|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 9:26:24 GMT -5
Its clear from Nicole's post with these lyrics: Somedays I cry, I cry for those who live in fear Somedays I cry, I cry for those who fear the worst How is that clear? I always take those lyrics to mean that Paul's heart goes out to the countless people suffering and fearing with their own troubles in the world. I don't attribute these words directly to Linda. I stand by what I wrote there. You've got no business declaring what Paul means in his songs as if you're "certain", if Paul doesn't come right out and say so. They are your own interpretation and nothing more. You have heard every quote Paul has ever uttered and yet you conveniently disregard every time he's ever said that he 'mainly' writes melodies and then sticks words in to fit later on. Meanwhile, you just keep harping on my first remark after I elaborated afterward on my original comments and praised the words of SOMEDAYS as being great lyrics coming from Paul's heart. I said this song is an example of Paul's fine lyrics. And why do you keep ignoring -- as I have pointed out for, what, like the THIRD or FOURTH time now --? --- the 1984 Aspel TV show comment for Paul when he says George used to ask Paul why he doesn't tap into his own experiences when writing songs, asking Paul how he could do that. (George meaning that he couldn't write like that, as he needs to tap into himself). So did Paul lie one way or the other? First he says he wrote it just as an exercise to kill time (which he also put into the CD liner notes)... and then he smiles when Matt Lauer asks if the song was about Lind so he says "yeah". Why does Paul first describe it as a knockoff with a time limit, and later waffle a bit with Linda? I don't know if you've done so yet or not, but I hope you will address my last reply to you from yesterday. Regarding the reference to George, you are missing an important distinction. Paul never said he doesn't tap into his own experiences when he writes. He just has the ability, like a novelist, to write outside himself. Not all writers can do that and it takes a lot of talent. It is an extra feature of his writing. His writing is not all autobiographical. But to say its not autobiographical based on that quote from George or based on the idea that he is too shallow to write introspectively is just wrong. IMHO, that not an opinion. He demonstrates it in songs like Somedays, Little Willow, Beautiful Night, Young Boy, The World Tonight or For No One or I'm Looking Through You etc. Eleanor Rigby is another matter, but it still has great insight.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 9:26:47 GMT -5
I stand by what I wrote there. You've got no business declaring what Paul means in his songs as if you're "certain", if Paul doesn't come right out and say so. They are your own interpretation and nothing more. You have heard every quote Paul has ever uttered and yet you conveniently disregard every time he's ever said that he 'mainly' writes melodies and then sticks words in to fit later on.
Meanwhile, you just keep harping on my first remark after I elaborated afterward on my original comments and praised the words of SOMEDAYS as being great lyrics coming from Paul's heart. I said this song is an example of Paul's fine lyrics.
And why do you keep ignoring -- as I have pointed out for, what, like the THIRD or FOURTH time now --? --- the 1984 Aspel TV show comment for Paul when he says George used to ask Paul why he doesn't tap into his own experiences when writing songs, asking Paul how he could do that. (George meaning that he couldn't write like that, as he needs to tap into himself).
So did Paul lie one way or the other? First he says he wrote it just as an exercise to kill time (which he also put into the CD liner notes)... and then he smiles when Matt Lauer asks if the song was about Lind so he says "yeah". Why does Paul first describe it as a knockoff with a time limit, and later waffle a bit with Linda?
I don't know if you've done so yet or not, but I hope you will address my last reply to you from yesterday.
Oh, knock it off. Do you know where I get that quote from? PAUL HIMSELF! That's right --- countless times over the years when pressed as to where certain songs come from or what they mean, Paul often says he himself doesn't even know, that they often (not 'always') are just words. It's amazing how you know every fart Paul ever let loose and every syllable he has ever said, and yet you never heard him admit most of his songs are just words stuck into a melody.
You're really testing my patience here, RTP. I have said over and over again that Paul can also write great lyrics. And many times he is not shallow and his songs have deep meaning (even if it's what others take from them where he didn't mean it that way). Don't reduce my comments to putting words in my mouth like "Paul is so shallow he can't write songs with meaning".
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 9:33:01 GMT -5
Regarding the reference to George, you are missing an important distinction. Paul never said he doesn't tap into his own experiences when he writes. He just has the ability, like a novelist, to write outside himself. Not all writers can do that and it takes a lot of talent. It is an extra feature of his writing. Did you see the 1984 Aspel interview recently? Do you have it in front of you? Run it back and see if that's what Paul actually said, or if that (again) is your own interpretation. Aside from the bit about George, Paul made it clear -- at least by his words on this particular occasion --- that he doesn't write that way. (Of course he can't possibly literally mean "never", as we know he has tapped into his own feelings). But Paul has always made it clear that it is the exception. You go on a lot about Paul's "talents as a clever songwriter". Well, it takes talent (not to mention balls) to expose yourself and write about your own direct feelings and life as well. (Which I DO believe he does with SOMEDAYS... it's just a shame this discussion has fallen into this particular thread). Maybe it's because Paul blatantly said "I wrote SOMEDAYS to see if I could write a song against the clock before Linda was done". Then maybe you ought to take it up with Paul. HE is the one who said it, MANY TIMES --- all I'm doing is listening to what he's said.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 9:34:45 GMT -5
Here again is still more proof from Paul himself that he basically just writes songs and most of the time doesn't even know what they're about or why. Things just come to him with little meaning.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 9:37:25 GMT -5
Here again is still more proof from Paul himself that he basically just writes songs and most of the time doesn't even know what they're about or why. Things just come to him with little meaning. Why do you re-quote this from me? Quote Paul... that's where I get that stuff from. So does he lie sometimes and play dumb just to throw people off? It's not my problem. And yet again I'll ask you -- why do you not consider the posts I've made after I elaborated and praised the words to SOMEDAYS?
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 9:44:04 GMT -5
Why do you re-quote this from me? Quote Paul... that's where I get that stuff from. So does he lie sometimes and play dumb just to throw people off? It's not my problem. And yet again I'll ask you -- why do you not consider the posts I've made after I elaborated and praised the words to SOMEDAYS? I did acknowledge that you gave Somedays a high rating. And I will correct my post. You didn't say Paul never writes songs with meaning. But I think there is an implied stereotype some people have with Paul that his lyrics are shallow and superficial.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 9:50:32 GMT -5
You didn't say Paul never writes songs with meaning. But I think there is an implied stereotype some people have with Paul that he is shallow and superficial. It's a stereotype because it's true a lot of the time!! Even Paul has said that countless times in interviews about his writing style! (not with words like "shallow and superficial", but it comes to the same principal). A reputation like that often comes from the majority of circumstances, not the exceptions. Even John (and I know this will irk you) said things like "which goes to show that Paul can do well when he tries", and things like that. And I know exactly what John meant by that... that Paul often just wrote third person songs ("like a novelist")... and often needed someone to challenge him and tell him, like Lennon or Elvis Costello.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 10:00:45 GMT -5
Paul made it clear that he doesn't write that way (introspectively). (Of course he can't possibly literally mean "never", as we know he has tapped into his own feelings). But Paul has always made it clear that it is the exception. Has he really made it clear that it exceptional for him to write a song with any deep meaning? I think if he says anything along those lines, he is reacting to people always asking him about the meanings of his songs and his frustration about not wanting to talk about it. He said he would rather leave it up to each person. But it goes beyond that. Some of his songs meanings are so private that he is uncomfortable talking about them. The Lauer interview is a perfect example. He was cornered on that occasion into talking about something he didn't want to discuss. The two things aren't mutually exclusive. You can still write a meaningful song with a time constraint. Paul is so talented that he is trying to challenge himself with a time constraint. It doesn't mean a song is a throwaway or knock off just because it is written against the clock. And the evidence of that is the song iteself.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 10:03:40 GMT -5
You didn't say Paul never writes songs with meaning. But I think there is an implied stereotype some people have with Paul that he is shallow and superficial. It's a stereotype because it's true a lot of the time!! Even Paul has said that countless times in interviews about his writing style! (not with words like "shallow and superficial", but it comes to the same principal). A reputation like that often comes from the majority of circumstances, not the exceptions. Even John (and I know this will irk you) said things like "which goes to show that Paul can write well when he tries", and things like that. And I know exactly what John meant by that... that Paul often just wrote third person songs ("like a novelist")... and often needed someone to challenge him and tell him, like Lennon or Elvis Costello. I would put Paul's catalog up against any other songwriter for the number of meaningful songs. He has probably written a thousand songs. Some of them will have throw away lyrics of course. But I don't know of many people who have come up with the numer of great songs he has in his career. And BTW it takes real imagination to be able to write songs like a novelist and also be introspective.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 10:12:30 GMT -5
Has he really made it clear that it exceptional for him to write a song with any deep meaning? I think if he says anything along those lines, he is reacting to people always asking him about the meanings of his songs and his frustration about not wanting to talk about it. He said he would rather leave it up to each person. But it goes beyond that. Some of his songs meanings are so private that he is uncomfortable talking about them. The Lauer interview is a perfect example. He was cornered on that occasion into talking about something he didn't want to discuss. I've heard Paul many, many times in interviews attempting no such "hiding" or trying to "throw listeners off the scent". He openly admits he mainly gets the music first and then tries to find words that fit. Funny how you only concede Paul "hiding things" when it benefits his image, but not when it detracts from it.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 10:17:05 GMT -5
I would put Paul's catalog up against any other songwriter for the number of meaningful songs. YOU WOULD!? YOU..? REALLY? My Lord, that was the surprise of my freakin' day. Yeah, me either. Is this the point where I stroke your forehead by repeating for the umpteenth time that I consider Paul McCartney to be the greatest Songwriter Of All Time...? (I know that's not good enough for you, but...) Paul is not very introspective in his music. With some exceptions. Have you run out of toilet paper for Paul's ass yet today? The day's several hours old...
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 10:24:35 GMT -5
I would put Paul's catalog up against any other songwriter for the number of meaningful songs. YOU WOULD!? YOU..? REALLY? My Lord, that was the surprise of my freakin' day. Yeah, me either. Is this the point where I stroke your forehead by repeating for the umpteenth time that I consider Paul McCartney to be the greatest Songwriter Of All Time...? (I know that's not good enough for you, but...) Paul is not very introspective in his music. With some exceptions. Have you run out of toilet paper for Paul's ass yet today? The day's several hours old... Making a quick trip for more. Now lets see--Harrods or Selfridges...
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 10:26:51 GMT -5
Making a quick trip for more. Now lets see--Harrods or Selfridges... Make sure it's triple-ply! ;D
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 10:29:05 GMT -5
Is this the point where I stroke your forehead by repeating for the umpteenth time that I consider Paul McCartney to be the greatest Songwriter Of All Time...? (I know that's not good enough for you, but...) You just made me feel just like Paul felt when during an argument John would lower his glasses and say "its only me'.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 10:36:14 GMT -5
Is this the point where I stroke your forehead by repeating for the umpteenth time that I consider Paul McCartney to be the greatest Songwriter Of All Time...? (I know that's not good enough for you, but...) You just made me feel just like Paul felt when during an argument John would lower his glasses and say "its only me'. Well, I keep saying I've always related most to John.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 9, 2012 11:11:29 GMT -5
Nicole said another neat thing that was equally true with me from Day 1 as to "Somedays" when she mentioned the accompanying documentary to Flaming Pie. I cannot walk away from the "Somedays" segment in the absolutely wonderful documentary In The World Tonight and believe anything but that song was specifically about Linda's then illness. Of course Paul had to be vague about the inspiration to that and a couple other songs on that album because Linda was alive for about another year after the release of Flaming Pie. But images in the video drive it all home to me. "Somedays" is an absolutely heartbreaking song and there is no happy ending in it. It is not "Hope Of Deliverance." If it is truly just an exercise in writing a song in a half hour then it no longer resonates with me and I don't want to ever hear it again because then it is just toying with my emotions and is hollow, not about a real situation. I don't need that. If it is in fact about Linda's illness and the fear, worry, love, and devotion Paul was experiencing for the love of his life Linda(as I believe it to be), then it is one of Paul's greatest moments as not just a master songwriter but as a human being. But if it is just an exercise to write a song(I think Paul was talking in code when saying that to spare Linda further pain) then it is phony and dead to me as a song. I want that human touch to the music that inspires me and not Tin Pan Alley exercises in craft. I'm done on this Thread or I will walk away hating this song.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 12:43:38 GMT -5
I'm going to risk having people scratching their heads by saying yes, I do think Paul is thinking of Linda with this song - I suppose I always have. It's just that I guess what happens to me when I listen to it is, I also relate to when Paul expresses heartache for those other people who also live in fear and hurt.
I think what got me started was when RTP said he thought the one specific line at the beginning was directly about Linda's eyes themselves sometimes not looking clear, or only sometimes "shining", due to her cancer. That is his interpretation of that line and I don't necessarily agree on that one point. Somehow from there it lead me on this downward spiral with RTP's Paul dedication getting the better of me. I began saying "how do you know it's about Linda's cancer?" (when I meant that one line about the eyes) and then bringing up Paul's interviews where he often says his lyrics are just things he comes up with for a melody.
I don't like that during the course of this whole thing I went overboard on the "not Linda" thing, when I really was questioning only RTP's reading of that first line.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 13:45:52 GMT -5
I'm going to risk having people scratching their heads by saying yes, I do think Paul is thinking of Linda with this song - I suppose I always have. It's just that I guess what happens to me when I listen to it is, I also relate to when Paul expresses heartache for those other people who also live in fear and hurt. I think what got me started was when RTP said he thought the one specific line at the beginning was directly about Linda's eyes themselves sometimes not looking clear, or only sometimes "shining", due to her cancer. That is his interpretation of that line and I don't necessarily agree on that one point. Somehow from there it lead me on this downward spiral with RTP's Paul dedication getting the better of me. I began saying "how do you know it's about Linda's cancer?" (when I meant that one line about the eyes) and then bringing up Paul's interviews where he often says his lyrics are just things he comes up with for a melody. I don't like that during the course of this whole thing I went overboard on the "not Linda" thing, when I really was questioning only RTP's reading of that first line. And I understand that because as you pointed out that line can be taken to mean Paul's eyes that shine. I didn't take it that way. But I think the other references to people who live in fear and fear the worst carries the meaning further. I suppose I do tend to word my posts as though my interpretation is the true meaning. By the way, I found the TP at Harrods. Its gold infused. Ooh, sounds painful.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 13:53:03 GMT -5
Nicole said another neat thing that was equally true with me from Day 1 as to "Somedays" when she mentioned the accompanying documentary to Flaming Pie. I cannot walk away from the "Somedays" segment in the absolutely wonderful documentary In The World Tonight and believe anything but that song was specifically about Linda's then illness. Of course Paul had to be vague about the inspiration to that and a couple other songs on that album because Linda was alive for about another year after the release of Flaming Pie. But images in the video drive it all home to me. "Somedays" is an absolutely heartbreaking song and there is no happy ending in it. It is not "Hope Of Deliverance." If it is truly just an exercise in writing a song in a half hour then it no longer resonates with me and I don't want to ever hear it again because then it is just toying with my emotions and is hollow, not about a real situation. I don't need that. If it is in fact about Linda's illness and the fear, worry, love, and devotion Paul was experiencing for the love of his life Linda(as I believe it to be), then it is one of Paul's greatest moments as not just a master songwriter but as a human being. But if it is just an exercise to write a song(I think Paul was talking in code when saying that to spare Linda further pain) then it is phony and dead to me as a song. I want that human touch to the music that inspires me and not Tin Pan Alley exercises in craft. I'm done on this Thread or I will walk away hating this song. Don't worry JSD, I have a feeling Paul was trying to write the melody in a certain amount of time as a challenge--finding the right chords and notes for the tune. He says he is inspired at all different times. I don't think he had all the words in place then, though he had the general theme perhaps. I'm sure that took more time to complete the lyrics. Would it make any difference if he were in the studio saying now I'm going to write a song. Lightening can strike anywhere, but if he didn't feel inspired, nothing would have come of it. Judging from the song, he was inspired.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 9, 2012 13:59:42 GMT -5
Don't worry JSD, I have a feeling Paul was trying to write the melody in a certain amount of time as a challenge--finding the right chords and notes for the tune. He says he is inspired at all different times. I don't think he had all the words in place then, though he had the general theme perhaps. I'm sure that took more time to complete the lyrics. Would it make any difference if he were in the studio saying now I'm going to write a song. Lightening can strike anywhere, but if he didn't feel inspired, nothing would have come of it. Judging from the song, he was inspired. Just when I thought you and I were done... Why are you "sure" it took more time for Paul to complete the words? Because that's what you wish for? All we have to go on from Paul is that he set a time limit in which to write the song, and he says he wrote it in that alloted time. (Which was a very short time). We have to assume he wrote the whole thing then and there, words and music. Not that that's a bad thing, as the song is one of the best he ever wrote.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 9, 2012 14:33:54 GMT -5
Don't worry JSD, I have a feeling Paul was trying to write the melody in a certain amount of time as a challenge--finding the right chords and notes for the tune. He says he is inspired at all different times. I don't think he had all the words in place then, though he had the general theme perhaps. I'm sure that took more time to complete the lyrics. Would it make any difference if he were in the studio saying now I'm going to write a song. Lightening can strike anywhere, but if he didn't feel inspired, nothing would have come of it. Judging from the song, he was inspired. Just when I thought you and I were done... Why are you "sure" it took more time for Paul to complete the words? Because that's what you wish for? All we have to go on from Paul is that he set a time limit in which to write the song, and he says he wrote it in that alloted time. (Which was a very short time). We have to assume he wrote the whole thing then and there, words and music. Not that that's a bad thing, as the song is one of the best he ever wrote. You're right, of course. I am not sure about it. But I imagine him working on perfecting the words and adding to them later. It may not be the case. For me, I don't think it would be bad if he wrote the entire song in that short time. JSD thought it would indicate it was a hack songwriting job.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 17, 2012 16:48:41 GMT -5
Boy, you do 5 or 6 of these in a row , you get a little rush!
I'd forgotten how good this one was. It softer than what I normally go for. Paul's voice never goes off into bad territory. The classical instruments give this that arty feeling without putting you to sleep. Nice unobtrusive horns, good guitar work. This is an overall great sounding song, as is the album Flaming Pie.
3.5, 3 in the pole.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on May 17, 2012 16:59:17 GMT -5
3.5. I've never heard this one before. Nice to know there are still some undiscovered gems awaiting me in the Beatles canon.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 17, 2012 16:59:41 GMT -5
OOh, I feel kind of bad, giving this song it's first 3 instead of 4.
In the other threads, I feel the need to read everything before I post. I don't want to repeat someone else's comment, unless I say "I agree with ... ". I don't want to step in the middle of a fight if I can help it. But with the Karlosi Solo Songs, I want to comment, and now rate, before I read anyone else's comments.
One test of a 4, for me, is will it play on the radio? Or better yet, if I were a radio station programer, would this fit in? On this, I'd have to say no.
That said, it's nice to buy an album and find a strong song like this.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 17, 2012 17:35:52 GMT -5
3.5. I've never heard this one before. Nice to know there are still some undiscovered gems awaiting me in the Beatles canon. Excellent! That's part of what this exercise is all about!
|
|
|
Post by theman on Aug 12, 2012 18:04:02 GMT -5
4--One of Paul's better sounding, "older voice", songs.
I would pair this with "Wanderlust" as two examples of songs equal to anything he wrote with the Beatles.
|
|