Songs that Should have Made the cut...

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by dissention

To be honest, I think Lindsey sounds strained in WISYA.

No need for you to apologize, sorry for thinking you were the one who had said that.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by dissention

That's how I feel about WISYA.

No way. WISYA does not work as an instrumental, IMO.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

but really lyrics are the least important component to a great song.

I'm not knocking an opinion you're entitled to, but for the record, many of us care a lot more than that about lyrics.

- Jake

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

What's written in the middle of the Ben & Jerry's ice cream pic?

I've always torn through the carton too quickly to notice.

- Jake

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

In my opinion the song certainly isn't bad or half-assed... but "cartoonish," to me, implies buffoonery.
And I'm sorry, but I just don't see anything "cartoonish" about a song that features a soulful classical guitar solo, gently sung vocals and a vibe of melancholy.
I think the parts of the song that you're deeming "cartoonish," are simply there because of the time-period in which the song was recorded. As I said, it's pure '80s... and I don't think Lindsey was poking fun at himself OR that particular sound.

I think he was. He took a sound that was very popular in the 80s and used it to over-the-top effect, which I suspect was his intention all along.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I broached the subject of her fame and fortune, and their potential to cause listeners to have a cynical view of certain songs, based on your past comments. You seemed to have a rather disdainful opinion of her singing about those particular problems, citing lyrics such as "I talked to my famous friend last night," and "I sing for the things that money can't buy me," as unrelatable.

The thing with those types of songs is that they'll never reach a large audience, no matter how good or bad they are. It's not that she doesn't have a right to sing those lines, she does. Hell, they might be good in different songs than the final result. But when I critique Stevie's lyrics, I critique them based on two things. One, how they flow together, and two, how they effect me emotionally. Hearing her sing "I talked ot my famous friend last night" doesn't elicit much response from me, but then again, that whole song doesn't do anything for me. As far as "I Sing For the Things," I don't find it unrelatable per se, I just find the message of satisfying yourself in ways unrelated to money to be bogged by down by an "I'll do anything for you, baby" vibe, grating singing, and a tempo that's too slow. I can overlook those shortcomings, though, when I listen to the upbeat outtake that's out there; I quite enjoy it.

Again, I have no problem with her singing about her depression and unhappiness. "Storms" is my favorite song and that thing reads like a goddamned suicide note. But sometimes I feel that Stevie can't see past herself in some songs and the result is that a select few of her songs become exercises in ego stroking.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Billie Holliday wasn't a songwriter nor a musician... and you've stated that part of what makes "WISYA" so rotten to you, is the "lazy songwriting" and "maudlin music."
So, am I to assume that you feel it could have become a masterpiece in Billie's hands, solely on the strength of her singing?
If so, does that then imply that it could have been a masterpiece in your opinion, if Stevie had sung it in a way in which you approve?

Yup, if Stevie had actually sung the song and not droned on like a tone-deaf, first semester music student...I might have liked it. If I can overlook the shortcomings of ISFTF when I listen to the upbeat version, I probably could have overlooked the MANY shortcomings of that particular song if it was simply listenable.

As for Billie, listen to some of her stuff. She chose some pretty awful songs to record, but it were her interpretations and singing that saved the truly wretched ones. She could drive home a songs message like it was nobodys business. Even if the song itself was forgettable, her take on it would be so breathtaking that you couldn't help but be wrapped up in her voice and the message she was conveying.

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

Ah, if only it were the end of the story... but it seems to be the one song we keep coming back to again and again.
In fact, you mention "When I See You Again" far more than I ever do.

Hell, you've got me there. But if it wasn't so wretched and mind-numbingly awful, I wouldn't have to bring it up.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by darklinensuit

No way. WISYA does not work as an instrumental, IMO.

- Jake

Oh yeah, I agree. But if given the chance to hear only music and not Stevie on that song, I'd choose the music.

[darklinensuit]

Originally Posted by dissention

Oh yeah, I agree. But if given the chance to hear only music and not Stevie on that song, I'd choose the music.

Well, that's an improvement. At least you're admitting the song is music finally.

- Jake

[dissention]

Originally Posted by darklinensuit

Well, that's an improvement. At least you're admitting the song is music finally.

- Jake

Don't push it!

[face of glass]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I completely disagree that it was "intentionally cartoonish."

I suppose this all depends on your definition of 'cartoonish'. I personally think that Lindsey has attempted for such an effect in certain songs throughout his career since Tusk.
In fact, I might as well say that every time he uses a VSO in order to sound cartoonish (intentionally exaggerated, or even a tad inhuman, that is), he is trying to insert some sort of humour, or at least some sort of distance into the track. This does not refer to things like the female grunts of the studio "Big Love", which sound very 'human' and not all that exaggerated, after all.

If Lindsey had meant it to be cartoonish, I don't believe he would have wasted such a beautiful and intricate classical guitar line on it, nor sung the verses in such a gentle way.

What bothers me in this part of your post is the suggestion that it is a "waste" to put some sophistication and nuances into a tune that's supposed to be "lightweight" and superficial. This, of course, comes from someone who thinks the lightweight is just as valuable as the "deeper, serious" emotions.
Why would it be a waste anyway? Should every piece of humour that he does be as obviously cartoonish, straightforward and simple in instrumentation (a word Lindsey has used himself when discussing the song) as "Bwana"?
As for his vocal being particularly gentle in "Family Man", I also have to note that it's a way of singing he hardly uses elsewhere. In fact, only "Oh Diane" has a similar vocal on it, and I've never taken that one as a serious confessional piece either.
I do not understand why the song should have a constant stream of humour anyway. If he identifies with the topic (which he does, as I believe [nevermind the poor lyrics], and remember that it shouldn't prevent him from making fun of it as well) then he most likely won't ridicule it all the time.

Plus, the song is a descendent of some the stuff on 'Go Insane,' and a precursor to some of the stuff on 'Out Of The Cradle'... and I don't believe any of those songs were meant to be "intentionally cartoonish," either.

Ah yes, the supposed 'serious' period before the slight throwbacks to Law And Order with the Gift Of Screws material. How could Lindsey have anything so obviously humorous in the middle of it?
May the albums feel serious to you, I certainly do not view them entirely as being such. Not with the exaggeration of the various vocals in the title track of "Go Insane" or the freakish chanting in "I Must Go" (the call-and-answer of "hey little girl, leave the little drug alone", for instance).
Neither is OOTC devoid of humour in the same department, especially when one of the first things that greets us on the album is the chorus of "Don't Look Down". And "Young Mister Rockcock!" is another cartoonish shot as well.

So yes, I think that when he uses the VSO in the ways I stated above I think he has an obvious sense of humour/intellectual distance put into some of the songs.
You can already hear it in "Walk A Thin Line" and the like, with that middle section of "monks chanting in a temple" (as I prefer to put it). There's another song with "a certain melancholic vibe" that has similar tactics in use.
Law And Order and Mirage have all this in obivious use throughout, and it affects Chris' and Stevie's material as well ("Hold Me", for instance).
Of course they are being used on SYW as well ("Illume"! How dares he! ), and once again in places where you wouldn't expect them to appear ("Say Goodbye"). And a new trick is revealed from his sleeve when he distorts the chorus of "Come" to absurd heights. Since that song is, in my belief, a parody on the dominant and possessive male tendencies, it is very appropriate to use them there.
And none of this ever prevents him from directly communicating to us and poking some fun at himself at the same time. That's what the sonic painter (no matter how bad Mari may feel about the constant overuse of this ) is trying to do, he is trying to cross those various streams of emotions together in the same space for a moment.

I think the parts of the song that you're deeming "cartoonish," are simply there because of the time-period in which the song was recorded.

As I stated above, this is not just a typical '80s thing; he has similar attempts at humour elsewhere too.
The song's lyric is a no-brainer, an inobtrusive thing. The song also has a latin/flamenco/Spanish/whatever (those are the various descriptions I've seen) guitar, the tone of which is similarly inobtrusive. So yes, it could be passed off as another piece of muzak to be played while you're making love, if it weren't for those voices. You do not find them humorous, so be it. But they definitely question the whole thing at least.

But the expression of depression and despondency...

Again, I haven't seen any other people but hardcore fans thinking of "When I See You Again" being 'that kind of song'.
For me the depression in "When I See You Again" isn't obvious at all, except for one line: "and she stares at the stairs, ooh there are many things to stare at these days". That's something that fits the usual routine of a depressed person; there's nothing that inspires the person, he/she can only stare. In any way, that line is still possibly too vague for many.
After all, we're speaking of her mature period here, the time when she settled down after years of excesses and got "subtler".
So it is only natural that the depression in "When I See You Again" isn't too obvious, and isn't particularly off-putting either. I can't see the "depression" being the reason for its failure to be recognized as a standard of "Landslidian" proportions because the song could be just another Rumours drama thing for many.
But I'm not going to comment on its quality yet again. It can be a moving song definitely, but that can be said for every Stevie song because of her constant sincerity.
For me it's a song that underlines the one obvious flaw in Stevie Nicks' music for me, her constant seriousness. It's at such a level that it is almost, *gasp*, inhuman. Thank God for her sense of humour in interviews and that she doesn't think of herself too highly.

But then being hugely diverse in music or emotions has never been Stevie's forte.
She does what she knows and feels is the best for her and by gum, it can work often.

The reason why I, too, like to discuss "WISYA" is because I feel the only real attraction in it that comes from Stevie is the vocal. I am not fond of the songwriting, it isn't up to the freshness of the past and there is very little of some of the regained rhythmic sensibilities that she started acquiring back during the making of TISL.
But that's that. No more beating this horse, at least in this thread.

In fact, you mention "When I See You Again" far more than I ever do.

No one can ever ignore "Family Man" either. Hate it through the bottom of your guts but it won't go away. It's out to get you!

[face of glass]

Originally Posted by darklinensuit

I'm not knocking an opinion you're entitled to, but for the record, many of us care a lot more than that about lyrics.

Lindsey Buckingham's lyrics should not be analysed on their own, without the music, unless one is trying to get away from his original intention.
How many of you would care for some of Stevie's lyrics anyway, if it wasn't for the way she sings them? Or, for that matter, the life she's lived. I'm not saying her lyrics are no good when compared to the best of the best in rock music, all I'm saying is that I do not listen to rock music because of its literal content, I listen to it because of the combination of that with the music. Because, frankly, has any rock musician come up with a truly original lyric idea on their own?

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by dissention

I think he was. He took a sound that was very popular in the 80s and used it to over-the-top effect, which I suspect was his intention all along.

If 'Go Insane' and his production on 'Tango In The Night' weren't so immersed in the '80s style, maybe I'd agree with your opinion.
It was a popular style that Lindsey was exploring and experimenting with... I don't see it as him attempting to go over-the-top or to be cartoonish. And while I believe he does infuse lightheartedness into his songs, I don't believe he has ever been intentionally garish, and I certainly don't think he was lampooning '80s music.

Originally Posted by dissention

As for Billie, listen to some of her stuff. She chose some pretty awful songs to record, but it were her interpretations and singing that saved the truly wretched ones. She could drive home a songs message like it was nobodys business. Even if the song itself was forgettable, her take on it would be so breathtaking that you couldn't help but be wrapped up in her voice and the message she was conveying.

Well, that's how I feel about Stevie... even when the song is less-than-stellar ("Docklands," "Desert Angel"), that voice draws me in and blows me away.

But "When I See You Again" isn't one of those less-than-stellar songs for me... it's pretty dang close to perfection.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by face of glass

I suppose this all depends on your definition of 'cartoonish'. I personally think that Lindsey has attempted for such an effect in certain songs throughout his career since Tusk.
In fact, I might as well say that every time he uses a VSO in order to sound cartoonish (intentionally exaggerated, or even a tad inhuman, that is), he is trying to insert some sort of humour, or at least some sort of distance into the track.

What bothers me in this part of your post is the suggestion that it is a "waste" to put some sophistication and nuances into a tune that's supposed to be "lightweight" and superficial. This, of course, comes from someone who thinks the lightweight is just as valuable as the "deeper, serious" emotions.
Why would it be a waste anyway? Should every piece of humour that he does be as obviously cartoonish, straightforward and simple in instrumentation (a word Lindsey has used himself when discussing the song) as "Bwana"?

I do not understand why the song should have a constant stream of humour anyway. If he identifies with the topic (which he does, as I believe [nevermind the poor lyrics], and remember that it shouldn't prevent him from making fun of it as well) then he most likely won't ridicule it all the time.

Ah yes, the supposed 'serious' period before the slight throwbacks to Law And Order with the Gift Of Screws material. How could Lindsey have anything so obviously humorous in the middle of it?
May the albums feel serious to you, I certainly do not view them entirely as being such. Not with the exaggeration of the various vocals in the title track of "Go Insane" or the freakish chanting in "I Must Go" (the call-and-answer of "hey little girl, leave the little drug alone", for instance).
Neither is OOTC devoid of humour in the same department, especially when one of the first things that greets us on the album is the chorus of "Don't Look Down". And "Young Mister Rockcock!" is another cartoonish shot as well.

Don't get me wrong, Gaius... as I just said above, I do believe Lindsey has often infused his songs with a peppy lightheartedness. I'd be blind not to see that.
I just don't believe he's ever tried to be cartoonish... which, in my opinion, is music that is garish and purposefully ridiculous (think "Weird" Al Yankovic).

And if someone is laughing at one of his songs because of his use of a VSO or a toy piano, I somehow don't think Lindsey would take that as a compliment.

But hey, maybe I'm completely wrong.

[Hawkeye]

maybe I'm completely wrong.

yeah but whos to say whats right?

[Johnny Stew]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

yeah but whos to say whats right?

I need somebody to help me through the night!

[face of glass]

Originally Posted by Johnny Stew

I just don't believe he's ever tried to be cartoonish... which, in my opinion, is music that is garish and purposefully ridiculous (think "Weird" Al Yankovic).

I don't know what you think of the voices in "Family Man" then. Do you think they're another example of Lindsey running along with the experiments and the new toys of the '80s? You once spoke of him getting lost in chasing a particular sound and "losing the heart of the song" (again, I don't think one has to take everything he does in terms of 'songs', they could also be taken in terms of aural collages), so is this another example of it?
Musical humour has existed since the beginning of music, obviously. In classical music, for instance, it was almost without exceptions conveyed through the notation (I remember Leonard Bernstein lecturing on TV on a particular Handel piece; the composer reused a quiet snippet from an earlier part of the piece in order to lead people into believing it's the same theme again, but instead followed it with a BANG). When the electric instruments started appearing (leading to the arrival of rock music), it opened a lot of new possibilities for this too.

My belief is that Lindsey has never experimented just for experiments' sake on a finished product. He may have stacks of tapes of such things, like him farting in the microphone, lying around but no, I don't think he ever uses those on finalized products, and definitely not because he just wants to appear "weird and unusual".
It can all be done with a purpose, the same way Stevie can labour on a particular lyric. Whatever the purpose is, however, depends on the listener. We're all entitled to believe what we want, of course.

And if someone is laughing at one of his songs because of his use of a VSO...

Like I said above, I do not think he always uses the VSO in order to create a humorous effect, but he certainly can do it here and there, especially when he makes these exaggerated voices, just like people doing the voiceovers for cartoons. That's what he is doing in there.
Of course, it can also be seen as people making funny voices in everyday life, a thing that is often seen as childish.
And like I said, the childish humour in "Family Man" is tremendously necessary so that the piece won't seem too serious. And with that lyric, it definitely should not seem as such.
Does it make the entire piece cartoonish? No, but I stated that above. Does it take away from the seriousness of the delivery? Yes. Does it prevent one from enjoying the OOTC-level sophistication in the layering of the track? No.

...or a toy piano...

I <3 toy instruments. Hear Talk Talk's "It's Getting Late In The Evening" for a heartbreaking use of them.

But hey, maybe I'm completely wrong.

Johnny, I do not write what I write in order to make people understand "the true, deep-reaching artistry of Lindsey Buckingham" or whatever. I'm just as much in the middle of a dark cave as others are in this matter. Only Lindsey knows what he's trying to achieve in his pieces, and I bet that sometimes even he doesn't know what he's trying to do (see a particular quote at MadnessFades.net).
I have a passionate connection to music and I try to desperately put that into words, often failing (Frank Zappa said it's like using dancing to describe architecture). Some people here are drawn to the lyrical content (in a delivered form, possibly) the same way I'm drawn to the musical one.
I think musical content can be analysed in a somewhat similar way to the lyrical analysis; a particular sound might not be there just because 'it sounds funny', for example.
In Lindsey Buckingham's work I have constantly found lots of things to analyse, while still retaining the emotional connection to it.
I don't think the analysis can increase the enjoyment of something, or make one like a piece more though. It's still through the emotions that we connect to something, through those a piece will either rise or fall in our eyes.
Enough fooling around now for me.