, it even borders on country, which I personally can't stand. Yet, the meaning bowls me over. I can't listen to it without crying. Thus it is a masterpiece. Bob Dylan's work is a good example also. Good poetry can really add to a mediocre piece of music.

On the other hand, when I was a child I used to listen to an instrumental LP of the U.S. Army marching band, which my parents had laying around. I think it was of WWII war music. ??? I loved the sounds in it, but I had no idea what inspired it, nor what its message was about. The same goes for "The Nutcracker". You don't need to know the story to appreciate the music.

It is a complex thing.

 

[tryptophan]

yeah everything means anything so everything means nothin. jealousy is sad.

 

[Jack Russell]

yeah everything means anything so everything means nothin. jealousy is sad.

'solar prestige agemon'?

 

[Folkie]

You're welcome. It's been on my mind a lot lately.

There are some cases where the meaning of the song is truly the meat of its content. For example: "Abraham, Martin, and John" is a tune that always hits a chords with me. The song, from the 60s, is about assassinations of Lincoln, Martin Luther King, and John and Robert Kennedy. It is a cheesy recording with marginal musicians. The singer isn't that good (IMHO). Heck, it even borders on country, which I personally can't stand. Yet, the meaning bowls me over. I can't listen to it without crying. Thus it is a masterpiece. Bob Dylan's work is a good example also. Good poetry can really add to a mediocre piece of music.

On the other hand, when I was a child I used to listen to an instrumental LP of the U.S. Army marching band, which my parents had laying around. I think it was of WWII war music. ??? I loved the sounds in it, but I had no idea what inspired it, nor what its message was about. The same goes for "The Nutcracker". You don't need to know the story to appreciate the music.

It is a complex thing.

I agree wholeheartedly. Lennon's "Imagine", or "In My Life" are pretty specific in their intent, I think.

And yet, I can't disagree with Hapi--the songs evoke feelings as well. And it is absolutely true that the listener may (probably will) get a different meaning than the writer intended. Just gotta live with that--makes me feel good that they listened at all.

Someone else said it was about the emotion of the singer--and yeah, got to add that into the mix. Janis Joplin's version of "Summertime" get to me every time I hear it. It's my favorite version. There was another, much faster version (can't remember the singer--sudden, complete brain block--black guy--back in the 60's--damn!) that I never really paid attention to. It was okay, he had a much better voice, but I never really liked it. Then I heard Janis do it, and WOW!

On the other hand, I went to a concert once where the performer sang a tune about travelling with his cat. I've travelled with cats and I still could not relate to his crappy (imho) lyrics. Good voice, good musicianship, ok tune, but I never want to hear it again.

I guess there are so many things that make a good song--and you have to take all of them into account. It ain't easy.

 

[Supercreep]

A great song can have stupid lyrics, but a great song with great lyrics will always be better. A great song can make me rock out, but great lyrics to a great song can provoke a real emotional reaction.

Lyrics aren't poetry. They don't exist for their own sake. They are there to provide a connection for your audience -and to help them remember how the song goes. If the audience is listening, hopefully you are telling a story- at least something for the listener to hold on to.


IMHO, Grain of salt, etc.

-C

 

[ethos]

i think they deffinetly matter.
its all subjective though, you may hear something and completly relate to it,
even though what you got out of it was completely different then what the writter intended. the song on the first page might be jiberish to some, but i might remind others of their childhood.
thats what i love about music, you take what you want and form your own understanding.

 

[VSpaceBoy]

Ya know its funny, I can think of several of my favorite songs that I don't even know the lyrics to, or what its talking about. I just remember like 3 words, both those are the words I connect with.

 

[famous beagle]

You're right, it probably wouldn't have had the same impact. But that doesn't mean that Mick had control over how listeners were (and are) interpreting his "meaning." Consider Bob Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" for a moment. Let me be the first to say that this song is brimming with amazing lyrics. It is also one of Dylan's most popular songs. Still, is there any agreement at all over what that song "means?" And I don't think it bothers Dylan at all whether there is or isn't. (I pity the fool that would dare to ask him, too.)

While I agree with your basic sentiment regarding lyrics, I don't think this was the best example to choose. Although "Like a Rolling Stone" makes use of many beautiful images, its meaning seems fairly clear to me. Actually, the chorus sums up the song very well. If you listen to the verses, they all pretty much relate to the sentiment of "how does it feel? to be on your own?"

It's basically about someone with perhaps a privileged past now having to deal with hardship and adversity.

Perhaps "Tambourine Man" would have been a better example.

 

[HapiCmpur]

Although "Like a Rolling Stone" makes use of many beautiful images, its meaning seems fairly clear to me.

It's basically about someone with perhaps a privileged past now having to deal with hardship and adversity.

But aren't you guilty now of assuming that...

a) most other people would agree with your interpretation, and
b) Bob Dylan had your interpretation in mind when he wrote the song?

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, by the way. Philosophically speaking, there's just no doubt that the listener's personal experience is always going to influence his or her interpretation of the artist's intended "message." Neverthess, communication is what human beings do, and what we will continue to do regardless of its difficulties, inefficiencies, and frequent outright failures. And now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to ride off on the chrome horse with my diplomat. I hear he's got a Siamese cat on his shoulder for some reason.

Perhaps "Tambourine Man" would have been a better example.

Maybe, but consider how much disagreement there is over what appears to be the simplest and most direct of lyrics -- Puff the Magic Dragon. You remember him. He lived by the sea. (Or was it the THC?)

 

[famous beagle]

But aren't you guilty now of assuming that...

a) most other people would agree with your interpretation, and
b) Bob Dylan had your interpretation in mind when he wrote the song?

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, by the way. Philosophically speaking, there's just no doubt that the listener's personal experience is always going to influence his or her interpretation of the artist's intended "message." Neverthess, communication is what human beings do, and what we will continue to do regardless of its difficulties, inefficiencies, and frequent outright failures. And now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to ride off on the chrome horse with my diplomat. I hear he's got a Siamese cat on his shoulder for some reason.

Maybe, but consider how much disagreement there is over what appears to be the simplest and most direct of lyrics -- Puff the Magic Dragon. You remember him. He lived by the sea. (Or was it the THC?)

Ok well, I see your point. But I'm not talking about understanding every single line of a song. I was just talking about the general meaning of the song. And in those terms, "Like a Rolling Stone" seems fairly clear.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect to understand EVERY single line in a song, unless you're talking about country lyrics or other very plain-spoken styles. The title of this posts is "Do Lyrics Even Matter?" So I guess that means we need to decide if that applies to every single line, or the sentiment in general.


A chrome horse sounds like a motorcycle to me. And I don't leave the house without a Siamese cat on my shoulder!

 

[Jack Russell]

A short story about interpretation

Back in the 80s Bruce Cockburn came out with a tune call "Rocket Launcher". A band I was in decided to work up a cover of it. I can't remember why we would do that, but that's not important...

I read the lyrics and listened to it. My impression was that Cockburn was definitely an anti-war activist radical. The main line was:

"If I had a rocket launcher
some son of a bitch would die!"

He was saying that if the U.S. poured more arms into these poor countries, we'd make things 100 times worse. At least that was my opinion of it.

The drummer in my band, who was pro-Reagan (although he didnt' admit it often) had an opposite impression.

The same line was like a macho 'call to arms' about the U.S. getting down there and kicking some "fucking ass", and making those commie sons of bitches die.

We argued over the meaning, and then we dropped the song.

But that just shows how even when a writer tries to be very clear, the listening will still get different impressions and they might love it for even the wrong reason. But does it matter?

 

[Benreturns]

Great example, Ben. That song is pure, love-struck, bee-bop joy. It has a great, upbeat rythm, happy harmonies, and it begs the listener to sing along. It doesn't much matter what the lyrics are about, as long as they're not about dead puppies, suicide, or something completely incongruous.

You're right, it probably wouldn't have had the same impact. But that doesn't mean that Mick had control over how listeners were (and are) interpreting his "meaning." Consider Bob Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" for a moment. Let me be the first to say that this song is brimming with amazing lyrics. It is also one of Dylan's most popular songs. Still, is there any agreement at all over what that song "means?" And I don't think it bothers Dylan at all whether there is or isn't. (I pity the fool that would dare to ask him, too.)

And consider this from Dylan's "Visions of Johanna:"

"The ghost of electricity howls in the bones of her face
and these visions of Johanna have now taken my place."

I don't know if that line grabs other people the way it grabbed me the first time I heard it. But grab me it did. I do not know what Dylan intended to "mean" by it, but it causes me anguish (in a good way) and it generates a powerful visual image in my head at the same time. I don't really want to know what Dylan had in mind when he wrote it. It's not his anymore; it's mine.

On a similar note, i bet that dylan may even be hard pushed to tell you the meaning. In alot of cases i think the songs which are dissected for meaning on a regular basis are just jumbles of words that sound nice when strung together and sound they might mean something to sombody. We've all written songs here - how many times have we all thought of a great line which sounds deep, but just plucked it out of our thought-flow without any thought to its meaning? Thats great art. John Lennon couldnt tell you what I am the Walrus was about. He said it was just an extention of his meaningless wordplay a la Alice in Wonderland and a tongue in cheek nod to the critics who would pour over every line he wrote for 'hidden meanings'.
Who knows, maybe even Dylan was having a laugh at all our expenses.

 

[mshilarious]

I marvel at Radiohead's lyrics. I think they are as off-the-wall as anything out there, but they are brilliant also.

Take a study of a classic Radiohead tune, Subterranean Homesick Alien.

First, note the use of the title. A good title unlocks the meaning of the song by adding a new dimension. In this case, there are (at least) two meanings of the title: one is a reference to Bob Dylan's Subterranean Homesick Blues, which adds meaning to the song which is otherwise lost. If Yorke tried to incorporate that into the already complex lyrics, it would sound cheeky, but it's perfect as a title.

Second, the change to the word "Alien" relates it to the song both in respect of the narrator and the subject:

I wish that they'd swoop down in a country lane
Late at night when I'm driving
Take me on board their beautiful ship
Show me the world as I'd love to see it

Later in the song we learn that Yorke is the alien, not the actual aliens. Genius.

Pay attention to the title. Make it more clever and your lyrics less so.

 

[mshilarious]

The same line was like a macho 'call to arms' about the U.S. getting down there and kicking some "fucking ass", and making those commie sons of bitches die.

I suspect you know this, but that drummer was an idiot