David Byrne
I want to deviate from the normal Fretterverse guitar-is-all-that-matters worldview for today’s post. It’s Friday, the sun is finally out, and I’m feeling frothy, so you’ll have to excuse my temporary diversion from sweep arpeggios, pointy guitars, and the latest guitar pick that will completely re-invent music as we know it. We’ll get back to that next week, I promise!
David Byrne, of Talking Heads fame, was recently interviewed by CNN, where he stated that song lyrics are overrated. He said it’s often the sound of the words more so than the words themselves and their meaning that makes lyrics work.
Now, in one sense I can see where he’s coming from, as virtually every Talking Heads song I’ve ever heard leaves me struggling to figure out what Mush-Mouth Byrne was saying, and yet I can still appreciate the verse groove for “Burning Down the House.”
His vocal prowess notwithstanding, however, the comment (and my ensuing question) strikes deep in the heart of what many of us – as primarily guitar players first and songwriters second – struggle with when writing songs. So I ask you…
Is David Byrne an idiot?
I’m a Guitar Player, Who Cares About Lyrics?
I held this view for 20+ years of guitar playing. I come from the progressive rock and shredder schools. Yngwie, Satch, and Gambale were my guitar heroes, and Rush was (and still is) the greatest group ever. For me, it was all about the music. Lyrics were nothing more than afterthoughts slapped over top of the riffs, kind of like a basil leaf on a plate of pasta.
Sure, I would sing along to my favorite Rush songs, but I certainly didn’t learn all of the lyrics, and the words Neal wrote and Geddy sang didn’t have nearly the impact of Peart’s drum breaks in Tom Sawyer or any of Satch’s solos on Surfing With the Alien. I was completely blind to not only the message of the lyrics, but also the emotional impact, brilliance of writing style, word choice, form, etc.
Granted, most of the lyrics in progressive rock are complete shyte, anyway, so I don’t think anyone who liked prog really has much of a leg to stand on to argue the importance of lyrics. (Rush is certainly the exception, as they are rather darn good lyricists.) So when you grow up playing music and listening to songs where lyrics are afterthoughts and not well written, it’s very easy to see how a comment like Byrnes’ “song lyrics are overrated” would make perfect sense. But at some point you really need a paradigm shift. Generally this happens when you get older and branch out and expand your listening taste beyond what you liked in high school, but if it doesn’t then you kind of need to force one in order to grow as a musician.
A Tectonic Shift
For me, my paradigm shift was Kevin Gilbert.
I was introduced to Gilbert’s music (and lyrics) through my Din Within band mate Mark. Had I not been turned onto Gilbert’s CD Thud, I probably would have gone on playing music in a blissfully ignorant state. But there was something about Gilbert’s style and approach that really reached down to my soul and slapped it awake.
“Wait a minute,” I thought to myself, “you mean, some people actually having something to say that adds value to the music?” In retrospect it sounds ridiculous, but remember how I grew up listening to music. Many jazz musicians have similar problems, as it’s 99.9% all about the improvisation.
Here was a guy that was writing somewhat more simple music than I was, but was able to strike a perfect balance where the words, meaning of the words, melody, and instrumentation were all working in consort with each other to create a complete song. Now, I’m not here to necessarily extol the virtues of Gilbert’s lyrical brilliance (though you would be a fool not to check out his music – shame on you, Sheryl Crow!) but it certainly takes a lot to break someone out of a 20+ year old shell.
From that day on I made it my mission to pay attention to lyrics. Not only what I was writing, but also to go back and listen to everyone else’s music with new ears and a fresh perspective. Bands I never paid attention to growing up because the guitar solo didn’t have 32nd notes suddenly became as important to me as breakfast. When it came time to write lyrics for the Din Within CD “Awaken the Man” Mark and I worked harder than we ever had on the music to make the lyrics matter, to ensure that what we were saying and how we were saying it was just as integral to the song as the chord progressions and instrumentation. And I have to tell you, it took our music to a whole new level. We were now able to express ourselves both musically and with words. People could now more easily relate to the stories and messages we were making by paying attention to the lyrics. If they were able to bob their head along as well, it was a bonus!
So, let’s go back to the beginning and I’ll pose my original question again: Is David Byrne an idiot?
Perhaps his Talking Heads lyrics didn’t have much of an impact on their fans, but if he didn’t spend much time on them then what do you expect? But don’t tell me that the lyrics to Let it Be don’t have a serious impact; they inspired a whole friggin’ generation, not to mention all of the generations that followed! Or what about “Imagine” by John Lennon?
Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
(Hopefully I won’t get sued for reproducing the lyrics here.)
But seriously, these lyrics are overrated?
Mr. Byrne, yes, you are an idiot.
Loading ...
Thanks for the shout out! KG is an important figure in my musical and lyrical development as well; I’m glad he dope-slapped you as well.
As for the rest, here’s my take: David Byrne is probably right. The vast majority of the record-buying public is probably too dense, too apathetic, or (most likely) too distracted to care much about the message or the artful way it’s presented. I mean, he’s sold plenty of albums, so I guess he knows a little of something. And Nickelback has sold a billion copies of multiple songs that sound EXACTLY THE SAME (and most of the buyers didn’t notice) so the audience at large is probably pretty unsophisticated.
But does that mean we shouldn’t TRY? I say nay nay. Forward the art form, don’t just succumb to the least common denominator. Eh?
I think what David Byrne was getting at is that in music the SOUND of the lyrics are just as important. And in the context of pop music, I would say he’s right. A great part of what makes a great hook is that the words roll right out of your mouth.
Obviously it’s different when you start getting into more challenging music and singer/songwriters that are all about telling stories. Then the meaning of the lyrics becomes VERY important. But in general I can see where he’s coming from.
The probelm with a lot of prog lyrics is that, not only are they cheesy, but they try so hard to use big words that the lyrics don’t flow.
Byrne is not an idiot. In fact he’s far from it. Music and the creation thereof is a very personal thing, especially to those of us who take the art seriously. He just happens to look at the creative process and perhaps even the outcome differently than you do.
To some, lyrics are the be all end all of the song. To others, they’re just another facet of the composition. Who am I to impose my musical perspective on anyone. Sometimes saying nothing at all will deliver the most impact.
Byrne spends a lot of time with Eno. They’re kinda cut from the same cloth and in my opinion neither of them look at music strictly from a singer/songwriter only perspective. They live in a much more inclusive and open mindset than that.
@Ernesto: I agree that the sound of the lyrics may, perhaps, be as important as the lyrics himself, but I’m not sure that’s exactly what he was saying. I think he was saying the lyrics were MORE important than the meaning. Semantics, perhaps, but it’s not the same.
@John: I completely respect someone who looks at the process differently than I do. My point is, if you are going to go the full monty and write lyrics, they should mean something. By just making a blanket statement of “they are overrated” and, essentially, not important, it seems (to me) to be something of a cop out.
“In a certain way, it’s the sound of the words, the inflection and the way the song is sung and the way it fits the melody and the way the syllables are on the tongue that has as much of the meaning as the actual, literal words,” he said.
At no point does he say the sound is more important. Note that he actually doesn’t say “Lyrics are overrated.” That was just a sensationalist title given by CNN.
@Josh: I know what you’re saying but the problem is you’re trying to apply your rules to his perspective of music. You know as well as anyone that the are no explicit rules for music, or any form of art for that matter. In music, the rules are just things that academics come up with to help explain the works of the many masters of the art form.
Lyrics don’t have to make sense. They don’t have to mean anything. Perhaps when you’re writing songs it’s important to you for lyrics to mean something. But maybe to me they don’t have to mean anything at all. Maybe they’re just serving the music sonically.
Here’s something else I was thinking about. I’m not a particular fan of Opera translated to English from it’s original written language. Ever heard a German or Italian opera translated and sung in English? Not very pretty in my opinion. The translations are usually done in a way to best preserve the “meaning” of the lyrics. The problem is once that is done the “sound” of the lyrics no longer support the musical intent of the composer. This is a great example of where the “sound” of the lyrics is as important if not more important than the “meaning”.
Fun conversation by the way.
Of course I’m trying to apply my rules to his perspective; or, at least I’m trying to relate it to my perspective.
I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree. If you’re going to write lyrics, I think you should make them as important as the music. If not, don’t bother.
But I do know exactly what you’re saying about opera. I can’t translate Thai to English literally because it sounds ridiculous!
If David Byrne’s is applying his statement ‘lyrics are overrated’ to himself, it is just being realistic and honest (not to criticize his lyrics, but just acknowledging that they may be the least important element in his songs), however applying it to the whole of pop music is completely ignoring the impact lyrics can have on people and contribute to the popularity of a song, let alone other styles of music where it can be more about the lyrics than the music.
In Folk music, at its root level, you can find different versions of songs with the exact same melody but completely different lyrics, typically one that originated from Ireland, or England, or Scotland, then has crossed the pond and was re-written with lyrics describing a completely different type of experience, an story based on the American life (and the music may have been altered but is still based on the original one).
And even in more recent times, the folk revival of the 60′s, Bob Dylan and others wrote songs with important lyrics, often ground-breaking you could argue, but not bothering with the music that was just borrowed from old tunes, that’s continuing the process I was describing. This has gone out of fashion though (as old folk tunes just sound old to most people today).
But clearly there are so many ways people can experience songs, but bottomline is that it is more natural to care about lyrics than not to.
Just to add that there are some artists whose style in nature call for good lyrics, you expect them to be meaningfull, and when you feel it doesn’t reach that expectation, it can be annoying, I’m thinking about Nick Drake (in this particular case, it is more immaturity in the lyrics, at least in my opinion, but then he was a young man and can’t be blamed for that, against a strong maturity in the music).
As for bands like Oasis, it may be like David Byrne, where the lyrics were never meant to be important (and no much effort was ever put into it), and this did not prevent the songs to become popular, but then ten or fifteen years later, it starts becoming more of a problem as you don’t feel much motivation to rediscover the songs you liked as a teenager when the melodies feel a bit worn out and you can’t find anything more to appreciate in the lyrics.
i donno, listen to the lyrics of something like Once in a Lifetime, he clearly does think they do have some importance. i mean that whole song is a pretty clear statement about the lifestyles of the rich i think…
The day I realized how important lyrics were, was after the many mixed reviews my improv spoken word project received. The reactions were great ranging from calling the poet a genius to telling him to shut the fuck up & learn how to write. For the people literally giving hate mail, it was as though it got under their skin because he was simply reading and they felt that the lyrics were something that anyone could do. Where did he have the right to release a record?
What was frustrating though was it was all about the lyrics that ever seemed to be mentioned in the reviews. Now granted the band was named after him, but what I came to realize is that reviews are writers and they are going to relate to words first. I started to notice that to be true in a lot of reviews since even ones that are song based oriented music.
I know what you mean, Dale. I notice several years ago the (not so) subtle clue that non-musicians always know the words to the songs they like, but musicians always know the musical parts of the songs they like.
Imagine John Lennon with “no possessions.”
Boy, am I late to this game, but I have just recently found your site and have been looking through the archives. I like your point about musicians knowing the musical parts. I often ‘sing’ along with solos, mostly guitar solos, but Miles Davis has a definitely has ‘singable’ style. Now, I, for one, really like David Byrne’s lyrics and believe that he is being intentionally understated when describing them. Another writer who is in that category is Walter Fagan of Steely Dan. Their music is all about a deep groove and sometimes the lyrics seem non-sensical. However, I liken it to an Impressionist painting. When you look closely it’s just a bunch of brush strokes, but when you step back and take it as a whole it’s quite revealing
Now here’s a story: Back in the early 80s, I was studying French and Spanish literature at uni. But I found the lyrics of David Byrne a lot more interesting to apply my new-found literary criticism skills to than many of the texts I was supposed to be writing about. To suggest that his lyrics are some facile filler for the music is absurd. I would go as far as to say that DB is one of the great intellectuals that rock has produced.
But you have to apply some effort. They are not just the Ayn Rand derived glibness that Rush produced. Much as I like some of Rush’s stuff, I wouldn’t waste my time looking for poetry and profundity in their lyrics. I have listened to and attempted to analyse most of the stuff DB wrote on the first half-dozen Talking Heads albums and the lyrics really repay some study.
They are suffused with great humour and irony. How can you not be amused and entertained with the view of bourgeois mainstream American life depicted in “The Big Country”, the view of a sinister and unaccountable government in “Life During Wartime”, the exasperation of petty concerns in “No Compassion”, the subtle depiction of a politician and his sleight of hand in “Born Under Punches”, or the description of drug taking in “Pull Up the Roots”? To think that these lyrics are just random words because they are phonically interesting is to confuse David Byrne’s writing with that of Yes’ Jon Anderson.
From interviews that I remember, it is true that Byrne admitted to being bored with writing lyrics and, having nothing much further to say, wished that he could just write random sounds. But that was after he had already written a lot of seminal songs. You also want to take what Byrne says with a pinch of salt. He is constantly ironic, self-deprecating and provocative. Harold Pinter once said, in a moment of exasperation with a journalist, that his plays were about “the weasel underneath the cocktail cabinet”. There ensued a lot of speculation about what this phrase actually meant. Pinter said much later that it didn’t mean anything; it was just to wind up the journalist and end a discussion that he didn’t want to get involved in.
You aren’t going to get to the root of any serious artist’s work in a couple of minutes, and don’t expect them to give you all the keys. I have to admit, that if you wanted to start a discussion about the meaninglessness of lyrics, you chose the wrong guy to pick on in citing David Byrne. There’s more meaning in much of his stuff than in about 95% of what passes for rock music. “Smoke on the water. Fire in the sky”. Yup, it sometimes gets a bit more complicated than that.
All excellent points, Alex, thank you so much for your input. And I have to give you mad props for being the first to use “profundity” on Fretterverse; who says guitarists are dumb!