{"id":49,"date":"2016-10-14T22:04:06","date_gmt":"2016-10-15T02:04:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/?p=49"},"modified":"2016-10-14T22:53:33","modified_gmt":"2016-10-15T02:53:33","slug":"meaningless-matters-the-form-of-musical-lyrics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/uncategorized\/meaningless-matters-the-form-of-musical-lyrics\/","title":{"rendered":"Meaningless Matters: The Form of Musical Lyrics"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/img09.deviantart.net\/67e4\/i\/2011\/071\/8\/7\/wallpaper___simple_scratch_by_ooklah-d3bg5jc.png\" alt=\"\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>Noah Cowit<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><em>For a while<\/em> <\/strong>I hated 80\u2019s pop. Or at least I thought I did. I thought I hated about \u201cCall Me\u201d and \u201cCome on Eileen\u201d, \u201cTainted Love\u201d and \u201cI Ran.\u201d I thought I hated big synthesizers, repetitive melodies, and articulated lyrics. At the very least I saw these things as empty, a useless joke. Something to scoff at, not to listen to.<\/p>\n<p>I was certainly not the only one.<\/p>\n<p>80\u2019s pop, and pop music in general, may be one of the most critically disregarded genres of music. There is none other so routinely criticized in popular intellectualism. Of course there is the occasional contrarian fluff piece, like the Huffington Post\u2019s so called \u201cDefense of Pop Music\u201d<a href=\"#_edn1\" name=\"_ednref1\">[i]<\/a>, which boldly states that \u201cPop music is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be.\u201d Despite, or perhaps because of, these feeble defenses, I would\u2019ve been content to hate 80\u2019s pop forever. Except for one thing. It&#8217;s structure, it&#8217;s lyrics, were fantastic. It was form without truth, a glorious superficiality.<\/p>\n<p>Maybe for this reason, it grew on me. 80\u2019s pop began to become a guilty pleasure. It slowly ate through my playlists, becoming 10, then 20, then 30% of what I listened to. Trying to justify 80\u2019s pop to myself, I searched for some significance in the lyrics. I can tell you that it becomes pretty obvious, pretty quickly, that looking for hidden truths in \u201cGirls Just Want to Have Fun\u201d is an exercise in futility. A friend of mine perhaps put it best when they said, \u201cMusic should have meaning, even if it is just about love and relationships; the music you listen to is about nothing.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>But that does not settle the matter. It should not settle the matter. It cannot just be accepted without a fight that meaning is all that matters, that form and style have no value. 80\u2019s pop is hardly unique in this. People like meaningless lyrics. People like meaningless language. Yet they are bothered by a lack of meaning, and not by a lack of form.<\/p>\n<p>So, this leaves us with one option. To develop a defense for meaninglessness, or find that it is impossible to listen to 80\u2019s pop, or read detective novels, or the comics in a newspaper, without creeping feelings of guilt and insecurity. This is a defense of 80\u2019s pop, and not only that, it is a defense of all language, all art, that does not carry an inherent meaning; that which is primarily form.<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly enough, the route to doing this is through the song \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d, by Suzanne Vega.[ii]<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Tom&#039;s Diner -Suzanne Vega\" width=\"584\" height=\"438\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/mNWyF3iSMzs?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>This may seem an odd choice at first<em>. <\/em>Although made in the 80\u2019s, \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d is not a pop song. For one, it is sung A Capella. No drums, no synthesizers, not even an acoustic guitar. It does not blast into being like most pop music, it smoothly flows. There is no repetitive chorus. In fact, there is no line repetition whatsoever. The events it describes are simple, the setting ordinary. And most importantly, \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d arguably has hidden meanings, hidden \u201ctruths\u201d. But this, of course, is absolutely necessary. You cannot elevate form unless it can be shown that it has some potential to outdo meaning. It cannot be done in a song with none.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the best way of interpreting what meaning and form contribute to \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d is by comparing what can be gained from both. We can try to separate the two, describing the song with meaning at the expense of form, and then form at the expense of meaning. Then we may be able to tell how they each contribute differently to our understanding of the song. We will start with meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Tom\u2019s Diner is a song about a lonely person in a diner. Some evidence that they\u2019re lonely is because they look away when two of the characters in the diner show a level of familiarity with each other, kissing in greeting. This could also be attributed to social awkwardness or perhaps a general problem with intimacy. However, later contextual evidence points to the idea of loneliness over these later two premises. Additionally, the character feels isolated from the world, and from other people in general. Examples of this include when the character doesn\u2019t know of the person they read about in an obituary. There is a level of blocked intimacy when the character finds themselves unable to make eye contact with a woman outside, because the glare from the glass blocks her view of the inside. So the woman outside can also be considered to be isolated. Also, there is a level of sexual tension, as the character outside is moving her skirt up on her leg, to straighten her underclothes, but despite her efforts the rain is making her hair damp. This could also be considered commentary on idealized perfection. Finally, there seems to be a romantic aspect to the loneliness the character may be experiencing, as another person in mentioned who seems to have a level of familiarity with the person at the diner.<\/p>\n<p>Hopefully that didn\u2019t completely ruin the song for you.<\/p>\n<p>It could be questioned at this point why that read like the essay of a middle schooler. The answer is simple. If meaning is all that matters, everything of value in Tom\u2019s Diner should be able to be gained from the paragraph above. Creative form shouldn\u2019t be needed to supplement meaning, so long as the knowledge given is correct and clear. But there is something obviously wrong with this argument. Or if not wrong, at least not right. If it hadn\u2019t explicitly said it, a person could honestly wonder if what is being described is a song, or just some weird passage about a person in a diner. Clearly <em>something<\/em> is missing.<\/p>\n<p>Maybe it\u2019s that the paragraph doesn\u2019t take into account how seamlessly the words line up in \u201cToms Diner\u201d, how even a slight syncopation grabs the attention like a vice. Maybe it\u2019s that it doesn\u2019t have quotes to show us how the language is so simple, and yet so effective. Maybe it\u2019s that it doesn\u2019t tell us that song is written in first person, that is \u201c<em>I<\/em> am sitting-in the morning-at the diner-on the corner\u201d and how the result is intensely visceral and personal. Maybe it\u2019s that it doesn\u2019t mention despite this first person narration, when the women is \u201coutside looking in\u201d, it is not \u201cI think she sees her own reflection\u201d, but \u201ccause she sees-her own reflection\u201d and how it isn\u2019t \u201cno she does not see me\u201d but \u201cno she does not-really see me\u201d. Or maybe it\u2019s all of these things. Maybe it\u2019s that the story of \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d is one that could be described in a million different ways, but that for some reason, this way, with this particular arrangement of words, is one that works.<\/p>\n<p>Wasn\u2019t that better? Doesn\u2019t it seem that by concentrating on form instead of meaning-by focusing on the language-not the knowledge-we can gain a better sense of what \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d really is? This may be because form alone has the potential to affect the reader, or the watcher, or the listener, in a way that meaning simply can\u2019t. It is all about effect. If form is effective, if it makes the audience feel something, then it works. Form can exist in a palatable form without meaning, but meaning cannot do the same without form. This may be because form alone has the potential to create feeling, while meaning alone just has the potential to create more meaning. It is about emotion and subjectivity, about the potential of words to shape us.<\/p>\n<p>More than that, it is about the potential of words to shape how we view the world.<\/p>\n<p>The study of words is central to the understanding of form. Words are often incorrectly considered perfect descriptors. That is, the word \u201cchair\u201d is not just a representation of the thing we call the chair, the word chair is the chair. Or at least the thought connected to the word is the chair. But is it really? Are the word and the thing truly one and the same? In \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d, would there really be no difference if the word wet was replaced with moist? Or better yet, saturated. The words all refer to the same thing, why couldn\u2019t they just be swapped? Possibly it\u2019s because words aren\u2019t just descriptions, at least not in the traditional sense of the word. Words are packages of connotations, \u201cactively shaping the things they purport to describe.\u201d<a href=\"#_edn3\" name=\"_ednref3\">[iii]<\/a> Wet, moist, and saturated all bring different feelings into the mind, feelings that are shaped by our prior experiences with language. We need to study form, or risk being thoughtlessly swept up in these connotations. Words matter, especially if we think they don\u2019t. Meaning cannot exist on its own in language; form will always create meaning of its own. It is then necessary to study form to fully understand a piece of writing.<a href=\"#_edn4\" name=\"_ednref4\">[iv]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Now, &#8220;Tom\u2019s Diner&#8221; uses particularly broad and vague language. Words like \u201ccounter\u201d, \u201cman\u201d, \u201ccoffee\u201d, and \u201cwindow\u201d make up the majority of the song. The connotations these words are general and impersonal. They give the song a sense of transparency and clarity that could be mistaken for a lack of form. But this is simply untrue. Choosing to be broad with language creates an effect on the listener, just as the use of specific ornamentation does. In this case, it creates a sense of emptiness, leaving a vacuum where \u201choroscope\u201d, \u201cstockings\u201d, and \u201ccathedral\u201d can take on a greater prominence. It is an active choice to use general language, not an unbiased default. Form is truly present everywhere.<a href=\"#_edn5\" name=\"_ednref5\">[v]<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Yet even this does not do form justice. Sure, it shows why form is valuable to study, but it doesn\u2019t give validation to our innate desire for it. It does nothing to show us why we enjoy form on its own. Meaning professes to tell us what are deepest desires are, how we think, how best to live a life. Its goal is to show us who we truly are as human beings. It makes sense that we would be drawn to meaning. Form can tell us a lot about a text, but what can it tell us about ourselves?<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the answer to this question can be found in \u201cToms Diner\u201d.\u00a0 Again, \u201cTom\u2019s Diner\u201d is about a person in the diner. But it\u2019s about more than that. Ironically, it\u2019s about a person who has a problem with form. The narrator, who is \u201cturning to the horoscope and looking for the funnies\u201d, but with an air of detached triviality. Who doesn\u2019t talk to anyone for the entire period of the song, and in fact seems to avoid doing so. It\u2019s about the instance with the women outside who looks and \u201cdoes not-really see\u2026cause she sees-her own reflection\u201d Overall, there is a sense that the narrator in the diner can no longer appreciate form. And what is the result of this? The narrator seems profoundly isolated and deeply lonely. They seem unable to make basic connections, for want of deeper ones. They are stuck in a prison of import, where meaning is the only thing that matters.<\/p>\n<p>An appreciation of the study of form is necessary to break out of this prison, by acknowledging that human beings are inherently social animals. We do not always talk about substantial matters. In fact, most of the time we talk about nothing. Yet we always talk with form. If a person who speaks with only form is shallow and superficial, then the person who speaks with only meaning is incomprehensible and insane. Yet for some reason, we act as if we are completely serious whenever we write, or we read, or we listen to music. We ignore the lighter social aspect of our nature, half of what makes us human.<a href=\"#_edn6\" name=\"_ednref6\">[vi]<\/a> We ignore the part of us that is the not logical, but emotional, that is not knowledgeable, but creative. On some level we know that meaning isn\u2019t everything. That is why we like form; that is why it is so important to music, cinema, and literature. We are naturally drawn to things that bleed form, the subjective and the superficial, because that is part of who we are. Through fantastic form a song, a movie, or any piece of writing can become greater than the sum of its parts. It can become something truly human. It can become art.<\/p>\n<p>Both form and meaning have a purpose. Meaning can make us feel complete. It is part of our sense of being, the way we interpret the world. But sometimes looking at a piece of art for its form can tell us something more revealing than looking at it for its meaning. It can tell us that words matter for their own sake, that they change the way we look at the world. By imparting in us that form is naturally a part of who we are, it can make us feel more in touch with all aspects of our own humanity.<\/p>\n<p>Form can make us feel free. Free from the stifling pressure that everything has to mean something, free from the idea that meaning is all that we are. We should embrace form. We should revere it. And at the very least, the next time you watch a superhero movie, or read a romance novel, or listen to a fantastic 80\u2019s pop song, remember the unnamed women from \u201cToms Diner\u201d and do as she did.<\/p>\n<p>Look, and see your own reflection.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Footnotes:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref1\" name=\"_edn1\">[i]<\/a> Harris, Austin S. &#8220;In Defense of Pop Music.&#8221; The Huffington Post. Accessed October 14, 2016.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref2\" name=\"_edn2\">[ii]<\/a> Full Lyrics Sheet can be found at: <a href=\"https:\/\/play.google.com\/music\/preview\/Tckcwalufy5dyxanbw75s5iae7y?lyrics=1&amp;utm_source=google&amp;utm_medium=search&amp;utm_campaign=lyrics&amp;pcampaignid=kp-lyrics&amp;u=0\">https:\/\/play.google.com\/music\/preview\/Tckcwalufy5dyxanbw75s5iae7y?lyrics=1&amp;utm_source=google&amp;utm_medium=search&amp;utm_campaign=lyrics&amp;pcampaignid=kp-lyrics&amp;u=0#<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref3\" name=\"_edn3\">[iii]<\/a> Thorne, Christian. \u201cLecture: Theories of Language and Literature\u201d September 2016<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref4\" name=\"_edn4\">[iv]<\/a> Nietzsche, Friedrich. On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense. S.l.: Aristeus Books, 2012. Nietzsche establishes in the idea that there is a separation between the word and the object described. This is the\u00a0idea that words are metaphors themselves, and that they carry innate cultural connotations that are not vested in reality.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref5\" name=\"_edn5\">[v]<\/a> Lanham, Richard A. The Motives of Eloquence: Literary Rhetoric in the Renaissance. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1976. Lanham established the idea that form is most evident where it seems like there is none; that seeming transparency is sometimes the craftiest use of form.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"#_ednref6\" name=\"_edn6\">[vi]<\/a> In <em>Motives, <\/em>Lanham established the idea of the rhetorical (social) man as \u201chalf of man\u201d. He compares the style of literature to social life, and the meaning of literature to meaningful life. Lanham considers the balance between meaning and meaninglessness the fundamental dichotomy of humankind, and tasks literature to be a projection of this balance.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Noah Cowit For a while I hated 80\u2019s pop. Or at least I thought I did. I thought I hated about \u201cCall Me\u201d and \u201cCome on Eileen\u201d, \u201cTainted Love\u201d and \u201cI Ran.\u201d I thought I hated big synthesizers, repetitive melodies, &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/uncategorized\/meaningless-matters-the-form-of-musical-lyrics\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1350,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1350"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":65,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49\/revisions\/65"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl-209-fall16\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}