|Earl the Squirrel's Rule #50|
That's not an opinion. It's a statistically verifiable, scientifically quantifiable fact. Take all the songs you know. Read their lyrics. Recite them at an open mike, if you dare. See how few songs work as poetry. Aside from some verses by Leonard Cohen (we've mentioned "Famous Blue Raincoat" in this context), Bob Dylan and a handful of others, the success rate for lyrics is closer to .1% than the 10% suggested by Theodore "90% of everything is crap" Sturgeon. No matter how small that number is, it exceeds the number of successful¹ contemporary poems (i.e. zero) by a factor of infinity.
Think about that. Over the last half century, as bad as lyrics have been, their success rate as poetry is infinitely better than poetry's success rate as poetry.
On the one hand, saying that lyrics don't make good poetry is like saying apples don't make good orange juice. They are entirely different media and art forms. On the other hand, as the exemptions prove, there is no reason lyrics have to suck. What is more, songs with substantial lyrics outlive "silly love songs". Four decades later, "Imagine" gets far more air play than the cringefests that made the Beatles famous: "She Loves You", "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", "I Saw Her Standing There", etc.
"Ruins" by Cat Stephens
Ruins posted by Earl Gray on Vimeo.
Aside from the video's use of multiversing, where the audio and visual verses feature parallel themes, what is remarkable about "Ruins"? It is singing but, let's face it, it ain't opera. It also lacks the sparkling technique and mindblowing tropes we look for in literary verse. It ain't poetry². Rather, it is the evocative modulation of tone, pace, pitch and volume we might expect from a competent storyteller. It is what is missing from poetry.
Ruins", just speech with music. I don't mean background music, as in videos like "Beans". I mean a song told rather than sung. If you live where there are red squirrels--we grays are too shy for this--you have heard pairs of them doing this every spring and fall. One makes a patterned sound, like the beatbox performer in an a capella group. The other is the poetry performer. Indeed, they call it "speaking song", where "speaking" can be a verb ("I am speaking [a] song") or a modifier ("Do you prefer Spoken Word or Speaking Song?"). Those who may think the two are arguing would half right; this is part of their mating ritual. Trust those reds to make an art form out of a lover's quarrel!
|Earl the Squirrel's Rule #1|
|Earl the Squirrel's Rule #106|
This exercise can be a form of entertainment, "poetryoke", where the idea is to perform the words as an actor rather than a singer.
Spoken songs could also evolve into a legitimate art form among humans, as it is with red squirrels. Songwriters may write their verses with an eye toward dramatic performance--speaking--rather than singing. The notes might exist only in the author's imagination--the piece might never be produced with singing--but the melody could hover like a ghost in the audience's mind.
¹ - As measured by those who can recite it.
² - That is, at first blush, it ain't what many would consider great poetry.
Your feedback is appreciated!
Please take a moment to comment or ask questions below or, failing that, mark the post as "funny", "interesting", "silly" or "dull". Also, feel free to expand this conversation by linking to it on Twitter or Facebook. Please let us know if you've included us on your blogroll so that we can reciprocate.
If you would like to contact us confidentially or blog here as "Gray for a Day" please use the box below, marking your post as "Private" and including your email address; the moderator will bring your post to our attention and prevent it from appearing publicly.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Earl Gray, Esquirrel