In the context of the Genesis catalogue, it's memourable for how forgettable it is!
Quite.
Yes
-
-
It just seems strange to me that a band with such enormous musical skill and imaginative song writing capabilities would strip things down so much as they did on Misunderstanding. It's totally insipid.
I realise I'm taking us further off-topic of Yes by continuing the focus on this one Genesis song, but this is such an interesting point to me I couldn't resist. I usually find it an admirable thing when a band with those skills chooses to strip back. Okay in this case it resulted in a song you didn't like, but that aside, I personally don't find it strange a band like them might choose to do something comparatively so basic. I'll add that I really don't mind Misunderstanding - I agree it's not among their best work but I think it has a nice feel and provides a good contrast from the mountainous Man Of Our Times (which I really like) and the ponderous Heathaze (which I really, really don't). That 3-song sandwich kind of sums up what I love about this band and the breadth of their material.
Their stripped-back approach worked much better on Abacab, where they really got into a proper stride of creating sparser songs with a starker, spacier feel which I liked a lot and it remains one of my top Genesis albums.
-
Unlike Owner Of A Lonely Heart, of course
There's a lot more going on in OOALH musically. It's far from being the bands greatest achievement of course, but it is a song of contrasts. It has a memourable heavy rock riff, presented with bright pop production and, what was at the time, some classy use of sampling. Most people would know that song. It has catchy hooks and memourable melodies. Misunderstanding is utterly forgettable IMO, with it's dull production, dull piano riff and boring lyrics.
(Smoothly bringing it back to Yes)
Owner is okay. In terms of having more going on, probably yes but I don't find it results in a song any more or less okay than Misunderstanding. The latter comes across to me as more of a free-flowing, "organic" song which gives it a nicer feel, whereas Owner with its chopped-up on-off sampling bursts and jarring edits makes it sound like it was generated by a piece of software. I'm not necessarily saying that's a bad thing (I'm a big fan of electro-pop), rather that its hard straight lines are less pleasing to my ears than Misunderstanding's soft curves.
Most discussions of lyrics are a hiding to nothing. I long since stopped bothering about them. I think it's a nice bonus when there's a good one, but beyond that my view is, it's just rock and pop, I'm not expecting well-crafted poetry. At best, the lyrics of both these songs are equally non-descript. If I had to choose, I'd actually go for the admittedly formulaic predictable unlucky-in-love Misunderstanding lyric over Owner which reads like out-takes from a bargain-bin self-help book.
The canon of both bands is littered with lyrics that were either totally nutjob hippy-dippy (Anderson) or cringe-inducingly twee/pompously cod-philosophising (Banks).
-
There's a lot more going on in OOALH musically. It's far from being the bands greatest achievement of course, but it is a song of contrasts. It has a memourable heavy rock riff, presented with bright pop production and, what was at the time, some classy use of sampling. Most people would know that song. It has catchy hooks and memourable melodies. Misunderstanding is utterly forgettable IMO, with it's dull production, dull piano riff and boring lyrics.
There's a lot more going on in OOALH musically.
Very true and it applies to the whole album. The more stripped-down approach didn't mena they gave up their musicianship.
-
Most discussions of lyrics are a hiding to nothing. I long since stopped bothering about them. I think it's a nice bonus when there's a good one, but beyond that my view is, it's just rock and pop, I'm not expecting well-crafted poetry.
The canon of both bands is littered with lyrics that were either totally nutjob hippy-dippy (Anderson) or cringe-inducingly twee/pompously cod-philosophising (Banks).
I agree with you about not bothering too much with the lyrics. Personally, I don’t have an issue with Banks as a lyricist though. Ok, he’s no T.S.Eliot, despite old Tiresius showing up to add a bit of class to the ‘Cinema Show’ with all that man/woman earth/sea stuff. No, what irks me most is PG’s tiresome word-plays.Was it considered fun & quirky back in the day? I wouldn’t know, I was a small child. But to me, now, it just reads like some sort of psychedelic hangover and dates the songs. I realise this may imbue then with a nostalgic tint for those old enough to remember those days. If so; great. I totally understand the power of nostalgia. Personally though, I couldn’t agree more with Hackett when he described ‘Willow Farm’ as a cross between ‘Teddy Bear’s Picnic’ and ‘I am the Walrus.’ But does it stop me from loving the music? Well, I’m no great fan of that particular piece, but no it doesn’t. I might be less likely to sing along to the ‘silly bits’, but I don’t listen to Genesis for that anyway. There are far better bands out there for when I fancy a sing song and a bit of dad dancing.
-
Hackett said that about Willow Farm? I'm no great fan of WF but all the same can't see that comparison at all. Whatever PG's shortcomings were as a lyricist I'll take them over Banks with his burning ropes, sandless horses' kicks and sugary tales of mice and cats. He often sounded to me like one of those pompous teenagers who thinks he's writing great poetry. Adrian Mole, basically.
-
Hackett said that about Willow Farm? I'm no great fan of WF but all the same can't see that comparison at all. Whatever PG's shortcomings were as a lyricist I'll take them over Banks with his burning ropes, sandless horses' kicks and sugary tales of mice and cats. He often sounded to me like one of those pompous teenagers who thinks he's writing great poetry. Adrian Mole, basically.
Ouch!
-
Hackett said that about Willow Farm? I'm no great fan of WF but all the same can't see that comparison at all. Whatever PG's shortcomings were as a lyricist I'll take them over Banks with his burning ropes, sandless horses' kicks and sugary tales of mice and cats. He often sounded to me like one of those pompous teenagers who thinks he's writing great poetry. Adrian Mole, basically.
No? Oh, I immediately saw what he meant: a jaunty plinkerty-plonk melody (Teddy Bears’ Picnic / WF) coupled with wacko psychedelic lyrics (walrus / Winston Churchill in drag etc)
Give me a horse of sand anyday. However, I quite agree about that dreadful ‘mouse’s night’ rubbish. Ironically, of all Banks’ lyrics, it’s FoF that most people tend to slate. A classic example of your very point. Who even listens to them when you’ve got Steve Hackett in top gear?
-
This is why I don't bother much about lyrics. I love FoF and the lyrics make the right sound. That'll do me. When I actually read them, they sound like a badly written speech by a politician or a CEO.
WF bears the hallmarks of a creative young man not quite channelling his imagination all that well, though at least they paint a consistent picture of things not being what they seem to be. But incidentally, while also not a favourite of mine, Walrus isn't quite the piece of "wacko psychedelia" most suppose it to be.
-
But incidentally, while also not a favourite of mine, Walrus isn't quite the piece of "wacko psychedelia" most suppose it to be.
hmm, intrigued! Dare we go off topic and explore this further? I think we should. You can’t leave that just hanging there. Come on, out with it, old chap. Do tell!
-
No? Oh, I immediately saw what he meant: a jaunty plinkerty-plonk melody (Teddy Bears’ Picnic / WF) coupled with wacko psychedelic lyrics (walrus / Winston Churchill in drag etc)
Give me a horse of sand anyday. However, I quite agree about that dreadful ‘mouse’s night’ rubbish. Ironically, of all Banks’ lyrics, it’s FoF that most people tend to slate. A classic example of your very point. Who even listens to them when you’ve got Steve Hackett in top gear?
There was a very twee side to Genesis, which sometimes is irritating. Mike Rutherford wanted them to make a concept album of The Little Prince, but they ended up doing the Lamb instead (thankfully)
As for All in a mouses night, the lyrics are among the bands worse IMO. The music is actually pretty good though.
-
Yes, I’m also pleased that The Little Prince got dropped. As for ‘mouse’s night’, I can take it all except for that ending where the music slows into ghastly pantomime:
“Then comes this monster mouse, he's ten feet tall...
No! no! a thousand times: no!
-
Yes, I’m also pleased that The Little Prince got dropped. As for ‘mouse’s night’, I can take it all except for that ending where the music slows into ghastly pantomime:
“Then comes this monster mouse, he's ten feet tall...
No! no! a thousand times: no!
"..with teeth and claws to match...It only took one blow!"
-
...If only I had the editing skills to fade the song out before this, then the song would make my 'playlist'. Alas, I don't! I'm reminded of Mark Twain's comment about golf: "A good walk, ruined!"
-
Hackett said that about Willow Farm? I'm no great fan of WF but all the same can't see that comparison at all. Whatever PG's shortcomings were as a lyricist I'll take them over Banks with his burning ropes, sandless horses' kicks and sugary tales of mice and cats. He often sounded to me like one of those pompous teenagers who thinks he's writing great poetry. Adrian Mole, basically
As for All in a mouses night, the lyrics are among the bands worse IMO. The music is actually pretty good though.
I feel sorry for Phil, having to sing that, every time I hear it. I am quite sure Peter would have refused to do it and even Phil, as of Duke. That said and having established that Mouse really sucks, I like Tony's lyrics; it is true that he sometimes went overboard but he wrote wonderful stuff and he is my second favorite lyricist in Genesis.
-
The instrumental coda to Mouse's is the only bit I like of that song. I might consider isolating just that bit and binning the rest! Cringeworthy as Mouse's mainly is, I think Scenes From A Night's Dream wins the prize for toe-curling teeth-hurting sugary tweeness of all Genesis songs. In fact it'd be my vote for Worst Genesis Song.
Anyway, about Yes (etc etc).
-
The instrumental coda to Mouse's is the only bit I like of that song. I might consider isolating just that bit and binning the rest! Cringeworthy as Mouse's mainly is, I think Scenes From A Night's Dream wins the prize for toe-curling teeth-hurting sugary tweeness of all Genesis songs. In fact it'd be my vote for Worst Genesis Song.
Anyway, about Yes (etc etc).
Agreed and all three accounts:
The coda to Mouse is probably the best bit of the song.
Scenes from a Night's Dream is musically and lyrically appalling.
So, Yes......
-
...yes...about Yes.
Their 50th anniversary tour has started in the US - here is the setlist so far:
Close to the Edge
Nine Voices
Parallels
Mood for a Day
Leaves of Green
We Can Fly From Here
Sweet Dreams
Heart of the Sunrise
—Intermission—
Perpetual Change
Does it Really Happen?
Soon (closing section of "The Gates Of Delirium")
Believe Again
Awaken
- Encore -
Yours is No Disgrace
Roundabout
Starship TrooperNot a bad setlist! Can't wait to hear it!
-
hmm, intrigued! Dare we go off topic and explore this further? I think we should. You can’t leave that just hanging there. Come on, out with it, old chap.
See the shiny new Beatles thread for my response.
In a similar vein, while Willow Farm is a bit junior-psychedelic, there is a general point to the lyric, that of deception and things and people not being what they appear.
-
In a similar vein, while Willow Farm is a bit junior-psychedelic, there is a general point to the lyric, that of deception and things and people not being what they appear.
'Things and people not being what they appear'? And you're linking that with psychedelia: ...erm.....yeah; no one would argue with that. Anything else, beyond stating the obvious?
