Red Mosquito

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:i love QE so much. And while it blames trump, in the end it also blames the subjects for scapegoating and externalizing and distancing yourself from your responsibility. it literally goes to mars to make that point.

musically it is fucking awesome

Eddie’s lyrics are much smarter than people often give them credit for. Folks stop at fairly superficial levels because they dont think there are extra layers to imbue with meaning, and Eddie is not a showy writer

Imbue is such a weird word choice here. Are you suggesting some listeners are lazier than others because they don’t inject their own meanings into the song?

Well first off, as you know, there is an element of subjectivity in all but the most basic level of engaging with any piece of art. people will find their own meaning. But any text gives you more or less raw material to work with. I don't think people are lazy in regards to Eddie and his writing. But I think people sometimes stop short of fully of interacting with the levels that a set of lyrics might have because they make the assumption they won't find anything.

i.e. - reducing QE to a song about Trump messing up the world.

I see. In any event, I don't view this read is even remotely reductive:

Quick Escape is about escaping a place that has fallen into systemic disrepair, with the subjects going so far as Mars to find respite, because everywhere else they tried had been ruined by Donald Trump. But once there, the escapers realize they've neglected their responsibilities back home.

Any read above and beyond that would, in my view, be unnecessarily generous to both Ed and the band. It's not that I have a problem with simple lyrics, but I do have a problem with dumb lyrics, especially when they're on top of annoying music. All the Zanzibar/Marrakesh stuff is Kiedis-levels of goofy, but delivered with a sense of foreboding that is tough to stomach.

The underlying composition is a locomotive of dogshit, the lyrics the carriage. The Trump reference is just the caboose.

and that is exactly my point

Why on earth would anyone consume a piece of art, and upon concluding that the seasoned creator’s intention was insufficient, then try to imbue greater significance into the art? That’s like when I tell my five year old that her crappy drawings are awesome.

you wouldn't. And my point was, and remains, and feels well illustrated, that many Pearl Jam fans who shit on Eddie's lyrics often have literal and ungenerous interpretations of what he is doing, and are inclined to look superficially and then conclude that they were unable to find what they did not look for. And it seemed to me that your dismissal of the QE lyrics are a great example of this.

You don't have to like it. You don't have to find it meaningful. But I think the prevailing wisdom among many fans here is that Eddie isn't that good at this, and stumbles accidentally into decent lyrics. And I think there is a lot more going on in much of his writing than first appears.

It is, of course, possible that I am wrong and Eddie usually sucks as a lyricist.

If anything, I think the QE lyrics are notably better than the Bushleaguer lyrics. At least the verses. BL is an example of something seeming smarter than it is, whereas QE is the opposite

But you haven’t expounded on anything other than what’s plain to see in the printed lyrics. You claim to see additional value but have yet to add anything substantive. Maybe you’ve provided more insight in the Quick Escape thread?

tragabigzanda wrote:stip hates pearl jam, you heard it here first folks

Leatherhead wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Strat wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Leatherhead wrote:Ed's best lyrics are in Johnny Guitar.

With a leg under a red dress I wish I could see
Further North a warmth alive & lingering

Ick

Nah. Johnny Guitars lyrics are fantastic. Super playful, great wordplay, delivers exactly the intent of the song. Very clever and fun

I don't have a problem with the wordplay or the cleverness or the fun, merely the assertion that anything about the lyrics are Ed's best anything. That's an icky take.

Sorry, Leatherhead, I love you regardless.

Oh yeah. I love JG, lyrics and all, but the post was not serious. We're in the Can't Dent Me thread after all.

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:Okay real quick - Trag, you do basically cover the 'plot' of the song. But below the surface there are a few things happening, I think:

1. A romanticization (even fetishization) of a purer, less exploitative way of living, that leans into idealized simpler times and places (going further and further out to locations that are coded as more exotic, primitive, and more innocent), the moral superiority of manual labor, etc. And it does so in ways that feel almost childlike, even infantile

2. Trump is not really a person in here. He's a cipher for deeper self destructive logic of how we structure our lives and society. And part of the conceit of the song is that this is something we can theoretically outrun

3. And underneath it all, manifesting at the end and reinforced by the music, is a critique of this tendency as wish fulfillment and a way to absolve both having to take responsibility for our actions and engage in the kind of critical reflection that might lead to change (the quick escape is the singer/subject running from this as much as from the social destruction he thinks is following him but he actually brings with him).


Quick escape is not an essay. You have to tease some of this out, or read a little deeply. But it's there, I think. Both in intent and in the text. And that doesn't make it a lyrical masterpiece. But it's not a dumb song either.

But I think it's also important, with Eddie's writing in particular, to see the songs in the albums in conversation with each other, developing and grappling with the central ideas that he is working through on the album. And so the companion songs both illuminate and enhance what's going on at a particular moment.


If this was a Radiohead album, I don't think anyone would question this approach to thinking about the lyrics. But because it's a pearl jam album, I think many of us are just a little too quick to dismiss it and stop our own thinking with a surface level read. Eddie's writing is a much richer text, with a lot more to mine, than he's given credit for. That is my bigger point.

No offense step but this all reads like a very verbose retread of everything we already know about the song (and I’m skeptical #2 holds much water).

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:

stip wrote:Okay real quick - Trag, you do basically cover the 'plot' of the song. But below the surface there are a few things happening, I think:

1. A romanticization (even fetishization) of a purer, less exploitative way of living, that leans into idealized simpler times and places (going further and further out to locations that are coded as more exotic, primitive, and more innocent), the moral superiority of manual labor, etc. And it does so in ways that feel almost childlike, even infantile

2. Trump is not really a person in here. He's a cipher for deeper self destructive logic of how we structure our lives and society. And part of the conceit of the song is that this is something we can theoretically outrun

3. And underneath it all, manifesting at the end and reinforced by the music, is a critique of this tendency as wish fulfillment and a way to absolve both having to take responsibility for our actions and engage in the kind of critical reflection that might lead to change (the quick escape is the singer/subject running from this as much as from the social destruction he thinks is following him but he actually brings with him).


Quick escape is not an essay. You have to tease some of this out, or read a little deeply. But it's there, I think. Both in intent and in the text. And that doesn't make it a lyrical masterpiece. But it's not a dumb song either.

But I think it's also important, with Eddie's writing in particular, to see the songs in the albums in conversation with each other, developing and grappling with the central ideas that he is working through on the album. And so the companion songs both illuminate and enhance what's going on at a particular moment.


If this was a Radiohead album, I don't think anyone would question this approach to thinking about the lyrics. But because it's a pearl jam album, I think many of us are just a little too quick to dismiss it and stop our own thinking with a surface level read. Eddie's writing is a much richer text, with a lot more to mine, than he's given credit for. That is my bigger point.

No offense step but this all reads like a very verbose retread of everything we already know about the song (and I’m skeptical #2 holds much water).

*stip

stip wrote:If anything, I think the QE lyrics are notably better than the Bushleaguer lyrics. At least the verses. BL is an example of something seeming smarter than it is, whereas QE is the opposite