NEW SECTION FEATURING ADVICE FOR BUDDING SONGWRITERS
FROM PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN THERE, DONE THAT.....AND SURVIVED..
THIS TIME IT'S NASHVILLE STUDIO MAN DAVID ROBINSON OFFERING SOME POINTERS ON THE THORNY SUBJECT OF ORIGINALITY.
The followiing text originally appeared on the newsgroup alt.rec.songwriting and any references to other's work is to be seen in that context. David is replying to fellow lister Cyndy...
"The issue of originality, over-used rhymes, and clichés
comes up often in songwriting. It seems that in critiques, that is the first
thing that is usually pointed out. But I have thought a lot about this lately.
I think in trying to help the writer it gives us something to point to and
say, a-ha this is your problem, when in reality the song may just be weak
overall."
Speaking of critiques, your opening lines were so good, Cyndy, that I saved
that post. I happen to agree with you so far....
"One of the reasons I think it is a good time to bring this subject up, is
the recent postings of some very original lyrics on this newsgroup. I certainly
hate to be the one to put someone down for original lyrics, especially since
there are so few of them, but I feel like I just have to say, for the most
part, they are too original for me. I do not mean to say, however, that there's
not an audience for that type of thing, it's just not me."
Here you almost lost me. You're saying 'original lyrics' and then that they're
'too original.' What I think you're talking about is some of the more abstract
writing coming from our new Goth friend. While some of his references are
obscure and very abstract, he's not completely original (check out "Christ's
Entry Into Brussels In 1889" by James Ensor at the Getty Museum, or the latest
coffee table book that pairs images from it with Bob Dylan's 1965 masterpiece,
'Desolation Row'). He's putting a macabre spin on Christian spirituality,
which isn't all that new or original. He might deny the influences, or even
cite wholly different ones, but I don't think originality is the word you're
looking for. Until you correct me (or I find out later in this string) I will
assume it's NOT.
"But I think this brings up an interesting dilemma.
Just how original can you be in writing songs? I view songwriting as almost
totally opposite from poetry. In poetry, to me it seems, the writer tries
to obscure the meaning. While in songwriting the meaning has to be apparent.
I know a lot of us say (myself included), "Well, I really just wrote this
one for myself." And I know that we do write things sometimes just because
it feels good to us at the time without the consideration of what anybody
else may think of it. But, I still think the ultimate goal, and the art of
songwriting is to connect with other people".
This is a conundrum I've been wrestling with for years; it started somewhere
near the end of my degree studies and intensified when I moved to Nashville.
But first things first: 'good' poets don't try to 'obscure the meaning.' Poetry
isn't about obscuring meanings, it's about expression and creativity and many
of the same things songwriting is about (it's just done differently). But
poetry has never been an instrument of mass media the way songwriting has,
and as a result doesn't pander obsessively to popular tastes the way Pop songwriting
does (I'm including all of Rock, Country and a few other genres in the term
'Pop songwriting' here). And really, Pop songwriting HAS to pander to those
tastes, otherwise it wouldn't be 'Pop.' Of course, everyone has their own
variation on this, and SHOULD. I'm sure you could find at least a half dozen
people on this list that would despise the very idea of 'trying to be a Pop
songwriter' (of any stripe). I think your analysis in the end, that songwriting
is about COMMUNICATING with other people, most closely resembles my own intentions
though. At one time, if all I did was express myself, that was enough. But
now I find that my writing has to be more efficient, it has to reach other
people as well.
"Some people write for themselves and some people write for other people;
each deserves the audience he asks for." (Paul Leka)
"What I have found in my own writing, is in order to make this emotional connection,
I cannot avoid clichés and over-used rhymes. For me, it seems like people
relate better to simple words and ideas that they have heard in the past,
and they almost 'expect' to hear something familiar. I will try to change
them around a little, try to mix in some not so used rhymes, and try to come
up with original themes, but that is about all I can do. If I get too original,
people just do not respond. Of course my biggest concern is that this may
be due to my lack of skill as a songwriter."
Around here, if your writing avoids the clichés and whatnot too cleanly, you're
seen as a kind of 'songwriting snob.' The same goes for musical terminology;
if I mention key signatures or tonic chords too often, other musicians get
self conscious and start to take offense. Heaven forbid I get on a technical
bent and start talking about phase relationships and stereo imagining in the
studio--then I'm written off as a techno nerd junkie wanna be.
Beginning songwriters don't take note of clichés; it's only the intermediate
and craft-conscious writers that worry about them. Successful and (usually)
rich songwriters seem to be oblivious to them. I think the real point is to
make that emotional connection; you have to notice when you're writing above
the audiences' head, so to speak. As far as clichés go, well...I'm conscious
of them, but the way around them is to use the same or similar terms in a
new way, casting new light, etc. (what is that all the books say? 'Breathing
new life' into them?). The trick is to do it in a way that's on the same intellectual
level as the original cliché (that's my guess, anyway). When I first began
writing, I barely had a grasp on rhyme at all, much less perfect rhyme. Looking
back on older pieces, it wasn't until I 'got serious' about songwriting that
I fell into perfect rhyme and started using the overused rhymes and clichés.
Once I started developing some craft and technique though, I gradually got
away from it. The most important thing to me now is to tell the story, and
then make it rhyme. If you want to hear someone that has a good handle on
re-using clichés, give a listen to David Wilcox. He turns them inside out
all the time.
"What I really think though, is that it's just a very thin line, and that's
probably what makes songwriting so difficult. On the one hand you have to
be original, but on the other hand not so original as to lose your audience.
And lyrics depend so heavily on the music, that it is just about impossible,
I have decided, to give or get an accurate critique with lyrics only. The
simplest lyrics may sound profound with the right music and it is possible
that beautiful lyrics may not hold up too well when set to music."
Yes, I agree completely. Songs are comprised of three elements: words,
music, and performance. A given song may lean heavily on one element more
than the other two, but they all three need to be there. And again, the main
point is that you COMMUNICATE with your audience, not how many clichés you
do or don't use. Make them part of the song; think of their reactions as an
integral part of song structure.
"I have been attempting to analyze songs lately, to
see what does and doesn't work. I have found that clichés and over-used rhymes
appear a lot in songs you hear on the radio. And while it seems I have found
this is especially true in country, it is not only limited to country. I hate
to bore you guys to death with this but just as an example of the opinion
I have just given I have posted these words to what I consider a great song.
Written by Bob Dylan, many may have heard it recorded by Garth Brooks. "
The radio is not the first place I'd go in search of great songwriting technique.
Consider that 'great songwriting' and 'hit songs' are not necessarily the
same thing, and in fact the two rarely coincide. It's usually not until long
after a song has been in circulation that it can be fairly judged both a 'hit'
and a 'great' song.
"To Make You Feel My Love When the rain is blowing in
my face..."
Obviously, this isn't Dylan's best work. I think it achieved radio airplay
simply because Dylan wrote it, and Garth Brooks sang it. Dylan probably wrote
it BECAUSE Brooks was going to sing it, and those kinds of contrived collaborations
rarely stand up over time. It reads like a Dianne Warren lyric, and needless
to say she isn't my favorite writer...Brooks could have chosen from hundreds
of Dylan's songs and come up with a much better record, but he probably wanted
something written specifically for him...tsk, tsk, what a waste. That said,
Dylan can be very masterful when it comes to using clichés. A better example
might have come from one of the Traveling Wilbury records, where they ALL
trotted out their favorite clichés, but made them work. Dylan in the guise
of a Bruce Springsteen wanna-be, lampooning a lot of Springsteen's work...Tom
Petty lampooning Dylan, and Jeff Lynne doing his best George Harrison impersonation,
with George standing right next to him, no doubt. I'm getting off the point,
though, which is: you can write clichés poorly or well, it depends on how
much effort you put into it. Most people don't put much effort into it, and
I think that shows through. Maybe it's because they don't know HOW to put
the effort into it, and maybe some of them couldn't be bothered with putting
any effort into it at all. But you're right, you can go through any catalogue
of songs and find clichés galore from some of the best of writers (don't forget,
though, that some of these clichés were the result--after the fact--of what
were once some very original ideas and writing).
"I have also saw read critiques where over-rhyming,
as in this case with the first three lines rhyming, is discouraged. So once
again we're led back to the question of what does and doesn't work."
Not everybody is a great critic...some people are just working concepts out
for themselves. Maybe we should put that in as a notice or warning (what's
that Latin phrase for 'Buyer Beware'? Tempus Fugit? Nolo Contendre? Something
like that?!?!? I forget...) , especially to 'newbie' writers--something like
"I'm not an expert, but..." I'm always suspicious when I see a critique that
starts out, "In a recent songwriting workshop," especially if it continues
with either 'held by the local NSAI chapter' or 'moderated by such-and-such,
a famous songwriter/lecturer/really nice guy who has all kinds of amazing
credits.' Somewhere within the critique you are bound to find the phrase,
"that just wouldn't sell in a) Country music, b) on the radio, c) if you pitched
it to TAXI" or some other purported vehicle of songcraft or wanna-be arbitrator
of taste.
Don't get me wrong, I think NSAI is a really good organization for people
interested in developing their songwriting chops. Lots of good information.
And I'm not knocking what's his name, the famous songwriter/lecturer/really
nice guy who has all kinds of amazing credits, either. I just don't think
he can give you all he knows about songwriting in thirty minutes, or even
an hour. I've studied with successful songwriters for months, even years,
and they couldn't give me the whole enchilada. And not all of those guys are
particularly good at articulating what they do know in front of an audience
composed of many different skill levels, either. On the other side of the
coin you have a lot of people who latch on to the latest catch-phrase and
recite it incessantly whether it has any bearing on the lyric at hand or not
until they become a cliché unto themselves...a three hour workshop doesn't
make you an expert on song or lyric writing technique; neither does a degree
in Songwriting. Even having a 'hit' song doesn't make you an expert; there
are plenty of good songwriters out there who couldn't explain how they do
it to save their life, and couldn't even tell you if what you have written
is 'good' or not.
What makes someone an expert? Being right ALL the time. Not just now and then,
or once in a while...but looking at each lyric from a fresh perspective, determining
what does or doesn't work about it (as opposed to some criteria set forth
in a book you may or may not understand for what a given line is SUPPOSED
to do), and analyzing it from that perspective. Personally, I can't do that,
which is one of the reasons I don't spend nearly as much time writing critiques
as I used to. I just don't have the energy to be right for all of the time
it would eat up, even if I could be right all the time. Which I can't. I'm
all for going over a lyric with or for someone now and then, but being a critic
is actually a full time job, a specialty all of it's own, and I'd rather be
a songwriter...
"A man must serve his time to ev'ry trade, save censure--critics are all ready
made" (George Gordon, Lord Byron, English Bards and Scotch Reviews)
"I wrote this post..."
Well, Cyndy, I'm glad you did. It really made me think. And now that I've
vented, I'm going to bed.
David Robinson
DAVID ROBINSON
is a Nashville based ex Navy electronics specialist and Berklee College of
Music graduate who also writes songs.
For further info. about his career and his studio work see WHISKEYJACK