Here’s something I’ve been thinking about lately: songwriting and True Will.
Or maybe that’s not the right way to put it. Let me back up a bit. I’ve started pre-production on what I’m hoping will become a new collection of recordings from The Contrarian. Basically, this means sorting through four track snippets, beaming them over to the Pro Tools rig, examining them up close and making some judgment calls about which bits could work in full-fledged songs. It’s also a time to reassess my gear and make improvements/upgrades. (My last release, Northern Lights, suffered from unconvincing drum sounds and a too-crisp master; I’ve solved the first part of that equation.)
So the tools and appliances are there. The songs, not so much.
Let me describe a bit about my process. Typically, I’m a “dive in” kind-of-guy — I pick a thread and start following it, and the next thing I know, there’s an honest-to-goodness song. Not to compare myself to the great artists of antiquity, but it’s a bit like Michelangelo and his marble. There’s a statue under there, you just gotta know where to chisel.
I’ve never been much of a self-contained songwriter. Meaning, unlike some of my talented peers, I rarely sit down with the acoustic or in front of the keyboard and compose from start to finish. Instead, I work in a more modular fashion, letting parts “speak to me.” If I don’t get in my own way (the real difficulty), this allows me to respond with appropriate tweaks and additions. I also tend to arrange as I go, but often the most appealing structures have their own logic, which which doesn’t always reveal itself immediately. In this way, it’s a bit like painting.
The process can be time-consuming and occasionally frustrating, but it plays to my strengths — namely, instrumental competence, melodic/harmonic sense and decent arrangement perception. That is, unless I’m feeling lazy and/or my ideas suck.
Which brings me to the real point of this post.
I’ve started tracking a song based on an acoustic figure in DADGAD tuning. It sounds pretty cool on its own, and I’ve ghosted out a vocal melody that fits well enough. Unfortunately, in the process of fleshing it out, it’s becoming a bit, um, cheesy. You know, like those abhorrent mid-tempo acoustic rock cuts? Now, I’m clever enough to weight things so that what might feel like a fucking Staind song could end up more in T. Rex territory. But wouldn’t I be denying the composition the fulfillment of its True Will? If the music WANTS to be elementary or generic, should I see that through or abandon it to quietly die of neglect?
It’s been said that an individual has a superficial will that isn’t always in accordance with their True Will. The latter can remain obscured unless one undertakes certain methods to make it manifest in one’s activities. The lack of awareness (or unconscious defiance) of one’s True Will can lead to neurosis. Of course, my acting as an artist/producer might be in defiance of my own True Will, making the likelihood of failure much greater. (Maybe I should be a garbageman.) Then again, what constitutes success versus failure in art?
In music, I’d say that success means the piece is complete unto itself, with its various aspects in harmony with one another (even if this harmony is actually cacophony). Just because the song I’m working seems to be pulling itself into aesthetic areas that offend my sensibilities, doesn’t mean it’s not correct in terms of fulfilling its own Nature.
I guess I’m asking for your advice and perspectives. What say you, smart creative people?
[...] the last post was a bit too heady for your Thursday afternoon, we can offer you the following information jacked [...]
Interesting question. Predictably, I’m going to equivocate: On the one hand, there is some Martha Graham quote where she says it isn’t for the artist to determine what is good or worthwhile, it’s only important that you do it, and you do it the best you can. I’d call that the Squeeze ‘Em Out theory. On the other hand, I don’t think there’s any shame in turning back if it seems you’re on the wrong path, ie the Scrap It And Move On theory. On still another hand (I could become a Hindu god at this rate), if you find yourself heading down that same path again and again, maybe there’s a reason for it that you should investigate (theory trade name pending).
I’d say the determining factor is what you’re in the mood for. The problem with Staind (and here let Staind = what you dislike taste-wise) is not with their sound, but with an approach that you find inauthentic and uninspiring, deceptive even. You could give it a stab and end up with something beautiful such that it sounds like *they’re* ripping *you* off. It can’t hurt to try. Or… maybe it can. In which case, quit. The beauty of it is, no one ever has to hear it.
Get it? Good, then tell me what the fuck it is I’m saying.
Really great comments, Neil. You’re one of the talented peers whom I was thinking of when I talked about people with a knack for “traditional” songwriting. I’d be curious to hear more abut your process.
This is something I’ve struggled with a little bit as well…I’m not sure I’m going to articulate this well enough…but here goes. I think that if you start writing a song that’s really catchy, commercial and good, then you owe it to yourself (and maybe the world) to finish writing it, even if the cheeze/schmaltz factor makes you uncomfortable. One contemporary example that illustrates this point is Feist’s album “Let it Die.” There’s some straight-up Sade-style smooth r&b on that record. But it’s fucking awesome, and now look at her. She’s a star! And critically respected too! Her third album sounds like fucking Carole King even!!! Now I would take smooth r&b and Carole King over Staind any day, but the point is…you should turn your ball cap backwards and write and record your awesome nu-metal acoustic ballad and be fucking proud. Because you deserve to be pop Casey.
Art, you were the other talented peer I was thinking of in that line!
I must say that this song, which I may reveal to y’all shortly (did I just say y’all? Help! It’s inside me!)), doesn’t REALLY sound like Staind. But it is rather straightforward and “dude.”
Honestly, I write so inconsistently. I wouldn’t say I have process as much as I have likes/dislikes, almost a sense of smell about what’s right. Melody, chords, lyric or intention equally might come first, but what develops any of them is the same sensibility, which pretty much amounts to just what I find interesting. Which is why I found it interesting that you’re entering into the equation some real or imagined “will” of the song independent of your own personal tastes. I’ve never felt responsible to gestate something I wasn’t into out of sheer charity. Everything I’ve undertaken has served some perhaps selfish desire to make something I thought was cool for one reason or another. And I mean “cool” in the sense that it’s cool to me. So I guess I feel that (begin bullshit alert) that kind of “selfishness” is what creativity’s all about. I read somewhere (probably somewhere corny) that God (or the eternal/ineffable, I use the proper name only as a convenient fictional character representing abstract concepts) manifests within you, AS you. So since you are the manifestation, why bother subjugating your own character to some imaginary and yet further remote abstraction? You can only speak words that come from you, otherwise you’re a charlatan.
Okay, now I *am* drunk. End transimission.
Tie Karin Dreijer Andersson to your back and work as a team using osmosis.