Post An 'uh!'

[Sting]

It's a song about somebody longing for an ex lover, to the point where that somebody becomes obsessive, and jealous in a paranoid way. But when I wrote it, I wasn't entirely aware of the exact meaning. I was off me head on Babycham.

 

I've done a lot of interviews, but in most I was drunk on Babycham. So you can't really take anything I say too seriously. Whey aye man, I'm plastered on the stuff right now pet!

 

S

[Just1L]

[MonoStone]

I'm going to disagree about the Men Without Hats one.

 

Their song 'Safety Dance' was a contender. Brilliant song. I just don't think Pop Goes The World was THAT good. I doubt there'd have been a fight between record company execs for it. Maybe I'm wrong.

Edited April 2, 2015 by MonoStone

[MonoStone]

Oh I missed the Safety Dance post earlier...

 

I like that song a lot, very fond young memories of it on the telly...

 

Contender... but ummm... definite UH? I dunno. I mean ... I really don't know. But then I don't know much about much.

[Just1L]

I'm going to disagree about the Men Without Hats one.

 

Their song 'Safety Dance' was a contender. Brilliant song. I just don't think Pop Goes The World was THAT good. I doubt there'd have been a fight between record company execs for it. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

I do agree aside from the fact it reached #20, still a hit song. It could be that it only made it because they were already popular? Maybe an Undeniable Hit should really mean one that is a hit song by an unknown artist? Otherwise, it is kind of hard to tell whether it's an undeniable hit, or if the popularity of the band has anything to do with it. I will rescind the Pop Goes the World song as this thread is about Skylarks version of UH, which I'm cool with. And I agree there probably wasn't a fight between execs to produce it. 

[MonoStone]

If only they'd asked what EBYT was about!

 

Or... if only we could have been arguing about what kind of bottle Message In A Bottle was about...

 

[Guest]

Again --because no one seems to be directing responses to anyone here-- I'll assume the couple of prior posts about Every Breath You Take were meant in answer to me, and so I respond.

 

 

As a fan of the song since its publication I'm very familiar with these quotes. Sure, I know Sting has said "It's about jealousy and surveillance and ownership." I've known that for well over three decades. I don't doubt for one second that those are correctly attributed comments. All I'm trying to get across is the nuance that separates a song fueled by notions of "jealousy and surveillance and ownership" and a song "about a stalker." They are not the same thing. It's lazy, reckless, and misrepresentative to reduce Sting's well-considered comments about the song to "duh, it's about a stalker."

 

The pro-stalker group has yet to produce a quote wherein Sting has even used the word "stalker," much less said it's "about a stalker."

 

I'd hate to have to count how many times Sting has been asked about the meaning of his most famous song. He has supplied various responses over the years. He also has said that he prefers to leave the meaning to the audience [paraphrasing here], whatever the song means to you, that's what it's about.

 

Let's honor the writer --the creator of the work-- at least enough to 1) let him say what a given piece is about or 2) let listeners come to a personal connection to a song. What say, though, we stop dumbing things down by flatly asserting "it's about a stalker!" for another thirty years, hmm?

 

7¢...

 

ADDENDUM: Dek... You would get that post in ahead of me by ONE MINUTE!

Edited April 2, 2015 by Skylark

[Just1L]

[MonoStone]

New entry -

 

I'm choosing this one for 2 reasons -

 

1. Any record company exec with an ounce of sense must have realised this was a UH, regardless of Phil's status (and he wasn't exactly a pop pin-up or cool anyway at that time). In fact hearing this on TOTP even as a kid I absolutely knew it was a future classic, and at that time I had no idea who he was... he was just some old bloke looking kind of dodgy on the telly, with a song that stopped you in your tracks.

2. It proves a point, that winning lyrics don't have to be totally logical, thought out, planned as a hit, about a certain subject...etc etc bla blah... and writers don't always fully understand what their song is about so... how can we know... often words just come from inside and we don't understand our own, they just seem right...right?... and if you're brilliant or very lucky then they'll seem (when heard as part of the song) right to A LOT of people (though not always for the same reason to each person). I know this song created a lot of myths about the meaning. All that matters is how the overall song makes people feel.

 

[Guest]

tunesmithth...

 

Asking who the post was directed toward was apparently too much so I suppose it was crazy for me to hope that you would do anything more than send a bunch overly-large articles… (sigh)… Fine… I’ll perform the due diligence…

 

link 1 (from wikipedia) —

 

The part where we read “Essentially, it is a song about stalking”? Those are not Sting’s words; those are the words of someone who contributed to the Wikipedia article? Do you get that? Do you even understand how Wikipedia works? A Wikipedia contributor saying “…it is a song about stalking…” is OPINION (by no one of particular import)

 

Again… Nowhere is anything you cited has Sting saying EBYT “is about a stalker.” Not even the word is used here. Next…

 

link 2 (from songfacts) — Thanks for having me wade through that.

 

Again… The mention of a “stalker” is the OPINION of whoever wrote the songfests article, not the words of Sting. This is what is quoted as Sting’s words;

 

"Once I'd written and performed it, I realised it was quite dark. My intention might have been to write a romantic song, seductive, enveloping and warm. Then I saw another side of my personality was involved, too, about control and jealousy, and that's its power. It was written at a difficult time.” The word “stalker” never even appears. Next…

 

link 3 (ultimate classic rock) — Why’d you oven bother with this one?

 

Here Sting’s words are, “I think the song is very, very sinister and ugly…” Right. See “stalker” anywhere? Next…

 

link 4 (last.fm) — This article doesn’t include ANY quote by Sting at all! Next…

 

And then you include a partial lyric to a song we’ve been discussing for what seems like weeks… Pourquoi? Anyone who cares has probably looked over the lyric by now. Very little to see, in fact… There are only about 71 different words used in the entire lyric, even less in what you supplied. And you know what? “Stalker” is not among them. Neither is “stalking”… Or “stalk”… Or “stalked”… Or “stalks”…

 

Do you see/read something altogether different than do I? You have done exactly NOTHING to strengthen you argument that Sting wrote Every Breath You Take “about a stalker” so… Why not try saying something like, “That song reminds me of a stalker or something like that?” It’s much more becoming than to pound incessantly in vain behind a misguided idea you once read somewhere. Really… Why are you so invested in this erroneous position?

 

Read my earlier posts to see exactly what I said about this. There is still no evidence that the author of Every Breath You Take ever said “it’s about a stalker.”

[Guest]

Yeahsurerightwhatever, Skylark.  And, the last time the U.S. engaged in "war" anywhere in the world was in 1941, because that's the last time Congress formally declared "war" per the Constitution.

 

Please don't further foul the discussion by adding terribly messy analogies. 

 

By your reasoning, if a songwriter does an interview and offers any insight as to what the song means to them, then that's all the song means - period, and if the songwriter never gives such an interview, I guess we should assume the song is about nothing, or at least keep our opinions to ourselves, until the songwriter does offer insights.

 

Wow... That is a pathetically flawed extrapolation!. Really? If I say "don't say what is in the box if you don't know for certain" you hear "there's nothing in the box"? uh.... OK... 

 

All I've said is that as far as I know Sting has never actually said Every Breath You Take is "about a stalker." And --so far-- neither you nor tunesmithth has shown otherwise. What Sting did say is that he was writing about feelings he was having when his marriage was falling apart (or after it fell apart). And long after he wrote the song he mused that he might have subconsciously tapped into a number of sinister ideas. And writing about that cannot honestly be equated with writing a song "about a stalker." 

 

Do you really wanna die on the same hilltop as tunesmithth? 

 

How convenient for you that, as you deride those who see the song as descriptive of a stalker's mindset, and as you chastise them for expressing that view, you ignore Sting's own statement that you set forth that whatever the song means to someone, then that's what it means.

 

I derided someone for how they interpreted a song? You could hardly be more wrong. What bothers me is exactly that no one is saying "I think it's about..." or "It strikes me as..." or " It seems like..."   No... It's several members loudly parroting a decades-old misunderstanding and boldly proclaiming, "EVERY BREATH YOU TAKE IS A SONG ABOUT A STALKER!" And you know what, Hobo? It just ain't. (Unless you want it to be... For you...) 

 

(BTW... Was it convenient for you, to distort the argument? Or can't you help it?   )

 

Most reasonable people (Sting included) would consider Sting's descriptions of the song as being consistent with a general description of a stalker mindset - and, I know that you know it.  

 

I don't much disagree with your conclusion. (I think I even said as much in a prior comment.) I spoke of the nuance...  Do you not see the nuance between some darker elements of romantic love --creepy though they may be-- and just puking "EUREKA! I HAVE FOUND IT! IT'S ABOUT A STALKER!"

 

Guess not... 

Edited April 2, 2015 by Skylark

[MonoStone]

Can I raise a practical question at this point? Are we gonna do "Every Breath You Take" tomorrow?

[john]

I am sure we can all discuss this without it being an argument.

 

To summarise, Sting wrote a song. He has stated that the meaning  "evolved" for many of his songs. He wrote the title first for pretty well all his songs and then the song grew from there. In terms of intent, that too seems to have evolved. I scoured video interviews and found very little. The same statements he made (on video) about "every breath she takes", he also made about "walking on the moon" and "message in a bottle"

 

In print he was more forthcoming, but equally non commital. He is a cerebal writer. he thinks deeply, and is both self-absorbed and self-admitedly very vain. Quite frankly, I don't give a toss. lol

 

Did the accidental nature of misunderstanding have an effect? Who knows.It's like arguing whether a specific drop of water caused a flood. It's an answer no one can know. We can guess, we can reason, but none of us, including Sting, can know.

 

What we can say is that there are various sources that cite (correctly or not) that it is a song about obsession, more than love. Nowadays that level of obsession is often thought of as stalking. The lyrics do seem to support that interpretation, but they are not unequivocal.

 

Personally, my opinion, and it is just that, is that Sting has deliberately used ambiguity (something I use a lot in writing lyrics). Ambiguity leaves a song open to interpretation. That in itself facilitates discussion. It enables people to have arguments over set interpretations, when in fact the writer deliberately allowed for several interpretations and THAT is the true nature of the LYRIC's success.

 

But there are many songs that are popular where no one, including the writers, are exactly sure what the song is about. Many songs where no one is exactly sure, creatively, why that song is popular and another is not.

 

In truth a big part of it is about marketing and promotion creating the opportunity for a song to impress. Another part is undoubtedly the existing platform and the circumstance of the release. For example, with another song by The Police, "Roxanne", it was released in the UK, on the platform of the band being unknown. It went nowhere. The Police went to New York and the went down a storm on the college circuit and returned to the UK on a wave of common acclaim. They re-released Roxanne and it was an instant hit. Instant for a second release, that is.

 

However, that is not the core of this topic. UH.UH is a relatively contestible concept as there are many elements beyond the song itself that enable the song to become a hit. But let's look at the song as the core musical platform for an UH. I will also suggest that for this topic it is best to consider the finished song, not overly examine the shifting sands of intent at the time or times of writing.

 

What you can say is it is a very well written song. It has all the elements of an UH. A great bunch of melodies, and engaging and intriguing lyrics. Indeed the mystery and myth about the lyrics is still working it's magic today (as can be seen by this topic). On a song level I would say it qualifies as an UH in as much as anything could.

 

But this is all subjective and, like everything else in this topic, a matter of opinion.

 

On the subject of melody over lyrics, I think it is genre specific, so there is no fixed answer. On balance I think that it is slightly in favour of melody being more important, but as I say that is governed by genre. For example, for many folk styles the story is the important thing. Then there are rap and hip hop styles where there is minimal melody at all. Love it or hate it, that is the reality on the ground. What shapes our opinions so strongly is our primary engagement with music, our personal connection. If you mainly folllow genres where melody is the primary element, that is how you view it. If you more closely follow more lyrical domainated styles then that is how you will view it. Simple as that.

[Stova007]

I thought Puff Daddy wrote "Every breath you take"...

[john]

lmao

[Guest]

Oh, well... Now it all makes sense!

 

http://patch.com/new-york/easthampton/cops-p-diddy-stalker-arrested-too