"Waiting for You" or whatever it ends up being named is generally a love song, loving vibe, and all beautiful things.
PEGIDA is none of those things.
So, the lyrics need to reflect the resistance but no-one wants PEGIDA to cross the Rainbow Bridge. We want them to get their shit together as humans before they even think of it.
It's not much of a love song when it goes on about hating PEGIDA but we don't hate them anyway. We're annoyed with the stupid things they do but we don't hate them. Hating stupidity is pointless as the only thing anyone can change is ignorance.
Hate ignorance if you like but that still doesn't get any closer to the lyrics of the song.
The intro part - has no lyrics. It's purpose is to be grandiose and introduce a Heavy Thought.
The rambly part - deliberately repetitious as we're lost and going around in circles. The vocal is spoken and, thus far, only talks about being lost.
The bridge part - There they are, across the bridge ... waiting for you.
Try as I might, I'm not detecting a lot of protest in that.
So
The rambly part needs to be more direct. It's talking to the PEGIDA kid. Yah, because PEGIDA does it too. There are NAZI bands saying join us and that's part of how they beguile them.
We need to do that ... and do it better. The reason we can is we don't hate anything and can play free.
Say there, young man,
they have told you all these stories
The Others will come
and take your life away
but here we stand
No-one wants to hurt you
New friends are calling
is here where you would stay.
Then break to the bridge part.
Cross the bridge
It's waiting for you
etc
This part doesn't seem to need to change in its vibe to much. What wasn't clear going into it is who is lost and who is being called. The rambly part will clarify that so ... on with the show.
As to the musical dynamic, the intro part should define the musical root. The rambly part, technically, should be the dominant minor, and the bridge part is the resolution. Very nice, very nice ... but it doesn't do that.
The question is whether it should. I believe the dominant minor is a fifth above the root but my musical theory words are limited. The purpose in that change is it makes the vibe deliberately disturbing, relative to the root, such that satisfaction / resolution doesn't just come but is required or it leaves a mixed feeling.
Stirring it around. Not recording yet but it is coming into focus.
Assuming there is a change to the musical dynamic, it only needs to happen to the rambly part as it goes up a fifth. That makes the structure I-V-I but I just read a note that most of classical music takes that general form (somewhat). This is not, by any stretch, classical music but the lesson I take is don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.
PEGIDA is none of those things.
So, the lyrics need to reflect the resistance but no-one wants PEGIDA to cross the Rainbow Bridge. We want them to get their shit together as humans before they even think of it.
It's not much of a love song when it goes on about hating PEGIDA but we don't hate them anyway. We're annoyed with the stupid things they do but we don't hate them. Hating stupidity is pointless as the only thing anyone can change is ignorance.
Hate ignorance if you like but that still doesn't get any closer to the lyrics of the song.
The intro part - has no lyrics. It's purpose is to be grandiose and introduce a Heavy Thought.
The rambly part - deliberately repetitious as we're lost and going around in circles. The vocal is spoken and, thus far, only talks about being lost.
The bridge part - There they are, across the bridge ... waiting for you.
Try as I might, I'm not detecting a lot of protest in that.
So
The rambly part needs to be more direct. It's talking to the PEGIDA kid. Yah, because PEGIDA does it too. There are NAZI bands saying join us and that's part of how they beguile them.
We need to do that ... and do it better. The reason we can is we don't hate anything and can play free.
Say there, young man,
they have told you all these stories
The Others will come
and take your life away
but here we stand
No-one wants to hurt you
New friends are calling
is here where you would stay.
Then break to the bridge part.
Cross the bridge
It's waiting for you
etc
This part doesn't seem to need to change in its vibe to much. What wasn't clear going into it is who is lost and who is being called. The rambly part will clarify that so ... on with the show.
As to the musical dynamic, the intro part should define the musical root. The rambly part, technically, should be the dominant minor, and the bridge part is the resolution. Very nice, very nice ... but it doesn't do that.
The question is whether it should. I believe the dominant minor is a fifth above the root but my musical theory words are limited. The purpose in that change is it makes the vibe deliberately disturbing, relative to the root, such that satisfaction / resolution doesn't just come but is required or it leaves a mixed feeling.
Stirring it around. Not recording yet but it is coming into focus.
Assuming there is a change to the musical dynamic, it only needs to happen to the rambly part as it goes up a fifth. That makes the structure I-V-I but I just read a note that most of classical music takes that general form (somewhat). This is not, by any stretch, classical music but the lesson I take is don't make it more complicated than it needs to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment