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)