Date: Oct 4, 1980
Weeks: 3
I think it's interesting to have this song follow right after "Frankenstein" (#295), because they're actually pretty similar in a lot of ways. Both songs have somewhat traditional components, but then there's a percussion-only intermission in the middle followed by some experimental, weird sounds. And yet this song makes it work.
I think the primary reason it works so well is that there's a stronger through-line in this song. The percussion breakdown maintains a similar beat from earlier in the song. The vocals continue sporadically, and connect the song's beginning to its end. The percussion intermission doesn't feel like it lasts nearly as long. It's not that the intermission in this song is any less experimental and odd, it just doesn't seem quite so out of place, nor so aggressive and unpleasant.
This song has two points to recommend it most strongly: the excellent bass line, which stands out and uniquely identifies the song within the first three seconds, and Freddie Mercury's vocals. Mercury is, in my opinion, the best male vocalist who ever worked in rock and roll music. He had a big range and no fear. He sang boldly and highly and intensely, and this song is one of the finer examples of what he could do. The only bad Freddie Mercury song is one where he fails to explore his range, and this is not one of those songs.
One thing that makes this song unique is its restraint with the lead guitar. It comes in and provides occasional accents, but generally it lets the bass guitar carry the song. The odd sound effects scattered throughout are somewhat less successful, and keep the song from getting my unreserved recommendation. It's possible the song might be too repetitive without them, but the lead guitar could have carried that on its own, I think. I'm not sure if the simulated gunfire sound during the lyric "out of the doorway the bullets rip" is clever or silly, but it's certainly attention-getting.
I'm not sure if I've ever really understood the lyrics. On the surface, it seems to be about a street thug gunning down his opponents. He's lamenting the life that brought him here, including the unspecified person who kicked him out of his home, and the song seems to end with him being shot himself due to his dangerous lifestyle. On that level, I guess it works an interesting story, but it's quite dark for a pop song. Some quick research doesn't seem to advocate any alternate interpretations. That really is what it's about. I think it's interesting to learn that Queen supposedly released this as a single because Michael Jackson suggested it to them, because I was thinking the lyrics reminded me most of "Beat It" (#532). Similar songs about street thugs that don't necessarily advocate street thuggery. I saw hints that maybe this song was describing a cowboy, and I can see that interpretation, although to my mind, the music suggests wet streets and back alleys in a 20th-century city.
My verdict: Like it. The bass line and Freddie Mercury's voice are both too great to let any of the small problems I have with the song take over.
Showing posts with label 1980. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1980. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Song #493: "Woman In Love" by Barbra Streisand
Date: Oct 25, 1980
Weeks: 3
This song is so soft and so slow that it's an instant candidate for my insomnia playlist. Can't sleep? Pop on some of the softest, slowest, least interesting music you've ever heard and you'll be off to dreamland in no time.
The music is barely there. A slow guitar strums and a minimal drum beat is present, and there are occasional swells from strings. But even though the music is slight, it's not stark. A stark sound, such as a lone piano or an acoustic guitar, can make a song feel intimate and meaningful. But this sound is just full enough to rob it of that intimacy without replacing it with anything engaging. This music drones.
I suppose the music is so low-key to make sure it doesn't interfere with Barbra Streisand's vocals. I feel like Streisand's singing gets mocked a lot for sounding overemotional in a really fake way. Having listened to this song, I'm not going to argue with that perception. The emotion feels forced, like she's trying to show off her voice rather than convey a feeling.
The lyrics are meaningless. I don't understand what is being conveyed here. "I kiss the morning goodbye, but down inside you know, we never know why." What? We never know why you kiss the morning goodbye? At noon the morning ends and we don't intuitively understand how the rotation of the earth makes that happen? You know we don't know something? Did I know that? What does any of this even mean? And that's just a representative sample. Most of the rest of the lyrics have the same problem.
Not that you'll even notice the lyrics after the music puts you to sleep.
My verdict: Don't like it. This one fails on just about every level.
Weeks: 3
This song is so soft and so slow that it's an instant candidate for my insomnia playlist. Can't sleep? Pop on some of the softest, slowest, least interesting music you've ever heard and you'll be off to dreamland in no time.
The music is barely there. A slow guitar strums and a minimal drum beat is present, and there are occasional swells from strings. But even though the music is slight, it's not stark. A stark sound, such as a lone piano or an acoustic guitar, can make a song feel intimate and meaningful. But this sound is just full enough to rob it of that intimacy without replacing it with anything engaging. This music drones.
I suppose the music is so low-key to make sure it doesn't interfere with Barbra Streisand's vocals. I feel like Streisand's singing gets mocked a lot for sounding overemotional in a really fake way. Having listened to this song, I'm not going to argue with that perception. The emotion feels forced, like she's trying to show off her voice rather than convey a feeling.
The lyrics are meaningless. I don't understand what is being conveyed here. "I kiss the morning goodbye, but down inside you know, we never know why." What? We never know why you kiss the morning goodbye? At noon the morning ends and we don't intuitively understand how the rotation of the earth makes that happen? You know we don't know something? Did I know that? What does any of this even mean? And that's just a representative sample. Most of the rest of the lyrics have the same problem.
Not that you'll even notice the lyrics after the music puts you to sleep.
My verdict: Don't like it. This one fails on just about every level.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Song #484: "Another Brick in the Wall (Part II)" by Pink Floyd
Date: March 22, 1980
Weeks: 4
Ah, I remember seeing the music video for the full version of "Another Brick in the Wall" when I was way too young for it. There's some good old-fashioned nightmare fuel right there.
I've never particularly liked this song. Maybe it's due to that traumatic childhood memory, evoking the video every time I hear it. Maybe it's because I generally enjoyed school. Maybe it's because the song has been taken out of context and misappropriated as an anti-education anthem, and I'm not generally a fan of people who are anti-education. Or people who take things out of context, for that matter.
According to what I've read, the writer, Roger Waters, was specifically writing about his own grammar school experience in 1950s England. "He hated his grammar school teachers and felt they were more interested in keeping the kids quiet than teaching them." (SongFacts.com). That's fair. I certainly felt that way sometimes in school. But I don't think the lyrics successfully communicate that feeling. Instead the song makes education synonymous with thought control, and shouts "Teachers, leave those kids alone." The actual message seems to have been lost during the writing, and it's just anti-school now.
The music is dark 70s guitar rock. It's full of minor chords, and is actually kind of unpleasant to listen to. Obviously that's the artistic intent and I won't fault Pink Floyd for making art. But that doesn't make it good pop music. In fact, this is exactly the kind of song that seems fine within the artistic context of an album, but once it escapes its context it loses a lot of value.
My verdict: Don't like it. Listening to it again now hasn't changed my mind about the points I made above.
Weeks: 4
Ah, I remember seeing the music video for the full version of "Another Brick in the Wall" when I was way too young for it. There's some good old-fashioned nightmare fuel right there.
I've never particularly liked this song. Maybe it's due to that traumatic childhood memory, evoking the video every time I hear it. Maybe it's because I generally enjoyed school. Maybe it's because the song has been taken out of context and misappropriated as an anti-education anthem, and I'm not generally a fan of people who are anti-education. Or people who take things out of context, for that matter.
According to what I've read, the writer, Roger Waters, was specifically writing about his own grammar school experience in 1950s England. "He hated his grammar school teachers and felt they were more interested in keeping the kids quiet than teaching them." (SongFacts.com). That's fair. I certainly felt that way sometimes in school. But I don't think the lyrics successfully communicate that feeling. Instead the song makes education synonymous with thought control, and shouts "Teachers, leave those kids alone." The actual message seems to have been lost during the writing, and it's just anti-school now.
The music is dark 70s guitar rock. It's full of minor chords, and is actually kind of unpleasant to listen to. Obviously that's the artistic intent and I won't fault Pink Floyd for making art. But that doesn't make it good pop music. In fact, this is exactly the kind of song that seems fine within the artistic context of an album, but once it escapes its context it loses a lot of value.
My verdict: Don't like it. Listening to it again now hasn't changed my mind about the points I made above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)