JPF Home Page Forums Lyric and MP3 Feedback Lyric Feedback Forum 2 Rant about lyrics

9ne,

Do you actually think that the little guy/gal who is attending an NSAI meeting and following a format by the numbers really has a chance to out "commericalize" the hoards of writers in Nashville alone simply by focusing on writing in a commercial format? I don't. I think that when an outsider makes it, they are generally doing something outside of what the commercial experts in Nashville are doing and that freshness raises eyebrows and makes folks who are jaded interested. This assumes of course that the person writing the song has knowledge of (whether they use it or not) the fundamental rules for writing songs, just as someone needs to know how to spell and write sentences before they can write a book.

I see thousands of writers out across the US each year they will not likely have any significant commercial success. It seems a shame for someone to avoid writing what they want and feel so they can chase a format that even if they achieve it, will not likely lead to any actual interest or success in what they are doing. If writing in a focused commercial format doesn't push your artistic buttons, you're wasting your time, life and creativity trying to force it. Now, some people are very comfortable writing in a rigid radio format. Many of them live in Nashville and focus 100% of their energy in that pursuit. For those who aren't interested in that life, I say learn the mechanics of songwriting, and then build your monsters and let it loose on the world. That approach is no less likely to find an audience than someone forcing themselves to write what they don't really feel.

Brian

PS: Your example of a young kid writing a bad song doesn't really apply. I prefaced my comments above with the fact that it's always beneficial to learn the basics and understand why those tips help make a song easier to consume by a listener. Take the basics into consideration and make the process your own. If you vary from standard operating procedures, that's fine as long as you do it from a position of knowledge and choice and not ignorance of what your choices mean and will result in.

i believe that people who go out to these NSAI workshops and all these type events are people who have yet to find their voice as songwriters.

good songs follow a formula, which is what these NSAI events are about. their about writing quick catchy songs that people will like just long enough to make some money.
these are songs that can be pitched to just about anyone, and the song will go over

classic songs are songs that when you hear them, you realize that NO ONE ELSE could've wrote them.

songs like "thunder road" by springsteen, "american pie" by don mcclean, "round here" by counting crows,
i could keep going

what we all have to do as writers is ask what kind of writer are you. i feel im a little bit of both. i have songs that i feel are commercial, and others that arent, but its the ones that arent that have some depth to them. its those that i want to be remembered for.

much like my song "what does being fat feel like?" which was talked about earlier by Linda and Buzz. that ones not commercial, but has more to do with my voice and why i write than my more commercial material.

scott

"I think that when an outsider makes it, they are generally doing something outside of what the commercial experts in Nashville are doing and that freshness raises eyebrows and makes folks who are jaded interested." Brian, you appear to be confusing performance or style with songwriting. Aerosmith can do their song "Amazed" with a rock attitude, Garth Brooks could do it with a country attitude and Boyz to Men could do it with an R&B attitude. In all cases the SONG is great. I'm talking about the song not the style or arrangement. Again, you missed the point that Buzz wants to write commercially, (perhaps not this lyric)
Yes! Anyone with talent and the proper song CAN outdo the hoards in Nashville. Of course "the hoards" have an advantage because of contacts, but if you can get a great song to the right person at the right time it can happen. You speak of "commercial" like it's a dirty word-Check out the Beatles or Hank Williams catalogue; both "commercial" acts, both strong songwriters. All I'm saying is beginning writers should not be encouraged to totally go their own way and it's more than learning a few basics...

9ne,

The Beatles didn't write commercial.. they created it. Commerce embraced them, not the other way around. As they matured as writers, the industry followed them, they weren't chasing what was on the charts, they were creating art which was so compelling that people had to jump on board. Do you think anyone in Nashville would give the time of day to a song like I am the Walrus or a Day In The Life? NO. Instead, they'd tell the writer to go to an NSAI workshop and learn how to write a proper song with proper lyrics and a proper structure.

There are plenty of great writers who write music that people love and buy, but that don't get airplay or attention from the mass media. Ever listen to Tom Waits? How about hard core Rap or Industrial? Lots of fans for those styles, no radio airplay to speak of. (The Rap you see on MTV isn't hard core, it's been sanitized by the process).

Jazz music doesn't often get mainstream airplay. But it's still commercial and there's an audience who loves 8 minute long riffing and improvisation around a loose theme. A band like They Might Be Giants doesn't even begin to follow any format for writing.. their career is still going strong after 20 years. (And the Grammy's finally caught up to their style and recognized them last year). In fact, artists like them are likely to be around and remembered far longer than the latest pop or country singer singing the latest manufactured commercial song. Some people enjoy writing that style (Diane Warren lives and breathes it every day) but if you're not inclined to mimic her style in your art, why force it? Because you might have a short term country hit that will pay you less than if you worked an average day job over the same course of time? (You're in Nashville.. you must know writers with hits, even number 1 songs that are long forgotten and which paid much less than most people think).

I am all for people learning how to write. I was an NSAI member and it was a great introduction into many aspects of music and the business surrounding it. But no one can really claim their method will produce success commercially. If they could, all the staff writers in Nashville would hit home runs every time. Right now in country, the best way to break in is to come up with a clever hook line or a funny twist in your song or something controversial, but not too controversial. OR.. you can be a very polished and fine tuned version of yourself and make your art, and use the eduation you got to make sure you are the best possible version of yourself you can be. Make sure you fully develop your ideas and melodies. Make sure you are successful in saying exactly what you want to say in the most effective way possible. Tools can fix and fine tune a car, but it's not the car itself. Your talent, imagination and passion are what will get you from point A to B.

I've been up all night again fine tuning the final nominees for our awards this year. The depth and quality of this music across every genre is frankly amazing. Most of it is accessible to fans of the genre, but only a percentage of it follows rigid guidelines that are taught by music educators. Sure, there are a few of those songs in each genre to represent what's on the radio, but the really cool stuff does it's own thing. We have a great mix of Grammy winners and nominees, #1 writers, producers and artists and regular old Just Plain Folks all mixed together. I wish everyone could hear all the music in all the genres to really understand what musicial choices and directions exist outside of mainstream Radio airplay. I think it might even change your mind on this issue a bit. Either way, I do understant where you're coming from on this and why you feel the way you do. I've been there myself in the past.

Have a great weekend,

Brian

In 63-64 the Beatles covered songs by Chuck Berry, Carl Perkins, The Shirelles (or was it the Chiffons?)and many others, proving they knew what they wanted to sound like. (Not imitating, but influenced by) They stated they WANTED to sound like certain girl groups on certain songs.The Beatles DID write commercially. Their own material,(such as, She Loves You, I Want To Hold Your Hand, I Saw Her Standing There, reflected their peers work including Little Richard. Part of their success WAS due to their look and the twist on an old formula. In their later years when tracking new material they would discuss what the new song was to sound like by saying do Roy Orbison here or the Beach Boys, (Back In The USSR) They knew exactly what they were doing and more importantly they felt they could "pull off" anything."Walrus" could not have succeeded in '64, (not commercial, not a single) but they could write it in 68 because, (as I previously stated) established artists can write what they want.
The point you seem to keep missing is I'm NOT referring to "Performers" I'm speaking of songwriting. I could write for Brooks and Dunn, Celine Dion or Bon Jovi. I'm a songwriter, I don't limit myself to certain styles. I have no affiliation with Nashville or LA or New York or Chicago. I do understand what a COMMERCIAL SONG sounds like, which is what I thought we were discussing, not styles or performers...

[This message has been edited by 9ne (edited 06-26-2004).]

9ne,

You seem to be putting words in my writing that aren't there. I am talking about writing as well. They mimiced others because they were learning to be musicians and writers. That's how most people learned then (before other educational options were available) and many do still today. Once they learned to perform by playing clubs every night and learned to write by copying others that came before, they used the knowledge to write songs that didn't fit the formula and create art, rather than simply repeating the commerce loop over and over by writing 10 years worth of I wanna hold your hand. If they hadn't become artists (in the creative sense, not in the performance sense) they wouldn't likely have been remembered as they are today. The songwriting in I am the Walrus or A Day In The Life (or insert a hundred other examples) hardly fit the format or formula of radio or the industry. But it DID change it. It forced others coming up to first mimic and then branch out from them. That's how it works.

People learning basics from NSAI and others can learn valuable tools just as the Beatles learned to mimic the writing methods of their day. Then you use that knowledge to create great art in your own voice, style and way. If you only pursue the format and not your art, even if you succeed in producing something palatable, where have you really left your mark on it.

It's obvious we're going to disagree on this at this point. We have 25,000 members. Probably 10% will have a reasonable level of commercial success and probably 90% won't. But all 25,000 if they choose can create meaningful art regardless of the commerciality of it. And I will bet that just as many or more find commercial success by being unique voices and presenting unique ideas in an original way than find commercial success simply following someone elses bouncing ball.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Brian

To Clarify: I use the word artist to represent the creator. Painters, Songwriters, Authors, Scupltors etc. to me are ALL ARTISTS. You are misinterpreting that to represent performers only (who are also artists as they create a presentation of art).

I meant to add this as well:

Learning a songwriting formula and using it can make you a great technician. But it doesn't make you a great artist. Commerce may require a great technician. It obviously doesn't require great art though. A songwriting education can help you a great deal to become a songwriter technician. The art is solely up to what's inside you.

Brian

Check it out at hundreds of places on the web.
The Beatles came so close to not making it.
George Martin observed that, other than Harrison, they were terrible musicians. It was their sense of humor and the uniqueness of thier appearance that made him decide to take a chance on them. NOT! Their musical ability. George Martin refined them and helped them develop thier God given talent.
Otherwise we may never have heard of them.
Thank goodness Epstein took them to him.
The rest is history.

Like Delbert McClinton said, "There's only two types of music in the world. The kind you like, and the kind you don't like."
I agree with Brian 9ne....The rest is commerce, plain and simple. If you feel you have to follow the commercial process (songwriting clinics etc.) then do it with your heart but there's nothing there to say it's going to put you on top of the game. It's just another way to approach it. In today's day and age, plain ol good luck is going to play a part in it too.
When I started playing in a band in the mid 60's there were only 6 bands in this small town I live in. There's well over 30 now. Times have changed and the population hasn't grown all that much.

Don't get me wrong....I think the Beatles developed into commercial genuises and I dearly love their work. However, thier first big hit in Britain "Love Me Do" could be learned by just following the song along and playing a guitar by ear. You'd have it before the song was done. The facts are, not that many were trying to do that back then. The popularity of seeking recognition and money through the veins of music using this musical group thing (or big name artist) has mushroomed into what it is today.

If you feel you have to approach it that way 9ne then that's what is going to work for you.
I know lots of people that gave their heart soul and life to the music business, songwriting clinics in Nashville, New York etc. Most of them still playing but they're also driving cab and waiting tables too. Everyone has to survive.

This ain't no Shangrila in the long run!

UNLESS! You're doing it as a hobby to escape the pressures of this turbulent old world.

Eric

9ne,

Actually, this thread wasn't about commercial success at all. It was intended to solicit reviews of these lyrics from others here to compare with what my NSAI group had to say about them.

That's not to say that I don't want commercial success. I think most songwriters would love to have their work played on the radio. I certainly belong to that group.

However, as I learn more about what Nashville seems to want, I'm finding myself frustrated with their rigidity. It's probably somewhat similiar for other genres but I think there's a real market out there for songs that don't fit the "accepted" mode. Unfortunately, I don't have the resources to prove it.

Therefore, if I want to have commercial success at any price, it seems I will have to compromise my art and fit the cookie cutter mode.

What I find strange is that they claim they want you to be unique yet at the same time, want you to fit into the generally accepted priciples of good songwriting. In other words, they claim they want one thing but they really seem to want the same old thing.

You know what else I find funny about it?Many of the artists who have really made their mark are the ones who bucked the system until someone had the guts to take a chance on them. IMO, that chance pays off a lot more than not if the songs are good.

In the end, I'm probably going to keep writing what I want to write the way I want to write. Should that lead me to commercial success, that would be great. If not, I haven't quit my day job, so it won't be the end of my world. Persistance pays off more often than talent but it doesn't always get you what you want. Only time will tell whether it will pay off for me.

Evenin' Folks,

Just a few comments.

I have been reading this one and have tried to stay out of it ... but eventually it touched enough buttons that I had to jump in.

I know many of the people who have responded to this thread and I respect them all; especially Brian.

However, as a lyricist ... ie, one who deals in words, I am particularly attentive to words in general and certain words in particular. One of these is "artist".

I cringe everytime I see someone refer to themself as an "artist" or their work as "art". It is never done by someone who is commercially sucessful. It as if applying the term to yourself and your work puts you on a level with the beatles. It does not.

Another word choice concerns a pair of synonyms: manage and manipulate. The latter has a negative connotation, the former a positive. When one uses the word "manipulate" exclusively throughout a posting, one should at least label it a rant or an editorial, not to be confused with fact.

Please do not misunderstand me. There are lyrics which I consider to be artistic. There are songs which cause me to freeze and wonder in awe. This lyric from 1993 is not one of them.

dawg

[This message has been edited by greydog (edited 06-27-2004).]

Dawg

Wooo I wasn't aware that you've read all of my masterpieces Wooo smile









------------------
http://www.ampcast.com/music/26305/artist.php

"I agree with Brian 9ne....The rest is commerce, plain and simple. If you feel you have to follow the commercial process (songwriting clinics etc.) then do it with your heart but there's nothing there to say it's going to put you on top of the game. It's just another way to approach it. In today's day and age, plain ol good luck is going to play a part in it too"
Eric-I've NEVER attended a seminar or purchased a "songwriting" book. These options are certainly helpful for some-I didn't feel they were warranted in my case.

I'm confident in my ability, I've NEVER written to any "formula" except for the standard song options. It disturbs me when I hear people with Brian's influence encourage new writers to "Do What They Want" it could lead a person with great talent down a long road when there may be a shortcut. Telling someone their song is on a level with the Beatles, (not Brian's words) is NOT helping that person. When I say commercial, I mean a song that is instantly appealing, catchy. I also prefer those songs to be well written. When people say-this is a hobby-but I wouldn't mind a hit if it came, they're talking from both sides of their mouth. Why post if it's for YOUR enjoyment? Bullshit. Speaking of fecal matters, when it comes to songwriting-[naughty word removed] or get off the pot!


[This message has been edited by 9ne (edited 06-27-2004).]

9ne

Be reasonable. This board isn't for serious minded songwriters only. Millions of people share thier likes and dislikes in this world today, some of those things being hobbies. That's what draws them close together and develops friendships.
You know as well as I do that a prolific lyric writer like Dawg for example (sorry to take your name in vain Dawg) doesn't post everything he writes here for the sole purpose of it being nothing but commercial material. However, we both know that if some work he or someone like him posted here for the fun of it became viable for commercial development then he would gladly accept the gains whatever they may be. That does not constitute a hypocrit or someone wishy washy in their personal committments. Most of what a writer like Dawg posts here is for serious consideration but that doesn't mean he or anyone else like him excludes the rights of other songwriters/lyricists to express themself in whatever manner they feel comfortable.

However, what I do, in most cases, is I critique as if the piece I am reading is being considered for commercial development.

Personally I couldn't give a sweet [naughty word removed] if I ever made it big in the songwriting business. But I'll do anything in my power to help someone else who's sincerely trying to.

All that taken into consideration, it'll be a long day in hell before I stop posting what I enjoy writing because there are others here that enjoy reading it just the same as I enjoy reading theirs. Don't think for a moment I am taking anything you wrote in your post personally. I just thought you were a little more tuned into your own needs than accepting the wide picture of the rest the amateurs here. Not everyone wants what you want.
I have no idea what all that childishness about fecal matter was all about.
Some of us enjoy writing this stuff without all the seriousness and we like to share it.

Have a good day.

Eric

No, I wasn't being personal; I've always enjoyed your comments and support and in the past I've told you I appreciate them. Here's something; If someone,(a so called "hobbyist") had their song picked up, how long would it take for them to write songwriter instead of hobbyist after their name? What I'm saying is, I seriously doubt there are true hobbyists when it comes to songwriting-see above. As for Dawg? A fine writer, (props man!) I believe he cares about EVERY SINGLE WORD he writes, (even if it's not for commercial consideration, it IS representative of his craft)-don't kid yourself; he's dedicated and I admire that...

[This message has been edited by 9ne (edited 06-27-2004).]

I don’t usually engage in these discussions. I tend to prefer the comfort of the bleachers.

But I had to jump in this time, because this one seems so simple. Unless you’re just bloody lucky – like the Beatles were – you don’t get a hit coming out of the box unless you’ve got the basic skills down pretty pat. Learning the skills teaches you when and where you can get away with breaking them. And push the envelope. If you’ve got “spark”, but no skills, there’s no way you’ll get your message across. If you’ve got the skills, but no spark, you’re just a mechanic, and mechanical doesn’t move too many people. But build on those skills and twist them to your own “artistic” vision, and you might just have a chance of being the next 10 year journeyman overnight success.

You gotta hone your skills, whether you’re a baseball player, a video game designer, a machinist, a teacher, a rocket scientist…or a songwriter. When you’ve got the basics, then you can push the logarithms in an unexpected direction, and come up with the next big breakthrough. But unless serendipity comes a’calling, without the skills, nothing’s going to happen. And you’re not going to accomplish it in a vacuum. You learn from books, from example, from Zen songwriters, JPF posts that work and don’t work for you, anywhere you can, even NSAI guys. A lot of it you can chuck. But you can’t figure out what to chuck until you’ve practiced, practiced, practiced it all.

Those NSAI guys were just mechanics. They’re working from the manual, and lots of times the manual is myopic. It can’t see the forest for the trees. Think about your car. How many times have you taken it into a mechanic and they can’t fix it? Or they try, and you end up coming back over and over again before – if you’re lucky – it’s almost as good as it was before. Most mechanics can barely fix your car, much less turn it into a finely tuned racing machine. It takes an intuitive imagination to be a great mechanic. What makes you think the NSAI guys are any different from the average mechanic?

Paul and Van’s lyric here, IMO, is still rough around the edges. But it’s got spark. It’s provocative. Some people are not going to like the message. After all, this is America, and we’re not the slimmest of cultures on this planet. It hits close to home. But it is reminiscent of those classics mentioned earlier, even though it’s not on a par with them. Quite yet. Go back and pull up “Fool On The Hill” and read it again. It’s a great lyric (IMO), but one that is still debated to this day as to what it really means. Because of that, the NSAI guys woulda torn it up and sent John and Paul packing, even though it has strong mechanics; good rhyming, great meter, especially in that all important couplet. It’s just not wrapped up nice and concrete. The mechanics don’t like that. But the Boys had the skills down well enough by then to use all the tools correctly, then take a step beyond them, in a different direction. And now it's a classic.

I’ve rambled. A lot. Sorry. So what’s the point? If the NSAI guys of the world point out mechanical errors of rhyme, syntax, meter, rhythm, tense, plotline, POV, cliches, redundancy, lack of direction, and stuff like that, well, listen up. They might be onto something, and that something may make you a better songwriter. But when they start talking about revising the motives and fates of your characters, or what you should and shouldn’t write about, beware. Remember. They’re just mechanics, not race car designers. Stick to your vision.

Wow Michael, that was an excellent contribution to this thread. Thank you very much for that POV.

9ne, I totally appreciate your passion and your POV. I don't have to agree with everything you say to do those things.

This thread had taken on a life of its own and IMO, that's a good thing. This is a very healthy disussion and I hope that anyone else who wants to contribute their opinion will not be too reluctant. Ultimately whether "Tall and Thin" is worthy of praise or not, all the responses have contributed to my knowledge. I hope it does the same for others as well.

Thanks to everyone,

Van

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-27-2004).]

i think a great way to look at this whole discussion is to look at matchbox twenty's song "3 AM"

on their DVD "Storytellers"
Rob Thomas (lead singer) says:
"you could take this next song however you want, but it was written about a time when i was a kid and my mother had cancer. she's ok now, but for awhile it was like mommy sleeps all the time, why does mommy sleep all the time? AND ALOT OF PEOPLE DIDNT GET THAT, AND I THINK WHATS GREAT ABOUT THAT IS THAT IT MADE IT MORE UNIVERSAL."

then he goes and does a simple original piano version of the song, and you finally get it. you finally understand whats really going on in the song and just how powerfull and emotional it is.

the radio version got me interested. it made it a catchy upbeat song. but THIS VERSION moved me to tears.........SAME LYRICS, SAME BAND.

the original version couldn't be a huge hit because of how america looks at commercial material. they understood that.

so they do the original version for the fans who want to know more about the band, and they do the HIT RADIO version for everyone else. THATS WHY THEIR HUGE, and THE REST OF US HAVE TIME TO POST HERE.

so if your looking for commercial success, take what they did in mind. write what YOU want and FEEL and then adjust it to fit the mold.

scott

Damn Michael

You write such beautiful prose!!!! My basic opinion is everyone should stick to mechanical writing, this way I can remain unique!!! I do think most people are missing the point when it comes to writing hits; all the form and the twisting of such ain't worth diddly if they don't hum your melody and sing your words after the first listen, so whether you're writing "Hotel California" or "Yummy Yummy Yummy, I've Got Love In My Tummy" it all comes down to one thing are your words and melody memorable!

------------------
http://www.ampcast.com/music/26305/artist.php

[This message has been edited by sweetjoyce (edited 06-27-2004).]

LOL!

Mike And The Mechanics

Now I understand.

No California dreamin on a summer day for you Mike...<g>

Glad you dropped in. Well done!

Eric

Michael,

Great post. Right to the point and well said.

Dawg,

I do consider every song I listen to or every lyric I read someone's art. I don't have to qualify it as good or bad art before it qualifies to be art in the first place. I often visit museums when I travel (I think I've been to most of the top art museums in the US as well as some in France) and without failure I will see some pieces in every museum that to me, look like someone's practical joke. Like the canvas in New York that was solid black or the canvas in Chicago (or was it Indy? can't remember) that was two tones of red, like someone ran out of one tint and finished it with the closest thing they could find). To me, it's as if any amateur simple covered a canvas with a single color and painted nothing, but at the same time there will be a hoard of scholarly experts that will insist it's great art. They're at least half right. It qualifies as art. The great part is up to the beholder right?

How many songs have you found lacking in anything artistic which someone else has liked? I am guessing a lot. I see lyrics here that I think are great that no one else responds to and lots of examples of lyrics that I feel are really lame that people rave about. It's all art. Only the perceiver can decide for themselves if it is good or bad, great or heinous. But I think you're playing the role of Omnipotent Critic if you can call one person's effort art and someone else's NOT art. It's all art.

Definition:

Main Entry: [2]art
Pronunciation: 'ärt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin art-, ars —more at ARM
Date: 13th century

1 : skill acquired by experience, study, or observation <the art of making friends>

2 a : a branch of learning: (1) : one of the humanities (2) : plural : LIBERAL ARTS b : archaic : LEARNING, SCHOLARSHIP

3 : an occupation requiring knowledge or skill <the art of organ building>

4 a : the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also : works so produced b (1) : FINE ARTS (2) : one of the fine arts (3) : a graphic art

5 a : archaic : a skillful plan b : the quality or state of being artful

6 : decorative or illustrative elements in printed matter

synonyms ART, SKILL, CUNNING, ARTIFICE, CRAFT mean the faculty of executing well what one has devised. ART implies a personal, unanalyzable creative power <the art of choosing the right word>. SKILL stresses technical knowledge and proficiency <the skill of a glassblower>. CUNNING suggests ingenuity and subtlety in devising, inventing, or executing <a mystery plotted with great cunning>. ARTIFICE suggests technical skill especially in imitating things in nature <believed realism in film could be achieved only by artifice>. CRAFT may imply expertness in workmanship <the craft of a master goldsmith>.

Hopefully, especially you of all people, are not suggesting that art is only determined by commerical acceptance and endorsement. Most of the greatest artists throughout history were roundly rejected commercially and it took years, decades or even centuries before they rose to the level of admiration they enjoy now. At the same time, many of the contemporary commercial successes have been long forgotten as relevant "art."

Brian

Brian,

I suppose we disagree profoundly in our respective definitions of what constitutes "art". To my thinking good and bad do come into play. Greeting card doggerel is no more art than a "Sponge Bob Square Pants" cartoon.

I feel it is the height of pretension for any individual do declare they are writing "art". That appellation can only be made by one's peers, and over a course of time. ... and I don't mean leaving a lyric in a drawer for 11 years and then posting it.

I would guess the majority of JPF mentors are members or products of NSAI and hold its teachings in a bit higher esteem than you.

Whichever source of critique you choose to solicit, accept their counsel with grace and gratitude. Whether you choose to follow their counsel is your choice.

However, to just shop around until you find folks who agree with you, is not a recipe improvement or success.

Think what you will of the two-tone red painting, if it was hanging in a museum, it did not come out of a 99 cent bin at Walmart.

I would have had much more respect for Van and the lyric had he not told us he was disatisfied with the critiques he received at the NSAI meeting. If you don't like the way they do things, don't go ... but don't run down their methodology on another forum.

That is bad form.

dawg

[This message has been edited by greydog (edited 06-27-2004).]

Oh, hell, I'm back again. Why do I do this to myself?

With all due respect, Dawg - and I do have a ton for you - what you said in that last paragraph made the hair stand up on my neck.

When a public figure, proclaiming to be an expert on a given subject, stands up and is clearly, in my mind, to be without clothes, I'm going to stand up and say so. In public. I'm going to stand up and say, "look, he has no clothes!", and see who agrees we me. And, I hope, so will every other red blooded American. And if it is me they point at, I will welcome the scrutiny gladly. Just don't point out my shortcomings.

It is not bad form to engage in public discourse over views that one feels are dead ass wrong, especially when espoused by "experts". I would expect us all to do so, in every town hall across this country.

And JPF is one hell of a town hall.

Michael,

The respect runs both ways. However, in this instance there was no public figure making a pronouncement. Let us read Van's own words:

"I took this song to my monthly NSAI meeting and the song was not well received. Perhaps the overall message may be disturbing to some but some of the comments I got were nonsensical to me.

One guy said that perhaps there should be something in the song about good things the guy did during his life that would make people emphathize with him or miss him. He pretty much said that unless there is something "redeeming" about the guy, he's just another fat slob that died (perhaps not the exact words but this is exactly what he meant). The others agreed that there was a need to remove the word "fat" and that something was needed to make them care about the guy.

Well, I didn't say anything because I didn't want to come off as defensive but these folks pretty much proved the point of the song. Society looks down on obese people and considers them lazy slobs with little or no redeeming qualities. HELLO!!! That's exactly the point..."

It was a local chapter meeting, not a song camp.

The statements were not made by an NSAI executive.

Van did not disagree there, at the time. He waited and delivered a third party, hearsay story, about a lyric he did write critiqued by people he did not identify nor disagree with at the time.

That is why I say it is bad form. If you have a problem with NSAI, take it up with NSAI ... not as gossip in another forum.

Just my opinion of course, and I have been known to be wrong.

dawg

Dawg, I respect you opinion but I think your judgement of my motivation (which was clearly spelled out from the beginning) is unfair.

Yes, I wanted to rant because I don't believe my NSAI group even based their criticism on the formula that NSAI recommends. Michael said it better than I did but if you noticed, the people here who didn't like the lyrics and explained why, at least based their opinions on a learned approach, not a bias against obese people.

And what good would it have done for me to bring this up to my group when they can't even base their opinion of this song on the actual structure? They would just see it as sour grapes, much the way you are judging me now. Not only that, I did accept their comments with grace, which is why I didn't tell them how stupid it was to say what they said. Honestly, what would that have accomplished? And no I did not identify them because their identity is irrelevant to the discussion.

Honestly, I don't mean to offend but I think your comment about shopping around until you find someone who likes the lyrics is a bit silly. Unless you score a cut the first time every time with every new song, that is exactly what you (and all other songwriters) do every time you shop one of your songs. It is exactly what record companies do when they try to sell the music of a new artist. Not to mention the fact that there is not universal agreement on what the best written songs are anyway. And how do you know when a song is actually "finished" being written? I guess when someone decides to give you a cut huh? But you could probably still find something to nit about a "finished" song if you really wanted to.

How many times have you heard about huge hit songs that were turned down anywhere between 10-20 (or more) times before someone decided it was a good enough to try to plug? If those songwriters did what it seems you are saying, they would have given up after their first rejection or they would have rewritten it to the point it wouldn't have been the same song that became a big hit. Certainly, part of the learning process is to study and listen to the advice of others. But just as important is to know when the advice of others is bogus.

And what the hell is up with accusing me of gossiping? I thought this forum was a place to discuss and get feedback on lyrics. As far as I know that doesn't preclude a discussion of how other people have critiqued the lyrics. Perhaps the songwriting forum would have been more appropriate but the point is the same.

That being said, unless Brian or another moderator informs me that I am using these forums inappropriately, I'm going to post what I post.

This thread was never intended to turn into what it has but until now, I thought it had some great feedback from several different angles. I thought that was a good thing. I certainly wasn't looking to get into a pissing contest with anyone. If you find it offensive, you certainly have a right to say so but please don't accuse me of things when you don't even know what kind of person I am.

Van

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

Dearest dawggie,
I disagree.
"take it up with NSAI"?
what?...and look around the room and say "you guys are all nuts"...wrong? or such
THAT would be bad form
He didn't state up front what his issues were. He merely stateed he had some about this lyric.
I wouldn't dream of putting words in Buzz's mouth, but I can tell you how I would have reacted, if I had a room full of folks all agreeing to an opinion about my somg which I found hard to believe.
I would ask a different group WITHOUT any preface of what group #1 thought was wrong.
as Buzz did.
NOW..... if we had basically agreed with the other critiques, I think his further responses would have been different.
In my case I probably would have said something like
"Okay. I had a group of folks give me the same opinion, which didn't seem right to me. But you all agree with that. Maybe I need to think about it some more. "



------------------
Harriet
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/9/harrietamesmusic.htm

Right on Harriet. Thanks for putting it so well. If one person tells you you're a fool, you shrug it off. If two people tell you, you might think it over but you still shrug it off. If the majority of people tell you that you are a fool, you'd better have a long hard look in the mirror.

Dawg,

Ironically, Buzz meets your criteria and so does the lyric. Buzz didn't write it. He simple liked it as an admire and continued his search for feedback (nor did he give any specific about what he wanted to know). So, he thought it was Art and thus, from your definition, he's an outsider who made the judgement, not the creator.

Art, as defined includes all efforts, not just those that you or I like, nor those that the government or media proclaims as such. Were the great composers or painters who were condemned in their day not making art, but over the test of centuries it suddenly became art? Not in my opinion. It always was. And what of the "art" that was recognized back then and forgotten today? Yup, that was Art too. And so is all the rest of it. A kids painting in 6th grade is also art. So are the poems written by the lady I used to come and read to when I was a college student in her nursing home. Art can't be definied literally for quality because it's an intangible. Should we simply defer to the masses about what qualifies? Should we vote? Over 50% say yes and it's art? If we did that, most of the classical music of today would get voted down because like it or not, only a minority of people like listening to it. Same with art in galleries. Most would never "sell" as a print to the masses (if it did, there would be regular stores selling nothing but prints of Van Gogh in the same quantities that Britney Spears sells CD's).

If you can't use a majority opinion, then what DO you use? How about any 1 opinion? That's all that is needed in this 1 opinion.

Now, when it comes to what is good art and waht is bad art.. then it's a free for all.

Brian

An interesting Sidebar:

Rap music was considered a non art for (in fact many said it wasn't even music) for much of it's existance. But this year in our awards, we got rap music not only from the Urban US community, but in a wide array of genres made by a wide array of ethic and even religious backgrounds and in a wide array of languages. (Including Rap music from multiple countries in Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia/New Zealand and South America). It's now being made world wide and it's not only clearly music but also clearly a widely accepted and appreciate art form. Art is Art. Commerce has nothing to do it with being valid art or not. Commerce is ALWAYS playing catch up to Art and trying to financially exploit it however.

Brian

By the way, though Buzz started this topic, it's expanded far past his initial question to a much broader and very interesting topic. Thanks to all who are participating.. it's been fun so far.

Brian

Let me be a bit more specific.

Van, I did not question your motives. I question your actions and the rationale for them.

At your local chapter meeting, did you give them the lyric sheet to critique, or did you play them the song, either live or on a cd?

I used the term "gossip" because you translated a comment, without attribution, into an opinion. "That may not be exactly what he said, but that is what he meant."

I am saddened by the lack of standards in actions.

Are songs shopped to more than one publisher ... absolutely. Are songs changed between pitchings ... you bet they are. Do songwriters go to publisher B and badmouth publisher A because he passed on the song ... not if they hope to have a career.

A publisher can pass on a song for many reasons. It may not be a good fit for the artist who are going into the studio at the time. He may be already pitching a similar song from one of his staff writers. Maybe its a ballad when he wants up-tempo. The reasons are as irrelevent as they are varied.

You are asking him to invest his money and time in your song. It is his money and time and he has the right to decline.

You are paying dues to be a member of NSAI. If you think the critique was done incorrectly, ask for a review. They publish a newsletter, write a "letter to the editor".
Contact one or more of the NSAI executives and request they critique the song/lyric.

Or you could just do the Natalie Maines bit.

Going to a third party to rag your frustrations with your local NSAI chapter without even making an attempt to resolve them within the group is what I did, and still do, consider bad form.

I am saddened by the lack of standards in definition.

When you reduce the superlative descriptor "art" to nothing more than a "Special Olympics of Creativity" where everybody wins the title, humanity suffers. When a trip to a museum is suddenly the equivilent of a Saturday morning at the Garden Club Arts and Crafts Fair, learning is stiffled and education is hindered. When the ability to scratch a record qualifies one for inclusion with the likes of Beethoven, musicologists cringe.

Culture has more than one definition. It is the elevation and appreciation of the humanities and fine arts within a society. It is also the mold that forms on old cheese and skunky beer. I prefer not to see the two interchangable. At least Larry Flynt describes himself as a smut peddlar, not Michaelangelo.

When you consider every word and every note as art, how can you then complain about what is being played on the radio ... isn't that also art?

Ain't it amazing how easy it is to agree with those who agree with us.

dawg

This lyric could be written about any "problem" one has and chooses to "not wake up to". Too fat, Too skinny, Too ugly, Too unbeautiful.(is that the same?) What makes it so strong is the health issue. If you do not take care of yourself as best you can, you'll all too soon be Singin' with Jim Morrison and John Lennon and a few others. I can picture this a GREAT poem(just use the chorus once).But I really don't think it will be a good song, due to the subject matter. Unless,maybe, if the word FAT were replaced with the word PORTLY. Is it that word that is so evil??? I don't know!?

R.T.MOORE

Dawg,

So according to you, nothing created by anyone in any medium is art, until some unspecified later date some unspecified group with undefined credentails and unknown motivations declares that is is ART. Does that correctly sum up your version of how Art is determined? If you have more specifics (i.e. when, who, how, why, what and where) please fill them in. Otherwise, since Music is considered one of the arts (as is writing, painting etc..) the definition AND tradition are not on your side in this. Even Kindergarten teachs and creates art in class. You seem to be confusing an evaluation of what is "good" and "bad" art with the idea of art itself.

So, how many people must declare something is art for it to be so? What must their qualifications be? How does that process of determining work? Who are the people who get do decide? Where does this determination take place? When does it happen? And what happens if some people disagree? Can something start off as Art but then later stop being art? Can something start off NOT being art but them later become art? How does that happen?

While we wait, I bet a lot of new art will be made. Some good. Some bad. Some apparently will have to wait for your system to be defined and put into place.

Brian

Getcha Popcorn Peanuts Crayons!

------------------
http://www.ampcast.com/music/26305/artist.php

Dawg, thanks for your clarification. Yes, I provided all of them with lyric sheets and I played the song on the guitar (hey, one person at least liked the music - my part in this song... ).

I didn't quote the person verbatim because I couldn't remember his exact wording. But he absolutely did use the wording that the fat man was just another fat slob unless something in the lyric gives him some redeeming quality - just probably not exactly as I wrote it, therefore, no quote. His wording (again paraphrased) was that the lyric needed to say that in spite of his size, the fat man did good things. In other words, there is nothing in the lyric to make him care for the man because he was just another fat slob unless he had a record of doing something good that everyone remembers him for. And yes, that is the way he put it.

With no one else objecting and most pretty much agreeing with him, how does one begin to raise a fair point in such a climate? I could have given a lecture on how they are proving the point of the song but I think that would have been less constructive than to just thank them for their opinions. My dad used to tell me to never argue with ignorance because it's a waste of your intelligence. I try to keep that in mind when I choose which battles to fight.

This is not to say that I don't find value in my NSAI membership and if I gave that impression, I take that back and apologize. It's just that the critique of this particular song kind of left me wondering what the hell they were thinking. You are right that I need to work more within my group. I think they just caught me off guard this time. I certainly didn't expect bias against the obese to be part of a critique.

I didn't attribute the paraphrasing because my purpose was not to call him (a specific person by name) out in this forum behind his back. If my intent was to do what you seem to believe I'm doing, I would have named him and probably said something about what an insensitive bastard he is, don't you think? Instead, I just wanted to know if others saw what I saw based on my interpretation of the lyrics. As expected, some here enjoyed it and some didn't.

A couple of others here not only didn't enjoy it but seemed irritated that others did enjoy it (as if that somehow offends their sensibilities). FWIW, I do agree that art should have standards but there are also people who are what I call "artistic snobs."
They have their minds set (just like everyone else to one degree or another) about what constitutes good art. The difference between them and others is they tend to get offended when others don't apply their standards. Perhaps we're all guilty of that to some degree.

We all agree that music is an art form. Just like amateur painters, there are ameteur musicians and writers. While these folks are technically creating art, I suppose the true test of an artist's work is whether enough people agree that it's worthy of the term "art." But does the really mean that the amateur artist is not actually creating art? In the true sense of the word, probably not.

To me, this only proves what we've all known all along. Most songs that have some appeal will only appeal to a small percentage of the number of potential listeners/readers. TrumanCoyote makes this point very well in a thread in the general forum called "song lyrics."



That's just one paragraph from Truman's post. He certainly makes some great points IMO.

Anyway, I didn't intend to offend anyone but I'm kind of glad that this thread has sparked so many interesting opinions. I think it's a healthy discussion as long as no one is left with hard feelings.

Van


[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-28-2004).]

OK Brian,

I will give you my quick and dirty definition and standard.

A. Art is an original and unique work created by an artist which is deemed capable of inspiring the human spirit.

B. An artist is a creative person, recognized by his or her peers for his or her body of work over an extended period of time.

The term artist is like a lifetime achievement award. Until the peer recognistion is granted the person remains a painter / sculptor / writer / composer/ lyricist / musician / weaver, etc.

I consider Carol King's "Tapestry" to be art. The first song she wrote at age 12 was not.

I believe when you lower the standards for a descriptive superlative to an "all-inclusive" level, you cheapen the term and disparage those deserving.

Just my opinion, but if "refridgerator art" is what you consider "art", you can save a considerable amount on museum admission.<g>

dawg

PS ... doncha think "bad art" is an even worse oxymoron than "Bob Young"?


[This message has been edited by greydog (edited 06-28-2004).]

you mentioned that the NSAI member wanted the FAT man to have some redeeming quality, or else he's just another FAT MAN. in other words he was saying "DONT WRITE A SONG EVERYONE CAN RELATE TO BUT ONE THAT ONLY A SELECT FEW CAN RELATE TO".....because only a select few have their situations get better.

i think that says EVERYTHING about the current state of country music and nashville, and thats probably why songs are not connecting anymore. theirs too much christian goody goody in songs right now.

what happened to HE STOPPED LOVING HER TODAY where the main character DIES BECAUSE HE CANT LIVE WITHOUT SOMEONE. today, they would have the main character simply move on.

music shouldnt be a self help book but a representation of REAL emotions, and thats what this song is

scott

one more thing:

had the original post mentioned the song as the subject instead of "rant about lyrics", or had the song itself been cookie cutter hallmark lyrics that DONT push the envelope....there would be about 5 POSTS instead of close to 100.

if you ever wanted a key to success, there you go. a great song stirs up emotions and gets people talking, which this one has done.

so from now on, IM GONNA START MENTIONING HOW I TOOK MY SONGS TO A LOCAL CHAPTER AND DISAGREED WITH THEM.

scott

LOL, interesting point Scott. Actually, I guess the title of this thread should have been "Rant about lyric critique" but the current title seems to have gotten more attention than the norm...

Maybe it was my rant that got more attention than the lyrics but it does seem that they have contributed to the discussion. I can't complain about that.

I knew an old professional commercial painter friend a few years back that used to say. "Eric anyone can be a painter, but it takes a painter to take the paint off the glass."

Eric

"Eric anyone can be a painter, but it takes a painter to take the paint off the glass."


Alkyd you not, I must be slow to-day-tell me what this means...The Old Roller(No Brush Cut)

Dawg,

It looks like we've come full circle my friend. Based on your definition, it only takes 1 single person to determine something is art. Looks like we agree.

Brian

9ne
You'll have to think on that one a bit more.
If ya wanna......
Keep the faith bro.

Eric

Converts are always welcome Brian ... even if they're having a li'l trouble with the comprehension part.<g>

dawg

This is only tangental to the main point of this thread, but I think it's important.

I am a long-time NSAI member, and I raise my voice not to defend the organization, but to clarify some apparent misconceptions about it.

There is no NSAI "way." They have no songwriting manual. They publish no songwriting books. The have no procedure as to how to write a song. If you should attend an NSAI seminar, you will hear from professional songwriters and publishers etc. You will not hear from an NSAI "faculty" quoting from "NSAI dogma." Neither exists. They have song camps. The instructors are professional songwriters who teach what they think is appropriate. They do not take their syllabus from some murky NSAI "method."

If you send in a song for evaluation, it is heard by a songwriter, not some NSAI staff flunky. Their opinions are NOT from a solid bloc. Different evaluators will make different comments. If you doubt me, test it.

If you go to an NSAI workshop away from Nashville, you are not in the presence of "experts." You are in a room full of people just like yourself...people interested in songwriting enough to attend a meeting once a month and share whatever knowledge and opinion they do have with the others in attendence. The NSAI local coordinators are not "experts" and claim no expertise. They are trained by NSAI ONLY in how to run a workshop.

In truth, NSAI "approach" is as varied as its members. Critiques are NOT one dimentional. Each comment comes from the heart of the individual, not from any official NSAI stance. If everyone at Buzz' Chicago meeting said the same thing, either they should move the meeting to Stepford, or his song magically effected every person in the room the same way. Or, perhaps, the comments he refers to came only from a couple of the people. He didn't say.

It is certainly true that there are common threads that appear whenever you get songwriters together. An NSAI meeting is no exception. You may hear similar comments coming from several individuals. I think that's normal. There are many well-accepted conventions regarding songwriting, and many are quoted at an NSAI meeting. But, if the advice you get from a collegue there does not please you, the proper thing to do is to thank him/her for the effort and move on. You simply cannot debate someone's opinion of your work. You own your song, but they own their opinion.

Buzz was ABSOLUTELY correct in not confronting his critics. He asked for their opinion and got it. I presume he would offer the same courtesy when each of them asks for his opinion of their work. And I presume he would tell the truth, as he saw it.

One other comment regarding NSAI: they state clearly that their function as an organization is to support people who are trying to succeed as professional songwriters. If a person has no interest in that goal, then NSAI is probably not the right club to join.

The debate about commerciality is a frustrating thing. A song is not commercial because of the way it is written; it is commercial because of the way people react to it. Consider: we all want to write songs that touch people...songs people will like...songs people hear and say, "man, that is a good song!" If we do that successfully--and often--commercial success just might follow. After all, a commercial song is merely a song that lots of people like.

[This message has been edited by TrumanCoyote (edited 06-29-2004).]

Truman, that was extremely well put as usual. I think my mistake in this whole thing was not explaining well enough what my rant was about.

It's not that I want to quit NSAI or even that I think my group is useless. It was mostly my rant about one critique of one song. And no, not every single one of the people there overtly agreed with this one person. However, I did see a couple of heads shake in agreement when he said what he said. In fairness, an affirmative head shake can mean something other than complete agreement. Perhaps I reacted to the critique too emotionally, hence the rant. I honestly think I was flabergasted more than anything.

Truthfully, they have not given me a good critique yet. I'd like to think that has nothing to do with this rant. Maybe on some subconscious level, it does. I try to be as objective as I can about it and I always thank them for listening. After all, their opinions belong to them and they are entitled to them. I honestly do not believe that even a calm discussion of my POV of the song they critique is worth the effort because you are basically dealing with opinions. It's my job to determine which opinions are valid and to do so with as little emotion as possible in order to get the most out of the meetings.

I think it's different on these boards (which again, I thank Brian for providing and everyone for contributing to these discussions). I think these lyric boards are the perfect place to challenge a critique because it's not an in your face kind of thing. And by challenge, I don't mean by getting all pissy and throwing a fit. I mean challenging in a respectful way, which I always endeavor to do.

In the end, we're all just trying to advance ourselves and help each other along the way. A healthy debate is a good thing so long as nobody goes overboard or takes things too personally.

Thanks again for your words of wisdom.

Van

[This message has been edited by Buzz Grudge (edited 06-30-2004).]

Really says it Trueman.
Buzz. Every opinion is valid.
It is your job to decide which ones you believe are the ones to help guide you.
If any at all.
Graham

------------------
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/2/grahamhendersonmusic.htm

Truman,

To clarify, I am speaking from direct knowledge, not second hand opinion. Aside from the fact I was an active NSAI member for 7 years in multiple (3) cities with completely different chapter coordinators and also attended multiple NSAI workshops in Nashville, I am also good friends with a lot of the people who teach both the coordinators for NSAI and many of their workshops AND I am friends with over quite a few current NSAI chapter coordinators and some of them are our JPF coordinators as well. In fact, I even led Gracie Hollombe to NSAI to get a job there as their Chapter/Membership Coordinator. I am very VERY familiar with NSAI, how it works, how they teach, who is involved and I know a lot about their history. In fact, the last time I was in their office in Nashville, I gave one of their new members an orientation session on the NSAI, what they do and how they do it all.

That said, there's a definite NSAI Dogma. It's the same dogma that circulates the entire Nashville educational community because all those folks are enterwined with the Nashville way of songwriting which is exactly what you'll get in large helpings when you learn anything from NSAI. And that's not a bad thing, but it's a very obvious thing. Jason Blume, John Braheny, Harriet Schock, Pete and Pat Luboff, Steve Seskin, Danny Arena and Sara Light etc. etc. etc. have all worked for and with the NSAI to educate, and there's clearly a lot of commonality from those folks in the way they approach songwriting and how they teach you to write for commercial purposes. (All are JPF mentors as well). There is a clear idealogy about what will most likely find success in structure, style, subject matter etc.. and the NSAI has been a large part of that process for many years and they still are. It's just a fact.

Now, perhaps some of their chapters are not as up to speed as they once were. But when I was actively attending meetings, the coordinators, who had been trained directly by the NSAI, had very specific ideas and guidance on songwriting. That part might have changed as I haven't been to a general NSAI meeting for over a year. But most of those teachings and attitudes and approaches aren't forgotten overnight.

This hasn't been an attempt to run down NSAI. Just the opposite. They are probably the very best option for an entry level songwriter, interested in Country music especially, to learn the basic and mid level chops they need to structure songs that people look for in Nashville. It's like going to a great school to learn how to read and write. It can also be a great support community for folks who have no contacts in the music industry when they go to Nashville (though I liked it a lot better when their offices were still on the Row instead of where they are now). On the other end of the spectrum, Bart Herbison is doing a lot of Political Lobby work on very high end subjects (and we've co-signed some of the same documents used in various initiatives being worked in Washington, DC). I have no problem with NSAI. But rest assured, there is an institutional system of writing that they've nurtured and fed for many years. It's so engrained that it's nearly invisible.. but it's there.

Brian

Dawg,

I lament, with you, the loss of the superlative in modern language. I'm not completely sure that it applies to the word "art." My wife was an art teacher for many years, her paycheck didn't say painting teacher or a drawing teacher. Still, in spirit, I think you are right.

During a recent visit to a coffee house, I asked for a large coffee. Noticing there were several people with cups larger than mine, I returned to the counter where I was informed that the "large" cup was actually the smallest cup offered. I have since taken to asking for the "largest cup available" when in coffee houses, since they can't seem to agree whether this is called the "grande" or the "venti" or whatever faux romantic name they give to the superlative.

Another problem is with the word "great." I'll sing a song at a writer's night and after finishing, someone will come up to me and say that it was "great." Well, it may, I hope, be good...but it's certainly not great.
Neither is it "wonderful," "awsome," "terrific," or "marvelous" (though it may be "brilliant" but I doubt).

Getting bact to "art." Unfortunately, it's the only word of which I'm aware that fits the bill. "Craft" encompasses too many Martha Stewart projects (I'll bet the license plates will be beautiful.) My godfather, "Uncle" Pete, was the art director for the Sun Times newspaper. He did painting, scupting, drawing, woodcutting and mosaic, among other things. My mom always said he was an "artist." Must someone like he, who is without credential, be a painter/sculptor/drawer/woodcutter/mosaicist? A few more forward slashes and I might have the link to the pentagon. No, I think that, currently, the encompassing term is "art."

I also have another question. Is the term "artist" a title or a description? If it's a title given by some amorphous group of both professional and amateur painting/drawing/scultping/singing/songwriting/dancing/photography/bass playing/filmmaking/poetry critics, then I guess the truest musical artists would be Beethoven and Madonna. If it's a title bestowed by academia, then Bob Dylan would be a craftsman. If it is a title that needs to be bestowed by many, Van Gogh was never, in his life, an artist. And, if it is a title that may be bestowed by one or a few, it is useless.

I recall visiting the Norman Rockwell Museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts. The tour guide related an interesting story. Rockwell was often referred to by critics as a draftsman or a painter of charicatures. After his death, many of his works were exhibited in Manhatten. The most influential and prestigious art critics in New York attended the opening. Mr. Rockwell's people were concerned about their reaction. Upon viewing his life's work, these tough, hard-nosed critics were brought to tears. The reviews were...well...superlative.

I am an artist. I am proud of my profession. I may not be a good artist, I am certainly not a great one, but I am proud of those who are. Some of my fellow artists are not very good at what they do. Others of my fellow artists include names which will be praised throughout history. I am an artist. I will not let anyone else's opinion dissuade me of this.

And, Dawg, you are too.

All the Best,
Mike

------------------
Mike Dunbar Music

That said, there's a definite NSAI Dogma. It's the same dogma that circulates the entire Nashville educational community because all those folks are enterwined with the Nashville way of songwriting which is exactly what you'll get in large helpings when you learn anything from NSAI.

We disagree. That's okay. I would not characterize the common threads found in Nashville as "dogma." I would characterize them as...er...common threads. There is bound to be some consistency of thought in any pursuit. In Nashville you have thousands of folks involved in a common goal, so it is natural that some consistency of thought developes. I would not institutionalize it the way you have, but that's okay, too. I am always amazed at the diversity of thinking in Nashville. I find that the record industry there is far more guilty of rigidity than is the songwriting community. When you go see the Nashville acolytes perform at, say, the Bluebird, it is awe-inspiring to hear their songs that do NOT "fit the format." I guess it is just the format-fitting songs that get cut most often. Who would be surprsed by that?


This hasn't been an attempt to run down NSAI.

I never suspected that it was. Your commnets were in no way disrespectful. In fact my post was not much motivated by your comments. I feared that others might have gotten the wrong impression from them. Again, I am not defending (NSAI needs no defense), but trying to clarify.


But rest assured, there is an institutional system of writing that they've nurtured and fed for many years. It's so engrained that it's nearly invisible.. but it's there.

Again, I disagree. Over the years, I have attended a lot of NSAI functions and it still surprises me the extent of the differing viewpoints you get.

The main point I strive to make is that, at a local meeting, like Buzz' group in Chicago, you are going to get opinions from a group of peers...not pros. The people who attend the meetings and share their views bear no mantle of expertise...they are just people trying to get better at songwriting. To characterize them as anything else is probably not accurate. And, if you take a song to be critiqued at such a meeting, you should be realistic in your expectations. The people listening to your song are NOT industry professionals, and you should not expect a professional-level critique.

NSAI is a good organization, but it is not for everyone. I think Buzz has a good handle on it.

[This message has been edited by TrumanCoyote (edited 06-30-2004).]

[This message has been edited by TrumanCoyote (edited 06-30-2004).]