LC has a gift, we all have the same language with which to say things.
LC's gift is he can put that language into exquisite prose, but the way some of you talk you are making him into a godlike being.
He is the one and only person I would really like to meet in the world but even I do not try to elevate him to godlike proportions.
I consider him the greatest living poet but that is a gift he has been given and he has used it well,
Why do you feel you have to analysis LC's music so much
Well said, and nicely said, Paula for the point I believe you're trying to make. It seems you may be mixing and matching the concepts a bit on the analyzing and elevating him to g..dlike proportions. One doesn't necessarily equate to the other.
The analysis of what he means will continue for many years, as it does with any great literature. With poetry in particular, it seems much of what is said lies between the lines, as well as in them. With his heavy use of metaphors, etc. and his poetry-like songs, there's even more to take hold of and grapple with. Nothing in that process suggests his being elevated to any degree. Simply a deep and abiding interest in what his songs have to say to us personally and collectively.
Elevating him to g..dlike proportions is more being in awe of him, and worshipping him, as a result of his gift ~ or whatever else. I agree that he is not a g..d, and he'd be the first to clarify that, were there any question.
At least that's my perspective. I am in awe of his ability to write....and yes, it is truly a gift. As a person, I feel he's quite human and quite the opposite of a g..d.
~Lizzytysh
The analysis of what he means will continue for many years, as it does with any great literature. With poetry in particular, it seems much of what is said lies between the lines, as well as in them. With his heavy use of metaphors, etc. and his poetry-like songs, there's even more to take hold of and grapple with. Nothing in that process suggests his being elevated to any degree. Simply a deep and abiding interest in what his songs have to say to us personally and collectively.
Elevating him to g..dlike proportions is more being in awe of him, and worshipping him, as a result of his gift ~ or whatever else. I agree that he is not a g..d, and he'd be the first to clarify that, were there any question.
At least that's my perspective. I am in awe of his ability to write....and yes, it is truly a gift. As a person, I feel he's quite human and quite the opposite of a g..d.
~Lizzytysh
I think your answer is exactly my point. Sometimes poets write the poems in a certain way just because they rhyme and there is no hidden meaning.
You are creating complexity where I don't think any is intended.
LC thoughts just flow on the paper and I am sure some of it is just filler
I also notice you write g-d rather than god I know LC does that out of respect, why do you do that.
I am trying not to be disrespectful to you it is just an observation.
You are creating complexity where I don't think any is intended.
LC thoughts just flow on the paper and I am sure some of it is just filler
I also notice you write g-d rather than god I know LC does that out of respect, why do you do that.
I am trying not to be disrespectful to you it is just an observation.
Hi Paula,
From what I've read of Leonard's own comments, and of his songs [where he always seems to stay pretty true to rhyme], I've gotten the definite sense that nothing is just filler. Even had I any doubt, it would have been immediately clarified when I read where he said that he'd written down [I may be wrong on the exact number] 700[+?] words that rhymed with the ____"x"____ word that he was wanting to use. Now, he could've found any number of filler words between #1 and #700. Not only must the words chosen align appropriately with rhyme, meter, and length of the line, but with meaning and intent as well.
He has also said that he sweats every word. Filler stuff wouldn't rise to that level, even when keeping his focus at "every word." I've gotten the sense that Leonard is a very stern task-master with himself. He's been writing too long and too well that if rhyming were merely a casual issue and not required to meet all of Leonard's criteria within the song, Leonard would not spend the extended periods of time on each of his songs, and would quite possibly have written as prolifically as Dylan [when you look at all the rewrites in his notebook on Alexandra Leaving, I just can't see that he ever uses filler].
The end result certainly seems to just flow, yet that is one of the marks of excellence ~ the ability to make it look so easy. In reality, I don't think it flows at all, maybe a phrase, or a line, or the perfect word now and then ~ overall, however, I think it's after a whole lot of struggle that it finally comes before our eyes.
I didn't take your query to be out of disrespect, Paula, and I don't mind answering it at all. I read somewhere way back how, indeed, Leonard does that and why. I really liked his reasoning, and as I'm recalling, it also had to do with that aspect of G..d which is unnameable, un-pin-down-able [sorry, it's past the end of a long workday, and the word I want is just not there!], elusive, unknowable, unfathomable [something along those lines] ~ and try as I might, now, I just can't seem to write it without the "ellipsis." After reading and agreeing with his comments, I just started doing it and it feels right.
All good things,
Lizzytysh
From what I've read of Leonard's own comments, and of his songs [where he always seems to stay pretty true to rhyme], I've gotten the definite sense that nothing is just filler. Even had I any doubt, it would have been immediately clarified when I read where he said that he'd written down [I may be wrong on the exact number] 700[+?] words that rhymed with the ____"x"____ word that he was wanting to use. Now, he could've found any number of filler words between #1 and #700. Not only must the words chosen align appropriately with rhyme, meter, and length of the line, but with meaning and intent as well.
He has also said that he sweats every word. Filler stuff wouldn't rise to that level, even when keeping his focus at "every word." I've gotten the sense that Leonard is a very stern task-master with himself. He's been writing too long and too well that if rhyming were merely a casual issue and not required to meet all of Leonard's criteria within the song, Leonard would not spend the extended periods of time on each of his songs, and would quite possibly have written as prolifically as Dylan [when you look at all the rewrites in his notebook on Alexandra Leaving, I just can't see that he ever uses filler].
The end result certainly seems to just flow, yet that is one of the marks of excellence ~ the ability to make it look so easy. In reality, I don't think it flows at all, maybe a phrase, or a line, or the perfect word now and then ~ overall, however, I think it's after a whole lot of struggle that it finally comes before our eyes.
I didn't take your query to be out of disrespect, Paula, and I don't mind answering it at all. I read somewhere way back how, indeed, Leonard does that and why. I really liked his reasoning, and as I'm recalling, it also had to do with that aspect of G..d which is unnameable, un-pin-down-able [sorry, it's past the end of a long workday, and the word I want is just not there!], elusive, unknowable, unfathomable [something along those lines] ~ and try as I might, now, I just can't seem to write it without the "ellipsis." After reading and agreeing with his comments, I just started doing it and it feels right.
All good things,
Lizzytysh
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
Leonard
Well said Paula and Liz
We are all in awe of Cohen or we would not be on this Board, he is without doubt the most prolific songwriter, poet and novellist of the 20th and 21st C and a terrific performer. A long time ago he dissappeared off the stage on a Judy Collins show. Now to a lot of people, he is the stage.
For whatever reason we are here, Leonard has touched a secret chord in all our hearts and i have a tremendous respect for him as a artiste and a man.
For some time i have said that Leonard is a beacon, to say he is a god is unfair but to many he has been, he is without doubt a trigger and a subtle one to enable people to question their sanity and existance and to do so, to enrich their lives. Fans, we owe a lot to Leonard and i take this oppurtunity to salute him. Long may he continue writing either songs or poetry for they are all psalms.
Georges
We are all in awe of Cohen or we would not be on this Board, he is without doubt the most prolific songwriter, poet and novellist of the 20th and 21st C and a terrific performer. A long time ago he dissappeared off the stage on a Judy Collins show. Now to a lot of people, he is the stage.
For whatever reason we are here, Leonard has touched a secret chord in all our hearts and i have a tremendous respect for him as a artiste and a man.
For some time i have said that Leonard is a beacon, to say he is a god is unfair but to many he has been, he is without doubt a trigger and a subtle one to enable people to question their sanity and existance and to do so, to enrich their lives. Fans, we owe a lot to Leonard and i take this oppurtunity to salute him. Long may he continue writing either songs or poetry for they are all psalms.
Georges
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
Quality
Without doubt, Leonard has the most quality...........
and the more heart searching lyrics
georges
and the more heart searching lyrics
georges
I hear the music first.
I hear the chords
I hear the tempo
I hear his delivery
The words hang onto the tune and enhance the melody.
I then find it difficult to read his lyrics as poems.
It's only much later do I listen to what he is actually saying and I then truly admire his choice of words.
It's the music which enticed me first and foremost and that is how it has stayed.
Maybe I'm in a minority but that's the way it is. It possibly explains why there is only one song I hate...Jazz Police. I've no idea what he is singing about there as the music detracts from any analysis.
Anyway, I thank him for the music
the songs he sings
thanks for all the joy he brings
who can live without it
I ask in all honesty
what would life be?
(oops, slipped into abba mode there!)
No, he is not a god but he makes me happy anyway.
Pete
I hear the chords
I hear the tempo
I hear his delivery
The words hang onto the tune and enhance the melody.
I then find it difficult to read his lyrics as poems.
It's only much later do I listen to what he is actually saying and I then truly admire his choice of words.
It's the music which enticed me first and foremost and that is how it has stayed.
Maybe I'm in a minority but that's the way it is. It possibly explains why there is only one song I hate...Jazz Police. I've no idea what he is singing about there as the music detracts from any analysis.
Anyway, I thank him for the music
the songs he sings
thanks for all the joy he brings
who can live without it
I ask in all honesty
what would life be?
(oops, slipped into abba mode there!)
No, he is not a god but he makes me happy anyway.
Pete
I was not suggesting that Leonard merely pulled a word from the air to fill a gap, He does however have brillant songs and not so good songs.
The words of Joan of Arc are exquiste however the words of don't go home with your hard on are absoulute crap. I consider that a filler song.
Also some of his poems
"I would like to remind the management that the drinks are watered that the hat check has syphlis and the band contains former SS monsters but since it is New Years eve and I have lip cancer I will put my paper hat on my concussion and dance."
That is not verbatim I couldn't find the book of poems anywhere but that is my favourite poem of his because of the imagagy. Sorry about my spelling that is something else that is crap.
Also on the subject of Bob Dylan. I think he borrowed heavily from Woody Guthrie but some of his lyrics are excellent:-
"The motor cycle black madonna two wheeled gypsy queen" beautiful lyrics, just not as good as Lenny
The words of Joan of Arc are exquiste however the words of don't go home with your hard on are absoulute crap. I consider that a filler song.
Also some of his poems
"I would like to remind the management that the drinks are watered that the hat check has syphlis and the band contains former SS monsters but since it is New Years eve and I have lip cancer I will put my paper hat on my concussion and dance."
That is not verbatim I couldn't find the book of poems anywhere but that is my favourite poem of his because of the imagagy. Sorry about my spelling that is something else that is crap.
Also on the subject of Bob Dylan. I think he borrowed heavily from Woody Guthrie but some of his lyrics are excellent:-
"The motor cycle black madonna two wheeled gypsy queen" beautiful lyrics, just not as good as Lenny
For me it was his words first of all, and the way he sang "Dance Me to End Of Love" on Austin City Limits where I first saw him, and he didn't do anything other than stand there with his eyes closed. 
Then it was finding out more about him on this website, and his interviews, what he had to say impressed me very much. He wasn't this talking to his pockets kind of guy, he was for real, it came from his heart. Next it would have to be his voice, the older the better, he still has a lot to tell us and the voice just fits. The music itself I would have to admit is immaterial for me. Not to say I don't enjoy the music and the beat to some of his songs, but I do get caught up in his words and actually don't pay much attention to the music, except the violin of Raffi Hakopian in "The Window". I have a hard time listening to his songs and not analysing some phrase in them, (off course I haven't been listening for thirty years) or just saying "that was beautiful" about a particular line. He has well chosen words and I believe I read somewhere it takes him a long time to find the right word sometimes. I hope he is soon ready to put something more out.
Then it was finding out more about him on this website, and his interviews, what he had to say impressed me very much. He wasn't this talking to his pockets kind of guy, he was for real, it came from his heart. Next it would have to be his voice, the older the better, he still has a lot to tell us and the voice just fits. The music itself I would have to admit is immaterial for me. Not to say I don't enjoy the music and the beat to some of his songs, but I do get caught up in his words and actually don't pay much attention to the music, except the violin of Raffi Hakopian in "The Window". I have a hard time listening to his songs and not analysing some phrase in them, (off course I haven't been listening for thirty years) or just saying "that was beautiful" about a particular line. He has well chosen words and I believe I read somewhere it takes him a long time to find the right word sometimes. I hope he is soon ready to put something more out.Linda
If I had to show preference, Cohen is my 4th favorite songwriter/poet at the moment just behind Dylan. But it changes as life does, and he has had his day at the top.
These days I prefer more direct lyricists and am more interested in the ideas the words project than in wordplay itself.
Paula, if all you've heard of Dylan are his Guthrie-inspired songs then you have missed out a lot on his 600 song catalogue.
These days I prefer more direct lyricists and am more interested in the ideas the words project than in wordplay itself.
Paula, if all you've heard of Dylan are his Guthrie-inspired songs then you have missed out a lot on his 600 song catalogue.
Hi Kush
No I do not only know his Guthrie inspired songs. I listened to a lot of Dylan in the 60's - 70's and I went to see him in concert a couple of times.
I didn't much like the stuff after he became a christian it lost a lot of its edge. But as you say tastes change and so does the edge of songwriters
No I do not only know his Guthrie inspired songs. I listened to a lot of Dylan in the 60's - 70's and I went to see him in concert a couple of times.
I didn't much like the stuff after he became a christian it lost a lot of its edge. But as you say tastes change and so does the edge of songwriters
lc's not a god
one of the reasons that i enjoy l.c. so much is precisely that he is so "ordinary".he has a gift for using words eloquently but he also seems so normal. his online chat made that very clear. i really don't think that every word he writes is meant to be life changing.i connect with some songs but certainly not with all of them. his songs and poems are life enhancing. they make an evening more interesting .i think that that is quite a compliment to any artist ,to know that someone has heard and has an opinion. that's just my opinion anyway.
christine
christine
Dear Christine ~ I still believe that the mark of excellence is the ability to make it all appear so simple and easy. I agree that Leonard's simple comments seem very down-to-earth and ordinary....and in many ways he is. However, I feel a lot of struggle and analysis has preceded his comments. His genius is in being able to speak it all so well. Even so, when we hear any, given comment made by him, we have a whole warehouse full of material and knowledge of his history that the comment plays against in our minds, which facilitates us in hearing the depth even further.
Dear Paula ~ Your initiation of this thread questioned why we have to analyze Leonard's music so much. The specific thing you mentioned was rhyming and some of the rhyming words being filler, and that we may be trying to make more of those rhyming words than is warranted.
For me, a frivolous ditty ["Don't Go Home....," which I still haven't heard] doesn't invalidate the purposefulness of analysis of the rest of his body of work. It's also an entire song [the meaning of which doesn't sound too obscure] and your mention of it had nothing to do with rhyming.
Respectfully,
Lizzytysh
Dear Paula ~ Your initiation of this thread questioned why we have to analyze Leonard's music so much. The specific thing you mentioned was rhyming and some of the rhyming words being filler, and that we may be trying to make more of those rhyming words than is warranted.
For me, a frivolous ditty ["Don't Go Home....," which I still haven't heard] doesn't invalidate the purposefulness of analysis of the rest of his body of work. It's also an entire song [the meaning of which doesn't sound too obscure] and your mention of it had nothing to do with rhyming.
Respectfully,
Lizzytysh
When I instigated this thread the first reply posted was from Liz. I didn't agree with what she said and I didn't agree with her concepts but each to their own.
Further down the thread Liz commented on Shyones message I actually agree with Shyone LC's songs are not meant to be life changing merely life enhancing if they appeal to you. Liz says the mark of excellence is the abillity to make it all seems simple and easy. If only she would take heed of her own words and make her comments simple and easy she appears to use fillers of her own and a lot of it is waffle.
I think my main point is that it is not just LC's words Liz feels she needs to analylse. She seems to what to analyse everyones words. If somebody says they are hungry they probably are they are not trying to say something else. I have now confused myself.
I don't think I need my views interpreted by Liz I know I am quite capable of forming my own opinions without the aid of interpretation especially by someone who seems to completely miss the point.
Further down the thread Liz commented on Shyones message I actually agree with Shyone LC's songs are not meant to be life changing merely life enhancing if they appeal to you. Liz says the mark of excellence is the abillity to make it all seems simple and easy. If only she would take heed of her own words and make her comments simple and easy she appears to use fillers of her own and a lot of it is waffle.
I think my main point is that it is not just LC's words Liz feels she needs to analylse. She seems to what to analyse everyones words. If somebody says they are hungry they probably are they are not trying to say something else. I have now confused myself.
I don't think I need my views interpreted by Liz I know I am quite capable of forming my own opinions without the aid of interpretation especially by someone who seems to completely miss the point.