|
Post by FreeRider on Jun 10, 2020 9:16:26 GMT -5
Good stuff, everybody! I really appreciate the point of views here and the discussion.
As I've said, I'm more in line with the feeling, the sentiments coming through without the deep dive as to why or what the root cause is. Rather, I'm left to interpret what it means to me and what the song is really saying.
Or, as Jer wrote:
Indeed, I am not advocating the "shut up and play yer guitar" mindset either, but as I previously stated, I like and prefer subtlety and artistry of saying something without lecturing or getting preachy.
And true, some of those tunes anarkissed cited had a huge cultural impact. Again, I think there are nuances and artistry in how the artist makes a statement. Even if Paul's tunes aren't overtly political, but as pie wrote:
Absolutely agree that if done well, art is a reflection of society, it's holding the mirror up to all of us. Politics shape the sign of the times. And I agree as well that the Mats didn't get into the deep details, but rather they were expressing the feelings and voicing the concerns without overtly saying, "Hey! This trickle down economics is killing us" "Or this NAFTA agreement is bullshit."
Look at a song like "Unsatisfied"---genius, in that it expressed the feelings of the time without going into the "why are we feeling this way?" Not one lyric mentions anything about governance or political stuff.
And then I go back to the idea of what Paul originally said. This shit happened in his hometown, these past few weeks. He seems to be a caring and sentient person---how could this not affect him in some way? So again, I wonder what his thoughts are now about his previous statement about politics having no place in rock. Would he qualify it? Add some more nuance to what he meant? But true, I wouldn't expect him to write anything overt about it, if at all, but maybe make allusions to it. Like he sang in "Country Boy":
I don't know much about gay pride between animal rights or any police stuff...
|
|
|
Post by con on Jun 11, 2020 1:01:16 GMT -5
Pretty much everything is political because politics affects everything around us. There is no truly apolitical artist. All art is a reflection of our society which is a reflection of our politics. This is baloney. Art isn’t a “reflection.” It’s the real thing. Politics is the reflection, the pose, the lie. The ‘Mats created from a place of truth beyond the place of politics, which is why they’ve seared the hearts and souls of so many people desperate for authenticity. edit: sorry for the vitriol. Welcome to the forum, pie. Please excuse my boorish French.
|
|
Jer
Beagle Scout
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by Jer on Jun 11, 2020 6:32:29 GMT -5
Pretty much everything is political because politics affects everything around us. There is no truly apolitical artist. All art is a reflection of our society which is a reflection of our politics. This is baloney. Art isn’t a fucking “reflection.” It’s the real thing. Politics is the reflection, the pose, the lie. The ‘Mats created from a place of truth beyond the place of politics, which is why they’ve seared the hearts and souls of so many people desperate for authenticity. edit: sorry for the vitriol. Welcome to the forum. Ha.
I'm not sure about this, con. (and to defend the newbie ) Seems a bit harsh and really not true. Art is as much or more a reflection of society as anything is. You could say it goes all the way back to cave drawings. There are endless examples of current events or situations or technical advancements that are reflected in songs. It's a reflection in that the artist takes in his world and examines, then spits it back out in song or whatever other medium. You can go back in history and listen to songs that help you understand what was going on at that time.
I do agree that the mats came from beyond politics, which why they were seen as authentic and flannel-wearing, beer-drinking, girl-chasing kids gravitated to them over someone like U2 or Midnight Oil or these overtly political bands. I felt exactly what Paul sang about in 16 Blue when I was 16, but Sting singing about The Russians just seemed a world away to me. It was scary to think about a nuclear war, but it was puberty and girls and rock and roll that was keeping me up nights, not Gorbachev.
We're getting pretty deep into semantics and opinion here. You can say everything is political, and if you're bringing "personal politics" into it it's probably true, but I don't think that was the real jest of the initial post. Songs like Unsatisfied, Goddamn Job, Kids Don't Follow, these aren't political songs to me. Even Androgynous is a stretch, and that's about the most political they maybe got. Saying "you got no wars to name us" doesn't mean the song is about the horrors or war. You can stretch it like Androgynous is about trans-rights (or something), but I think it's about a couple kids who are confused and lonely and doing their best and trying to figure it all out in a society that doesn't understand them, not about f'ing Regan stomping on their rights to exist. Goddamn Job isn't about how the government has messed things up so unemployment is up to 10%, it's about a kid trying to get his shit together so he can buy beer and chase girls. There may be an embedded political undertones, but the songs are not political, they're personal. So I do not think they were a political band, at least in the sense of government politics, but there are little elements of politics that you can extract here and there.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Jun 11, 2020 9:09:10 GMT -5
yeah, I'll have to respectfully disagree as well about defining art. Unless you want to take a more funny or cynical definition that Warhol supposedly said. When asked what art is, how to define it, he said, "Art is anything you can get away with." The big themes of music---love, death, life, all of that is shaped by the artist's experiences and observations. Writing about the human condition, that is still a reflection of what is going on in peoples' lives. Guys like Springsteen capably tell those stories and it resonates because people are identifying with it. Because the guy IS singing about their lives. So, is everything political or not? I think again, a successful artist eludes that kind of pigeonholing by letting YOU, the listener, decide what it means. Or you don't have to elude that label and be like Pete Townshend or Bono and be more openly political or make anthemic statements. I loved The Who in their prime but even I got a little tired of Pete's navel gazing and overthinking at times. But even an overtly political statement song like "I've Never Known War" is just a great song melodically and story wise, I can forgive him because it's about the feeling behind all this international arms race shit back in the 80's and having grown up in post WW II England surviving that mess. One of their most under rated tunes, IMO. www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP0YWt4o8HAAs for Paul and the Mats, they were most certainly writing and singing about their lives and sharing the feelings behind it. And it resonated obviously with a lot of us Warren Zevon said that for him songwriting was about him having these feelings about the world and wanting to share them with others, to pass those feelings on to the listeners and hope they get it. Again, as for the politics--identity, social, or otherwise, it is clearly up to you want you want to read into it or get from it. For me, it's about Paul capturing the feelings of the times, the zeitgeist---young, angry, alienated, lonely, unsure, etc...and I think Paul could be affected by the rage and sadness of these recent events and do a good job of evoking those feelings without having to directly link it to any particular political event. Which was what I was really asking to kick off this thread. Love the conversation, everyone! Good to see more participation of late on the board (Paul hasn't given us much to talk about )
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jun 11, 2020 13:43:03 GMT -5
I think one songwriter who very capably walked the line between personal and political was Natalie Merchant of 10,000 Maniacs. She would take a social or political issue, but express it in terms of a very personal experience with it. "What's The Matter Here?" was about child abuse. "Trouble Me" was about watching your parents grow old. "You Happy Puppet" and "Headstrong" about being dominated in a relationship. "Poison In The Well", pollution. Even the more overt "Please Forgive Us" was about realizing that your tax dollars oftentimes went to support things that you didn't even believe in. Springsteen was pretty good at this sort of storytelling as well.
|
|
|
Post by con on Jun 11, 2020 16:46:30 GMT -5
Great points. I just can’t buy the argument that every creative act is somehow inherently secondhand because it is of a certain era or place. I think that kind of reasoning cheapens the genius of the individual behind the art, which is timeless and irreducible.
|
|
|
Post by raccoon on Jun 12, 2020 4:40:47 GMT -5
The best poets work in the medium of ambiguity and dual meanings.
'Someone Take the Wheel' is a prime example. Is the song overtly political (as in 'we need better leadership') or a rejection of politics (there is a war somewhere, but who gives a shit, put in another tape)?:
I see we're fighting again In some fucking land Throw in another tape man Someone take the wheel And I don't know where we're going Anybody say what you feel Everybody's sad, but nobody's showing
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Jun 12, 2020 8:10:10 GMT -5
The funny thing is that I was supposed to be in MN this weekend for my nephew's college graduation, which ain't gonna happen with this pandemic and the aftermath of the riots. I've never been to the holy land and I guess I'll have to wait another time to visit the famous house where Let It Be album cover was photographed, Bob's memorial park bench, etc...another day. I wonder what Paul's response would be to our discussion. Perhaps his response to me, or us, would be, "these are my private thoughts, fuck you. Why should I let you know what I think or feel about this? I write what I write and if you get to hear any of it, why should I tell you what it's about all the time? Quit knockin' on mine, man..." I remember some testy interview with Dylan where some journalist was trying to pin him down on some songs and he just said something along the lines of, "Look, I'm just a songwriter, I'm not speaking for anyone or any generation. I wrote a song, you and other people were somehow were disturbed by it, that's YOUR trip, man." I suppose it's no use to try and get into Paul's mindset, or what he's feeling, what he reacts to. If we're lucky, he'll answer us with some new songs. Or maybe he keeps it all to himself and records over it.
|
|
Jer
Beagle Scout
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by Jer on Jun 12, 2020 12:26:13 GMT -5
The best poets work in the medium of ambiguity and dual meanings. 'Someone Take the Wheel' is a prime example. Is the song overtly political (as in 'we need better leadership') or a rejection of politics (there is a war somewhere, but who gives a shit, put in another tape)?:
That example is a bit of a stretch I think. Audience interpretation of lyrics is a powerful and valid thing, and if that's what you get out of the tune then that's cool, but I don't personally think it has anything to do with politics or means anything other beyond the thoughts of a guy who's tired of the band he's in and is just trying to get through the day-to-day grind. I see it as a worn-out Bastards of Young where the gang mentality has become a job and gotten boring, and he wants out. The metaphor is the wheel/driver of the van for the leadership of the band, but I don't get the politics reference beyond that.
I agree that ambiguity and dual-meanings can be really powerful when done well, and Paul was good at it, but another part of what makes Paul a great songwriter to me was his ability to focus on the minutiae - a moment in time, a detail everyone knows but noone ever thinks to document. The bus in Kiss Me On The Bus, drivin' your pa to the bank in 16 Blue, a mail-order ring, stuff like that. Sometimes a duck is just a duck, and when you can paint a duck in a way no one has before, it's pretty great, but it's still a duck. He could work with dual meanings, but I don't think he was often looking to make a big social/political statement.
|
|
|
Post by anarkissed on Jun 12, 2020 13:49:16 GMT -5
[/quote He could work with dual meanings, but I don't think he was often looking to make a big social/political statement.
[/quote] If the artist didn't intend it, but people interpret it that way, or he does it by accident, or it acquires that meaning in hindsight, does it still count? Does he get credit for it?
|
|
|
Post by con on Jun 12, 2020 14:34:57 GMT -5
The funny thing is that I was supposed to be in MN this weekend for my nephew's college graduation, which ain't gonna happen with this pandemic and the aftermath of the riots. I've never been to the holy land and I guess I'll have to wait another time to visit the famous house where Let It Be album cover was photographed, Bob's memorial park bench, etc...another day. I wonder what Paul's response would be to our discussion. Perhaps his response to me, or us, would be, "these are my private thoughts, fuck you. Why should I let you know what I think or feel about this? I write what I write and if you get to hear any of it, why should I tell you what it's about all the time? Quit knockin' on mine, man..." I remember some testy interview with Dylan where some journalist was trying to pin him down on some songs and he just said something along the lines of, "Look, I'm just a songwriter, I'm not speaking for anyone or any generation. I wrote a song, you and other people were somehow were disturbed by it, that's YOUR trip, man." I suppose it's no use to try and get into Paul's mindset, or what he's feeling, what he reacts to. If we're lucky, he'll answer us with some new songs. Or maybe he keeps it all to himself and records over it. Amen. Hope you get to MPLS eventually! I want to pay homage someday too...
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Jun 12, 2020 15:19:28 GMT -5
|
|
Jer
Beagle Scout
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by Jer on Jun 12, 2020 18:13:52 GMT -5
If the artist didn't intend it, but people interpret it that way, or he does it by accident, or it acquires that meaning in hindsight, does it still count? Does he get credit for it?
I dunno, man. Those things do happen. It's a personal thing for the consumer and the artist I guess. I always felt like once a song is out there it no longer belongs to the songwriter as far as meaning or interpretation. It's up to the listener what it means to them. That's why I never read the lyrics when I buy records until years later.
Look at Born In The USA. A powerful, dark song about the struggles of vets returning from Vietnam to a country that turned its back on them. Next thing you know Bob Dole is using it to show what a patriotic candidate for president he was. Bruce can sue and make them stop, but he can't stop every dipshit with a baseball cap and a pair of Levis from thinking it's a pro-USA song.
|
|