Hey guys, did you know that actors make up the words in movies as they go along! That’s why they seem so real!
That’s the same as rock groups! They make up all the lyrics too so there’s never a need to compliment the actual writer when you talk about lyrics!
Or you could remember that “Along Comes Mary” was written by Tanden Almer, not the Association.
And it could be a California vs. New York thing, but I never once heard a real live human being refer to marijuana as Mary Jane or any derivative of that name. Other than this song, a reference to Mary was just a reference to a girl. And there are thousands of songs to Mary that have nothing to do with pot.
I’ve always gotten a kick out of the guy who plays the recorder sideways. Must be a flute player who couldn’t get used to holding the instrument straight.
So wait…it’s *not *an homage to marijuana? I just laid my ignorant soul bare for no reason? Well, I don’t know if I feel better or worse now. Would I appear any less stoopid if I said I never knew the words until I read the OP? I can definitely see why one would think it’s a drug reference.
Exapno Mapcase - Perhaps I missed it but I don’t believe anyone has said that The Association wrote the lyrics. I knew better when I posted the thread.
WOOKINPANUB - I saw a clip somewhere on Youtube of the recorder guy saying some years later that at least some parts of the song related to marijuana.
twickster - Sorry. I may have been around a long time, but I don’t spend all that much time in CS. I was aware of the restriction on quoting lengthy passages from books and articles but had no idea that it also applied to song lyrics, mostly, I suppose, because when you put them all together they come to lots fewer words than many of the article and cite quotes I see posted all the time. My apologies. The offense wasn’t intentional.
It’s just that nobody mentioned the actual writer in a thread about lyrics. A Pet Peeve.
The number of words is never a criterion for copyright violation. The standard has no numeric quantity at all.* All the excerpt has to be is a substantial taking, with substantial nowhere defined. However, song lyrics are generally so short that anything more than a verse is considered substantial, and even a line or two can get you into trouble. (Publishers’ lawyers won’t let you quote even that much. When asked about case law that forbids it they’ll change the subject. But you still won’t be allowed to quote.) Quoting the entirety of the lyrics (except for the odd special case like Tequila) is never acceptable.
*You will see postings all over the internet saying that 10% is okay or similar numbers. Totally bogus.
Fair enough. It’s a cool song with what I think is really great word play. The writer certainly deserves credit, and in hindsight I should probably have acknowledged him in the OP.
Fair enough as well. I would have thought that since anybody is free to sing a song - which they are - then they would also be free to speak the words in conversation. And like I said, I thought length would make it okay too. So ignorance fought. Thanks.
I always pictured her as a girl who was pretty, youthful and exuberant, but also not one to tolerate any bullshit. For some women this is a function of their attractiveness to begin with - their looks assure them of an ample social and romantic life anyway, so they don’t feel as much of a compulsion to put up with things like dishonesty.
I heard a radio guy once say that Windy was not really written about a girl (despite being referred to as “she” in the song), but actually about a hippie guy friend of the group. Dunno if it’s true, though. And it’s possible at this point, even the songwriter doesn’t know.
Well, as it happens I was reading up on this very issue just last night. The song was written by a woman named Ruthann Friedman, who according to Wiki had this to say on the subject:
Mostly the wordplay is found in the rapid-fire rhyming of words and sounds within the lines of the verse. (“only”/"lonely; “time”/“rhyme”; “verse”/“curse”; "kicks/“chick”/“pick”, or the repeating “s” sounds in “gassed and flacid kids are flung across the stars”.)
It comes into play also in the mix of rhyming and phrasing, such as the line wondering “Or will their waking eyes/ reflect the lies/ and make them realize/ their urgent cries for sight no more”. It says a lot in few words and is phrased in an unusual, dramatic and interesting way.
And of course when you look at the words within the context of the mellowing or other effects of smoking dope, which is what even some of of the band’s members have admitted the song is about, the cleverness of the phrasing becomes even clearer.
If you look up the full lyrics on the internet and read along while the song plays, I think you’ll get a better understanding of what I’m talking about.
Oh OK, I see that now. Between that and the tempo (or pacing) changes it makes for a very unique song. I still can’t figure out if it’s about a very special girl or a drug.
Of course, as noted by Exapno Mapcase, the band didn’t write the song - so their feelings about what it is about are not particularly more relevant than any listener (who, of course, is free to derive whatever meaning he wants).