[David]

You guys are being silly. That one segment in the 2003 doc where Lindsey is suggesting an alternative wording has been blown out of proportion -- by Stevie & all her fanaticals. Lindsey wasn't there to correct her grammar. He was trying to say that he thought the artistic power of that song -- or at least of that stanza -- would be stronger with his suggestion (& conversely that Stevie's wording lessened the song's power). He wasn't playing English teacher!

And every last one of us has done exactly the same thing on this very board. We've all posted opinions that this line or that line would have resonated more aesthetically with a (sometimes slight) change in the wording.

Of course, aesthetic power (appeal, magic, whatever) comes down to opinion, or preference. There's no geometric proof that can be posited to support the popular opinion that "The forgotten chimpanzee" in "Jane" is either artistically weak or strong or anything else. I think it's powerful, myself. It's a song honoring a gal who speaks out against chimp research, so what should Stevie have said? Monkey? Cute hairy primate baby?

One song of Christine's that seems to be everyone's favorite in terms of its verbal power is "Why," but I have always felt that song was kind of weak, lyrically.