Life Doesn't Rhyme

[TaoMannaDon]

A country-flavored lyric just for new songwriters

Please do-not critique this lyric -- wrong forum section for that anyway. My goal in writing it was not to make a good song, but to provide an imaginative way to think about using less rhymes in some songs. This lyric is definitely "not" on its way to a radio near you; but a lively discussion on the message contained within the lyric might be useful to a lot of new songwriters. I added some notes after the lyric if you want a little more explanation. I'm not trying to change any minds. This is just an offer of one point of view about rhyming for those who are still searching for ways to enhance their songwriting skills. Obviously, there are differing opinions on this subject -- here's mine:

Life Doesn't Rhyme

Verse 1:

Weaving through the five o'clock traffic

You're eager to get home

There's a wonderful song idea

Bursting from your brain

You can't let it escape you

Before it's written down

Verse 2:

Sitting at the dining room table

The page fills up with notes

But you stumble until you stall

Straining for some rhymes

You can't finish the lyric

The inspiration's gone

Chorus:

Cause life doesn't rhyme

Life can be painful or joyful

But it can't be rainful or toyful

Take a look around and you will know it...

Life doesn't rhyme

You probably won't bore us with a few rhymes in the chorus

But when the verses tell your story let them show it...

Life doesn't rhyme

Bridge:

Rhymes can come off clever, cool, or funny

You need a million rhymes or more when writing rap

Rhymes can steal the sweetness from a sober-minded song

Or turn your great idea into crap

Chorus:

Cause life doesn't rhyme

Life can be painful or joyful

But it can't be rainful or toyful

Take a look around and you will know it...

Life doesn't rhyme

You probably won't bore us with a few rhymes in the chorus

But when the verses tell your story let them show it...

Life doesn't rhyme

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In case you're still wondering, the song's message is this: in this song the verses tell the story, the story is a slice of life, and life doesn't rhyme.

That doesn't necessarily mean "absolutely no rhymes" in the verses, just not so many; and none, if you don't really need them. The real test is this: if you didn't have to rhyme, would you have written the lyric the same way? Or did the rhymes tell you what to say? (Hey! That rhymed!)

Notice the verses above. No rhymes needed, because the lines where rhymes might appear were different lengths and/or different rhythmic patterns. Use that technique and you will need fewer rhymes. Unrhymed verses will sound fresh in your listener's ear, even after hearing the song several times. Make your listener wait until the chorus for your rhymes and the rhymes will sound much sweeter.

Look at all the "perfect" rhymes in the chorus above. The chorus is a good place for a few rhymes but I've used too many here; too many rhymes can detract from the song's message. "Perfect" rhymes often don't sound serious enough for a serious song. Perfect rhymes have all been heard before; the ear tires quickly from hearing them again and again. Perfect rhymes tend to telegraph their counterparts -- how long did it take you to expect "show it" after reading "know it"? Rhyming "bore us" and "chorus" sounds a bit clever, but, if I were trying to be serious, "bore us" and "chorus" would detract from (not support) the message. Rhyming "rap" and "crap" sounds funny in the bridge; but it wouldn't work in a serious song. Limit the number of rhyming words even in the chorus; use near rhymes like consonance rhymes (the final consonants are the same) and assonance rhymes (the vowels rhyme) whenever you can.

Keep writing,

Don

[john]

Hey

Rhyme is facinating, both when you use it and when you don't.

People new to lyrics writing or poetry writing often overuse rhymes, and use overused or inappropriate rhyme schemes, but it's something we all go through.

To anyone learning I'd say, learn about standard song forms, and different ways of using rhyme (among other things).

Learn about not using rhyme, and when that is effective. After all, not using rhyme is still a rhyme scheme.

Whatever rhyme scheme you use it should be applied consistently through a song for maximum effect.

Experiment with internal rhymes, double rhymes and triple rhymes, half rhymes etc.

All that said there are many other mechanisms to use other than rhyme scheme.

It's a good idea to write a few lyrics where your aim is consistently use a rhyme scheme that uses a minimum of or no rhymes. It helps break the AABB or ABAB habit.

Cheers

John

[Lazz]

Hey Don.

Your posts always makw me wish to know more about you.

First, sorry this one has generated little discussion or response - especially given the unique mode of expression - but I have little to say about this subject myself.

The constant issue I stumble with is the artificial separation of words and music we deal with here on these boards when a successful song depends on the perfect marriage of both - and achieving the right togetherness is a challenge which needs to be resolved anew each time. And for me, it is the essential arc of melodic rhythm which dictates where and when a rhyme is most appropriate and effective.

Oh - I hear what you're saying ok - but can't go the whole hog on something like this: "No rhymes needed, because the lines where rhymes might appear were different lengths and/or different rhythmic patterns." ... because the implied causal connection is a tad artificial to me - I don't see why line-length need necessarily have any bearing on this at all.

There are a few songs in my own catalogue which have no rhyme - but there is in each some other small mnemonic of repetition to support the flow - melodic and/or rhythmic - and I don't believe I could have ever achieved a happy resolution lyrically without exploiting those significant indicators.

(this is definitely a rather prolix way of having little to say, isn't it ?)

But this is where I am intrigued to know more about your experience and background - which is clearly considerable - are you lyricist or composer ? or both ? do you collaborate ? and how ? is your arena completely genre-specific ? (your posts all seem to speak 'country' to me) do you have any examples of where your own hard-won lessons are applied successfully ?

Largely, I would stand next to John in suggesting that it is more beneficial first to study standard solutions to common problems - but I am interested to understand more of your owm journey though the craft.

Aah -the reason I came back to this thread is due to the provocations it contains - which is a good thing, I think.

Last night, for example, I lay waiting for sleep thinking of your hook statement.

And disagreeing with it.

So here I am.

Life does rhyme.

From the sins of the fathers to the complexities of cultural transmission.

The repeating patterns of personal relationships.

Histories large and small.

There are echoes.

Repeating patterns.

Life rhymes loudly.

[TaoMannaDon]

Lazz,

I must first note that your nice poetic ending refuting my contention that "life doesn't rhyme" is a serious-minded set of lines of differing lengths and rhythmic patterns .... containing no rhymes. And nowhere do I feel the need to hear a rhyme in those lines. We might disagree why rhymes aren't needed in your poem; but I'll happily defer you.

I'm just a guy who enjoys writing songs; there's no impressive history to reveal for you. Many years of writing found me struggling to make any significant improvement in my lyrics. A few years ago I began following the "plain English paragraphs" technique I described in the "Can't Finish Lyrics" thread. I noticed that many of the unrhymed "plain English" sentences made better lyrics than my rhymed interpretation of them. So I started using those unrhymed lines in my lyric. Sometimes I would be working on a line where a rhyme might normally appear and feel an urge to put a rhyme there. As it turned out, the urge to rhyme usually came when the new line had certain similarities with the earlier line. Minor or sometimes dramatic changes in the rhythm or length in the new line would make the "urge" go away. I'm sure there is more to it than that; my "Life Doesn't Rhyme" posting is just me offering what I learned through experience.

My lyrics have gotten a lot better. The improvement became the most noticeable when I began experimenting with unrhymed verses. I started this post only to give new writers an opportunity to consider the technique for themselves. It may help them; it may not. They won't know unless they try.

There are rhymes

There are crimes

There are times when rhymes are crimes

As ears once pleased

Become offended

Long before the song has ended

Keep writing,

Don

Edited December 10, 2008 by TaoMannaDon

[john]

Hey

For me we have a full range of tools at our disposal, some guidelines on what typically makes for a successful song.

I find the plain English approach can be useful for fleshing out lyrics, but then that is only a developing seed not the final flower. It is a mechanism to develop the lyrics, nothing more. Plain English approach and "does it rhyme" are obviously quite different propositions.

Sure plain English as a goal for lyrics is a very likely goal, depending on the genres you target the lyrics at, but I still find that to achieve a high standard of lyrics it still takes the same effort. A variety of tools and time in edit.

I agree that it is easy to get tied up in not finishing lyrics, but from experience I found that that was a limitation in how I used the tools, or when or how often I used them, not the tools themselves. Varying approach helps address that. To paint myself into any corner seems to me counter productive in that I am immediately limiting my options, and limiting my results.

As writers we can walk away from work at any point and call it complete. Satisfaction of that depends very much on the writer.

To call lyrics complete because it is an easy option, or quick, seems to me a false dawn. Volume matters little if quality is not high imo. I'm not saying that in response to your work (I do not know enough of your work to possibly pass comment and after all it is only my opinion) but rather to comment on the general ideas of approach.

Just my two cents and thanks for bringing up the subject!

Cheers

John

[TaoMannaDon]

To call lyrics complete because it is an easy option, or quick, seems to me a false dawn. Volume matters little if quality is not high imo. I'm not saying that in response to your work (I do not know enough of your work to possibly pass comment and after all it is only my opinion) but rather to comment on the general ideas of approach.

John

Perhaps it was a mistake to "bring up the subject." I didn't think about sparking a debate. I only wanted to offer a technique to those who might be interested. I don't know how to interpret the sentences I quoted other than as a slam at the ideas contained in some of my posts. It looks as though my ideas aren't welcomed by some senior members.

If my ideas aren't welcome, I'm not welcome.

Don

[Mazrocon]

Well I use to write lyrics like crazy, and wrote them like 2 or 3 times a day! But most of my lyrics didn't turn out quite right cause the rhyme scheme wasn't the same through out the song... and then I only made a lyric once a week... and now not really at all :/ But then I found out about a new form of poetry called "Haiku" that doesn't have any rhyme. It seems like not worrying about rhyme lets be more free and be more creative. I have now written 74 haiku's in my collection

~TIMOTHY~

[Lazz]

I'm just a guy who enjoys writing songs; there's no impressive history to reveal for you.

I was just hoping to be able to contextualise your opinions better, that's all.

And better understand your approaches.

For my sake.

I enjoy reading your posts (bet I've missed a few) and am always curious to know more about how others work towards the making of a song. I am a lyricist, myself, with only the most stumbling intstrumental facility, but who enjoys the privilege of working with great composers and players. But, like you, there was a long preceding period where all I wrote caused me great personal discomfort and, indeed, it only seems during the last decade that I have achieved any significant worthwhile improvement. You and I are of similar vintage, also.

Perhaps it was a mistake to "bring up the subject." I didn't think about sparking a debate.

I think it's a good subject - and one well worthy of discussion.

It looks as though my ideas aren't welcomed by some senior members.

If my ideas aren't welcome, I'm not welcome.

I believe you are mistaken, thou tender heart.

Unable to interpret John's comments on his behalf - still pondering his message - but he did make explicit that they were not directed at your work but stood as his own general perspective and approach.

Nonetheless, I think it's great that he and I are willing to exchange views with you over aspects of song-writing - I welcome it - and wish for even more activity in this section of the boards. I don't think that willingness to engage need be interpreted as negativity or attack.

I haven't really been following the 'plain English' idea - though a great fan of it in everyday prose - but have long been in pursuit of ideal simplicity of expression. However close my approach might get, it's always a huge sweat though - still hard work - I want it to sound easy and effortless, but it's always tough for me to find my way there.

And about this rhyme thing.... I just flicked open my copy of "Lyrics by Oscar Hemmerstein II" handily at my desk and found this quote: "If one has fundamental things to say in a song, the rhyming becomes a question of deft balancing. A rhyme should be unassertive, never standing out too noticeably. It should, on the other hand, not be a rhyme heard in a hundred of other popular songs of the time, so familiar that the listener can anticipate it before it is sung. There should not be too many rhymes. In fact, a rhyme should appear only where it is absolutely demanded to keep the pattern of the music. If a listener is made rhyme-conscious, his interest may be diverted from the story of the song. If on the other hand, you keep him waiting for a rhyme, he is more likely to listen to the meaning of the words."

So Oscar is in fundamental agreement with you (and so am I).

And the illustration he offers is "Ol' Man River" (as a wee kid, I was early smitten with Paul Robeson) where it is only lines 8 and 10 of the opening refrain which rhyme.

I think he is also in fundamental agreement with me where he says "a rhyme should appear only where it is absolutely demanded to keep the pattern of the music".

My impression is that a personal discovery of yours about rhyming liberation was prompted by the happenstance of minor or dramatic changes in line-length and/or rhythm - whereas my own preferences for these same variations in line-length and/or rhythm, I think, may be more rooted in genre or stylistic idiom For me, these variations follow a melodic conception which I have learned from others whom I admire and which have led me to the position that the music is primary and forms the emotional contour served by the lyrics. And that's only one of the reasons why I wanted to know more about your own journey and genre-map maybe.

So we may be arriving at the same place by different routes.

Don't go thinking you're unwelcome.

Warm Regards,

Lazz

[TaoMannaDon]

Lazz,

I'll reply some of your other points later when I have more time. Right now I want to address my "unwelcome" claim.

Just as a reminder:

To call lyrics complete because it is an easy option, or quick, seems to me a false dawn. Volume matters little if quality is not high imo. I'm not saying that in response to your work (I do not know enough of your work to possibly pass comment and after all it is only my opinion) but rather to comment on the general ideas of approach.

Perhaps it was a mistake to "bring up the subject." I didn't think about sparking a debate. I only wanted to offer a technique to those who might be interested. I don't know how to interpret the sentences I quoted other than as a slam at the ideas contained in some of my posts. It looks as though my ideas aren't welcomed by some senior members.

If my ideas aren't welcome, I'm not welcome.

Don

I believe you are mistaken, thou tender heart.

Unable to interpret John's comments on his behalf - still pondering his message - but he did make explicit that they were not directed at your work but stood as his own general perspective and approach.

You are probably right and I over reacted. I have an extremely low threshold for debate and the accompanying negative banter, so I avoid it when I can. Maybe I read something into John's post that wasn't there.

It seemed as though the point of his whole post was to advice others to guard against the shortcomings of "my advice." And the part I quoted seems to confirm that.

If he had posted into some other thread the reply I quoted from, absent the last sentence, then I would have agreed with everything he said. But, when he posted it to this thread and added that line, the whole posted seemed pointed at the quality of my advice.

As you suggest, he did say his response wasn't directed at my work. I haven't offered any work for him to critique. All he has seen are my ideas which, if my interpretation of his reply is correct, can lead to the false dawn of unfinished lyrics.

But I accept that my interpretation of his words could be wrong. Either way, I'll get over it.

Don

[john]

Hi

I didn't critique your work, nor did I criticise you. Nor did I criticise a plain English approach.

The back drop to my comments was inspired by explanations given by various people on the boards (who are likely to be reading the topic) where the volume of lyrics produced, or the speed at which the lyrics are produced is more of an aim than the quality, no editing etc. With any techniques there are pros and cons, their supporters and detractors. Personally I find value in most techniques and approaches but there are times when using a particular technique can be more or less effective or appropriate.

I have enjoyed reading your posts too, and thought you were interested in debate and finding out the opinions of others, exchanging ideas and comparing notes with other writers as well as passing on tips. I wanted to add to what you had not detract. I even stated that it was a very realistic goal and that problems I had had as a writer were due to how and when I applied writing tools not the tools themselves. My reply was related to this topic, not your other topics.

That said if you neither want my opinion, or indeed debate at all, I will duly avoid replying to your posts with no hard feelings. The last thing I want is for me sitting guessing what I can comment on or for you to take personally things I am saying. As you say that you have a low threshold for debate perhaps it would be for the best that I didn't reply. Your call. Whatever way I wont be offended, I have plenty of things to do. My interest here is in writing songs, and sharing knowledge, others and my own.

One thing I would say is that to disagree with you is not necessarily "negative". To me any idea that genuinely leads to better understanding, gives a fuller picture or explores aspects not so far explored is a positive contribution to a net understanding. I would point out that at no point did I put down your approach, the technique you were suggesting etc. However, all techniques have limitations whether they are suggested by you, me, Lazz or anyone else.

Senior member or not, I'm just a writer interested in my craft and was pleased to have someone new to exchange ideas with. My being a senior member makes no difference. This community is what it makes of itself. I am not a petty person, nor do I hold grudges, and I am not offended that you take issue with my comments. Nor are you, your comments, tips or suggestions unwelcome in any shape or form. Far from it.

Cheers

John

[TaoMannaDon]

John,

Thanks for replying. I took the final sentence of your previous post the wrong way. Thanks for clarifying.

As to whether or not you should reply to my posts, I'm not willing to make that call for you. Do whatever you normally do. I don't expect special treatment from anyone. If I misunderstand your intent in the future, just straighten me out.

On the other hand, if a debate breaks out, I'll likely stop posting to the thread. Differing views can be very useful; but, if it reaches the point of defending one view over the other, it just becomes a time-wasting aggravation for me. Some people enjoy it, I don't.

Thanks for responding,

Don

[john]

Hey Don

No problem.

I'm happy for discussion, but not argument. I am pretty open and flexible and believe there is no right or wrong, only what we find works for us individually.

There are way too many people who polarise into this way or that way and somehow think their way is "right" and the other's way is "wrong". While they may want to argue and prove their point, I'd prefer to learn the techniques, offer my thoughts and move on. Life is too short for me personally to devote time to convincing someone of something they don't want to see. "Too invested" is a phrase that springs to mind. I often find that this is due to proving themselves right rather than proving the technique.

I do like to believe that I have something to offer from my own experience, but that is my own ego speaking. I've written several articles on song/lyrics writing and I am always interested in the comments and feedback I get. The only time I have found myself in apparently defending something is when I think the points raised were misunderstood and I try to explore that with a poster, but apart from an initial further explanation for clarity I take it on board as to how I can improve my article with a clearer explanation by me. i.e the fault, if there is any, is not with the poster but with my initial explanation. I find that a healthy attitude for me and results in improved articles by me. In saying that there is always plenty room for improvement!

All I can say is that at least from me, please don't take comments personally as they will not be intended that way. I believe in constructive discussion, and constructive critique and my comments will (or should be) related to topic not the poster.

I look forward to reading more of your tips and posts and when appropriate I will happily reply. If you get bored you can find several of my articles in the Songwriting site area articles. Feel free to read and comment if you feel inclined to give me some feedback. It's all good

Cheers

John

[TaoMannaDon]

John,

I may have just set some sort of record. As the OP (original poster), I have a vested interest in keeping the thread I create on topic. Sometimes that's hard to do; no way to control or even affect what off-topic things others might post as a reply.

In this case, though, I'm the person who took the thread off-topic. How often does that happen, I wonder.

OK, what were we talking about? I forgot

Don

[TaoMannaDon]

Well I use to write lyrics like crazy, and wrote them like 2 or 3 times a day! But most of my lyrics didn't turn out quite right cause the rhyme scheme wasn't the same through out the song... and then I only made a lyric once a week... and now not really at all :/ But then I found out about a new form of poetry called "Haiku" that doesn't have any rhyme. It seems like not worrying about rhyme lets be more free and be more creative. I have now written 74 haiku's in my collection

~TIMOTHY~

Timothy,

Rhymes can complicate and even stall the writing process for some people. That's why I began using the "plain English paragraphs" process I described elsewhere (which led to experimenting with unrhymed verses). That process at least lets me determine what I want to say in each section of my lyrics without rhyme or line structure getting in the way.

Haiku forces you to say a lot with few words, a quality that every lyricist needs. Haiku is also great practice for developing the discipline of line structure -- you must have a certain number of syllables in each line. If you were to think of a Haiku poem as one verse in a song and every verse was written with the same number of syllables in each corresponding line of the verses, you would be part of the way toward a traditional approach to lyric writing. Another important traditional issue is syllable accent placement. Line one of verse one should be similar in syllable count and accent placement to line one of the other verses. Line two in each verse should be similar, and so on. There are more technical and accurate ways to describe this, but they tend to make my eyes glaze over, so I limit myself to layman's descriptions.

I've read some of your Haiku -- great work. You might want to see if you can translate your new-found talent into lyric writing. Just develop a Haiku-like structure (probably with longer and more lines) and use that structure to develop your verses from. Getting the syllable accent placement to match from verse to verse will be a lot harder. You might want to try it but don't let that keep you from writing. It takes practice. I find it almost second nature for me to write that way now; but it didn't come easy. The closer you get to matching syllable accent placement between verses, the more musical and less conversational your lyric will sound. Some people prefer the looseness of the conversational approach.

Keep writing,

Don

Edited December 11, 2008 by TaoMannaDon

[Lazz]

In this case, though, I'm the person who took the thread off-topic.

Normally my job, I think.

But as long as it's being taken care of I guess that's ok.

[TaoMannaDon]

I was just hoping to be able to contextualise your opinions better, that's all.

And better understand your approaches.

For my sake.

My original intention was to slowly reveal "my story" in my first post in the Introduction section. I may still do that but it will take much writing and many short posts and, as I said before, there's nothing impressive to reveal. Hopefully the value (or lack of value) of my posts will be evident without knowing my less-than-impressive musical background. I, most accurately, am a guy who enjoys writing songs.

I enjoy reading your posts (bet I've missed a few) and am always curious to know more about how others work towards the making of a song. I am a lyricist, myself, with only the most stumbling intstrumental facility, but who enjoys the privilege of working with great composers and players. But, like you, there was a long preceding period where all I wrote caused me great personal discomfort and, indeed, it only seems during the last decade that I have achieved any significant worthwhile improvement. You and I are of similar vintage, also.

I write my lyrics and melodies and I create my own recordings in my home studio. I don't collaborate, I've tried but I want more control over the final product than I can get in a collaboration. My musical knowledge is quite limited but I can hear melodies in my head and that translates just fine to a recording once I'm certain how I want the words to be sung. I play guitar but not well enough to record (fingers are too stiff) so much of my instrumentation comes from note-generating software or from local musicians. I have no interest in professional music. By preference I am, and always will be, an amateur. I am somewhat intrigued by YouTube videos; I might consider posting a music video someday.

I haven't really been following the 'plain English' idea - though a great fan of it in everyday prose - but have long been in pursuit of ideal simplicity of expression. However close my approach might get, it's always a huge sweat though - still hard work - I want it to sound easy and effortless, but it's always tough for me to find my way there.

The "plain English paragraphs" process is just a way to get the creative motor running at full speed without the encumbrances of rhyme and structure. Once the process leads you to what you want each song section to contain, the hard work begins. But all the stuff you come up with in the "paragraphs" process can help a lot in arriving at a good finished product.

And about this rhyme thing.... I just flicked open my copy of "Lyrics by Oscar Hemmerstein II" handily at my desk and found this quote: "If one has fundamental things to say in a song, the rhyming becomes a question of deft balancing. A rhyme should be unassertive, never standing out too noticeably. It should, on the other hand, not be a rhyme heard in a hundred of other popular songs of the time, so familiar that the listener can anticipate it before it is sung. There should not be too many rhymes. In fact, a rhyme should appear only where it is absolutely demanded to keep the pattern of the music. If a listener is made rhyme-conscious, his interest may be diverted from the story of the song. If on the other hand, you keep him waiting for a rhyme, he is more likely;y to listen to the meaning of the words."

I haven't read "Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II" but I'm sure that, wherever I came up with my point of view, my original source was probably influenced by him. I've never said it quite as well as your quote, but I've used similar words many times.

So Oscar is in fundamental agreement with you (and so am I).

Probably more accurate to say we agree with him. He died before I wrote my first song.

I think he is also in fundamental agreement with me where he says "a rhyme should appear only where it is absolutely demanded to keep the pattern of the music".

He was a lyricist who probably wrote to a melody his collaborators created first. Even if that is not accurate, his high level of skill probably made him think of words, at least in part, as their musical counterparts -- note values (half notes, quarter notes, etc). That may be why he used the phrase "pattern of the music." I don't think of the music as demanding a rhyme; I think of the rhythm of the words as sometimes demanding a rhyme. Two lines that have similarly accented syllables in a place where rhymes might appear tend to make me feel the urge to rhyme those lines. I understand why a composer would say it that way; but a lyricist who doesn't understand music is more likely to relate to rhymes as being demanded by words and not notes. I guess my version is just a less sophisticated way to say the same thing.

My impression is that a personal discovery of yours about rhyming liberation was prompted by the happenstance of minor or dramatic changes in line-length and/or rhythm - whereas my own preferences for these same variations in line-length and/or rhythm, I think, may be more rooted in genre or stylistic idiom For me, these variations follow a melodic conception which I have learned from others whom I admire and which have led me to the position that the music is primary and forms the emotional contour served by the lyrics. And that's only one of the reasons why I wanted to know more about your own journey and genre-map maybe.

I don't think about the guidelines or limitations of genre when I write. I haven't studied genres and can't talk intelligently on the subject. From a broad perspective, my work has elements of classic rock, easy listening and modern country but I never think about that when I'm writing. That's one of the advantages of my amateur status. I never have to think, "would a country song say that?" I'm not a fan of most country music but some of the new songs sound a lot like the Neil Diamond, Roy Orbison, James Taylor, etc. stuff I grew up listening to.

Don

[Lazz]

My original intention was to slowly reveal "my story" in my first post in the Introduction section. I may still do that but it will take much writing and many short posts and, as I said before, there's nothing impressive to reveal.

Everything makes an impression.

Just the facts, ma'am.

I had missed your introductory post and went back and read it in the interim.

And I am impressed to be makinge acquaintance with the son of sharecroppers.

Bet that's a Songstuff first.

(I'm their first ex-tunnel-miner)

I haven't read "Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II" but I'm sure that, wherever I came up with my point of view, my original source was probably influenced by him. I've never said it quite as well as your quote, but I've used similar words many times.

That similarity is what made me reach for the quote. They aren't thoughts original to him, either. It's all quite commonly shared craft lore. Just that he expresses it so nicely and concisely in the lovely essay which introduces the collection of lyrics.

Probably more accurate to say we agree with him. He died before I wrote my first song.

Oscar is eternal.

He was a lyricist who probably wrote to a melody his collaborators created first.

It varied some: Jerome Kern was a tetchily rigorous and demanding old git who delivered the music first and would not countenance even the most minor alterations to accomodate sense or syllables; Richard Rodgers was a far better match I think - for whom Oscar predominantly wrote lyrics first. But he wrote them with a pronounced musical sensibility and awareness. (No surprise, I guess, if you've already worked with guys like Kern, Youmans and Romberg)

I don't think about the guidelines or limitations of genre when I write.

I don't think I do either - well, sometimes it becomes more conscious - but I do aim for authenticity within the idiom.

Which means in effect that I can't do country or rock well

[cobalt21]

So then, why are there no songs about oranges