shoeless
Riffin'
It's cruel to be kind.Robyn Hitchcock and Peter Case come to mind. And Nick Lowe, probably, since we recently had that thread where someone cited him as a one-hit wonder.
It's cruel to be kind.Robyn Hitchcock and Peter Case come to mind. And Nick Lowe, probably, since we recently had that thread where someone cited him as a one-hit wonder.
Lennon gets a lot of credit as a lyricist, but Davies and even Mick Jagger started eating his lunch after about ‘67/‘68.
That statement has all the trappings of meaning something, but alas it signifies nothing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ray Davies and Mick Jagger were, on average, writing better lyrics than John Lennon starting in or around the chronological Earth years of 1967/1968.
I cannot wait for you to return to your home planet. It would be a shame if you died on the way back.
Dion DiMucci.
I'm sorry, you're right. I just put all three artist's lyrics through a scientific lyric quality detector, and Ray and Mick's post 67/68 lyrics did register as "better" than Lennon's on the lyric-meter. I guess you're not just spewing opinions out of your ass.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
why is there a Motorik post?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pretty sure opinions have semantic meaning, mr. linguistics. Even ones that are controversial.That statement has all the trappings of meaning something, but alas it signifies nothing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pretty sure opinions have semantic meaning, mr. linguistics. Even ones that are controversial.
I don't see you in other threads... "ACKTUALLY BRO THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC WAY TO DETERMINE WHAT CONSTITUTES SHORT PANTS OR LONG PANTS!!! THEREFORE IT IS ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS TO SAY WHEN YOU WEAR THEM!!! DELETE THIS THREAD, MODS!!! DELETE THIS WHOLE BLASTED FORUM!!"
Is it not possible for a person to have an opinion that X was writing better songs than Y at this point? Have I committed a thought crime? Are you just being a twat? Inquiring minds.
I guess throwing in a non-sequitur is consistent.I'm pretty consistent...
Not all language has semantic meaning
I guess throwing in a non-sequitur is consistent.
explaining things is tedious.
There is no connection, because I never said all language has meaning.I could tediously explain the connection for that one also, but it wouldn't be fun so I won't.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Unless you're trying to make the case that opinions are a result of brain damage...
There is no connection, because I never said all language has meaning.
![]()
Unless you're trying to make the case that opinions are a result of brain damage. Which might be true for some forumites but not all of us.