On Love

During our discussion on love songs, I had two recurring thoughts. The first was that I had incredible trouble thinking of a love song that wasn't about breaking up or falling in love, but somewhere in the middle. All the intense emotions are in the beginning and the end of a relationship--this is where all rationality is thrown out the window and the floodgates are opened full-blast. From the feelings of total devotion and desire, to heartbreak (which i always thought was a very idiotic way of putting the pain of separation, or however you want to phrase it), only the most turbulent times in a relationship are written about. Most likely this is because we don't really pay attention to our emotions until there is a sudden change. A relationship just starting off is full of energy and so high-strung on emotion that lyrics like, "I would cross the ocean just to see your face," make perfect sense and are completely plausible until an objective viewer actually asks the person in question, "Would you? Really?" Because, of course, nobody thinks straight when they're falling in love. The same is true for breakup songs. Feelings are raw and exposed and throbbing with hurt. People write about it to release all the pent-up energy created from the emotions, and more listen because everybody can relate. I don't think there's any BS in either form of these two main forms of love songs, because as long as the artist is writing from feeling alone and not based on what he thinks people want to hear, what is said is exactly what was felt at the time. Sure, he won't really cross an entire ocean, but he won't realize how illogical that is until somebody else points it out to him. So maybe she won't curl up and die because her man left her, but she feels like she might at any minute. Because they truly believe what they're writing is true, it isn't complete bull, it's just lacking in logical thinking.

That turns into a completely different matter once emotions are settled, and everybody stops singing love songs because, yes, they're in love, but the whole thing's under control now and they don't need a song to release pent-up emotions. On top of that, it's pretty difficult to imagine a million songs all about how things are going swimmingly for a couple who have been together for quite some time. I've heard songs out there--for instance, "Dear Bobbie," by Yellowcard, is about an old man writing a love letter to his wife--but there's a reason there aren't too many songs in the 'middle stage' of a relationship. They're boring. Emotions aren't running high, so there's not too much to say.



The other thing I kept thinking of was a song that I think is a complete exception to everything we talked about with love songs. I may be completely wrong, but to me this song is about falling in love and keeping your head about it. The song is called, "On Love, In Sadness," by Jason Mraz, and the lyrics imply that the man is falling in love, but realizes the world is still exactly the same as it was before; as opposed to most people falling in love, who insist there is no sorrow, hardship, or darkness of any kind in the world anymore, he says in passing, "inevitably, well, it still exists/ pain, and fine, I can't dismiss/ and I won't resist/ and if I die, well at least I tried." I loved this song when I first heard it because the one thing I don't like about love songs is how they are all either denying any darkness in the world, or only seeing the sorrow of everything. This song is somewhere in the middle, completely levelheaded but still emotional. It's about people falling in love (or lust, as the song states in the chorus...isn't lust a very big contribution to the beginnings of love?) while bearing in mind the sad state of things around them. I just found it interesting how many times I was reminded of this song during our discussion.

Love Song Discussion I Missed

Apparently I missed a very interesting discussion in class on Friday, but it is kind of ironic. While I was at the tournament, my dad went driving around and found a yard sale. He bought me this Bob Dylan and the Greatful Dead cd. I never knew they had a concert together, but it was interesting that once I was listening to it, I read that you guys had a discussion about him in class while I was gone.
I agree with some of you that some love songs now are not as sincere. They only are singing it because it is what people want to hear or because it sounds good. I also agree that there are still some of them that have quite a bit of truth in them and they do not always have to be a certain style of music. I think Bob Dylan's songs are very sincere. He shows us all of the emotions associated with love including the pain and longing that is involved in his relationships. He may not have songs with many lyrics, or they may be repetitive, but they show a great deal of emotion in those few words. He may not be the most popular artist, but if you listen to him you can tell that he truly does feel the emotions he is trying to portray to his listeners, and he eventually evokes those feelings or ones like those feelings in his listeners whether they realize it or not. He takes those intense feelings and puts them into songs like quite a few musicians try but never can do that well.
I only like a few of his songs, because I have only listened to a few of them. But, the ones I like, do bring out lots of emotions in the songs. I tend to like music that I can relate to in some way or another. His music was introduced to me because my dad listened to oldies. Knockin on Heaven's Door came on the radio one day and at first I did not get the point. But, after I started thinking more and more about it, the more I started liking the song because of the emotions brought out in it. It may take a little longer to start liking his music because it is not what I typically listen to, but eventually I started liking more and more of his songs, as long as I gave them a chance. They may not be very long and may have a lot of chorus lines, but they mean quite a bit in those few lines. His songs make you think and figure out ways to relate to them, when sometimes you would never do that for any other reason.

Love? I have no idea what that means.

Where does a cliche come from? I mean, at some point, it wasn't cliche to write a love poem or song describing the beauty of a woman or the feats one would do to obtain her. Now, however, we hear one line like, Your eyes are as bright as the moon, and we automatically think "bullshit". Why is that? If you've read any Shakespeare, you'll know what I'm talking about. His plays and sonnets are filled with what we would now consider cliches but that wasn't the case when he wrote them, so what has changed? I think a lot of it has to do with how much it is copied, or used afterwards. If so many people didn't relate to love songs, then their wouldn't be such repetitiveness among so many of them. They become bullshitty for us, when we feel like we've heard it before, when we feel like the person isn't being sincere because they aren't having original thoughts and feelings to express themselves. But in all fairness, Love is not an original idea. Yes, there are many forms to it and it is different in some ways for everyone, but there still remains underlying factors of Love. 

I think another reason we tend to label love songs as fake or unreal, is because we may not have experienced that yet in our lives. It's hard for me to understand someone pledging their life's devotion, because I am nowhere near ready for a commitment like that in my own life. So when I hear someone singing about it, especially when the singer is my age or younger, it's unbelievably hard to accept as sincere. That doesn't make it bullshit though. I'm not saying there aren't love songs that are complete b.s., but i don't think as a whole they are. Just because someone is elaborating on a feeling they have for another person doesn't make it any less true. They may add fancy phrasing, but that only means they put more thought into it than in some everyday occurance. In all honesty, I think taking time to describe in acute detail how or what you feel makes those songs more real,more true. 

Love is complicated, and yet simple sometimes. It's beautiful, painful, difficult, joyous, exhilerating, and a billion other things. So how could we call anyone a bullshitter when writing about it. Almost anything applies, and for that person it may be completely different or very very similar to others' experiences with love. 

Love Songs

I guess I am too much of a romantic to think that all love songs are simply bullshit. Like I said in class, so many love songs are full of so many over exaggerations that we all know are not really true. But some of them, as Bob Dylan's songs, I thought, proved to us, are filled with truth. Metaphorical, symbolic, truth, but truth nonetheless. His songs were not filled with silly, over-the-moon in love, professing all the grand deeds you will do for your significant other bull. I thought Bob Dylan's songs, however, had a sincerity that I think many love songs do have.
Many of these songs that lack the worst of this love BS are usually accompanied with, as Bob Dylan's are, a certain amount of the misery that goes along with the joy of being in love. This kind of complexity of pain makes the whole being in love thing more realistic and thus much more believable. And, I think, a whole lot more boring. "I'd climb the highest mountain for you" is a lot more interesting than "I'd hang out with you"; but neither are as interesting as a love song by Muse that includes the line "You will suck the life out of me". Not only is this more true to life, but it also holds an intensity that songs full of only pure joy usually lack. Muse tends to hit listeners over the head with the intensity of their songs, but I liked how Bob Dylan did not do this. His poetic lyrics and simple, roughsound conveyed all the intensity in a simple manner that made his feelings more realistic than ever. It's like real life: most people don't even know what kind of intense emotions may been simmering underneath the surface, but they are there, nonetheless. In the same way, the emotions of Bob Dylan's songs, simmer underneath the surface of his much less than grand music.
I have to admit, usually like grander, more intense music. I like music that makes me feel something--that is usually how I determine whether or not I like a song. I like music that brings out in me some emotion that I have myself but wasn't currently using. This class has dared me to try to like music that does not do this. John Cage hated this idea, thinking that such music forced emotions on you. I do not think this is quite true, nothing can force us, make us feel anything that we do not. Some things can simply help us draw out certain emotins, based on which experiences of our own they help us relate to. But, I think there is also something to be said for music that is not so... what Cage would probably call emotionally pushy. These songs, I think, take more time to get into, but sometimes they end up meaning more to us than songs which we understand and relate to isntantly.

Dylan vs. Cage

I thought the love song discussion in class today was interesting, and it was weird having so many people in the room. Seriously, we usually have only like ten people, and all of a sudden we had about twenty-five. It changed the feel of the class.

I honestly think that some people need to learn the difference between B.S. and hyperbole. Hyperbole is a pretty common part of language (I’m starving, I need a drink). I’m honestly not sure how productive it is to go around listening to love songs (because we all know how calm, rational, and levelheaded people in love are, don’t we) and finding the hyperbole in them—it’s not exactly hard, and also kinda misses the whole point of the song. Not that I want to criticize whoever teaches that other FYS, but still.

As for the Bob Dylan songs, I thought they were interesting. I can’t say I listen to much Dylan—I enjoyed the songs we listened to today, but I can’t say I’m rushing out to download more of them. I think that Dylan is somewhat overrated—he is undeniably talented, but I think that some of his “poetic” and “voice of a generation” attributes are overrated. (If he had had all that big an impact on his generation, I doubt that his listeners would have all gone out and become yuppies—I’m pretty sure he wasn’t a big fan of that sort of thing).

But still, Dylan was talented, and as I said, I enjoyed his music. One thing I noticed was the difference between his stuff and modern music—regardless of genre, it seems (at least to me; maybe I’m wrong) that most modern music follows a strict formula—beginning stanza, chorus, middle stanza, chorus, optional ending stanza, chorus. The chorus seems to be the most important part of the song. Dylan didn’t do that, and I like that.

Dylan is, in many ways—that anti-John Cage. Cage’s music didn’t always make sense because he tried to strip away all emotion and feeling. Dylan’s music doesn’t always make sense (what exactly happened in the “come in from the storm” song? And could anyone quite follow the “turn of fate”track?), but his imagery—even if it doesn’t quite make sense—serves primarily to create a mood, an emotion. That’s why I think that Bob Dylan was a talented artist—while John Cage was a pretentious and unnecessary musician.

me rambling again

I enjoyed the conversation about B.S. in love music. I found it to be a very interesting topic. I agree that most love music is filled with B.S. Many of these are, however, are just exaggerations used to prove a point, and part of me thinks that that shouldn’t count as B.S. What’s the difference between telling someone that you’re always thinking of them or you’re thinking of them most of time. Heck, we do that in our daily lives. A man doesn’t tell his girlfriend that he thinks of her most of the time, he tells her that it’s all the time. If he only said most of, it wouldn’t be taken as much of a compliment.

They can also be given as examples or as “if I could, I would”s. Some of the examples may be physically impossible (an “if I could, I would”) or others may be implicit and could imply other things as well. The examples could be used symbolically and that’s not really B.S.-ing. Such as the lyrics “I would climb any mountain, sail across a stormy sea…” Now maybe that person would be willing to take those risks, full well knowing that he may fail (and probably die), but it is used not only to mean that he’s willing to give his life for this person, but also that he would do anything that he possibly could for her. Also, obviously this person can’t physically climb any mountain. I doubt he would reach the top of Everest, and on top of that there are Hundreds of underwater ones, some taller than Everest, which presents the problem of being able to breath. This person says I would, though, which would mean that if he could do this then he would, but the task is simply impossible.

All that I’m trying to say is that while these songs are filled with “B.S.” it can be used for other reasons than to simply make the song interesting, and I don’t think that some of them are filled with B.S. because they use “qualifiers” such as I would. Meaning that I can’t, I’m unable to, but if I was then I would. They can also be used as literary devices such as allusions, metaphors, and symbols and aren’t supposed to be taken literally which would kind of mean that they aren’t B.S.

Cage on Education

Here are a few Cage quotes you might enjoy related to the theme of education. All are taken from Richard Kostelanetz's Conversing with Cage.

Textbooks

"The reason I dropped out of college was because I was absolutely horrified by being in a class which had, say, two hundred members, and an assignment being given to all two hundred people to read the same book. I thought that if everyone read the same book, it was a waste of people. It was sufficient for one person to read the book and then somehow through that person, if the book had anything in it, everyone could get it, by talking with the person who had read the book. But to look at those desks with everybody reading the same book, that struck me with horror, so I marched away and went into the stacks of the library. I read books as irrelevant to the subject as I could find; and when the questions were given for the examination, I got an A. I thought there was something wrong with that system, so I dropped out of college."

Cage as a Teacher

"And the first thing I announced was that everyone in the class would get an A because I am opposed to the grading in schools. Well, when this news got around the campus the size of the class increased to 120 people who all wanted to have A's. Gradually, it settled down to about 80 people who came to my class all the time. But even those who just came and registered got an A. My first talk to them explained my point of view. And that included the fact that we didn't know what we were studying. That this was a class in we didn't know what. And in order to make that clear that we would subject the entire library to chance operations, to the I Ching, and each person in the class would read, say, five books or parts of five books, if the books were too long, and the I Ching could tell them which part to read. And in that way we would all have, I thought and they agreed, something to give one another. Whereas if we did as other classes do and all read the same book and knew what we were doing , then we could only be in the position of competing with one another to see which one understood the most. Whereas in this other class we all became generous to one another, and the conversations were unpredictable."

Time Management

"This (having schedules) must be refused. Anything that represents a continuity from one thing to the next should be changed to something that represents flexibility from one day to the next. Anything resembling an interruption, a distraction, should be welcomed. Why? Because we will realize that by these interruptions and distractions and flexibilities we enrich the brushing of information against information... "