A Mark In Time
Mark Knopfler Discussion => Mark Knopfler Discussion Forum => Topic started by: Jules on June 07, 2012, 01:19:52 PM
-
I made a mp3 cd with all the songs released by MK since his GH record and I
-
As a native English speaker (I think I've said this before) but I think his songs have become simpler; more often with a single meaning now, no memorable melody (which I think is an integral part of a well written song) and lazily based on books instead of using his own experiences or observations. Some of his best works IMO have been written from the point of view of a reporter - no coincidence.
-
I agree jbaent. MK is definitely more of a songwriter these days and although Quality Shoe was from 2002, when I first heard it I thought the lyric was really clever and I still do. Regarding melody - I think they are just as memorable, but perhaps more subtle than before eg "Before Gas & TV" "Monteleone" "Piper..." "5.15am"........
-
Interesting thread.
I also think much about Mark's songwriting... I need everything I can get (LEO, dictionary, THIS FORUM) to get behind the meanings of his songs - and I am surprised every single time about how great he puts these stories into these short form of lyric. You know, it is not a short story, it's a song.
For example: 5.15 am for example: Master piece.
But dmg ist also right: In earlier years his writing was deeper. I thought about this term, "deeper", and came to my personal conclusion that it is about
reflection: When Mark says that he can write about anything, a word someone mentions, a bus time table, movies or books, I am not sure if that is something that is really so great to mention! Or to stay into my picture: His reflection of what he has around himself is more facile, it is not going very deep into his soul. I had once a thread opened about Border Reiver, and that we learned the deeper meanings of it only because of Mark's press release and interviews.
So it seems that song writing has become some kind of trade for him - I sometimes miss the artistic approach... I know it sounds silly to say this about MK but I struggle a lot (lyricalwise, not music) with songs like Hard Shoulder, Cleaning My Gun, even So Far From The Clyde leaves some questions to me...
And that might be a language issue, and you would be right, jbaent!
Some positive examples:
Remembrance Day: The words perfectly mirror the mood: Mark said once that all these war memorials inspired him - and that
every village and town had some lost sons. The picture of these memorials can be found in the Maypole and later in the steeples - and the
stubble ground reflects the home ground from the sports in the first part - so he really makes strong pictures that help to illustrate what he means...
Before Gas & TV: Masterpiece. Period
5.15 am: When the ghosts of the dead people gather around the car, mute accusation, great, and the "back in time" part is also awesome - really epic...
I learned a lot of new vocabulary from MK, so I will always be thankful to him. He is an intregal part of my developments in English language, if you might call it so... and that contains interest in English history, landscape, and so on...
LE
-
I think back in the day, when y'all's (can one actually write that ::)) thinking his writing was "deeper" he was trying too much, and now it is more natural, this simpler at times.
-
I am often stunned by the contributions of non-native speakers of English to fora such as this. The English used may not always be perfect (and these days, less than perfect English is daily demonstrated by established broadcasters on radio and television) but the English is generally easily understood, showing a grasp of vocabulary and sentence construction that is more than admirable. Indeed, it is remarkable.
At the same time, English is a language that has subtleties that are often difficult to grasp by many native speakers, let alone non-native speakers.
I am not really the person to comment on MK's lyric-writing ability in general or its development over time in particular. I would only say that it can sometimes be more difficult to express ideas, thoughts, stories, memories and similar matters in a simple way. Distilling these matters to simple, straightforward lyrics without distorting the original idea, thought, story etc can be really difficult. The effort involved in achieving this should not be understated. Finding the right metaphor, the right analogy, the right image, to plant in the listener's mind is a delicate process. Then matching those lyrics to a suitable tune or musical motif can be just as tough.
I grew up in an age when protest songs were the order of the day but most of them hammer home a single message almost relentlessly. It could be fun joining in but it was a reductive activity. I know that some of you bristle at the mention of Dylan but, while he was first known as a protest singer and did write a few "hammer-home" social protest songs, most of what he wrote in that period of his life were not of that blatant kind and have lasted well. And he could write some strong "hammer-home" songs that were in no way protest songs.
My perception, as not essentially an MK fan, is that MK's writing has, if anything, strengthened and flowered. More important than my perception is that MK has not stood still in terms of writing. He is not simply repeating the formula of the past, the formula that brought him success, fame and riches, but is seeking to develop his songwriting in both width and depth.
-
My perception, as not essentially an MK fan, is that MK's writing has, if anything, strengthened and flowered. More important than my perception is that MK has not stood still in terms of writing. He is not simply repeating the formula of the past, the formula that brought him success, fame and riches, but is seeking to develop his songwriting in both width and depth.
Thank you, twm, I agree - you have said what I wanted to say! :)
Regarding non-native English speakers. I know I have said it before, but it always amazes me how fluently people from other countries manage to express themselves so well and often at great length too! I think their grammar is sometimes much better than some native English speakers, probably due to the fact that teaching grammar and spelling was frowned upon in the 80s in this country, in favour of free expression.
-
What Superval said about grammar and spelling, as taught in schools (or not taught in schools, to be more accurate) is absloutely right. Maybe it is a strength of English that it can still be used (or abused) in this way. Maybe it is a sign that the language can change and develop - and not ossify. On the other hand, this freewheeling attitude to language can have detrimetal effects on clarity and understanding. Even the omission of a comma (or putting it in the wrong place) can change the meaning of a sentence significantly.
The malaise is widespread. I know a prominent, professional writer on Dylan who is a graduate from a fine university, who studied there under one of the most revered scholars of English Language and Literature, and yet, in his own wrtings, can make some basic grammatical and spelling errors. Not extensively but, for me, very noticeably.
To support what Superval said, I know non-native speakers whose grasp of both the fundamentals and the "niceties" of the English Language is superb. I am thinking of one who is a native German speaker and another who is a native Spanish speaker and both have lamented the poor English used in the writings of some native English speakers.
I am not grammatically correct in everything I write, nor is my spelling always spot on, but I try to get right. Sometimes, I do express things in what is, technically, an incorrect manner but, on occasions, this is deliberate. I know that I am breaking the "rules". When I write articles, as I do in an amateur way, I review and review both sentence construction and word choice, in order to maximise clarity and minimise misunderstanding. I regard this as a writer's duty. Sometimes, I get the impression that that there are professional writers these days who just don't care. Sadly, I am not even sure that they do know that what they have written is incorrect.
-
Here's an example of one of my pet hates:
COULD OF, SHOULD OF, WOULD OF
COULD HAVE, SHOULD HAVE, WOULD HAVE
This is one of those errors typically made by a person more familiar with the spoken than the written form of English. A sentence like
-
The real art I wish to reach some day however is saying things in as few words as possible - the way our chairman Pottel does it! Pure admiration! (NOT kidding!) :lol
LE
-
When we got internet at the end of 2000, I went to a forum of a TV show in the USA. I was a big fan of that show and was searching for information. Because I liked what I read and saw how much fun those people had, I liked to take part in the conversations as well! Problem for me at that time was that I forgot most of the English language that was taught at school when I was young. Because I wanted to participate I bought 2 dictionaries. One English-Dutch and the other Dutch-English, after all it was at that time 23 years ago that I wrote the English language at school!
In the beginning I often needed my dictionary (uuuhhhhh
-
I wish you would write more messages Fieneke; you have a great writing style and your character really shines through in all your posts. :)
-
Ooooh whaauww dmg, you make me blush now!......... Thank you for your compliment! (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v510/Fieneke2/Emoticons/3511504d6836511af49a93488fbc3c4a1c3.gif)
Fieneke
-
I love the way Germans typically say "or?" at the end of sentences, as they would say in German "Oder" at the end of a question, inviting their counterpart to confirm the question. (absolutely NOT meant as an insult, my English is FAR from perfect)
-
It's fun when a song has layers of meanings and is deliberately (or not) left ambiguous. I find it hard to listen to foreign music, because relating directly to the emotion of a song is part of the thrill.
I'd be interested in how many non-English people have misheard MK lyrics and then had a realization of what was really being sung?
For years I thought a line in Portobello Belle was "he don't care about your window box or garden gnomes !"
I personally think that's a better line too !! :)
-
There is a word in English for a misheard lyric. That word is "mondegreen"":
mondegreen
noun
(Literary & Literary Critical Terms)
a word or phrase that is misinterpreted as another word or phrase, usually with an amusing result
[from the Scottish ballad `The Bonny Earl of Murray', in which the line laid him on the green can be misheard as Lady Mondegreen]
Don't worry if you've never heard of the word, as it is fairly obscure. I've only come across it because there are so many mondegreens pertaining to Dylan lyrics that there have been extensive discussions on the subject. In "Tangled Up In Blue", for example, Dylan sings "(we) split up on a dark sad night, both agreeing it was best" but many first heard this as "(we) split on the docks at night, both agreeing it was best". There are many others.
-
What I really meant in the first place it was something like it doesnt matter if you dont understand a word of Telegraph Road or Sultans of swing, that songs were musically so great that even you know whats the story about, you
-
Damn! I DID think it was "docks that night!"
Tell Dylan to enunciate better please.
-
Yes jbaent you are absolutely right especially about "Song For Sonny Liston": Although I looved it from the very first moment I heard it because of the
really awesome (and underrated) drumming and the unusual sound of an unusual MK guitar, there are really many many long lyric lines... and no guitar
solo on the album as you already pointed out... But the sound of the rhythm in this song reminds me so much of training work or footwork in the boxing ring AND even the bell is there, so really great. It has to be monotonously btw because of this. But it makes the listener very curious to hear so long paragraphs I think and he HAS to look for the lyrics to make out what the song is about.
LE
-
In order not to confuse things too much, perhaps it might be sensible to start a "Mark's Mondegreens" thread, so "amit-ers" can post their various misheard lyrics.
Any takers? It's just an idea.
-
In order not to confuse things too much, perhaps it might be sensible to start a "Mark's Mondegreens" thread, so "amit-ers" can post their various misheard lyrics.
Any takers? It's just an idea.
Excellent idea, I know over the years Ive heard many things incorrectly, its just a case of remembering them.
-
typical example is Jimi in " excuse me while i kiss the sky" or is it really "xcuse me, while i kiss this guy"??
i never knew.. and yes, Knopflers' mondegreens deserve their own thread...
-
Yes jbaent you are absolutely right especially about "Song For Sonny Liston": Although I looved it from the very first moment I heard it because of the
really awesome (and underrated) drumming and the unusual sound of an unusual MK guitar, there are really many many long lyric lines... and no guitar
solo on the album as you already pointed out... But the sound of the rhythm in this song reminds me so much of training work or footwork in the boxing ring AND even the bell is there, so really great. It has to be monotonously btw because of this. But it makes the listener very curious to hear so long paragraphs I think and he HAS to look for the lyrics to make out what the song is about.
LE
About Sonny Liston and the drums, that drums groove is one of the reason I love that song. That groove is amazing, specially live as Danny first and Ian after added a lot of great variations. Drum grooves are made of several patters and in that patterns the hihat and the bass drum usually have a very specifical place, well, in Sonny Liston the hihat is placed in a difficult way if you dont play drums very often. In other words, its common that in most of the drum patterns the hihat and the snare drum are played at the same time, not in this song. With practice you learn how to play that but, then you have a break and when you come back to the groove... You have to control that the hihat and the snare goes separately in this pattern!!!
Both Danny and Ian played it very well and spectacular, from the point of view of a (very very very) amateur drummer...
Hey, maybe there is a "I play an instrument" issue as well when yuo like or not a song ;D
-
Yeah, agreed totally, BUT I have to say that I like Chad Cromwell's drumming on this song the most BY FAR. Danny gave it a new dimension live on stage, for example the first time I really liked it was the Lyon 2005 version, much more powerful compared to other 2005 live versions.
But this drumming on the album is so perfectly well. Love it.
LE
-
As a no native English speaker I stronlgy enjoy Mark Knopfler's song for their musicality.
I don't care that much about their meaning. Just that if it sounds good enough to my ears that's okay with me.
But I must admit that Going Home/Wild Theme does feature some of his very best lyrics.
-
But I must admit that Going Home/Wild Theme does feature some of his very best lyrics.
;D
-
As a no native English speaker I stronlgy enjoy Mark Knopfler's song for their musicality.
I don't care that much about their meaning. Just that if it sounds good enough to my ears that's okay with me.
But I must admit that Going Home/Wild Theme does feature some of his very best lyrics.
I think this is a good point because I gained my interest in DS when I was only 9 and it was the guitar riff in MFN that first caught my attention. Then when I listened to other songs I discovered I liked his voice and overall musicality of the songs, but at that age I didn't bother to think about the lyrics that much. I think this shows that the lyrics are only a part of the jigsaw.
This has now made me wonder if he now spends too much emphasis on lyrics and too little on the other aspects. He should, IMO play to his strengths and he is capable of composing great music and is a genius on the guitar so why not have more musical passages? Oh, and if I can be a little greedy - fewer songs converted from books!
-
As a no native English speaker I stronlgy enjoy Mark Knopfler's song for their musicality.
I don't care that much about their meaning. Just that if it sounds good enough to my ears that's okay with me.
But I must admit that Going Home/Wild Theme does feature some of his very best lyrics.
I think this is a good point because I gained my interest in DS when I was only 9 and it was thme guitar riff in MFN that first caught my attention. Then when I listened to other songs I discovered I liked his voice and overall musicality of the songs, but at that age I didn't bother to think about the lyrics that much. I think this shows that the lyrics are only a part of the jigsaw.
This has now made me wonder if he now spends too much emphasis on lyrics and too little on the other aspects. He should, IMO play to his strengths and he is capable of composing great music and is a genius on the guitar so why not have more musical passages? Oh, and if I can be a little greedy - fewer songs converted from books!
Guy Fletcher always goes on about guitarists in a bad way. He also recalled an argument he had with Mk during the DS days when MK said DS were a guitar band and he disagreed. I often wonder if GF is an influence for good or bad, and maybe a reason for less guitar work on MK albums.
-
There is only one single "mondegreen" case I personally can think of, because the MK lyrics are always the first to look at when a new album is out, so there cannot be the case of (acoustical) misunderstanding. However, when "Shangri-La" came out, because of some unexpected and further unnamed circumstances ( ;D ) I was able to listen to the album a few weeks before the official release, and when I heard "Back To Tupelo" for the first time, there was no doubt (for me) that MK sang
It's a WASTE to go, back to Tupelo
Even when the album was out, I had no need to check because for me it was so clear. Took me some time to realize that indeed he was singing
It's A wayS to go, back to Tupelo
And telling you what? I still don't get the meaning of "A wayS". I mean the singlular A and the s at the end. What does it mean? Is is the same meaning as
"It's hard to go back to Tupelo", or is it "It's a possibility to go back to Tupelo"... The whole interpretation of the lyrics of this song are still unsure because of this line. Who is saying that? The Colonel? And is the LYING DUTCHMAN another word for the Colonel?? Questions, questions,
::)
LE
-
i am pretty sure the lying dutchman is the colonel, elvis's crooked dutch manager.
-
Here's an example of one of my pet hates:
COULD OF, SHOULD OF, WOULD OF
COULD HAVE, SHOULD HAVE, WOULD HAVE
This is one of those errors typically made by a person more familiar with the spoken than the written form of English. A sentence like
-
Simon, nice analysis! It is two sides of the same coin. What prevails is called development. But of course apart from the language development we have a civilization, ethics, consciousness, philosophy, way of life etc. It is quite peculiar that although technology has progressed a long way the last 150 years, everything else seems to fall behind.
Now how does this have to do with the language issue?
The way I see it is that the language is not just a simple vehicle to cover our daily needs. It is not only a bearer of culture or science. It is actually the very thing that separate as from the animals, because with language we have logic. And the more control we have over language, the clearer we see things. Now don't get me wrong, but the two languages I speak were more accurate, lets say 100 years ago, while ancient Greek was such an accurate language, that apart from the terminology of the modern technology, it is beyond me why it has turn into the language we call modern Greek. Of course we all know why these changes happen, and it is not the time or the place to analyze it. I sometimes feel that we give in too easy to such changes, there is no actual resistance, and that affects our languages and eventually our lives.
The fantastic English language, paid dearly the cost for becoming the international language.
-
When you say the languages were more 'accurate' Vgonis - I know what you are saying but in my opinion accuracy is only what is dictated i.e. what we are led to believe or rather programmed to believe. There is no accurate way to spell or pronounce a word - the only accuracy is what is accepted by society in general.
In England like all over the world there are many local dialects who spell and pronounce the same words differently. And the key word is 'different' - not wrong, just not the same.
We have a thing called the Queen's English - and there is nothing further from the truth - the Queen may speak it but 59.999999999 million other subjects don't:-)
-
Simon, I understand and fully recognize your points. I partially agree with them. By accurate I certainly didn't mean spelling or pronunciation. After all, I wouldn't be able to judge anybody, since my English are not that good. By accurate I meant "saying something with fewer chosen words, that lead to such a focused and condensed meaning, that the speaker can express his thoughts in detail, and the listener understands exactly what the speaker says and means". It is a bit hard to find such a combination (speaker-listener), and that is why we have put in use (in everyday life) poetic technics like metaphors. We let the imagination fill the gaps of the poor knowledge or use of the language. And at the same time, for the same reasons, this is a blessing. Unfortunately the ones that should not play with words(politicians) are the ones that do it the most.
Of course, there is a basis for the accuracy of the words. I see what you mean when you say that:
There is no accurate way to spell or pronounce a word - the only accuracy is what is accepted by society in general.
In England like all over the world there are many local dialects who spell and pronounce the same words differently. And the key word is 'different' - not wrong, just not the same.
We have a thing called the Queen's English - and there is nothing further from the truth - the Queen may speak it but 59.999999999 million other subjects don't:-)
But words have an origin. And the closer you get to this place of birth, the closer you are to their meaning. So a misspelled/pronounced word, might lead to a total lack of understanding or even worse a different interpretation/meaning , to a different-wrong result. A dictionary, world-widely recognized-such as Oxfords, should be used as a basis for better communication. And yes, any changes that prevail overtime, and are not just part of a fashion (how many of the hip words used in the swinging 60ies , are still in use?), and give new dimensions to the language and/or the mind, could be included in the official vocabulary of every language.
But back to the subject. MK's songwriting has changed since the DS days. I could follow his lines then, but lately, I caught myself trying to see if there are any printed lyrics, to see what he is saying. It is not the words he uses, but how they are used.
-
Simon did not mention my contributions and I'd have to look back on my previous posts to check but I'm sure I was referring to written English, not spoken English. The wide range of dialects and regional accents around these islands is one of the glories of the English Language. Yes, I find a few dialects/accents hard on my ear (I have "tune in" to understand them readily) and a very few simply set my teeth on edge (no specifics here, as that might upset some readers). Though a Londoner, I have lived in worked in many different parts of Britain, some with strong regional accidents and I really love hearing different words,phrases, word usage and pronunciation.
I was more concerned about written English - not, I hasten to add, English written deliberately to reflect a local dialect or accent but English written for general, everyday use and for academic and similar use.
To demonstrate: when anyone says "could of", the listener will barely notice it but, when someone writes "could of", it is an indication that the writer does not know the language. As the reader, I have to make a mental adjustment to understand what the writer is trying to say. It irks me to a slight degree but, more so, it saddens me.
"There is hope in honest error" [usually attributed to Charles Rennie Mackintosh but I believe that this originated with John Dando Sedding - both architects, interestingly]
-
AMIT-ers may be interested in this, part of an interview that French singer Hugues Aufray has given recently to the Montreal Gazette:
Still, the Qu
-
AMIT-ers may be interested in this, part of an interview that French singer Hugues Aufray has given recently to the Montreal Gazette:
Still, the Qu
-
No, since we were talking about a "language issue", I just thought it was an interesting comment from Aufray.
Aufray was born, I think, in a fairly properous part of Paris and therefore I assume that his normal voice is a fairly standard French
I understand that French has three basic regional forms, based on how the word for "yes" was rendered in years gone by (oui, oc and si - from the Latin "hoc ille", "hoc" and "sic") and that the first of these predominates these days. I also know that there were other languages in France, as I remember talking to someone in Alsace who was unhappy that the Alsatian lanuage was on the decline, and I have also heard similar comments about the Breton language. I also understand that there are many versions of French spoken across France and around the world, just as there are many versions of English spoken around the country and across the world. And I am aware that, for example, Jaques Brel's songs use a vocabulary from his particular part of Belgium.
I think Aufray is suggesting that French has become more standardised and that the form of the language which has become the standard form is not the most musical. I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with him, as I'm just not qualified to say.
And, anyway, Aufray's first recordings were in Spanish, weren't they? Maybe he found Spanish a more musical langauge.
And by all means try his "Aufray Chante Dylan" album which I have on Lp and also tthe expanded version on CD. I also have a double CD set that combines these early recording with some later recordings of Dylan songs by Aufray. I don't have time to check but think it was called "Trans".
-
I think Aufray is suggesting that French has become more standardised and that the form of the language which has become the standard form is not the most musical. I'm not saying whether I agree or disagree with him, as I'm just not qualified to say.
I see what you mean. True that the music industry, but also television and radios, tend to promote the standard form, let's call it the parisian.
And, anyway, Aufray's first recordings were in Spanish, weren't they? Maybe he found Spanish a more musical langauge.
I only know his two biggest hit songs have spanish titles / chorus. But indeed it sounds great.
I think french is not great for rocking tunes.
Only for love songs
I've listen to a few Hugues Auffray translations. Very surprising and strange. Dylan is a poet and it's not possible to find a good translation that still fits on the music.
But I found them enjoyable because he highlighted the guitar part.
Your comment is not off topic. I could compare the importance of music vs lyrics.
For MK's songs : the most important is the music. I don't care about the meaning of his songs. A better understanding doesn't help : I just need some more guitar.
-
The Aufray double-CD set I mnetioned was "Aufray Trans Dylan" and Aufray's short liner note uses lots of (French) words that start with trans..." to explain the problems of creating French language versions of these songs.
It is worth reading these notes, as they do cast a light on some of the problems of recreating the songs in French. Given my own difficultiues understanding Aufray, Brel, Brassens and others (my French is poor and learned decades ago, when at school), I much admire the contributions made in these threads by those for whom English is not their first language.