What's so wrong with writing in the third person?

[Johnny Stew]

Perhaps this is better-suited to the Chit Chat Forum, but since there has been a lot of discussion and debating in regards to "Thrown Down" being written in the third-person, I thought I'd post this here.

I have to admit that it kind of surprises me that it seems to matter so much to quite a few people, that the song was written this way, and that these people feel that fact lends a certain blandness to it.

I venture to say that the vast majority of novelists write in the third-person, and any number of songwriters too.
Granted, writing in the first-person is most effective in regards to songwriting, because it makes it all the more personal... but if one is trying to tell a story, and doesn't necessarily want the listener/reader to know it's about your own experiences, then third-person point of view is ideal.

I borrowed this comment from a site on writing styles....Third-person viewpoint is the most popular method used today. As with first-person viewpoint, the writer becomes the viewpoint character and sees, hears, touches, wants, and remembers only what that character sees, hears, touches, wants and remembers. The only information readers are given is the information the viewpoint character has (except for things that can be demonstrated in dialogue or body language or innuendo).In "Thrown Down," Stevie is telling the story of two former lovers, who are at a turning point in their relationship.
Past hurts have been dealt with, and they can once again remember why it is that they ever loved each other in the first place.

Given the soap opera-like history of Stevie & Lindsey, it's easy to assume that the song is written about them, which could be exactly why Stevie chose not to write it in the first-person.

Perhaps she wanted to leave the listener with some level of ambiguity in regards to whom exactly it is that she's singing about.

She's telling a story here... perhaps a little parable of sorts.
So, in my opinion, the third-person viewpoint is perfect in this situation. The song can now be applied to any number of people and their relationships, and doesn't *have* to be about Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham.

Any thoughts?



Johnny Stew

[ricohv]

Doesn't Stevie write in 3rd person a lot? All of her He saids/she saids seem like 3rd person to me!

[sulamith]

Very good points, Johnny.

I think Stevie does choose to write in third person alot because it allows her to deflect some of those heavy feelings away from herself. I believe I have even read some articles where she implies that that is exactly why she writes it that way.

While writing her prose is very therapuetic for her, helping her work through her own issues, she wants others to be able to read their own meanings into her words.

She also has stated numerous times that it is important to her that each person be able to interpret her songs in way that speaks to the individual. She doesn't necessarily want the listener to know exactly what she is talking about. (for me, that's the fun part!)

It is no small feat to take feelings and situations as unique as Stevie's and be able to turn it into something that others can take and apply to their own situation.

She's been touching numerous people a long time with her writing style, and it's definitely not for everyone.

If Stevie isn't your cup of tea, then just go listen to whoever you do like, BUT you'll probably just find more third person!
lol!
-Sharon

[CarneVaca]

Well, Johnny, since you asked. For starters, that excerpt you've got there doesn't sound like it's in reference to songwriting. If it is, I would say whoever wrote it is wrong. The most compelling songs are written in the "I" and "you" voice.

Don't mix apples with oranges. Writing isn't just writing. A brochure is quite different from a record review, and a newsbreaking story is not a business plan. I edit reams of copy week in, week out. I've had my hands on some compelling copy in my day, and unfortunately too often I've had to salvage writing that really wasn't worth salvaging. In some cases, the writers simply didn't understand the format. For instance, I got articles that are written as chapters of a book. And that simply won't do for my readers.

But I digress. How to explain this? Third-person songwriting can be compelling, but usually the first- or second-person songs are more interesting. They are more personal and the listener tends to relate to it way more. That is the difference between Go Your Own Way and Thrown Down. For instance, if I say in a song:

"He said he hated her guts."

Well, that's a pretty clear statement, but all it does is report on something. However, if I say:

"I hate your guts."

Now you have a more powerful statement because it's more direct and conveys emotion more effectively. Those words pack a hell of a wallop.

I hope you can see the distinction. It's about the power of the word.

Having said that, I will admit that some third-person songs are quite engaging. Here's an example:

Just a girl who can't say no
And her sweetheart on parole
Parents named her Jupiter
To bless her with a lucky soul
He's a boy who never cried
When they locked him up inside
And she nicknamed him her teardrop
For the tattoo by his eye

That's from "Jupiter and Teardrop" by Grant Lee Buffalo. Right off the bat, you have an unbelievably powerful statement. You know exactly what the writer means. Then cleverly the writer tells a huge story in a few lines, wrapping up the verse with the wonderful teardrop tattoo image. I get goosebumps when I hear this.

Now here's a bit of "Thrown Down:"

Thrown down
Like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to her
(So overwhelming, baby; there's nothing left to say)
That he could be good for her
(Don't say you're sorry, baby; think you should walk away)
They should be together.

OK, "thrown down like a barricade" is not bad, though not brilliant either. But then she goes into "maybe now he could prove to her." I would say that "maybe," "now" and "could" are superfluous words. Stevie should have pushed herself and come up with a more elegant way to convey the message. "So overwhelming..." Hey, if it's overwhelming, don't tell me, show me. How about something like, "She tried to tell him, but the words fled," or something like that. Now you're planting the image in the mind of the listener. You can actually see this person struggling to come up with words that just aren't there. "That he could be good for her." Again, I'm sure there are more elegant and engaging ways to convey that thought.

Frankly, I think Stevie has gotten kind of lazy about her writing. I would say to her: Write less and rewrite more. It's a pain, but the end result will be superior.

I hope that helps.

[CarneVaca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by sulamith
Very good points, Johnny.

I think Stevie does choose to write in third person alot because it allows her to deflect some of those heavy feelings away from herself. I believe I have even read some articles where she implies that that is exactly why she writes it that way.

BINGO! There you have it. If I can tell the actor is just acting, the actor loses me. If the actor becomes the character, I'm in.

She also has stated numerous times that it is important to her that each person be able to interpret her songs in way that speaks to the individual. She doesn't necessarily want the listener to know exactly what she is talking about. (for me, that's the fun part!)

That may be fun to some, but frankly, that is a cop-out. It's OK to write some lyrics that are intentionally cryptic, but if you're doing it all the time, the issue may well be that you simply aren't skillful enough to do it better.

She's been touching numerous people a long time with her writing style, and it's definitely not for everyone.

Excellent point. There's always a group of people that is going to like something. This is a good place to point out that Stevie has written some tremendous songs in her career. No doubt.

If Stevie isn't your cup of tea, then just go listen to whoever you do like,

Forget tea. Give me bourbon!

[Johnny Stew]

CarneVaca, you make some excellent points.
Like I said in my first post, I agree with the opinion that, when it comes to songwriting, first-person perspective IS preferable, because it makes the song more personal, and often more engaging.

However, in the case of "Thrown Down," I think the third-person narrative is far more suited to the song than if Stevie were singing, "You fell for me again, I watched it happen," or "You held my hand, I listened to what you had to say."
I think this song comes off a tad self-centered when sung in the first-person.

I mean, really, how can you sing about someone wanting you back *without* sounding full of yourself?

First-person works in a song such as "Enchanted," where she sings, "you thought you saw something in my eyes... it's a shame that you wanted me, you didn't try," because she's talking about someone being into her, but not taking a chance on pursuing her.

But to sing about someone throwing themselves at your feet, and asking for you to give them another chance, would be the epitome of narcissism.

By the way, you asked me to not compare apples to oranges (writing novels vs. writing songs), and yet you edited these song lyrics in a very journalistic fashion.
In journalism it's a necessity to be succinct, but in song-writing, without some of those "superfluous" words, you'd be changing the melody of the lyric left and right.

Really, try to sing "she tried to tell him, but the words fled," to the melody of "Thrown Down."
It simply doesn't work.
On paper it may be effective, but it's terribly dry if you try to sing it.

While "Thrown Down" may not be a brilliant song that's lyrically on par with "Silver Springs," or "Gypsy," it's still quite engaging, and evocative in its own right.

With any music, your level of enjoyment has a lot to do with what you bring to the song.
Every song touches some people, while leaving others out in the cold.
And when a writer has a style as distinctive as Stevie's, the line between the former and the latter is all the more pronounced.

But I definitely appreciate your opinion. I was curious as to what exactly it is about the perspective in this song that you don't care for, so I'm glad I asked. :)



Johnny Stew

[sulamith]

Cop out! Arrrgghh!

Aw, c'mon Carne......don't be such a curmudgeon......

You know you put on your chiffon bathrobe and dance around to "Dreams" everynight!

hee hee!

Meanwhile I'll just put on a little Seven Wonders or something.

[seteca]

IMO, a song written in the 1st/2nd person has an element of (even if its been written totally in the past tense) suspense to it, as though there is "unfinished business". In a love song particularly, its use usually conveys an image of confrontation between the two lovers, or ex-lovers. Think of the lyrics to "Big Love": "You said that you love me, and that you always will", or "The Chain": "I can still hear you saying you would never break the chain." This form of writing comes across (at least to me) as a lot more powerful than the 3rd person because it's as though you're witnessing a verbal fight or a confession, live.
Whereas, a song in the 3rd person is like a story book, so you know there's going to be an "ending", regardless of whether its happy or sad. This means that there is no "confrontation factor" involved i.e. the writer, if talking about himself/herself in the 3rd person, has accepted that "it is over", and is now telling his/her story. This method can still make a very good song, but I can't think of a single song written in the 3rd person that has moved me like one written in the 1st/2nd. My favourite songs are those where the writer is using the music to express feelings that he/she couldn't do by simply using words (on their own), so if I hear a song in which the singer is telling a story, it makes me wonder what drove the story-teller to write it in the first place (if anything.) Just makes it sound totally impersonal.
Now in the case of Stevie, we all know for a fact that her songs are about as personal and deep as you get, regardless of what person they are written in. However, so MANY of her songs would have moved and touched me more if she had written them in the 1st/2nd person. The fact that "Storms" is written in the 1st person, and is one of the most powerful and touching songs I have ever heard in my life, confirms this for me.

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

p.s. Equally as powerful (but in a very different way) as 1st person, is 1st person PLURAL.....a la so many Pink Floyd songs. It's a very rare form of writing, but pull it off properly (as they seemed to effortlessly do with every song that they used it in) and it sounds absolutely amazing.:nod:

[Steve]

I think Stevie does choose to write in third person alot because it allows her to deflect some of those heavy feelings away from herself.

Well, duy....now tell us something we don't already know.:o

[Steve]

I meant duh.:wavey:

[CarneVaca]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Johnny Stew
First-person works in a song such as "Enchanted," where she sings, "you thought you saw something in my eyes... it's a shame that you wanted me, you didn't try,"

Now, there's a truly wonderful lyric. I remember singing that many times when I was, oh, about 14. I'm going to have to play that song now.

But to sing about someone throwing themselves at your feet, and asking for you to give them another chance, would be the epitome of narcissism.

True, yet to write something that you think anyone else is going to read takes a certain amount of narcissism, even if you're a bit insecure about it. And to write something that you are going to perform in front of an audience takes even more narcissism. I have yet to meet a writer that didn't have that bit of narcissism in him/her. Except for myself of course. :]

Really, try to sing "she tried to tell him, but the words fled," to the melody of "Thrown Down." It simply doesn't work. On paper it may be effective, but it's terribly dry if you try to sing it.

You're absolutely right, and I figured someone would make that point. I don't mean that literally the words I suggested would be the way to go; I was merely trying to convey the idea of show, don't tell.

In fairness, Stevie has written some wonderful stuff, especially when compared to a lot of the drivel that passes for lyrics these days. I do feel, and this happens to a lot of writers, that she has fallen back on what's comfortable. She is not a particularly good self-editor. We know that from anecdotal evidence about the length of certain songs she's written, such as Sara and Silver Springs, which had to be pared down. If she asked for my advice [how's that for narcissism], as I said before, I would tell her: Write less, rewrite more.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by sulamith
You know you put on your chiffon bathrobe and dance around to "Dreams" everynight!

Great! That's the last time I tell you anything in confidence.

[DownOnRodeo]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Great! That's the last time I tell you anything in confidence.

Aw come on Carne, we all know that's not true!

... It's Gypsy you dance to!:laugh: ;)

[DownOnRodeo]

Pronoun

They say that you said that I saw you say you know
But it’s so overwhelming all these pronouns in a row
You could sit outside the store and stay
I could dedicate this to you for him

Pronouns
Like a barricade
Maybe now you could see through them
To find if there’s any meaning
To find a real first person

(About just how difficult it had been to comprehend me
Pronouns…)

[Brad]

Originally posted by seteca
p.s. Equally as powerful (but in a very different way) as 1st person, is 1st person PLURAL.....a la so many Pink Floyd songs. It's a very rare form of writing, but pull it off properly (as they seemed to effortlessly do with every song that they used it in) and it sounds absolutely amazing.:nod:

Seteca,

Just out of curiosity, could you name a few of the Floyd songs you're talking about? I'm a huge fan, but I'm unfamiliar with what "first person plural" is, so I'm not sure which ones to think of!

Thanks,

Brad

[SmthngOfADreamr]

Personally I have never really been a fan of Stevie's songs written entirely in the third person. If you take a look at what most people, even casual fans, would consider her best work, songs such as Dreams, Sara, Storms, Beautiful Child, Gypsy, Edge of 17, Stand Back, and even songs from TISL such as Sorcerer, TISL, Planets... NONE of it is written in the third person. The obvious exception to me is Rhiannon, but even that is written in a different perspective that Thrown Down. Rhiannon does not rely on the "he said, she said" or "he did this, she did this" forumla that Thrown Down is based upon. Rhiannon is a simple narritive, and the "she" and "her" in the song are defined. There is not this anonomous "She" and "He."

I think the reason that some people, including myself, dislike the "he said she said" third person in Stevie's writing is simply because it can be cumbersome to listen to and I think it is easier to convey feelings and emotions, which are primary elements in most of Stevie's work, if you write from the first person. Imagine Storms written in this third person, or Beautiful Child, or anything really that she wrote in the first person. It awful! "She had always been a storm?" "He said it will be harder in the morning. She waits for him to say just go. His hand held hers..." I mean I could go on and on. When you write about the things that Stevie writes about, I think it's obvious that first person is just better (at least to my ears!)

[seteca]

Originally posted by Brad
Seteca,

Just out of curiosity, could you name a few of the Floyd songs you're talking about? I'm a huge fan, but I'm unfamiliar with what "first person plural" is, so I'm not sure which ones to think of!

Thanks,

Brad

Hi Brad, nice to meet a fellow Floydian on The Ledge!:cool:

First person plural is basically using "we". As many of their songs have some sort of social and/or political meaning, or at least innuendo, it allows them to sound like "the voice of a whole generation". Unsurprisingly, its use in their songs is often coupled with the 3rd person plural i.e. "they".
Here's some examples:
"When we grew up and went to school there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could" - The Happiest Days Of Our Lives.
"At a higher altitude with flag unfurled we reached the dizzy heights of that dreamed of world" - High Hopes.
"We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control" - Another Brick In The Wall Part 2.

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

[Bella Figura]

Joe, loved your poem... :lol:

I don't have not much to add intellectually to this discussion except to point out, personally I've always thought that writing in the third person was more difficult then in the first person since the majority of songs are written in the first person. Not many songwriters do third person and in fact Courtney Love expressed in an interview that it was one of the reasons, she is such a huge Stevie fan.

To me writing in the third person implies additional thought and even wisdom, and twisting what seteca said to support my case"a song in the 3rd person is like a story book, so you know there's going to be an "ending", regardless of whether its happy or sad. This means that there is no "confrontation factor" involved i.e. the writer, if talking about himself/herself in the 3rd person, has accepted that "it is over", and is now telling his/her story." There is a sense of contemplation and lessons learned to a third person story...

The first person seems to be a more immediate songwriting style which conveys strong emotion but not always a care and contemplation...Carne illustrates this perfectly with his example ""I hate your guts." Now you have a more powerful statement because it's more direct and conveys emotion more effectively. Those words pack a hell of a wallop." but do just emotions, in the end, have anything really to say, any sincere meaning and any learned truth...

In the end, to me, music can just be an expression of raw emotion but great music should also can also convey a songwriters knowledge, experience and even life philisophy. Music, that can rise above just raw anger, raw hurt, raw love, raw longing and express profound ideas, create a deeper meaning is much more interesting to me...

but then again, sometimes, I just wanna dance... :blob1:

[jwys_soapbox]

Over the years, I've thought a lot about the perspective Stevie uses in her songs. In relation to Thrown Down, I have two points to make. The first is that her use of third-person in songs that are likely about herself is an effort to diffuse or even cover the power she has (or maybe wants to have) in her relationships. The second is that Stevie often confuses the issue by switching from third to second person.

In relation to my first point, I think it is unquestionable that Stevie is a powerful woman. Anyone that can build and sustain a career like hers has to be powerful--a born leader. The downside of being powerful, however, is that you can't flaunt it and be very likable. One's appeal as a "star" is related to how well one'e audience can relate to you. Could someone come off as sympatethic if he or she openly discusses the amount of power he or she possess and uses in dealing with others? I would say it is more likely one would come off as conceited or vain. In my observation, conceited and vain performers are few in Rock--especially if they are female. Female rockers walk a thin line between disclosure of their strength and the necessity of being "womanly." Their audience is primarily male so they have to, in some way, also seem as if they need their man. Can you imagine Stevie without her association with men like Buckingham? Her entire career has had him somewhere in the background of everything she writes: Stevie and Lindsey in love, Stevie and Lindsey breaking up, Stevie and Lindsey are apart but still getting over each other, Stevie and Lindsey are friends, etc. etc. etc. I offer the following as an illustration of what I mean, it is based on lyrics found on SaraRhiannon's Stevie Nicks Underground site...

He fell for me again, I watched it happen
Every day, day by day...
But more important... night by night
I watched it all come into play
He held my hands, I listened to what he had to say

Thrown down... like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to me
That he could be good for her
And that we should be together

I say I'm sorry, now I should walk away
But it's so overwhelming, I have nothing left to say
I can sit outside his door and wait...
I can dedicate my pain to him

Thrown down...
Like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to me...
That he could be good for me
And we should be together
(Thrown down...)
About just how much he never really told me,
Thrown down...
Ooh, about how difficult it had been to be without me...
Thrown down...
Thrown down...
Thrown down...
Ooh, he fell for me again...
I watched it happen
Thrown down...
I watched it happen...
Thrown down...
I watched it happen...

I have edited the above into the first person. How do you like the narrator now? I don't think she's as appealing as she is when Stevie tells her story. The story goes from one where Stevie is omniscient to one where she is the subject. Either way, you can judge the subject as you will. I would say she's certainly realistic, but not very deserving of sympathy--her heart is closed off to any future with this guy who clearly means well and loves her. Whatever way you judge her, how does Stevie come off? In the third-person version, Stevie is safe, she's not hard-hearted and somewhat braggy ("that guy told me he loved me again, what am I supposed to say to that? I just said "I'm sorry you feel that way"). Instead Stevie is just the reporter and is safe from any ill felings we might have about the subject. Another song to consider in relation to use of the first person instead of third and how the change would effect the narrator is "Sweet Girl." Instead of a story of a woman who gives up her personal life for her career, we have Stevie wining about how bad she's had it over the years.

As for my second point, what is it about Stevie switching from third person to second ("you say you're sorry, you should walk away"), who the hell is the you? Is it the guy or girl? In the above, I assumed it was the girl, but I could have easily made it the guy. Stevie does that in several songs and it drives me nuts. If we have any idea about her feelings on the matter, they are confused by her switch from an observer to a participant in the events.

Anyway, that's enough for me. I've probably pissed a couple of feminist off and God knows who else. My intention is not to stereotype female rockers, just to relate what I've observed.

John

[Johnny Stew]

I agree, John.
As I expressed in my earlier posts, I'm definitely of the mind that in some songs... "Thrown Down" in particular... Stevie would simply come off as conceited, if she were to sing in the first-person.

I'm not saying that I prefer that perspective over her songs featuring first-person narratives, just that in some cases it works better in the third-person.

And I know what you mean about her switching from third- to second-person, but I kind of have a theory on that.
To me, it seems that she intentionally sets up the story, and then switches over in order to "talk" to the characters in question.
Offering her wisdom on the situation, as Bella Figura suggested.

From the writer's guides I've read, that's perfectly acceptable (at times), though it's not done very often, because it's difficult to pull off.

As for "Love Is"...
I think that the first verses in the song, are implied to be quotes.
She's relaying the conversation, without the addition of "she said" or "he said" (terms she doesn't use until later in the song).

"Do you know what this is?"
"No, i don't... but whatever it is, it's very powerful"

"You know that I cannot stay"
"Yes, I know"
Etc., etc.

Re-read the lyrics, John, imagining quotation marks around anything that has "I" or "you" in it, and I think you'll see what I mean.
When you think of it in these terms, she never really leaves that third-person narrative.

Again, it's left open enough for us to interpret that it was *her* who had this conversation with someone, and yet, she could also have been an outsider listening in.


:)
Johnny Stew

[Brad]

Originally posted by seteca
Hi Brad, nice to meet a fellow Floydian on The Ledge!:cool:

First person plural is basically using "we". As many of their songs have some sort of social and/or political meaning, or at least innuendo, it allows them to sound like "the voice of a whole generation". Unsurprisingly, its use in their songs is often coupled with the 3rd person plural i.e. "they".
Here's some examples:
"When we grew up and went to school there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could" - The Happiest Days Of Our Lives.
"At a higher altitude with flag unfurled we reached the dizzy heights of that dreamed of world" - High Hopes.
"We don't need no education, we don't need no thought control" - Another Brick In The Wall Part 2.

:wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

Wow. Apparently my four semesters of English did me a lot of good! I was looking for something much more than "we"! Thanks for the info.

Brad

[sulamith]

You guys are really turning this into an interesting discussion. I totally agree with the point about Stevie using the third person to diffuse some of the heavy emotion as I said before, then a "Duh" response from someone, that is exatly what I meant. It keeps the listener from saying, "Oh, there she goes again....whining about her life......pining over Lindsey when she was the one who left him." I think the third person takes that and flips it around. It does draw you in, makes you want to know more about this "person" she is talking about.
I also very much enjoy the change to second person, because she does keep you guessing as to who the "you" is! Sometimes it is her, sometimes it is him.

Like in "Dreams", the first line is

Now there you go again you say
You want your freedom

This line has confused many a-FM listener because they think, wait, I thought she was the one who broke it off (at least that time), but what I have come to realize is that those are not her words to him, but most likely his to her, and the same thing later in the song, the question

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

I believe these again are his words to her, being angry over the way she changed once they joined FM. By using this, and by keeping you guessing, she takes a situation where she might just come off looking like a shallow bitch and by the end of it she has you eating out of the palm of her hand. Amazing. It softens a raw emotion.

I really like Thrown Down, but I know it is not the pinnacle of their work from this last year. I'll agree the lyrics are not an example of her mystical best. I'm going to hold my opinions until I hear the whole thing.

[The Tower]

Originally posted by sulamith
Like in "Dreams", the first line is

Now there you go again you say
You want your freedom

This line has confused many a-FM listener because they think, wait, I thought she was the one who broke it off (at least that time), but what I have come to realize is that those are not her words to him, but most likely his to her, and the same thing later in the song, the question

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?

BINGO!!! Sulamith, you have always been my favorite Ledgie... We think so alike.

Perspective is EVERYTHING. So, sometimes third-person is necessary to convey an idea of separation. While I haven't heard "Thrown Down" and I'm not thrilled by the lyrics one bit, I DO respect Stevie for her ability to dig down into the emotion of a song and really find the core.

[DownOnRodeo]

lol Thanks Bella Figura, thought my half-assed comedic efforts had gone to waste!

OK, I'll join the academic analysis session if I can cause I just noticed something about the third person while listening to it (yes I finally dloaded it).

One of the conceptual problems, versus the TISL outtake, is that Lindsey is singing. The way it's written, it cant really be about those two .. yet you sort of want it to be. Alterantively, Lindsey singing about some friend of Stevie's romantic miseries just doesn't ring true. In Dreams the others just help out on the vocally explosive phrase 'Thunder only happens..." which is just some "commonaly known proverb", whereas only Stevie sings the bit about the material situation "Women they will come and they will go..you will know etc". In Thrown Down, Lindsey is singing substantive content 'about the story', not just airy phrases like 'Thunder.." or "Thrown Down like a Barricade".
In fact i think if he only backed up on "Thrown down like a barricade" it'd work a bit better.

:confused:

[Sarah]

Originally posted by Bella Figura
I don't have not much to add intellectually to this discussion except to point out, personally I've always thought that writing in the third person was more difficult then in the first person


I have to agree with you. It is my opinion that 3rd is a more difficult voice in which to write a song. I'm not sure why that is. Itmight be because 1st is a standard, and if you use 3rd, you don't really have a template to go by.

That being said, I've been thinking about this topic in 2 ways. (Which conflict.)

1. Variety is the spice of life. I think it would be somewhat sucky if every song used the same type of voice, sounded the same, told the same stories, etc.

2. People don't like change. We become so uncomfortable around things we're unfamiliar with that the simple fact that it is alien inhibits us. This is a lot of the reason, in my opinion, that many people do not like newer music. They automatically brush it off as saying it sucks after they've heard a song 2 times. I used to do that. My friends would listen to, in my opinion, the most God-awful things and it would totally grate my nerves. Until I thought about it, and I was like, "K. I'm going to try to listen to this for what it is and see if it really does suck." (Half of it does, Half of it doesn't.)


So, I guess it depends on the type of person you are. If you like to have what you listen to mixed up a little bit.. or if you're perfectly straight with listening to one song or one cd on repeat because you know you like that and you don't want to deviate from your routine... then you probably won't like anything that gets off the track that your mojo is on.

I dunno.

Sarah

[Rumours]

I don't know, I guess maybe I don't analyze as much as others do. I tend to get more interested in the lyrical content OTHER than the "He said" "She said" or "I said" stuff. Take for instance the line from Thrown Down that I've had in my signature for a while now (hmm, it HAS been there a LONG time, maybe I need to think about changing these things more often--but that's another can of worms!). The "day by day" "more important, night by night" comments caught me more than the fact that it's He and She and not Me. It's the lyrics that make you go "hmmm", or "wow", that I'm more in tune to, than if she happens to be writing it like she's talking about herself, or if she writes it like she's speaking of someone else.

Just some ramblings by me....I've found the conversations going on here to be very interesting....thought I'd add a tiny bit in myself.

Stephanie :wavey:

[CarneVaca]

Guys, a couple of points about all this. And let's keep in mind a very important thing here, ultimately, there is no right or wrong. It comes down to what really speaks to you. I can look at a piece of writing and decide if it's good or bad. If it is particularly bad, from the standpoint of the mechanics of writing, most people who understand the mechanics will agree with me. But if it is bad writing but still evokes certain feelings and strikes a chord with the reader, then maybe it ain't so bad. I can think of a pretty good example: "The Perfect Storm" was one of the most compelling narratives I've ever read, but all along reading the book I couldn't help thinking how much better it would have been if the writing were better. As it was, it was written at sixth-grade level. Compare it to "A Civil Action," and you might see the difference. "A Civil Action" is a wonderfully engaging narrative that was crafted very skillfully by a top-notch writer.

But I digress again. Sulamith, your point about the first line in "Dreams" really only reverberates with those of us who are big fans of the band. The listening public in general probably never thought about it much or cared. They like the song because it's a good song with engaging lyrics and a nice, if disarmingly simple, melody. And they might be able to applk it to their own life experience.

The other point I would make is that some songs are not worth writing. I think Stevie has done some of that, and I don't even mean "Thrown Down" because I think "Thrown Down" is an OK song that could have been considerably improved if she had been a better self-editor.

[Hawkeye]

Ok guys I'm a bit confused on this 1st 2nd 3rd person stuff. So i don't know what i like better. Can some one tell me what stevie songs ARE written in 3rd person, and which are written in 1st.

[sulamith]

DownonRodeo, I think your parody of Stevie's lyrics is DEAD ON, lol, and I thought it was very funny! Sorry I didn't address it in my post.

The Tower, thank ya, darlin', for your compliment,
and Carne, I know, what you said about my comments on Dreams is only applicable to us hard-asses, but then again, so is this ENTIRE conversation. Like someone else commented, I don't think the general public cares about all the first, second, third person stuff anyway. Either they like the vibe or they don't. Whatever, baby. I still luv you, too!

And Hawkeye, it's hard to give you a short, definitive answer, because Stevie changes person so often. First person is the use of "I", second person is "you", and third person is "he, she, or it". I'm not trying to be a smart ass. I just wasn't sure about what you wanted to know.

-Sharon

[Hawkeye]

can you give some examples of songs written in third person.

[Sugar]

Rhiannon
The Highwayman
When I See you Again (ironically enough)
Ghosts
Alice
Sweet Girl (parts of it anyway, "She said "What do you..")

That's all I can come up with quickly...

But really, is Stevie's writing in the third person more annoying than her VERY liberal use of the word "well", especially in concert?

Thrown Down in concert:

Well, she watched it all come into play
Well, maybe now he could prove to her

:laugh:

You know that's how she's gonna do it...:lol:

[Cristian]

Originally Posted By Carne Vaca
I would say that "maybe," "now" and "could" are superfluous words. Stevie should have pushed herself and come up with a more elegant way to convey the message

I don't agree with Carne's analysis of that first verse of "Thrown Down" which led him to think that the lyrics were not good, or were badly-edited. In poetry (or in songwriting, for that matter), there's always the recurse of using words that could reforce the meaning of what's one trying to say. And those words are helping to making that message strong... let's see:

"Thrown down, like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to her
That he could be good for her
And that they should be together"

The narrator is seeing a relationship, like watching it on a TV, or from a different perspective. She is not living the situation, or dealing with her (that's when the use of the third person form becomes more relevant), she's only an observator. But she knows that the situation (that meeting of two old lovers) has no apparent meaning. At least it does not mean something that they could live in the future, something concrete. It is very vague. The future is dark with that person, as was the past. Again, it's not her the one who's living the experience , therefore the third person is an excellent resource. We know she is, but only because we know the story. A badly-informed listener would say that this is a nice story. And if he has good ears (or eyes to read the lyric booklet), he'd read that verse like this:

"Thrown down, like a barricade
Maybe now he could prove to her
That he could be good for her
And that they should be together"

because the intention is to leave one with the doubt. What's going to happen in the future? Who knows. Who cares even. The future is so dark that the words are stressing that point. And those become very important in that proces. By no means "superflous", in my humble opinion.

In the third person discussion, there is of course a thing about different songwriting styles, which, as Carne so elloquently put, is a matter where there's no "right" or "wrong". Let me put it this way. In their early years, The Beatles wrote songs "for their fans", as they expressed in their Anthology book... their songs were written in first person because they liked to put themselves in the ficticious stories that they told whilst doing the songwriting process. That, the youth and the first attempts on songwriting led to results such as:

Love, love me do
You know I love you

which of course made their point. They made an total change when (in their own words) realized that it was more "interesting" to say "she loves you" instead of "I love you", and they built a very sophisticated lyric (for the time, and for their ages) whilst writing a third-part story:

She says you hurt her so
She almost lost her mind
But now she says she knows
You're not the hurting kind
She says she loves you

This song would lose all the impact if written in first person ("I love you")... But that's a particular case. Paul McCartney in particular, stayed with this style of writing stories about other people ("Eleanor Rigby", "Rocky Raccoon", "Maxwell's Silver Hammer", "Another Day" are perfect examples)... John Lennon never liked the style, even though he used techniques of changing songwriting manners. For instance, he had, in the very confessional Plastic Ono Band album, a song called "I Found Out", about his own childhood traumas and stuff. He had this verse:

I heard something 'bout your ma and your pa
They didn't want you so they made me a star

but later on as it was going to become a "confessional" song, the change made it finally appear as:

I heard something 'bout my ma and my pa
They didn't want me so they made me a star

and it was more "impactant". Like that, in the first person.

So basically, it's everything about styles applied to certain songs. In the case of "Thrown Down", to me, it works. But yet Stevie can be very reiterative in the use of that way of writing, so I understand the fact that it can upset some people.

Interesting discussion. :)


Song of the moment - Jane

[Vianna]

Hawkeye...


Thrown Down is third person.

He fell for her again
She watched it happen

as opposed to

Every night you do not come
Your softness fades away

there she's talking to someone-2nd person

Later

But never have I been a blue calm sea
I've always been a storm

she's talking about herself-first person



=:-)

[CarneVaca]

Christian, you just made me realize for the first time that "She Loves You" was written in third person. How about that? I always considered it a second-person song, but upon closer inspection, I believe you are right, my friend.

Often, it just comes down to perspective. And, ultimately, it is perspective that matters most. For perspective becomes reality, doesn't it?

This is one of the most thoughtfull threads I've seen here. Let's have more of these.

[ricohv]

Thanks to The Ledge for these disections of the Mac/ Stevie's songs, etc. for now I know I am not alone in my "Mac nerdiness"!

The only thing I can think to add to this post:

For years people criticized Stevie for "fluff" songwriting and what seemed like narcissism. Now that her newer writing seems to be less mysterious and less"mystical", most of us die hards clammor for classic Stevie: witches, gold dust women and highwaymen! Her new songs are still catchy with some of her classic idiosyncracies , but personally I Miss You or That Made Me Stronger packed not half the punch of Candlebright or Sorcerer.

JMO: KEEP PULLING OUT THE OLDIES!!!
Ricoh

[Bella Figura]

talk about "macnerdiness", I'm in the movies over the weekend watching the previews and in my head pops, what if "Thrown Down" is really from a third party perspective??...Stevie could be observing and commenting on Christine and John's relationship during the Dance tour, after all from what I understand of their relationship breakup is that Christine left because of John's drinking and John was the one left behind, still in love. make John and Chris the characters in the song and Stevie the observer and the song still rings as true as if the narrative is about Stevie trying to "cover up" her relationship with Lindsey...

[Les]

Great thread!

Bella...about John and Chris, that's a very interesting possibility. It brings to mind a comment from Stevie in the 97 Rolling Stone article: "John drinks too much. And that's why Chris and John aren't together. Period." There was no lost love between them, but there was that "barricade." ;)

[Sorcerer386]

Well Bella Figura, you beat me to it, lol. I was sitting in class today and I was thinking about Thrown Down, and I thought, you know, this song could actually have nothing to do with Stevie. It might not have anything to do with Fleetwood Mac. Stevie has said that she writes songs about OTHER people in her life and their relationships, and maybe this is one of them. I know I do that a lot...

Also, as I was writing down the lyrics to Thrown Down in my boring Recitation class, I realized how much I like the line "you can dedicate your pain to him..." Just a side note...time for more class.

[Johnny Stew]

With about four (give or take) multi-page threads focusing on "Thrown Down," I'm guessing the song isn't quite so uninteresting after all! :laugh:



Johnny Stew

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I've always loved when she writes in 3rd person...because its like when she says "he fell for her again..." i get the feeling shes really reflecting there...because "her" is Stevie...and she kind of steps outside of herself and writes in 3rd person, which is great...i love when she refers to herself as "she"

[Sorcerer386]

I'm sure a lot of people by now have heard Christina Aguilera's song Beautiful by now, which I admit is a very good song and a VERY powerful video. However, the one thing that struck me about it when I was listening to it for the first time was the first chorus when she says:
" I am beautiful...words can't bring me down, I am beautiful in every single way..."
On first listen without hearing that the other two choruses swing out of first person, I was thinking, "Wow, she's really got that ego pumping doesn't she?" I was taken aback by the fact that she's calling herself beautiful...while it's nice she exudes confidence, it just sounds very egocentric (again, this shock was slighted after hearing the rest of the song).

There IS a point to this. It's an example of how writing in first person sometimes isn't the best thing. Stevie received guff for saying "I spoke to my famous friend last night," and I bet it would have been blunted if she'd said "She spoke..." or "You spoke..." Which, personally, something that I find myself doing a lot when I write is referring to myself in second person, which is really strange afterwards. For instance, one thing I wrote (not sure if I'd want to call it "Hourglass" or "Mad World") says:
"You say you know everything, you know it's very far from true"
And then I slip back into saying "I." I don't know if that shows a weakness to my writing or just an obscurity, but the point is sometimes it just sounds better to the WRITER to talk about it in a different sense.

[Steve]

With about four (give or take) multi-page threads focusing on "Thrown Down," I'm guessing the song isn't quite so uninteresting after all!

Of course it's interesting. It may be the first track from the new CD. That doesn't mean many of us don't have our obvious concerns.;)