Earl Gray

Earl Gray
"You can argue with me but, in the end, you'll have to face that fact that you're arguing with a squirrel." - Earl Gray
Showing posts with label John Stewart. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Stewart. Show all posts

Monday, December 8, 2014

Published - Part II

    In this series we will examine recently published poems as they might be received in a geek-infested critical forum.  Each post will feature the best work of a different publication.  If you have encountered a piece you'd like to see analyzed and rated (see scale below) please enter the text and author's name or, better yet, a URL below (your post won't be made visible to anyone) or send us, "Earl Gray", a message on Facebook.




     Rattle Editor-In-Chief Alan Fox's "The River" is a crude outline, one step removed from scatterbrainstorming.  Most of it is fat;  the entire poem could be captured in, at most, these 19 words:  

I heard you missed the eddy
and the stream¹ embraced you.
I skip a stone
and watch it sink.

    "The River" was chosen from all others in "Rattle #44, Summer 2014" because it isn't until the second line that we are struck by the lack of craft.  In a generous mood I'd rate it 3 out of 10 (i.e. "Rejected, pending significant revisions").

    For context, we need to check out the competition, direct and indirect.  Compare this flab to Hank Beukema's recitation of John Stewart's "Strange Rivers" (ignoring the repetitive last half minute for now):



    Which experience is more enjoyable?  Reading Fox's prose or hearing Beukema's rendition of Stewart's verses?  (The switch in media from print to audiovisual is part of the point here.)

    It gets worse if we contrast this flat text with John Stewart's song, as covered by Joan Baez:



    We know that poetry was replaced by song on the radio in the 1920s.  Here we see why.  In essence, poetry doesn't understand what it's up against.  How can today's print editors compete with an entrancing voice, let alone masterful music?  By producing shaggy dog stories with linebreaks?

We were col|lege best friends | for three years

     The inclusion of "best" causes a voice/mood problem, blending a chatspeak tone² with a stark theme, but serves to sustain the anapestic rhythm. Note, too, the sonics: alliteration of "We were" and "friends for", then the assonance of short and long "e" sounds in "We...three years". This creates an expectation of more to come. Instead, we get unremarkable reportage. Note that "kayaking" is the only relevant word in this entire strophe...and might work better as a title.

kayaking the rivers of the Pacific Northwest.

     A tip: Avoid plurals and groupings. They detract from the immediacy and our ability to visualize a specific setting.

I cherish our week in Glacier Bay,

     Instead of telling us what the speaker cherishes, try showing us why. Better yet, try showing us why we should cherish these words.

     Nothing in the second strophe before "I heard today" contributes anything but confusion to the narrative.

     The third paragraph includes more distractions. Who cares that it is his new wife? That he is hiking the hills of England?

     Here we see one of the key differences between institutional and independent poems:

into the sparkling waters of memory.

     Incoherence is a facet of academic poetry. Indies tend to have the opposite problem: a lack of subtlety. This last line has no purpose other than to club the reader (tinr) over the head and scream: "THIS IS SAD! SEE HOW THE STONE SINKING IN THE RIVER HARKENS BACK TO HIS FRIEND SINKING IN THE RIVER?"

     You know, in case we missed it.



Footnotes:

 ¹ - "River" changed to "stream" for sonic and rhythmic purposes.

 ² - It may sound too much like "BFF" ("Best Friend Forever") for some. Is "best" really necessary? Or is it an attempt to make the account even more mawkish than it is?



Rating Scale:

##   Action Taken                             Frequency 

10 = Anthologized                             Once every 10 years? 
#9 = Accepted and discussed                   Twice a year? 
#8 = Accepted and featured                    Once per issue? 
#7 = Accepted                                 ~1% of submissions 
#6 = Held for consideration                   ~2% of submissions 
#5 = Recommended for publication elsewhere    ~1% of submissions 
#4 = Rejected, pending suggested changes      ~1% of submissions 
#3 = Rejected, pending significant revisions  ~1% of submissions
#2 = Rejected with encouraging remarks        ~6% of submissions 
#1 = Rejected without comment                 ~80% of submissions 
#0 = "You were joking, right?"                ~8% of submissions 


Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Novel Tree

From "Poetryoke":   "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."



     No doubt you are familiar with Del Shannon's 1961 hit song, "The Runaway", which was used as the theme song to the 1986-87 NBC TV series, "Crime Story".  Thus, 25 years--a whole generation--later this song was being preserved in our common culture.  Similarly, hundreds of songs from the 1960s and later have been covered by today's artists.  Renditions of songs by Bob Dylan, Leonard Cohen and Neil Young are easily recognized by young people today--few of them sung by the original artist.  This longevity drops off as we go back to the 1950s and virtually disappears as we regard the 1940s.  Remarkably, this was about as evident in 1986 as it is today.  That is, in 2014 we might look back more than half a century to the 1960s;  in 1986 we might look back 25 years to 1961;  but, in 1961, we wouldn't look back more than a decade for songs to cover or use in movies or commercials.  Outside the protest genre, at least, our lyrical roots do not go much deeper than the 1960s. 

     The evidence is overwhelming:  the greatest English language lyrics were written in the last 50-60 years.  Why the switch from "songs" to "lyrics"?  Because the most reliable lifespan indicator is not music or performance but words.  

     Note how few songwriters you can name from before 1950.  This isn't a case of generational narcissism.  Even a cursory glance at lyrics by Ferron, Simon and Garfunkel, John Stewart, the Joans (Mitchell and Baez), Stan Rogers, and others should be enough to bring us to this inevitable conclusion:   

   Contemporary Songwriters:   ✓
      Classical Songwriters:   x


     I trust I don't need to convince you that there are no Shakespeares alive today.

         Contemporary Poets:   x
            Classical Poets:   ✓


   Contemporary Playwrights:   x
      Classical Playwrights:   ✓


Alison Pick
     The sense one has is that today's best versers have gone where the money is:  into song lyrics.  True, the vast majority of lyrics suck, as they always have, but we are only concerned with the verses that will survive the test of time.

     What about prose, though?  How do the great novelists of our time (e.g.¹ Carole Shields, Timothy Findley, Alison Pick, etc.) compare to those of the past (e.g.¹ Charles Dickens, Herman Melville, George Orwell, etc.)?  Not as storytellers, mind you, but as writers?

     No, it's not a trick question.  In fact, it's not even a tough one.

     Contemporary Novelists:   ✓
        Classical Novelists:   x




Footnotes:

¹ - Your list is as good as mine.



    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.

Signed,

Earl Gray, Esquirrel





Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Writing Song Lyrics

"Whatever is too stupid to say can be sung."

    - Joseph Addison (1672-1719)



Introductory Lyric Writing:

     Humankind's first musical instrument was undoubtedly the drum.  When Paul Simon went to South America to record "The Rhythm of the Saints" (released in 1990) he was astounded to see Brazilian kids being able to drum for hours, still maintaining a regularity that computerized equipment could barely surpass.   Today, with forms like rap, we seem to have come full circle:  words and drums, nothing else.  As they say in the music industry:  "The beat's the boss." 

Tip #1:  Have your beats fall on important words:  the nouns and verbs that tell the gist of your story.

     As a budding songwriter you want your tunes to be "singable".¹  You want people belting them out in the shower or humming them absent-mindedly as they play their computer games.  You want music directors, agents and producers to think of your pieces as earworms.  You want people to stop hitting their radio buttons when they come across your work.  Next to melody and beat, the most important aspect of your composition is the lyrics--not their meaning, mind you;  just the sounds of the words themselves.  In short, you want your music to be catchy and your words to be memorable. 

Leonard Cohen
And who will write love songs for you
when I am lord at last
and your body is a little highway shrine
that all my priests have passed?

    - "Priests" by Leonard Cohen, describing having one's songs played on car radios

     In this post you will find advice on how to write effective lyrics.  Don't sweat the nomenclature;  you just need to understand a few basic concepts.

     The two things that will make your words unforgettable are repetitions of sounds and rhythms.  You're already familiar with rhymes at the ends of lines.  In song, these don't have to be anywhere near exact, like "mask" and cask".  Virtually anything with the same vowel sounds will do.

Bob Dylan
Yes, how many ears must one man have
Before he can hear people cry?
Yes, how many deaths will it take till he knows
That too many people have died?

      - "Blowin' in the wind" by Bob Dylan

     In addition to rhymes, it is a good idea to repeat other sounds within the lines, especially in words/syllables that will be underscored by beats.  These "reps" are called:

1.  alliteration if they come at the beginning of stressed syllables;  if elsewhere,

2.  assonance if they involve vowels;  or,

3.  consonance if they involve consonant sounds.

     Your chorus is, essentially, one huge mega-rep used to burrow into unsuspecting brains.  

     Clearly, singing takes more time than speaking.  This, itself, helps underline your words, just as over-enunciating them slowly would (e.g. "READ...MY...LIPS...").  A sonnet takes about 65 seconds to recite but Shakespeare's Sonnet XVIII, performed by Pink Floyd's David Gilmour, can take more than twice that long (2:56 minutes, in this case):



Melisma:

    While we're talking about Pink Floyd, consider these two lines from "Comfortably Numb":

Pink Floyd's David Gilmour

I
have become comfortably numb

    How can one word--one syllable, even!--be an entire line?  By having the performer sustain it for more than one beat.  This adds drama, poignancy and, above all, time to the performance.  Note that this elongation almost always involves vowel sounds, and usually long ones:  "pay", "paw", "pea", "pie", "Poe", "Pooh", or "pew" as opposed to "pen", "pin", or "pun", with "pan" lying somewhere in between.  Remember this when you are writing the last--the rhyming--word of your line.  Singers love to milk these!

Accentual versus Accentual-Syllabic:

    Most lines or songs are syllabic:  one note per syllable.  Take, for example, that second line from "Comfortably Numb":

have become comfortably numb 
DUM  de DUM DUM de dede DUM

Earl the Squirrel's Rule #82
    The music and singing both have a set number of beats--four, in this case--per line without regard to the number of other syllables between them.  Beyond that, there doesn't seem to be much of a pattern going on.

     Nevertheless, this "accentual" approach is how most English poetry was fashioned a thousand years ago;  to this day, it is still very common in English lyrics.

     More recent practice has shown that, if we put the same number of other syllables between each beat, we increase the song's singability.  These form units called "feet" which are either 2 or 3 syllables long, each featuring a beat.  That gives us five different possibilities, depending on where the beat lands within the 2- or 3-syllable foot:

1. First of two:  Trochaic (DUM-de): 

"Tommy | can you | hear me?"

   - Sound Repetitions:  "hear me"
   - Source:  "Tommy" by "The Who"

2. Second of two:  Iambic (de-DUM): 

"And we | will run | the rid|ges of | our green | land, Ten|nessee."

   - Reps:  "run" - "ridges", "green land Tennessee"
   - Source:  "Run the Ridges" as sung by the Kingston Trio

3. First of three:  Dactylic  (DUM-de-de):

"Raindrops on | roses and | whiskers on | kittens"

   - Reps:  "Raindrops" - "roses",  "whiskers" - kittens
   - Source:  "My Favorite Things"² by Rodgers and Hammerstein

4. Second of three:  Amphibrachic  (de-DUM-de):

   "It's four in | the morning | the end of | December"

   - Reps:  "four" - "morning", "morning" - "end" - "December"
   - Source:  "Famous Blue Raincoat" by Leonard Cohen

5. Third of three:  Anapestic  (de-de-DUM):

"We crossed ov|er the bord|er the hour | before dawn."

   - Reps:  crossed, over, border, hour, before
   - Source:  "Roads to Moscow" by Al Stewart

     It would help if you were to learn the basics of scansion (roughly:  rhythmic writing) but, for now, let's simplify:

Tip #2:  Keep either one other syllable between each beat or two other syllables between each beat.

     Note that what is considered a stressed syllable in poetry is not the same as in song, where, again, "the beat's the boss."  For example, if you were speaking, this sentence would be pronounced thus:

"And we will run the rid|ges of our green | land, Ten|nessee."

     ...as opposed to the song where, because of the beat, every second syllable is accented:  "of" is promoted to a stress while "land" is demoted to an unaccented word.

"And we | will run | the rid|ges of | our green | land, Ten|nessee."

Sonic Tempo:

     Earlier we mentioned how some vowel sounds are slow (e.g. "pay", "pew") while others are fast (e.g. "pin", "pen").  The same is true of consonant sounds:  "sh" and "j" take much longer than "p" or "t".  For example, compared to "pit", the word "josh" takes forever and a day to say.  To avoid unbalancing your line, then, try to distribute both types of sounds/words evenly within your lines.³

Tip #3:

Do not crowd a bunch of slow sounds into one spot and faster ones elsewhere.


Tip #4:  Better to have one syllable too few than one too many.

     Cramming too many syllables into too few beats can lead to people mishearing your lyrics, as in this famous case of eleven jammed around three:

tell them a hookah-smoking caterpillar



Tip #5:  As in life, if you're going to mess up, do so earlier, not later.

     Here is an example of a great lyricist going wrong:



     Note that sqeezing three syllables before and between beats works okay near the beginning of the line:

And¹ when² you³ rise and listen¹ to² the³ song again

     ...but it fails miserably here, at the end of a line:

there are wings on the raven¹ on² the³ wind

     Much better would have been:

there are wings on the raven wind

In Conclusion:

     I understand that country folk may not be your genre of choice but, on the subject of singability, study the earlier efforts of the master:  John Prine.



     Note that we said your lyrics should be "memorable" or, ideally, "unforgettable".  We didn't mention "discernible" or "intelligible".  Remember the scene from "27 Dresses" where Jane and Kevin butcher the lyrics to Elton John's "Benny and the Jets"?  This reinforces the point that lyrics are about sound, not meaning.



     Songs are about what the audience hears, not what the singer says.



Footnotes
:

¹ - For what it's worth, there is a natural tendency among successful songwriters to write less singable, more complex tunes later on in their careers.

² - Technically, this lyric can be scanned as dactylic, amphibrachic or anapestic.

³ - Some of us geeks believe the same is true in metrical poetry, saying that "all verse is quantitative."  Should all lines of English language poetry take the same time to recite?  That debate rages on.



    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.

Signed,

Earl Gray, Esquirrel