Blender’s The 40 Worst Lyricists In Rock may have hit some worthy targets with Paul Stanley, Noel Gallagher and Jim Morrison, but their dismissal of Neal Peart is music journalist boilerplate sneering at it’s worst.
Drummers are good at many things: exploding, drowning in their own vomit, drumming. But the Rush skinsman proved they should never write lyrics—or read books. Peart opuses like “Cygnus X-1†are richly awful tapestries of fantasy and science fiction, steeped in an eighth-grade understanding of Western philosophy. 2112, Rush’s 1976 concept album based on individualist thinker Ayn Rand’s novella Anthem, remains an awe-inspiring low point in the sordid relationship between rock and ideas. Worst lyric: “I stand atop a spiral stair/An oracle confronts me there/He leads me on light years away/Through astral nights, galactic days†(“Oracle: The Dreamâ€)
Nothing like damning someone’s entire work by quoting a few lines out of context, is there? The same list also includes Gabriel-era Genesis, and naturally, Jon Anderson’s lyrics with Yes.
The only people that think the lyrics actually matter more than the music are professional rock critics, and fans of those bands that are/were all lyrics and no music.
So Jon Anderson’s 70s Yes lyrics were all stream-of-consciousness gibberish, and weren’t deeply symbolic of man’s struggle against his socio-political envionment. So bloody what? Perhaps I should point out that post-punk sacred cows The Fall have no tunes, their singer can’t sing, and musicians can barely play?
Tim, Tim…
You know these articles annoy you, so why read them at all? Yes, it’s lazy journalism, but that’s the state of mainstream music journalism. It’s a bit like disliking football but going to a match anyway, then complaining.
For what it’s worth, I disagree with your generalisation that “The only people that think the lyrics actually matter more than the music are professional rock critics”. It’s perfectly valid to appreciate any single aspect of a song – some value drumming above all, some guitar riffs, some lyrics.
Though normally the music comes first for me too, there are artists I appreciate mainly for the lyrics. Jethro Tull is one: I could get at least as much from just reading Ian Anderson’s lyrics (until ~1999) in isolation as from listening the music; I’ve never really rated Martin Barre, and I don’t like the production of several Tull albums.
Ian Anderson is the 18th worst lyricist in rock, apparently, whereas he was my favourite. That’s just the opinion of a journalist looking to make cheap remarks and sell content to readers who similarly don’t consider music as remotely serious. I really couldn’t care less what he thinks.
Seriously: I think it’d be a good blog entry if you explained why you think rock journalism matters enough to complain about, rather than merely ignore.
I agree with NRT above. Why torment yourself? Nobody other than other rock journalists takes this kind of guff seriously; the people who actually care about music are actually out there listening to it and looking for it.
Tell us about some recent new discoveries that are actually worth hearing about!
The reason it matters is that far too many people still take the opionions of these hacks seriously.
I’m continually getting ‘prog rock is crap’ repeated to me at work by people that have never heard a note of any 70s or later progressive music. They’re just mindlessly repeating a meme propagated by the likes of the hipper-than-though idiots at Blender.
Anything that reduces their mindshare, even by a tiny amount, is worth doing.
My end run around that sort of thing is not to attack the journalists, but to suggest bands that are good and not use the “P-word”. Just say it’s good music, and let people make up their own minds, and eventually they’ll figure out that music journalism isn’t exactly the end-all of opinion.
Notice how they didn’t include Katie Melua’s recent tribute to Doug & Dinsdale Piranha in ‘If You Were A Sailboat’: ‘if you were a piece of wood I’d nail you to the floor…’
I’ve managed to avoid that record
Jim Morrison was not a bad lyricist. He came up with some damn stunning lines:
- “Cancel my subscription to the Resurrectionâ€
- “`Alive,’ she cried,â€
- “I want to hear the scream of the butterflyâ€
- “Speak in secret alphabets.â€
He was one of the greatest front men in rock history. Hell the band released its first album 40 years ago:
http://darkpartyreview.blogspot.com/2007/11/dawns-highway-10-best-songs-by-doors.html
and we’re still talking about them.
It’s time to give Mr. Mojo Risin’ his due.
Oh come on…
“There’s a killer on the road/He’s squirming like a toad” (from Riders on the Storm)
That couplet’s in Sting’s league!
Yes, he was a great vocalist and frontman, and the Doors have stood the test of time. But I don’t really think it was because of lyrics like that.
Some of the journoes who slate Neil Peart for being too wordy/too juvenile probably forgot about the sheer tunnel-visioned quality of Kate Bush’s ‘Bertie’ from the Aerial 2-CD. ‘Lovely, lovely, lovely, lovely Bertie!’ Naming her son after Hugh Laurie’s character in Jeeves & Wooster is bad enough, but I have this vision of KB being an absolute bore about the child to all and sundry to the point where someone jokes ‘Did you know they had gold, frankincense and myrrh on a 3 for 2 offer at Savers?’ I have been around baby bores enough to know I don’t want to hear that someone I once idolised has become one.
I just hope Angie Gordon doesn’t turn into a that sort of baby bore
Blender Magazine: Worst music magazine ever! Writing at an ELEMENTARY school level. I’m a drummer, and reading this makes me want to spew forth a pool of vomit on this magazine!!
Whoever wrote the article is obviously not too intelligent. He writes about Neil Pearts “Fantasy and Science Fiction” without actually getting the real meaning of those lyrics. I would hope most people with a basic level of intelligence can see those lyrics actually are written to be taken in on few different levels. While the lyrics can be seen as science fiction stories, they actually are just vehicles for the real messages he is trying to get across. I guess the writer of the article doesn’t posses the intelligence to decipher the real meanings of some lyrics.
And how can one say that anyones lyrics are bad, you can say you don’t like someones lyrics, but isn’t this similar to saying someone’s opinions are wrong. Someones opinions are just that, their opinions and although you may not agree with them, its still “their” opinions and they can not be wrong. Aren’t lyrics a means of expression for the author’s opinions and views. Yes some lyric’s are just stories without ulterior messages, and maybe this writer may not like those stories or the way they are conveyed.
That’s “his opinion”, not a “right”, “wrong”, “best” or “worst” opinion.
Not only that, he doesn’t seem to understand that a lot of the best fantasy and science fiction is really about our own world even when it’s set on the planet Zog in the thirty-third century.
Frank Zappa was spot on about rock journalists. What most of them do is the same thing my four-year old daughter does: just says “poop in my panties” and other gibberish in the hopes that I respond. These rock writers just say things to get a rise from folks; they know the fan bases of these groups are, well, fanatical. So, by dismissing Peart, the “critic” knows a segment of Rush fans will respond, thus giving him/her the attention so sorely craved.
If someone writes a hundred or more songs that are published, I surely could find some lousy, hackneyed lines in some of them. I found the list humorous; I think the writer intended to be funny, not actually critical. If the critic were serious, how come he included buffoons like Timberland and Justin “Search of Talent” Timbalake? How come he excluded Dave Matthews (“Ants Marching”…did we need ANOTHER song criticizing what is really the majority of the working public from a pseudo-hip rock star?), the Go-Gos, Frank Zappa, Ozzy Osbourne?
Relax guys…like Dr. Laura, Rush Limbaugh and Al Sharpton, they are comedians and satirists; they don’t expect to be taken seriously.
He is a writer and he can’t spell Neil. He has very little credibility in his writing. He shouldn’t be concerned with anyone elses….
Neil Peart and his lyrics could be considered relevant to a degree. Yet the error in libertarian free will that the collective does have control over his or her own life through authority, thus making the lyrical theme in 2112, including using fantasy, which is not being-in-itself, being in a world that is chaotic, annihilates their audience since the spectator in Rush concerts and music, chaotic to the listener.
The only benefit of listening to a Rush album is that it provides the opportunity to scrutinize musical formula.
The philosophical lyricist of our time is Jim Morrison. He applied nihilism in a time of chaos. Yet madness had limits.
Peart is free will. Morrison is nihilism. Lyrics speak. Knowing what your listening to is important.
Who cares?