> Franklin politely commented> I beg to differ, Andrew. There is a
WORLD of >difference between a lyricist and a poet. The term
lyricist would imply >someone who is addressing the specific needs
of a song - generally three
>(rarely four) chords meant to charm 16.00 out of a 14-25 year old.
> Repetition, hooks, "catchy" chorus are all part of the "game".
Victor emphatically states>Sorry but you are completely wrong.
Franklin> OH SHIT!! AGAIN????
Victor> Lyric writing is an art within itself
Franklin>It's an "art within itself" alright - at least as far as
you're concerned. Now if you meant to say that it is an "art in
itself" I'd probably disagree. I believe most songwriters, including
the author of the bestseller "The Craft of Lyrical Songwriting" would
consider it a craft.
Victor>and the type of song you are speaking of is a tiny fraction
of what exists in the world as lyrics-
Franklin> A TINY FRACTION?? What planet did you say you're from?
Listened to any commercial radio lately - like in the last twenty
years?
Victor, assertively>it certainly doesn't fly as a definition of what
it means to be a lyricist and comes off as somewhat pretentious.
Franklin> Only somewhat? Oh SHIT - I blew it again... darn! BTY
definitions don't need to "fly". They simply need to serve a specific
purpose, suitable to the term, condition or situation at hand...
Victor> It is very difficult to write good lyrics
Franklin> I'll assume this is a personal confession... difficult for
who? That's an unmerited assumption. I've read scads of articles
involving songs I've found to be lyrically sophisticated, tasteful
and wonderful where the writer says, "it just all flowed right off
the pen."
Victor, vehemently> and the fact that they are put to music does not
make them less worthy than poetry. It is just different, period.
Franklin> Wasn't saying it wasn't. Just making a very real and
undeniable distinction. You're talking apples and oranges here son.
It's not something being "put to music" as you so eloquently stated,
that makes it less worthy - as Bill (Bubba) Clinton would say: "It's
the form/content stupid." Maybe it would help if some of these
"master" lyricists would start with the words instead...of visa
versa... Then there wouldn't be filler chords AND filler lyrics to
grace them.
Victor>There are brilliant lyricists just as there are brilliant poets...Neil
Peart, Robert Hunter(lyricist for the Grateful Dead), Joni Mitchell, Tom
Waits, Bernie Taupin, the list goes on...
Franklin> Never said there weren't. BTY, I consider some on that list
to be poets/prosodists, at times anyway.
Victor>Also, just because a song is simple and has simple lyrics
does not mean it did not take great skill to write. In fact, it is
very difficult to create
something that is very simple and yet comes across as brilliant.
Franklin> You're tellin' me? Once again, difficult for who? Be more
specific, who are you speaking for - which artists?
Victor> Neil Young and James Taylor in particular have mastered the
art of writing simple songs that are incredibly deep and powerful.
I wouldn't knock James Taylor so much. Many of his songs may seem
simplistic on the surface but they are more complex than they seem.
Franklin> I wouldn't categorize Neil Young with JT. In any event,
whose "knocking" JT? I simply stated some opinions regarding his
body of work. You sound like G.DUB - "don't knock our Great Country
(in other words, my political, freedom-stripping agenda) or you're a
TRAITOR!" Or should I paraphrase good ol' Forrest Gump: "simple is
as simple goes". You can whine and take PERSONAL snipes about my
opinions all you want, but that isn't going to change them. Perhaps
taking less emotive, more intellectually based approach might be a
start though... Just a suggestion. One of the big differences between
your approach and mine is that I don't "duck". I don't have to!
Victor>Just as there are good and bad poets
Franklin> That's an oxymoron if I ever heard one! (thanks, I collect
them). There are no "bad" poets - only failed pretenders. Poetry is
the conveyance of inspired truth - thus, there are only true poets.
Not "good and bad" ones. Time is the arbiter. Did you realize that
when Keats, Yeats, Longfellow, et.al, were writing, there were
literally TENS of THOUSANDS of "poets" writing "poetry" books being
published. Go try to find any of THEM in a bookstore - used or
otherwise.
Victor> as there are good and bad lyricists.
Franklin> Ain't that the solemn truth!
Victor> And IMO, lyricists would like to be known as lyricists and
not something else, as if lyric writing is somehow a lower art than
poetry.
Franklin> We're ALL entitled to our opinion (try to remember that,
please!!! Victor). And yes, unfortunately, as time will attest,
lyric-writing is a lower "art" as you call it, than poetry. I would
simply suggest that the two are mutually exclusive - truely timeless
poetry being the "art", while contemporary lyric-writing would
probably be considered more of a "craft" by most literary experts.
Now before you get "all stressed out" over that; remember, it doesn't
demean the noble craft of lyric-writing. It simply describes its
self-fulfilling placement in the hierarchy of literature.
Franklin
--- Victor Johnson
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit http://www.cdbaby.com/victorjohnson
Look for the new album "Parsonage Lane" in March 2003
Produced by Chris Rosser at Hollow Reed Studios
