Why some musicians don't explain the clear meaning behind obscure lyrics

This isn’t a confusing lyric: the guy knows not what the song he is singing means. That is, he’s singing along with a song on the radio without understanding what the lyrics mean. Kurt Cobain didn’t like people like that, although he was open about the fact that his lyrics usually didn’t have any literal meaning. They expressed whatever conflict was going on in his head, but he didn’t tell stories in his songs for the most part. (Polly, About a Girl, and Lithium come to mind as exceptions.)

It’s true that a lot of rock musicians just don’t want to de-mystify their lyrics and a lot of songs don’t mean much of anything - but when their is a clear meaning or a story that inspired the song, you need to remember that song lyrics are not essays. Writing exactly what you think is not necessarily that interesting. Writing something that fits the music and that listeners can interpret their own way and find meaning in - even if their version is very different from what the lyrics mean to you as the writer - is art. Cobain could be a snob (and so what if he was?) but he didn’t like people who heard what he was singing without thinking about what he was doing.

Because they’re just looking for words that rhyme. They don’t always give a shit that it means anything. But when fans start attributing deeper meaning to everything they say it goes to their heads.

And why must there be a meaning at all beyond “I thought the words sounded nice / matched the music / just randomly appeared and matched the ryhthym of the song”?

Sure, some songs have meaning - the songwriter is trying to tell us something. But I find the idea that all songs must have some deep message to be such a “poseur” position engaged by pseudo intellectuals that get a kick out of demonstrating how clever they are.

That’s actually a pretty easy song to parse. It means “I’m kinda dumb but I’m okay with that.” The lyrics are phrased in a way that suggest a Zen-like quality to the singer’s ignorance but it’s not a song one should mine for great truths.

David Bowie said at one point that sometimes he just writes down words, cuts them out and mixes them up to make new lyrics. That would explain a lot about some of his songs, to be honest.

Kurt Cobain, in particular, admitted to writing the lyrics first, then deciding their meaning later (if ever). This, in my mind, diminishes his standing as a lyricist.

There is a passage in “Come As You Are” that relates how he was furiously scribbling random changes/additions to a song on the way to the recording studio.

Perhaps this is how mulatto/albino/mosquito/libido was born.
mmm

Honestly, I had the same idea back in high school when we would discuss the deeper meaning of some passage in a novel. Like I remember discussing the deeper meaning in Moby Dick (and that was a boring book). I think there was an entire chapter describing a rope, which was supposed to represent some deep idea. Maybe Melville just really liked describing ropes. And it seemed clear to us as students that Dickens was padding things because he was paid by the word.

In Bloom was about as stated already about the new found “mainstream” fans that came flocking to Nirvana shows that Kurt held some resentment towards and it also had to do with his close friend Dylan Carlson.

Kurt was always obtuse when it came to his lyrics as he put it " he didn’t like to get in peoples faces" about them. And some of his songs have no meaning what so ever, the music was primary, lyrics secondary a phoenetic compliment to the music.

I always thought the open lyrics for Lounge Act was brilliant. “I’ll start this off without any words…”

You seem to require that the art in the music is: a) clearly defined; and b) wholly contained in the lyrics

I know of no such constraints

In the case of this song - well, it worked…on some level, in terms of its popularity and endurance over the past ~20 years.

Wouldn’t a better exercise be, given the nature of Art, for you to ask yourself what responses this song created in you - and whether you feel that those responses were due to the intention of the artist or your critique of their intent?

John Lennon agreed with you.

That’s unfortunate. There’s really no reason to look at it that way.

I don’t think that’s unusual at all.

There’s sweet justice in many peoples belief Mr. Jones (Counting Crows) is all about Adam Duritz’s dick. That’ll teach him to write obscure lyrics. :smiley:

I was down at the New Amsterdam
staring at this yellow-haired girl
Mr. Jones strikes up a conversation
with this black-haired flamenco dancer

I’ve read that Paul Simon said the words “Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio …” had no real meaning, and that they just sounded good when they popped into his head.

He knew he wanted a hero, but picked Joe’s name because it scanned vs. Lou Gehrig, AFAIK…

Free publicity. People still analyze American Pie, and it’s been 40 years! Had MacLean explained the lyrics, it would have died down by now.

No worse so than Lennon/McCartney’s approach to songwriting.

For me, the method with which a songwriter gets to the end product is irrelevant. The song’s interpretation and acceptance are ultimately subjective to the listener and whether the song was written as a drunken scrawl or first vetted through a think tank of philosophers and linguists makes no difference.

Here’s Wikipedia:

Simon’s favorite player was Mickey Mantle and he’s said he had the same conversation with Mantle when he asked why Simon had used DiMaggio instead of him.

Years back, I heard Bob Dylan on a phone-in radio show called “Rockline.” For about an hour, the show went like this:

DJ: Bill in Omaha, you’re on the air with Bob Dylan.

Bill: Bob, my favorite song of yours is “Gates of Eden>” Can you tell me what that song means?

Dylan: Well, I guess whatever you think it means, that’s what it means to you.

DJ: Ooookayyy. Susie in Dubuque, you’re on the air with Bob Dylan.

Susie: Bob, I’ve always loved your song “Isis.”Can you tell me what it means.

Dylan: Um… well, whatever you think it means is what it means to you, I guess.

DJ: Uh huh… Nick in Memphis, you’re on the air with Bob Dylan.

Nick: Bob, can you tell me what was going through your mind when you wrote “All Along the Watchtower”?

Dylan: “Welll… that was a long time ago, so, I guess I’d rather let you decide what it means, and then that’s what it means to you.

DJ: AAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!

Okay, I made up the part about the DJ screaming, but otherwise, this is EXACTLY how the show went for an hour. It must have been as painful for Dylan to do as it was for anyone listening.

But really, what’s Dylan supposed to say? A few things to remember:

  1. Dylan wrote “Gates of Eden” 46 years ago! Do you really expect him to remember exactly what he was thinking when he wrote a song 46 years ago?

  2. Suppose, just suppose there’s a lady who’s always thought of one of Dylan’s songs as touching and romantic. Heck, she and her husband have always regarded it as “their song.” NOW suppose that Dylan actually intended it to be a dark, bleak cynical song, Should he tell her? Or isn’t she happier with her own interpretation. Dylan may have learned, over the years, to let listeners find their own meanings and interpretations, regardless of his original intent.

To use a slightly more concrete example of what Diogenes was getting at, I’ll go back before the era of the rock & roll singer/songwriter.

In the song “Moon River,” Johnny Mercer came up with the memorable lyric “My huckleberry friend.” A great line but… what does it mean? People used to ask Mercer that all the time, and he gave several DIFFERENT explanations that couldn’t ALL be true.

At one point, Mercer explained that it came from childhood memories of picking huckleberries with his friends. At other times, he said it came from thoughts of Huckleberry Finn sailing on a raft with his best friend Tom Sawyer.

Was Mercer lying either time? I don’t think so. Rather, I think he came up with a cute line spontaneously, a line that gave him the syllables he needed and somehow conjured up a delightful feeling or image. He may very well have intended to find a more appropriate 4-syllable adjective later (My sentimental friend? My melancholy friend?) and then decided “huckleberry” somehow just WORKED better than the alternatives.

Mercer probably didn’t KNOW exactly where the line came from. But so many people asked him what it meant that he wracked his brain and came up with different plausible explanations for how he thought of it.

I guess I’m in the minority here (or just a hopeless poseur). I personally like to know the artist’s intended meaning if there is one. Maybe it’s because I’m not a musician but lyrics are every bit as important to me as the music. And maybe it’s because I’m a would- be writer, but I personally have never written anything without having something I am attempting to say. Of course I realize writing lyrics is probably different.

This makes me think of the oft told story about the real meaning of “Every Breath You Take”. I find it a fairly uninterseting song so it’s no skin off my nose but I, like the vast majority of people, assumed it was a song of love and devotion and not evil and obsession as Sting claims. Hell yes I’d rather know that before I play it as my wedding song (not that I ever would).

Before Mike Nichols approached Simon to write some songs for “The Graduate,” Simon had been working on a song about the 1940s, entitled “Mrs. Roosevelt.” He had hit a wall with that song, but after meeting with Mike Nichols, he dusted off “Mrs. Roosevelt” and changed it into “Mrs. Robinson.”

We can’t know what the lyrics to “Mrs. Roosevelt were,” but I imagine the song was reflectng on the fact that, in the Forties, America had heroes and icons like Joe Dimaggio and Eleanor Roosevelt, whereas the America of the Sixties just didn’t have such heroes.