User talk:MrMuskOx

From Lyriki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Radiohead - Let Down Reformatting

I though I could just let this thing go away... I guess I was wrong.

Ok. Here is the problem with the current Formatting of Let Down... Lets take the first two verses of Let Down:
Transport, motorways and tramlines
Starting and then stopping
Taking off and landing
The emptiest of feelings
Disappointed people, clinging on to bottles
And when it comes it's so, so, disappointing
The reasons for the current format are twofold: A misunderstanding of the complexity of Thom Yorke's lyrics and secondly that everywhere else on the web has it in this format. Thus whoever started this thread took the popular and wrong formatting and pasted it on this site.

Sorry but despite your insistence, this is not true. For now let me just say (once more...) that I have reviewed the lyrics while listening to the song and the format they have it's the one that made more sense to me.


First the complexity of the lyrics: This song is based in 4/4 time and the verses are based around a 8 measure progression which repeats. The beginning of the first cycle of 8 measures begins on the word Transport whereas the second cycle begins on the word Feelings which if we break it into two instead of one verse in the current format we get this:
Transport, motorways and tramlines
Starting and then stopping
Taking off and landing
The emptiest of
feelings
Disappointed people, clinging on to bottles
And when it comes it's so, so, disappointing


Now what is the reason for this odd splitting of a sentence between verses? That is due to what Thom Yorke is trying to achieve as a lyric writer. Instead of the standard way of writing a song where the lines of the song start on the first beat of the first measure through the 4th beat of the second measure, then starting the second line on the first beat of the 3rd measure, Thom after the word Transport begins the line in the SECOND measure which is really exciting if you think about it. But that means that the end of the line with the word tramlines in the sentence 'motorways and tramlines' spills out into the 3rd measure where normally is where the second line would begin.

I'd like to follow all you're saying, but you obviously have a deeper understanding of music metrics than me. This however does not entitle you to build your argument on statements such as "what Thom Yorke is trying to achieve as a lyric writer" (unless 1. you are in fact Thom York or 2. you can read his mind). Don't get me wrong I admire Thom York too (both as lyricist and musician), but that doesn't makes me shout "brilliance" everywhere. Can you prove that the odd way that the lyrics fit the music isn't more of a coincidence? It's pretty common for the lyrics of a song to be written separately from it's music, then "adjust" the lyrics to it (or the music to the lyrics). Given that Thom York writes most Radiohead lyrics alone, saying that's the case here if far from being a shoot in the dark (can you say that about your interpretation? would anyone else?).

So in the new reformatting. the first verse should go like this:
Transport, motorways and
tramlines starting and then
Stopping taking off and
Landing the emptiest of
Now if you notice the following words have the same syllabic rhythym which are emphasized: Transport, Tramlines, Stopping, Landing. Again the brilliance is he's still in the middle of a sentence when he holds it over to the next verse:
feelings. Disappointed
people, clinging on to
bottles And when it comes it's
so, so, disappointing


Here the emphasized words line up on the first beats of measure 1, 3, 5, 7 as a standard song would: Feelings, People, Bottles and So So. If you listen again to the song these are the words that are emphasized on the downbeats.

You're free to see brilliance anywhere you want, but you shouldn't expect everybody else to see the same as you. "the brilliance is he's still in the middle of a sentence when he holds it over to the next verse". Sorry but I don't need to disassemble a song to admire it. Regarding lyrics, that's congruent with not writing them in a way that makes it nearly impossible for everyone else to understand what they're about (that is, leaving aside the speculation that would be needed "to know what they're really about").

Now as to the current format, you can look this song up on google and find the same format on many sites:
http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/LET-DOWN-lyrics-Radiohead/DCF3DBF68D26E227482568660010C737
http://www.seeklyrics.com/lyrics/Radiohead/Let-Down.html
http://www.songmeanings.net/lyric.php?lid=556
http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/radiohead/letdown.html
But simply because everyone else has it in this format does not mean it is right. It's very likely that one person put it in this format not understanding the effect that Thom Yorke was going for, and everyone else just simply copied it. Thus the wrong format gets repeated over and over again.

Though it's true that most lyrics sites copy their lyrics verbatim from other sites, this is not the case here. All Radiohead lyrics I reviewed where compared to at ease and green plastic lyrics (fan sites are generally less prone to that). Then again, as I have repeatedly said, I have checked the lyrics myself. You know, the fact that the lyrics to this song are the same everywhere could also mean that most people agree (on their own terms) that this are the "correct" lyrics.

Well I am trying to redo the format at least here in Lyriki so that people when they look at the lyrics really understand what Thom Yorke is doing. Lyrics should be formatted into verses and chorus and most songs are. In the current format, the two verses are smushed into one simply because whoever authored it did not understand that there are in fact two rather than one. I think If Lyriki really wants to be a repository of lyrics and really be an authority it should seek to set out the correct lyrics rather than continue to promulgate errors.

You don't seem to know the different between what you think and the truth (you should probably do something about that). I don't pretend to know the truth either (I'd say that there's no such thing, but that's a different issue). However, general consensus (as I see it, the most we can achieve) seems to be that the current format is the most "correct" one.

Saying that to be taken seriously ("really be an authority") we must accept your truth, says not only a lot about your arrogance but also about you flawed logic: agreeing with everybody else could never weaken our credibility, disagreeing on the other hand (as you propose) could. For the record, I don't give a fuck either way.

--Attendant 20:08, 3 February 2007 (PST)