Dodgy Artistic Licence?

Subject: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 12:10 PM

?Vincent Black Lightning 1952? is one of Richard Thompson?s most beloved songs but the only trouble with the song?s title is that the Vincent company did not make a 1952 model.
Is that ?artistic licence? a case of sloopy reseach or just a case of Richard liking the sound ?1952? and it giving him more rhyming options?
And take Mark Knopfler?s ?Sailing To Philadelphia?. In the song Mark has Charlie Mason ( as in the Mason-Dixon Line ) described as a ?Geordie Lad? when in fact he came from Durham. Again, is this dodgy artistic licence.
And, would the songwriters from the 20s/30s/40s have been so ?imprecise.
Of course, that breed of song lyricists were very precise in certain areas, and they demanded ?perfect rhymes?, but come the rock era all that disappeared.
Dylan, for example, rhymes ?man? and ?sand? in the first verse of ?Blowin? in the Wind? and he has been called the greatest lyric writer of the rock era.
However, those old songwriters did come up with some dodgy lyrics. For example, in ?Winter Wonderland? ( 1934 ) the use of the word ?conspire", as in the line ?later on we?ll conspire, as we dream by the fire?, is a poor choice of word and always makes me cringe.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 12:12 PM

Wow! Most of the speech marks have become question marks.
How did that happen?

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 12:20 PM

The Black Lightning was a Vincent-HRD motorcycle first built in September 1948 at the Vincent works in Great North Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK, and produced from 1948 to 1952. At the time the Black Lightning was the fastest production motorcycle in the world.

Taken from this wiki page.

Mark Knopfler was born in Glasgow but raised in Newcastle so I think we can forgive his claiming other famous people as Geordies :-)

Perfect rhymes? One that always tickles me is by a master wordsmith and says

I left my cap in a public-house, my boots in the public road,
And Lord knows where, and I don't care, my belt and my tunic goed

I'll let you look up where it comes from :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 12:21 PM

In answer to your last question - iPad by any chance?

D.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 12:23 PM

"Dodgy Artistic Licence"... what ID do you need to provide to apply for one...???

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,nickp
Date: 23 Oct 17 - 01:47 PM

Although I understand the VBL didn't have keys for James to give Molly...

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:15 AM

Darn. I always liked "later on we'll conspire / as we dream by the fire." It conjures up thoughts of romantic, perhaps dangerous or maybe illicit adventures.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,LynnH
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:31 AM

Rather dodgy artistic licence making a fine story than possibly boring pedantry.............
Where can apply for a DAL?

Lynn

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: FreddyHeadey
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:50 AM

I love dodgy rhyme when it is flagged as dodgy for me.

last month we had this in a song
,............ galoshes,
...............poshest.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Mark Bluemel
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:53 AM

Tunesmith probably shouldn't look at any of Chris Difford's lyrics, clearly - try "Up The Junction", for starters.

Though I wonder... I remember many decades ago being shown how Louis MacNiece's "Bagpipe Music" was deliberately made up of bad/false rhymes (Blavatsky/Taxi etc) as a specific effect (like the dissonance of bagpipes) - perhaps Difford was doing the same.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Stu
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:55 AM

I've had my artistic licence revoked.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Mr Red
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 05:05 AM

later on we'll conspire, as we dream by the fire

Merriom Webster - Rhyming of conspire IMNSHO there is only one rhyme that comes close in meaning and desire doesn't convey the sentiments needed. I find conspire to be not only fitting, but very very clever in saying more than that number of words would normally. It makes you remember it, so in that context it worked on the OP'er!

What about Carole King's "Call out my Name, you know wherever I am" - she could have said aim it is technically and emotionally apt, but would it be as powerful? The song is not sharp edged, precise - it is just there for you!

One man's (or manette) dodgy is another song-writers assonance. It softens the flow. Cole Porter had a different method, enjambment. He usually made the rhyme perfect, but put it before the end of the line (or meaning/pause for breath).

If the song hangs together it is art. If the rest of the song is clunky - OK - it is naff.
Ballad of Bonnie & Clyde (sung by Georgie Fame) Dewlap bag should have been Burlap bag and the songwriters realised after the record was released. People wrote in! But they needed a bag for the story and assumed that the mental picture they knew to be correct was actually not the right word. It was a good song, certainly a good singer singing it.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 01:32 PM

Well, I have to disagree that "conspire" has any merit in the context of the song.
Here's a dictionary definition; "make secret plans jointly to commit an unlawful or harmful act".
What we have here, I believe, is the fact that everyone grows up hearing that song EVERY Christmas.
It has become part of our Christmas experience. We are comfortable with the lyrics. ALL the lyrics.
But, just imagine if that the song was written today as part of a songwriting class assignment.
Would we be surprised if the person grading the effort returned the lyrics and had drew attention to the fact that the word "conspire" is not appropriate in the context of the rest of the song.

Is it possible that the lyricist "settled" on a poor choice of word.
The couple in the song are making plans while they sit by the fire. But, of course, the word plans appears in the next line and, of course, wouldn't rhyme with fire.
No, I think "conspire" was a very poor choice, and I bet the lyricist wasn't happy with it neither!

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Mr Red
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 01:59 PM

Well! We all have our opinion, but If I had written the song, I would consider the royalties and those willing to sing it professionally were sufficient critique.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Mr Red
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 02:00 PM

Well! We all have our opinion, but If I had written the song, I would consider the royalties and those willing to sing it professionally were sufficient critique.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 02:03 PM

"No, I think "conspire" was a very poor choice, and I bet the lyricist wasn't happy with it neither"

I guess the better-fitting "perspire" didn't occur to them.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 02:19 PM

expire...???

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:25 PM

Later on, we'll perspire,
As we BLEEP by the fire...

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 03:35 PM

Thesaurus.com give a string of synonyms for conspire, several of which at least muddy Tunesmith's argument; one that I find interesting in this case is "get in bed with".

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 04:37 PM

frogprince said,
"Thesaurus.com give a string of synonyms for conspire, several of which at least muddy Tunesmith's argument"

I don't think so.

For example, " To Plan" can be a synonym for "To Conspire " as in, for example, The terrorists planned/conspired to blow up the building.

But, in the song the couple are planning their future, by the fire, and conspire doesn't fit.

Would you be happy, for example if the couple in the song talked about "conspiring to get married?",

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: DaveRo
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 05:07 PM

Songs and poetry would be greatly impoverished if authors had to stick to conventional (i.e, dictionary) definitions. 'Conspire' is fine: the 'con' is the important bit. The nub of conspiracy is confidentiality, not illegality.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 06:34 PM

I always heard "conspire" as a witty hyperbole on the part of the speaker: it's just we two with our secrets on the one hand, and the cold world outside on the other--deliberately underscoring the fireside coziness and the light-hearted semi-nonsense throughout the song. (Parson Brown can "do the job when he's in town?"But he IS in town: He's right there, you just built him.)   Of course when faced with an apparent anomaly, listeners try to make it fit, but I confess it never struck me as the least inappropriate.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: meself
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 09:48 PM

I vote for 'conspire'. It's imaginative and appropriate.


As for Parson Brown - no, he's NOT in town - he's out in a 'meadow',   outside of town, of course!

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 24 Oct 17 - 11:46 PM

"As for Parson Brown - no, he's NOT in town - he's out in a 'meadow',???outside of town, of course!"

OK, fair enough. We built snowmen in the front yard, where we had a nearby supply of coal, carrots, and top hats.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 02:32 AM

Well, I'm not convinced, and I still think it's a case of listeners growing up hearing a word and never stopping to consider if it is appropriate.
Also, writers have to be careful when reaching for a ' different' word instead of using an obvious one.
For example, when Richard Thompson says, "Don't renege on our love' , instead of, for example, " Don't give up on our love", we care a case of a writer trying to avoid an obvious word but ending up with an " unnatural" sound phrase.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: DaveRo
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 03:12 AM

"Don't renege on our love' doesn't mean the same as " Don't give up on our love". Why do you assume he doesn't mean what he wrote?

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Mr Red
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 03:37 AM

dictionary.com - 2. combine, concur, cooperate. how apt do you want it? Plus a little hint on the side of something more racy or adventurous.
And very telling they say: Can be confused "connive", "conspire". So they think the conniving interpretation is a stretch too far.
But we forget, we make the cardinal sin of Folkdom. We judge by the mores of OUR time. Words morph, meaning & connotations move. The song was written in a different era.


Thesaurus.com

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 07:23 AM

Context is everything! Just because certain words can be used as a synonym, doesn't mean they are always interchangeable.
I gave the dictionary definition of "conspire" in an earlier post, and it doesn't fit the context of the song.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 07:30 AM

DaveRo, well, I think it does!
And, can you imagine anyone saying to their partner," Don't renege on our marriage/love/relationship?"
For example, how often in the history of human relationships has that word been used in that context?
It sounds, like I said, a desperate attempt at avoiding the usual phrases.
But, that only works if the replacement words sounds natural.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: DaveRo
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 08:30 AM

'Renege' - break an agreement. The song goes:

Remember when we were hand in hand
Remember we sealed it with a golden band

It's more than just 'giving up' on the relationship; he's accusing her of breaking a promise. (I'm assuming a male singer, here.)

And yes, 'renege on our love' sounds odd, and no, I can't imagine anyone saying it. Perhaps RT wants to emphasise the singer's desparation - and rather posessive attitude to the woman.

I do agree that, in most circumstances, natural words are best - if it expresses what you intend.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Snuffy
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 08:32 AM

"To face unafraid the plans that we've made" reinforces the idea of a conspiracy.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 09:28 AM

BUT! Renege doesn't, to me, sound like a word that would be used in the context of the song.
It sounds unnatural and forced.

And, Snuffy, I can't get my head around your post.

And, again, I would say that "unfraid" isn't a good choice of word, anyway.

I know we often talk about facing the future unafraid, but not in the "lovey dovey" warm context of "Winter Wonderland".

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 09:48 AM

The present topic reminded me of another icon, and more "dodgy" elements in a song.
Joni Mitchell's "For Free" is one of her most beloved compositions but there is a dreadful irony in the main thrust of the song.
"For Free" tells the story of a street busker who is ignored by all pedestrian who pass him by ( "nobody stopped to hear him, though he played so sweet and high")
Joni, presumably the narrator of the song, is critical of all the passer-bys for not stopping to hear the beautiful music.
But, and here comes the irony, Joni doesn't stop either!

Now, you can bet your bottom dollar that somebody is going to say that Joni is well aware of this "irony" and that her actions just emphasize the total neglect of the busker's music.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 10:10 AM

In one of James Blount`s song of which name I know not, he says "I have a plan" and virtually in the same breath he says, "and I don`t know what to do".   Hello!!

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 10:36 AM

" you can bet your bottom dollar that somebody is going to say that Joni is well aware of this "irony" and that her actions just emphasize the total neglect of the busker's music."

Why wouldn't someone say that? The wording of the last verse makes is patently obvious.

I will just about bet MY bottom dollar that you will now say that I'm wrong. I will also bet a nickel that you're just trying to pull people's chains. I won't bet a dollar on that; maybe you really are just a bit obsessive. : )

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 10:38 AM

...makes IT patently obvious...

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 10:48 AM

frogprince, that doesn't make sense!

"Here's what Joni wrote:

Nobody stopped to hear him
Though he played so sweet and high
They knew he had never
Been on their T.V.
So they passed his music by
I meant to go over and ask for a song
Maybe put on a harmony
I heard his refrain
As the signal changed
He was playing real good for free

Clearly, Joni would NOT be influenced by the fact that the busker had not been on tv. She could hear that is music had great worth, so what is her reason for not stopping?

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 11:22 AM

Her "reason for not stopping" was simply going on about her business when the signal changed to "walk"; I would say there is an implication that, in retrospect, she doesn't feel that that was a good enough reason.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 11:33 AM

One could argue that every pedestrian is "going about their business".
And, if, as you say, Joni, a trained musician, doesn't think there was a good enough reason to stop, why even mention the general public's neglect.

In fact, why even write the song in the first place.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 03:02 PM

Like, pay attention! :) I think the implication is that, in retrospect, she feels she had good reason to stop; she's implying at least a bit of regret because she, like the others, just walked on by.

As with other thoughtful lyrics, such as that of "The Cha Cha Slide", there are any number of nuances that make the song worthwhile...

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 03:38 PM

Regret? She doesn't imply any such thing. She just moves on when the signal changes, and mentions, again, that he was playing real good for free.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Mr Red
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 04:45 PM

I gave the dictionary definition of "conspire" in an earlier post, and it doesn't fit the context of the song.

Feel free to be more right than dictionary.com - they are only human. Though they is a larger number than one opinion. But do tell us which English you speak.

It's not as if songs, poems, or novels are the lexicographical equivalent of a photograph. They are literary paintings. If you want precision, try reading a dictionary, the plot is somewhat thin, though author explains every word in detail.

Don't look in more than one, though, they do differ at times.

Sturgeon's Law nine tenths of everything is crud - and that goes for opinions IMNSHO.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: meself
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 08:34 PM

You know, btw, if Joni or anyone else writes a song with "I" or "me" in it, it doesn't necessarily mean they are actually singing about themselves ....

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: frogprince
Date: 25 Oct 17 - 09:49 PM

...or writing about a factual incident. I guess I have been approaching this as if it were an entry in J.M.'s diary. It is narrated by a person involved in music, though, not by a coal miner or gunslinger.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 01:56 AM

Well, if you know anything, you should know that Joni is the ultimate "confessional" singer.
Indeed, Kris Kristofferson once warned her about revealing too much of her personal life/emotions in song.
And, of course, the narrator in "For Free" is described as a successful singer who fills concert halls...just like Joni.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Allan Conn
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 02:26 AM

"She just moves on when the signal changes, and mentions, again, that he was playing real good for free."

I suppose people will read different things into what they are listening too. I would agree that she is hinitng at regret. The fact that she meant to stop - and that she's telling the story and bothering to mention that she meant to stop - hints at regret. For me anyway!

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: DaveRo
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 03:00 AM

Regret - and guilt - that she didn't stop and support an aspiring musician. And 'the signal changed' emphasises how trivial her excuse.

Next?

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 03:38 AM

But, if that is the case, doesn't the narrator, Joni, reveal herself as very arrogant?
Everybody else passed the busker by because "they hadn't seen him on their TVs ", but the great Joni Mitchell recognises his talent but can't be bothered stopping to listen.

Which ever you cut it, Joni doesn't come out covered in roses.

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 05:03 AM

Just from the lyrics, I automatically inferred that the narrator and the composer were far apart and that. the song was "about" the narrator's lack of self-awareness. It seems like a common trope in first-person songs in this genre: cf Paul Simon, Randy Newman.

But I'm not familiar with Mitchell's work, so what do I know?

Subject: RE: Dodgy Artistic Licence?
From: meself
Date: 26 Oct 17 - 10:22 AM

Not as much as Tunesmith, apparently. This thread seems pointless - I'm out.