Day to day living?

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:04 pm**

"EXCEPT WHEN THEYRE AN ARTIST"?????really now???well love is love--dont matter who you are and you would actually be surprised that it doesnt matter if a man sings it about another man or a man sings it to a women. most love songs are in general anyways--not sung like micheal bolton "when a man loves a woman". and i dont want to start a fight--just learn to accept that gay love does exsist.so dont let it change your view towards the lyrics ok. in your mind let it be about whoever you want it to be about ok.... :

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:05 pm**

cougar wrote:When I have an idea of what a song is about in my mind and find out its geared towards a man not a woman it changes the whole darn thing for me.

With all due respect - this is a personal problem.

A great love song is a great love song. Your interpretation shouldn't depend on the original author imagining a man, a woman, or a sun-warmed melon as they write and perform it. What it means to you is yours and yours alone. That's one of the joys of music.

At the same time I agree with you about dropping it (the subject of Shane's sexuality). The gender Shane chooses to have sex with is none of my business. I honestly don't care. The same goes for James, Jem, Philip, Darryl, Andrew, Cait, and Terry. Hell - I'll extend that to MacRua, Zuzana, Kufen, Jaffa, Cougar, John Powers, and all the rest of you. The gender that you choose to get naked with is of nearly no interest to me at all, is none of my business, and the discussion of it in the world is a disappointingly large waste of time and energy.

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:54 pm**

Bravo, DzM - well said, and thanks for saying it.

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:06 pm**

jaffa wrote:"EXCEPT WHEN THEYRE AN ARTIST"?????really now???well love is love--dont matter who you are and you would actually be surprised that it doesnt matter if a man sings it about another man or a man sings it to a women. most love songs are in general anyways--not sung like micheal bolton "when a man loves a woman". and i dont want to start a fight--just learn to accept that gay love does exsist.so dont let it change your view towards the lyrics ok. in your mind let it be about whoever you want it to be about ok.... :

Ok, after this I'll drop it, hahaha. You seem to think I have "something" against "something". I just dont want to know, thats all. I have a good friend that gay, and I dont have a problem with him being homosexual. You are right DzM, this is a personal thing. For me, I do not listen to songs to apply them to myself or my relationships. I listen to them from an outside perspective. This is the same for me with literature and visual arts. I do not apply "Of Mice and Men" or "The Old Man and the Sea" to my own life - rather, I am a visitor looking into the minds of Steinbeck and Hemingway while being entertained at the same time. When I lood at Picasso's "Guernica" I do not apply the scene displayed to my own life, I simply enjoy the artwork. But you are right, art should be open to interpretation. I really wish you hadnt thought I was bashing anything. Afterall, just like anyone has the right to be gay, dont I have the right to enjoy Shane's music without having to know whether he likes sex with women or men? Obviously, you can discuss it if you want, haha, but at the moment I was somewhat offended that anyone would, first, be concerned with it, and second, make assumptions of his sexuality without ever hearing him say something on the subject. Anyway, Ill shut up!!!!! Also, I was EXTREMELY hammered when I wrote that post, so the passion I expressed was probably me trying to get my mind to stop thinking about it.

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:49 pm**

Aha! Now a discussion about enjoyment and interpretation of the arts is an interesting topic. This is something I can get into.

cougar wrote:Ok, after this I'll drop it, hahaha. You seem to think I have "something" against "something". I just dont want to know, thats all. I have a good friend that gay, and I dont have a problem with him being homosexual.

Well - I can't speak for anyone else, but I read nothing in your post that made me think you were homophobic. What surprised me was your comment that knowing the sexual preferences of the writer would somehow change your ability to enjoy the final piece. This is a silly notion to me.

cougar wrote:For me, I do not listen to songs to apply them to myself or my relationships. I listen to them from an outside perspective. This is the same for me with literature and visual arts. I do not apply "Of Mice and Men" or "The Old Man and the Sea" to my own life - rather, I am a visitor looking into the minds of Steinbeck and Hemingway while being entertained at the same time. When I lood at Picasso's "Guernica" I do not apply the scene displayed to my own life, I simply enjoy the artwork. But you are right, art should be open to interpretation.

And now I think you're misunderstanding what I was saying. I don't think you have to apply any works of art to your own life, only that you should form your own opinions about them. Sometimes they'll attach themselves to something in your life, and sometimes they won't. That shouldn't change your ability to form your own views on them regardless of what their creators were thinking.

<img src="http://www.dzm.com/export_images/The_Scream.jpg" align="right">Take Munch's <i>The Scream</i>. He told a story about its inspiration. While the story adds an interesting element to the history of the image, it doesn't change how you or I should think of the image.

If to one person it represents nothing more than kitch from the 1980s and 1990s, should they change their view upon reading that Munch "sensed an infinite scream passing through nature" and was inspired? If to another person it represents all of mankind wailing against the crushing injustices of an uncaring world should that view change upon reading that the blood-red background is simply a sunset over the Norwegan city of Oslofjord?

While these tidbits and facts about Munch and the painting itself are interesting, they do not and should not change what the image may mean to the viewer. What it means to the viewer is theirs and theirs alone.

cougar wrote:I really wish you hadnt thought I was bashing anything. Afterall, just like anyone has the right to be gay, dont I have the right to enjoy Shane's music without having to know whether he likes sex with women or men?

I'm going to guess this was aimed at somebody other than me. I think I already agreed with you on this point.

cougar wrote:Also, I was EXTREMELY hammered when I wrote that post, so the passion I expressed was probably me trying to get my mind to stop thinking about it.

There are many times in life when mental floss is needed.

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:24 pm**

jaffa wrote:you should at least take that as a compliment that you were "hit-on"----and by the way---the use of the word "fag"is not acceptable. and also by the way--it is possible to live on the same planet. what you dont have gay friends???

DzM! Please don't get me wrong. I sincerely apologize for not seperating my thoughts. It was the above post by jaffa that hurt me. It sounded to me like jaffa thought I had stated something along the lines of not being tolerant of homosexuals. And, jaffa, I am not attacking you, bud, I just mention your name and post what you wrote to clear up the mentioned misunderstanding.
You bring up a good point, DzM. I have thought about what you said and you have made me consider rethinking my take on how music is or should be interpreted. Let me add this to our discussion: To me, (and I should warn I mainly make this assumption for the sake of argument) there are two real forms of lyrical music. Those about love, and those about "something else" - thats is, stories, illustrating scenes with words, etc. And since we're on a Pogues forum lets use them as an example. We'll take songs like If I should Fall, Main Drag and others that do more than just say "I love you", and compare them with, say, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Fairytale, Rainy Night, etc. I think we all can seperate which of the two catagories each selection falls into. The first mentioned really envelope me. They are not about me. Sometimes they are, but for the most part they are describing something that I have not experienced or been exposed to (I went to boarding school in New England, and I think Shane and I had very deifferent upbringings, haha). The second batch mentioned DO apply to me, however. And I should, say many of the "I love you" hits that Motown came out with. As much as I love these songs, I am unable to seperate the fact that they were written by somone who is very different from me and, therefore, writes different lyrics than me. (Time-out for a breath!). Overall, when I hear Shane's love songs I embrace the fact that I already have an image of who is singing these and enjoy them from that standpoint. Now I should make one thing clear, and that is that those Motown hits I mentioned to not evoke the same feeling. Many of them are joyous and wonderful, but quite empty love songs. So when I hear one of Shane's love songs I already have the version of Shane in mind that I want to hear. When someone states that he is gay, well boy, that really shakes things up! Not just the love songs, but as I mentioned before the other non-love songs - on account of my inability or should I say, lack of desire, to seperate the two. And I dont want things shaken up! I want those memories of my first impressions of songs to remain and be with me when I listen to them over and over again. About a year ago, me and a bud were talking about Bob Dylan. Somehow we got into a discussion about his song "Tamborine Man". My friend begain a sentance that went something like this: "I read a book where Dylan revealed the secret about what that song is about. Dylan said that...." Immediatly I said "Stop! I dont want to hear anymore!" I first heard that song when I was 8 years old and have had a mental image of what that song portrayed in my mind since then. There are many songs that are like that for me, and I would never want those images and memories "taken away" or simply polluted...by the truth that is, hahah. So I guess I got a little anxious when folks started saying that he was gay - that would just change the images too much. And that is something that I know you folks would say "shouldn't happen" to a song one loves (an opinion I respect and understand). I guess thats what I meant to say. If you understood what I wrote, congratulation!! Haha. Its quite possible I contradicted myself by typing the wrong word or whatnot but I'm out of energy and dont think I can edit. And I very much enjoyed what you had to say about Munch and how an artists' secrets can or cannot change someone, etc. Cheers

**Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:57 pm**

I can understand your position cougar, but I just can't agree with it. But then that's the great thing about the arts - the only opinion that matters is your own. If that's how you enjoy works of art, who am I to criticize?

I enjoy knowing the backstory on works of art (lyrical or otherwise), but I try to avoid letting that backstory influence how I feel about the piece.

I've never been to Spain, but "Night Train to Lorca" paints a hauntingly lovely vignette of a coal fired train belching smoke and sparks as it pushes through the inky night of a desert. The imagery and scene of this song wouldn't change for me at all if Jem announced "Yeah, in writing that I was describing a scene that really happened. I was dressed as a clown and couldn't find my shoes." I'd find the story amusing, but the song would still be, for me, a dark and descriptive scene.

I have been to the Louvre and stared in wonder at The Raft of The Medusa for hours. "The Wake of The Medusa" therefore strikes a more personal connection for me. I can vividly see the guests wandering the gallery, sitting on the benches, stunned by the size, the horror and joy of the painting itself. The scene in the song is very clear in my mind's eye and again would not be at all affected if Jem disclosed "I was high on acid and made the whole thing up. I've never even seen a photo of the painting. ... Really? That's the one we used on that cover? Wow," or even "We were all naked at the time."

Now a song like "Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah" is impossible to change regardless of the back story. It would take a real act of imagination to turn "I love your breasts, I love your thighs" into a declaration of love between two men (and if that act is performed then the recipient of the paen may not be thrilled to have their man-tits immortalized in verse). Even if I were to learn that this were a tribute to Shane's B&D sub named "Bear" it wouldn't change for me that this is a simple declaration of love and affection between a young man and his (evidently totally hot) girlfriend.

And finally, while not The Pogues, Lou Reed's "Perfect Day" would be no different for me if I found out this perfect day was a solo afternoon in the park with his favorite dog.

The point being that, for me, a beautiful song is a beautiful song regardless of how it got that way.

**Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:18 pm**

Well said, DzM. On many points I agree with you. If this discussion goes any farther I'm afraid it will turn into a philosophical conversation on how the human mind chemically interprets sound waves, haha. Good call, good call, and I am determined to remain open-minded about how I form opinions of songs in the future (whether I personally have power over that or not). Cheers.

**Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:55 am**

I think your all wrong I'd put Shane down as a gym goer, I'd say twice a day and The Pogues on his I-Pod.

**Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:11 pm**

as a matter of fact i saw him running in the park the other day with sting and the twins from the proclaimers

**Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:10 pm**

for the nearest pub trying to outstrip a curfew?

**Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:11 pm**

actually to purchase advance tickets for a boyzone concert

**Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:09 am**

Sting is into boyzone too?! unbelievable... Shane's influence I suppose.

**Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:54 am**

So now we know what Shane is up to. He's currently being creative and writing to finish his boyband tribute album with Sting and the Proclaimers on backing vocals. Called 'Paddy 8TEEN'. Can't wait to get this!!

**Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:57 am**

and releasing a fitness video, jumping jacks and the rest.

Day to day living?

Who is online