Fiction In Songwriting

[MikeRobinson]

I think that every song, even if it is personal, is "a work of fiction."

 

A subtle reason for this fiction-writing is that the listener, no matter who (s)he is, needs to be able to relate to the song as more than just a sympathetic bystander.  The listener should be able to project himself/herself into the fictional scenario that you've contrived, making it their own.

[john]

3 hours ago, MikeRobinson said:

I think that every song, even if it is personal, is "a work of fiction."

 

A subtle reason for this fiction-writing is that the listener, no matter who (s)he is, needs to be able to relate to the song as more than just a sympathetic bystander.  The listener should be able to project himself/herself into the fictional scenario that you've contrived, making it their own.

I have to disagree, it doesn’t need to be fictional to achieve that Mike. 
 

Ambiguity, generalisation and other mechanisms make it very achievable.

 

“I love you”

 

Utterly true if I say it to one person. Untrue to say it to others.

 

If I say “I love Karen” “I love my wife” “I love her”, they are all true because I know I am writing them about my partner. No fictional element needed. All you need is to adjust your perspective according to abstraction.

 

“I rode my Kawasaki Z1” “I rode my motorbike” “I drove my vehicle” “I went to”  “I travelled” all are true all are non fiction, there is no fictionalising involved, no made up or invented story.

 

Does the listener fictionalise? Possibly, but not definitely....

 

if I as the writer write “Sue is tall and slim and I made her my wife”, and it is true for me, I as the writer did not employ fiction.

 

As a listener if my wife is Sue and she is tall and slim, they did not create fiction. Yes we are thinking about a different Sue, but it isn’t fiction. It’s abstraction, which is not a fictional process.
 

Now, if a listener has a wife named Sue who is squat and fat, then they have to fictionalise To adapt the song. That is true for any listener where details don’t tally with their truth.
 

There is an art to writing lyrics that are non fictional but open to interpretation, and they can be emotionally charged too.
 

if I replace Sue with She, it is still true for the writer, but now a lot more listeners can think it true for them without any fiction at all.

 

Similarly, simile, allegory and metaphor are not fictional concepts 

[MikeRobinson]

John, I use the phrase "a work of fiction" here in a very specific way that you might have mistook.

 

Unless a work is a literal ((auto-)biographical) statement of a particular real-person's life or an actual it-really-happened situation, I call that work "fictional."  If the work interprets the situation in order to "relate it to" anyone or anything else, in my strict meaning of the term it has become "fictional."  You are now invoking some lesser or greater amount of "dramatic license," in order to convey a greater and more-universal point, because you desire the listener to connect with that point, not merely to be informed about "what occurred between Mary Jones and Tom Swift on May 21, 1997 at 2:35 PM."

 

The origins, and indeed the power, of many tales originate directly from real life.  (Hence the rich world of "historical fiction" and "alternative history.")  But they are, nonetheless, tales.  They are not meant strictly to inform an otherwise-disinterested bystander.

 

"Goody for you that you rode your Kawasaki ... what's in it for me, especially since I don't own a bike?"  "Glad to hear that you love your wife ... what's going to make me want to stop right now and hug my husband?"  This is what I meant by "fiction."  The word is not intended to convey that the events did not actually happen, nor that the persons are not actually real.  But, as a songwriter, you have purposely exercised your fiction and artistic license with the express purpose to include a third person:  Me.  Everyman.  And, not only that, but to tell him something.  Not literally "of" what happened, but more-universally "about" it.

[john]

9 minutes ago, MikeRobinson said:

 The word is not intended to convey that the events did not actually happen, nor that the persons are not actually real.  But, as a songwriter, you have purposely exercised your fiction and artistic license with the express purpose to include a third person:  Me.  Everyman.  And, not only that, but to tell him something.

 

I know this. I am very aware of the mechanism. I just don't think of abstraction as being fiction. I was merely giving examples of why I don't think of it as fiction from the writer's perspective. They have not carried out the fictionalising. They enable the reader/listener to do that.

[MikeRobinson]

On 4/21/2020 at 6:11 PM, john said:

 

They have not carried out the fictionalising. They enable the reader/listener to do that.

 

... but they devised, and intended, and purposed(!) for "the reader/listener to do that."  They meant for a third-party ... the reader/listener ... to be there, and to be The Audience.

 

Seriously:  in this case, pick a word:  "abstraction?"  "fiction?"  Really we're just talking about the same idea.  Anytime we exit from our own deeply-personal experiences and decide to write a song about these experiences, we have purposely invited an unknown-to-us third party into our experience.  And, to accommodate him, we prepare a place for him.  We've built a bridge.  A "fictional" place where (s)he can meet us.

 

To me, "fictional" does not mean "false."  Maybe it means "contrived."  "Necessary." 

[MikeRobinson]

I think we have a difference of terminology – of what you vs. I mean by the word, fiction.  "Songwriting is storytelling."  But I do not use the term "fiction" to mean that the song is artificial – only that it is constructed.  It is a thing that is built to be heard, and to convey its message to everyone who hears it – total strangers.  You aren't singing in the shower.  Your beloved (or ex-beloved)'s eyes might be hazel but you found a word that rhymes with "blue."  The song might be autobiographical but you selected a way to say it. Very likely the event did not happen exactly as the song portrays, because it might be quite boring to the audience if it did.

[Mac Wilkey]

I agree with John. By mikes terminology any documentary work would become fictional when a given reader had no way of relating to the characters in an interpersonal way. I’m not a PhD but I am married to an English teacher. “Abstract” seems to convey the concept better as John mentioned 

[MikeRobinson]

I agree.  My use of the word "fictional" could indeed, at least superficially, be satisfied by "abstract."

 

 

In some colloquial interpretations of the word, "fiction," the word is understood to refer to "pure fantasies" that never existed.  Harry Potter never was a Wizard.  Scarlett O'Hara never ruled over Tara.  Entire "fictional" empires were subsequently constructed over both of them, into which their customers willingly entered.

 

My interpretation of the term, in the sense of songwriting, was always intended to be much more limited.  (Sure: use "abstract" if you like it better.)  I simply intended to convey, say, that there never actually was a "Jenny Jenny" whose telephone-number was "867-5309."  Nor that the songwriter who actually penned that hit had to include the actual girl's name (if there ever was one ... unnecessary ...), nor her phone number.