Suicide Chump

[Slap]

It is an intriguing contrast between the first post, and where we have arrived, at, 'If you don't think it's funny, that's certainly your prerogative.'

Hey, Bert...

I got to thinking about this comment yesterday; my own earlier quote from Miss Brodie also says essentially the same thing.

Neither comment was intended to close the door on further discussion of the subject, or, for that matter, to shut down anyone's opinions.  (Like we could actually succeed in such a proposition amongst educated, opinionated Zappafolks.)There are two fairly distinct ideas being discussed in this little thread: the lyrics and their intent, and suicide itself and our responses to it.   Chris's comment and mine both refer to lyrical interpretations.  (Chris, jump in if I'm missing your intent here.)

And lyrical interpretation discussions amongst people of differing perceptions, exposure, language knowledge and interpretative styles will inevitably -- in most cases -- come down to some variation of "well, that's your opinion" at some point.  Without the writer of the lyrics to steer anyone into the "intended" direction, everything else comes down to a matter of interpretation based on the interpreter's background and studies.  By saying such things as "that's your opinion", it's a way of saying that it's interesting that you'd take such a  view, but I still disagree.  And really, who the hell am I to say?

All art -- but particularly music, I think -- is fascinating to me in one highly significant way:  once the creation is released into the world, the artist's intentions tend to become irrelevant, because their ability to control the interpretation stops the minute they've completed the work.  It then assumes a different life altogether once others begin to observe/consume, subject to all the glorious differences in perception we all bring to the table.  Jeff Koons' Lucite cube containing basketballs might be intended as some sort of meditation on sports/consumerism/man's inhumanity to man/breasts or whatever, but that's ultimately irrelevant.  I see it as a humorous visual that has no evident meaning to me, but makes me smile.

Am I off the point?  I don't even know.  Here's what I want to say:  I'm hoping you don't take our "that's your opinion" variations as personally insulting or judgmental.  That certainly wasn't the intent.

Damn, it sure does take me an awful lot of wordbarfing to say something simple sometimes.  

[Chris]

You're right; they're lyrical interpretations meant to be constituents of a friendly discussion. There's no need for anyone to get offended, since none of us wrote the song. Tastes are all different. This is what makes the world exciting. If we all felt the same about music, etc., there'd be no reason for this forum!

[bertanya]

Bert: King of the "copy'n'paste other's stuff" posters.

king bert - kong bert - song bert - sung bert - sunk bert - funk bert - punk bert - punt bert - pent bert - peat bert - peat cert - peat cart - feat cart - feet cart - feet curt - feel curt - feel hurt...

Q*bert - now there was a game.

Maybe you could start a cross-reference index.

Urmmm, will have to think about it...

bertanya

[Chris]

Yeah yeah yeah! Q-Bert. You're making me want to hook up the ol' Commodore 64 when I get home from work.

FZ's only mention of a video game in a song: Pac-Man (in the barely listenable "Valley Girl" from the otherwise breathtaking Ship Arriving...  album).

By the way, in case anyone wasn't aware -- Frank chose that Droodle for the front cover of his 1982 record because the lines in the drawing spell out "ZA" (the first two letters of his last name) and/or "FZ," depending on how you look at it.

Frank was, indeed, a ship arriving too late to save a drowning con-job of a nation (witch).

Stop...me...before...I...sub-reference...again...

[guacamole]

[/quo

All art -- but particularly music, I think -- is fascinating to me in one highly significant way:  once the creation is released into the world, the artist's intentions tend to become irrelevant, because their ability to control the interpretation stops the minute they've completed the work.  It then assumes a different life altogether once others begin to observe/consume, subject to all the glorious differences in perception we all bring to the table.  

In the field of literature, one of the authors that I've long had great admiration for is Samuel Beckett. He was notorious for his reticence in speaking about his work believing that everything that he wanted to say about it was contained in the work itself therefore it was up to the reader/actor/directors interpretation as to what it was all about. It's a bit different with FZ though - he was so vociferous on such a wide range of subjects that his comments were often ambiguous in their meaning if not completely contradictory.

[Chris]

Just like real life.