Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!nessus From: nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) Newsgroups: net.music Subject: Cryptic lyrics? Message-ID: <250@mit-eddie.UUCP> Date: Wed, 30-Oct-85 06:14:02 EST Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.250 Posted: Wed Oct 30 06:14:02 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 1-Nov-85 02:24:10 EST References: <294@mb2c.UUCP> <686@grkermi.UUCP> <2058@reed.UUCP> Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 27 Keywords: K. Bush > From: soren@reed.UUCP (Soren Peterson) > I found *Hounds of Love* to be "interesting" and, in fact, quite > listenable, despite the fact that the lyrics ranged, for the most > part, from obscure to pretentious--really, people, if you can't say it > comprehensibly, why say it at all, especially since in KB's case she > is trying to say *something*.... Really? I've always thought if you can't say it cryptically, why say it all? I mean if the concept you are trying to get across is so simple and easy to understand that you can put it in a couple paragraphs of lyrics and anyone could understand it without thinking about it, then it doesn't seem to me like the concept's worth saying. Also, lyrics that are cryptic stand up much better on repeated listening. Everytime you hear the song, you might understand the song in a somewhat different way. Everytime something new might be revealed. In any case, I don't have a whole lot of problems with understanding KB's lyrics, though I certainly can't claim to understand everything about them. I think her lyrics are the definition of perfection. If it really bothers you that you can't figure some of them out, I can send you Kate's official explanations. "Danced with ghosts of Genet" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)