[krastian]

I'm not really looking for any "deep" meaning......I just know it gets me off.

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by HaydenAsche

Nihilist!

sounds exhausting

[Hip Priest]

Originally Posted by Savage Clone

I hope you are not implying that only vocal/lyrical music can have any "meaning."

No, in fact in my previous post I stressed the opposite:interpretations of a song will be a reflection not only of the song's contents but will also be an intellectual consequence of factors such as one's upbringing, education, society, personal relationships, religion etc etc etc.

[HaydenAsche]

That song is awesome though. AOR was made solely for me to dance to.

[Toilet & Bowels]

edit: when i opened this page when hip priests post was the last in the thread what i'm saying is mostly been said by other people already. feel free to skip.

Originally Posted by Hip Priest

On the other hand, if I may opine, I think that if one doesn't read into music, if one doesn't find representations, then how will it ever be more than mere entertainment? How will it ever mean something to the listener?

because music can mean things without literally meaning things.
everyone here is discussing lyrics, does that mean that lyrics mean something but the actual music doesn't? nobody ever asks what the meaning of a particular bass line is or whatever, i find it irritating that people's whole interpretation of music hinges upon the lyrics, are the whole band thinking about the same thing as the lyricist when they play that song? i doubt it. and if lyrics are the be all and end all why bother with music at all, why not just read/write poetry. music isn't literal or logical, it's spiritual and emotional.
i agree pretty much whole heartedly with what truncated said (unless she's going to tell me i've missed the point) and find interpretations of anything presumptuous and hot airish.

although, having said that, when i was in my first year at art school i did a project where i lent my camera to friends from outside school and asked them to take photos for a day of whatever they wanted, and then asked people in my class to look at the photos and try to imagine and describe what the person who took that particular set of photos was like. anyway, most people couldn't have been more wrong with what they presumed about the person, but there 2 people in my class (out of about the 20 i asked) who every time i showed them a set of photos they described the person who took them very accurately. i had 10 different friends taking pictures for me, and each of them was described well, but only by these 2 same people. none of the people from school knew any of my friends who took the photos. it was very interesting.
so what i'm saying is is that i think a few people have an inate ability to decipher information from art, but that information isn't really always a particular message or meaning. and i think to assume that a piece art/music is created as a vehicle for a message is akin to misunderstanding that entire medium.

[Toilet & Bowels]

also, i think the whole business of disecting art is largely a skam cooked up by academics to keep themselves in jobs, because every budding academic i've ever spoken to has told me the reason they want to be an academic is so they don't have to get a real job in the real world. and that's probably true of critics too.

[Hip Priest]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

because music can mean things without literally meaning things.
everyone here is discussing lyrics, does that mean that lyrics mean something but the actual music doesn't? nobody ever asks what the meaning of a particular bass line is or whatever, i find it irritating that people's whole interpretation of music hinges upon the lyrics, are the whole band thinking about the same thing as the lyricist when they play that song? i doubt it. and if lyrics are the be all and end all why bother with music at all, why not just read/write poetry. music isn't literal or logical, it's spiritual and emotional.
i agree pretty much whole heartedly with what truncated said (unless she's going to tell me i've missed the point) and find interpretations of anything presumptuous and hot airish.

Just to clear one point up, in the post you quoted I used the word 'music' rather than 'lyrics' precisely because my point applied to the two things. I agree with what you're saying - I was taking to a saxophonist/songer I know who plays covers in bars and he was moaning that even with very well-known songs, the audience don't recognise the tune; they only recognise the track at all when the vocals start. I guess that's a very casual music fan, but it sort of ties in with your point.

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

although, having said that, when i was in my first year at art school i did a project where i lent my camera to friends from outside school and asked them to take photos for a day of whatever they wanted, and then asked people in my class to look at the photos and try to imagine and describe what the person who took that particular set of photos was like. anyway, most people couldn't have been more wrong with what they presumed about the person, but there 2 people in my class (out of about the 20 i asked) who every time i showed them a set of photos they described the person who took them very accurately. i had 10 different friends taking pictures for me, and each of them was described well, but only by these 2 same people. none of the people from school knew any of my friends who took the photos. it was very interesting.
so what i'm saying is is that i think a few people have an inate ability to decipher information from art, but that information isn't really always a particular message or meaning. and i think to assume that a piece art/music is created as a vehicle for a message is akin to misunderstanding that entire medium.

Thanks. You should copy n paste this onto the FOrtean Times forum - they have about a million sections and sub-sections, you'll get feedback there, I'm sure.

[HaydenAsche]

Originally Posted by Everyneurotic

sounds exhausting

They don't care if its exhausting because they are nihilists

[RIPfrey05]

nhilist is a funny word..
btw.. i like pondering song meanings and find it amusing.. its part of the art.


this is one of those threads where i SHOULD write a fucking paragraph of bullshit to back up what i said, fuck that.

[truncated]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

because music can mean things without literally meaning things. everyone here is discussing lyrics, does that mean that lyrics mean something but the actual music doesn't? nobody ever asks what the meaning of a particular bass line is or whatever, i find it irritating that people's whole interpretation of music hinges upon the lyrics, are the whole band thinking about the same thing as the lyricist when they play that song? i doubt it. and if lyrics are the be all and end all why bother with music at all, why not just read/write poetry. music isn't literal or logical, it's spiritual and emotional.
i agree pretty much whole heartedly with what truncated said (unless she's going to tell me i've missed the point) and find interpretations of anything presumptuous and hot airish.

although, having said that, when i was in my first year at art school i did a project where i lent my camera to friends from outside school and asked them to take photos for a day of whatever they wanted, and then asked people in my class to look at the photos and try to imagine and describe what the person who took that particular set of photos was like. anyway, most people couldn't have been more wrong with what they presumed about the person, but there 2 people in my class (out of about the 20 i asked) who every time i showed them a set of photos they described the person who took them very accurately. i had 10 different friends taking pictures for me, and each of them was described well, but only by these 2 same people. none of the people from school knew any of my friends who took the photos. it was very interesting.
so what i'm saying is is that i think a few people have an inate ability to decipher information from art, but that information isn't really always a particular message or meaning. and i think to assume that a piece art/music is created as a vehicle for a message is akin to misunderstanding that entire medium.

Well said.

The issue is definitely not limited merely to lyrics. It applies to any interpretation people feel at liberty to make regarding any facet of any piece of any art.

Nor do I think that an "outsider's" perspective is by default flawed. There are definitely some people who are more perceptive than others, who have the ability to consider more of the pertinent factors when trying to derive an objective (insofar as it can be) impression of something.

[truncated]

continuation of previous post because I'm too lazy to quote multiple passages -

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

also, i think the whole business of disecting art is largely a skam cooked up by academics to keep themselves in jobs, because every budding academic i've ever spoken to has told me the reason they want to be an academic is so they don't have to get a real job in the real world. and that's probably true of critics too.

I concur with this absolutely (ha isn't that funny that was what my degree was based on). Not saying that I don't want a real job. But so many of these people seem to think that the point of dissecting literature/music/etc. is to arrive at some profound meaning that, of course, is unprecedented, because, well, they're geniuses and all that.

I think that whole pursuit is really an exercise to help hone analytical thinking - nurture an ability to deconstruct and deduce, reason and hypothesize. Abilities that have much farther reaching implications than reading Macbeth and being able to pinpoint guilt/treachery imagery.

I digress.

Again, my basic, irrelevant point is that someone from SY (actually even that's unlikely, they have better things to do) is probably reading this and going, "Christ, those silly twats must be bored."

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Hip Priest

Just to clear one point up, in the post you quoted I used the word 'music' rather than 'lyrics' precisely because my point applied to the two things. I agree with what you're saying - I was taking to a saxophonist/songer I know who plays covers in bars and he was moaning that even with very well-known songs, the audience don't recognise the tune; they only recognise the track at all when the vocals start. I guess that's a very casual music fan, but it sort of ties in with your point.

ok, sorry, it's just that a lot of the time when people say music they're really only refering to the lyrics.

Originally Posted by Hip Priest

Thanks. You should copy n paste this onto the FOrtean Times forum - they have about a million sections and sub-sections, you'll get feedback there, I'm sure.

really? do you think this counts as fourtean terrirtory?

[Hip Priest]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

really? do you think this counts as fourtean terrirtory?

People's apparant ability to describe others from the photographs they take? Absolutely.

[Savage Clone]

Isn't everything Fortean territory if you stretch it far enough?

[Hip Priest]

Originally Posted by Savage Clone

Isn't everything Fortean territory if you stretch it far enough?

If it's 'strange', yes. Go to the forum and look at the diversity.

[noumenal]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

because music can mean things without literally meaning things.
everyone here is discussing lyrics, does that mean that lyrics mean something but the actual music doesn't? nobody ever asks what the meaning of a particular bass line is or whatever, i find it irritating that people's whole interpretation of music hinges upon the lyrics

I completely agree with this. Music has meaning but what it means is ineffable. As far as I know, SY always adds lyrics after writing the music, so as far as I'm concerned, the music is where it's at.

[truncated]

Originally Posted by noumenal

I completely agree with this. Music has meaning but what it means is ineffable. As far as I know, SY always adds lyrics after writing the music, so as far as I'm concerned, the music is where it's at.

That is in part what I'm saying. The experience could be completely aural, visceral. The 'complexity' could lie entirely in the music. Or its simplicity. Or there could be no meaning whatsoever. It could just be an aurally pleasing combination.

It could be nothing; it could be anything.

Now this has all ceased to make sense. English words have lost all meaning. Definitions and concepts have fled my understanding. I am officially a retard brain.

[noumenal]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

also, i think the whole business of disecting art is largely a skam cooked up by academics to keep themselves in jobs, because every budding academic i've ever spoken to has told me the reason they want to be an academic is so they don't have to get a real job in the real world. and that's probably true of critics too.

I grew up hating literary criticism. I loved reading, but I couldn't stand the wankering that we would do in English class - making conjectures about symbolism and so on.

However, music theory is copletely different. When I do music theory, I don't try to figure out what music means, that would be pointless. I just try to figure out how it works and doing that makes me a better musician, but more importantly, it makes me enjoy the music more. Listening to music is one thing, but listening after having played it and analyzed it is completely different. The reason I love music theory is because of the power it has to help me understand and enjoy music more.

Some people think that doing this is like learning how a magic trick is performed - that it takes away something from the experience, but this is completely wrong. If you haven't had the epiphany of understanding how a particular piece of music does what it does, you're missing out. I agree that music is "emotional and spiritual", but it is also intellectual and it isn't magic.

This distrust of academia is disturbing. The academic study of the arts has fallen behind, I'll give you that. It needs to catch up, particularly in music. But it's difficult because people don't want to change. On both sides. Rock music could benefit from a different viewpoint as well. However, I think that the tactic that a lot of academics take towards pop music is stupid as hell. All they talk about are the lyrics and sociological aspects - and this is the kind of crap that T&B is talking about. I shit on that stuff. But it would be great for rock music if there was a more systemized attempt to understand it musically. Ultimately, it would make for better music. IMO, rock music has yet to produce anything that can come close to the greatest music in the classical tradition. And it never will if people keep viewing music as magic that ought not be dissected.

[Everyneurotic]

that's why i don't mess with those threads, i know what the songs mean to me even if i don't know the lyrics.

even when bands go on the record about certain songs and lyrics, if they don't come close to what i think the songs are, i get frustrated and disappointed.

[Everyneurotic]

Originally Posted by HaydenAsche

They don't care if its exhausting because they are nihilists

that was a line from the big lebowski

i know they don't care