Originally Posted by the songcabinet
Well, you seem like a thinker, Michael.. starting a thread like this :-)

I'd like to defend the 'explainers' position, at least as long as the song is still in process. I agree any time, that as far as finished song marketed to the public, no particular explaining or 'set up' should be necessary, allthough certain song require a little talk before they start and still works.

But as far as a song that is still in process, and if it is peers who are doing the critique'ing, everybody understands that songs most often come with an intention from the writer. Even if this intention is not relevant anymore when the song goes public, peers can assist and support the writer in his/her intention, ending up with more satisfaction doing songs.

I'd say, there is nothing as good for creativity as confident integrity, and peers could support each other by accepting to discuss how the writers intention with the song best can be achieved. This is also craft, I think, as songwriters most often are not the 'average audience', and it feel just as pretentious if they should act like they were, while talking with peers about songwriting.

Well, thats my dollar on this..


Hi Magne,

The critical point for me, Magne, is when the writer's intention is made clear. If it's at the top of the post, a peer can turn his focus towards what the writer is trying to achieve.

If it's announced after critiques, I wonder as to the writer's true intention. I think it may have innocently been to see how folks respond, with no steering, as in "is my intention achieved without influencing the reader?" And if THAT is how a writer proceeds, I would argue that THAT particular writer is indeed treating the reader as an audience and not peer.

If treated as a peer, the reader/lyricist would be privy to what exactly it is the writer "is trying to achieve" aka his/her intention. When "true intention" is announced late, it's often very awkward for the reviewer, who can understandably feel "Shanghai'd" or embarrassed or stupid...or angry...If it was me I might say "Well, why didn't you say so in the first place, I could have been reading with my eye out for that."

But the truth is, most of us "writers" want our cake and to eat it too: we both want uninfluenced reviews, AND for the reader to understand our intentions AND whether or not we achieve them, ALL with a simple "let me know whatcha think" at the top of the page...and I believe such a reader is being treated as an "audience" by such a writer, or at least
momentarily like a "guinea pig" ...'til the writer announces what's really goin' on..almost a "you've been punk'd" kinda moment...

--Mike

Fate doesn't hang on a wrong or right choice
Fortune depends on the tone of your voice

-The Divine Comedy (Neil Hannon)
from the song "Songs of Love"
from the album "Casanova" (1996)