|
Title: Deciphering "He Gives Speeches" - any Twain experts out there? Post by: Jeff on February 01, 2011, 01:50:34 PM A few of you may remember a couple of posts on the old Smile Shop board speculating that He Gives Speeches is about Mark Twain and may at one time have been intended for Do You Like Worms. I've long believed in that theory, but haven't been able to solve the complete puzzle. While some of the lyrics are fairly easily understood, others are difficult.
Here are the lyrics: * He gives speeches but they put him back in bed * Where he wrote his satire (Twain liked to write in bed, but did others in any way "put him" there?) * He gives speeches always reaches out a lot * Led him to discover (Probably a reference to Twain traveling a lot, and to his evolving views on various issues.) * Silken hair more silken hair fell on his face * And no wind was blowing (This certainly seems to fit Twain.) * Stepped across the golden fields (Twain visited the California "gold fields," where many were mining for gold, and wrote about them.) * And saw that she was soon trailing after * She was nice and didn't fight * He fell into her friendly persuasion (A reference to his wife? She had a big impact on his evolving views.) * Late that night while by a street light * Little hands shadowed on the ceiling (I'm stumped by these lines.) As for the connection to DYLW, Twain was certainly known for giving speeches criticizing U.S. imperialism in Hawaii. He spoke about "the white man [who] came and brought various complicated diseases," and lamented the fact that native Hawaiians were basically dying off. He sarcastically noted that "[w]hen they pick up and leave we will take possession as lawful heirs." Twain also was fascinated by bicycles. He wrote an essay at one point called "Taming the Bicycle," and also wrote about cycling knights in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Andrew G. Doe on February 01, 2011, 02:00:43 PM Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Jeff on February 03, 2011, 02:45:32 PM Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Thanks everyone. Just a single response, and a negative one at that. Once again, I expressly said that I did NOT think that the finished version of DYLW would have included HGS. But remember, HGS was recorded early on - 9/1/66, so we can't know what it was intended for. It certainly could have been part of another song; maybe DYLW even grew out of it. Anyway, I was hoping to stimulate discussion on what used to be the subject of this board. Obviously a silly idea. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Andrew G. Doe on February 03, 2011, 02:57:17 PM Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Thanks everyone. Just a single response, and a negative one at that. Once again, I expressly said that I did NOT think that the finished version of DYLW would have included HGS. But remember, HGS was recorded early on - 9/1/66, so we can't know what it was intended for. It certainly could have been part of another song; maybe DYLW even grew out of it. Anyway, I was hoping to stimulate discussion on what used to be the subject of this board. Obviously a silly idea. I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: hypehat on February 03, 2011, 04:29:14 PM Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Thanks everyone. Just a single response, and a negative one at that. Once again, I expressly said that I did NOT think that the finished version of DYLW would have included HGS. But remember, HGS was recorded early on - 9/1/66, so we can't know what it was intended for. It certainly could have been part of another song; maybe DYLW even grew out of it. Anyway, I was hoping to stimulate discussion on what used to be the subject of this board. Obviously a silly idea. I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Not so, both are in F. Brian didn't need much more than two sections being the same key to weld them together, so it's not completely out of the realms of possibility - imagine the last bass note slotting into the 'Mahalo Lu Lei' section of Worms... Of course, AGD's second point is more pertinent, but Brian obviously didn't forget about it and favoured it over more 'canonical' Smile material for Smiley, which surely says something, and possibly not that he held them in low esteem - Wonderful and Vegetables were songs he obsessed over, for instance. I enjoyed the lyrical analysis of it, too - I don't have much clue about those lyrics, so them being about Twain would slot it into the Americana vibe into some sort of tangential way.... Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: bossaroo on February 03, 2011, 05:53:11 PM this might be my least favorite Brian Wilson song of all-time. The melody is boring and repetitive, and the words always seemed silly to me.
your analysis has made me rethink my position somewhat, so thanks. I think the Mark Twain connection is very plausible. Has Van Dyke never commented on these lyrics? I hear a real similarity in the background part Brian sings on "Speeches" and the tag on the end of the Cantina version of "H&V", which is one of my all-time favorite Brian Wilson moments. If "Speeches" contributed to that tag, then I appreciate it even more. I also get a big chuckle out of "She's Goin Bald", particularly the lines "she made a beeline to her room and grabbed all kinda juice" and "it's too late mama, ain't nothin upside your head"... pretty funny stuff. so I guess the song isn't so horrible after all. also, don't let Andrew get you down. he likes to appear the expert that he is, apparently even in matters of pure conjecture. Not sure if his tone is meant to be as condescending as it comes across... maybe it just appears that way in print. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Jeff on February 03, 2011, 06:49:15 PM Thanks bossaroo. I think you're right about the similarity between HGS and the Cantina tag, and I know others have made comments about that in the past.
I remember that someone emailed Van Dyke about HGS a few years ago, and he responded by saying "Not mine." I really have a hard time believing that, given the lyrics are very Parksian, and he's known to be a Twain fan. I often forget things that I write after only a few months, so it wouldn't surprise me if he forgot 40 years later. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Austin on February 03, 2011, 07:33:43 PM I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Not so, both are in F. Brian didn't need much more than two sections being the same key to weld them together, so it's not completely out of the realms of possibility - imagine the last bass note slotting into the 'Mahalo Lu Lei' section of Worms... Harmonic similarity, but not melodic similarity. That they share two similar (but not exact) chords doesn't seem like enough to suggest a correlation, especially given AGD's and VDP's remarks. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Andrew G. Doe on February 04, 2011, 12:56:32 AM Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Thanks everyone. Just a single response, and a negative one at that. Once again, I expressly said that I did NOT think that the finished version of DYLW would have included HGS. But remember, HGS was recorded early on - 9/1/66, so we can't know what it was intended for. It certainly could have been part of another song; maybe DYLW even grew out of it. Anyway, I was hoping to stimulate discussion on what used to be the subject of this board. Obviously a silly idea. I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Not so, both are in F. Brian didn't need much more than two sections being the same key to weld them together, so it's not completely out of the realms of possibility - imagine the last bass note slotting into the 'Mahalo Lu Lei' section of Worms... Thanks for that - as I say, I'm no muso (often wish I was ) but to my simple mind, 'growing out of a song' would involve more than them just being in the same key and 'welding together', more a shared riff or chord sequence, e.g. "Wind Chimes"-"Been 'Way Too Long" or "Barbara"-"Cuddle Up". also, don't let Andrew get you down. he likes to appear the expert that he is, apparently even in matters of pure conjecture. Not sure if his tone is meant to be as condescending as it comes across... maybe it just appears that way in print. This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: smile-holland on February 04, 2011, 01:49:15 AM This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) It might be your avatar, Andrew. He looks a bit grumpy towards me everytime I read one of your posts. ;D But I assume William Beldham was much nicer in person as well. :) Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Andrew G. Doe on February 04, 2011, 02:42:29 AM This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) It might be your avatar, Andrew. He looks a bit grumpy towards me everytime I read one of your posts. ;D But I assume William Beldham was much nicer in person as well. :) His two wives and nine children would agree with you. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: smile-holland on February 04, 2011, 02:50:14 AM This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) It might be your avatar, Andrew. He looks a bit grumpy towards me everytime I read one of your posts. ;D But I assume William Beldham was much nicer in person as well. :) His two wives and nine children would agree with you. Sounds like you should write a book about him ! (by the way, two wives at the same time? ::) ) Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Andrew G. Doe on February 04, 2011, 03:38:57 AM This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) It might be your avatar, Andrew. He looks a bit grumpy towards me everytime I read one of your posts. ;D But I assume William Beldham was much nicer in person as well. :) His two wives and nine children would agree with you. Sounds like you should write a book about him ! (by the way, two wives at the same time? ::) ) I'm researching it now (2012 is the 150th anniversary of his death)... and no. Stout Surrey yeomen didn't do that back then. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: hypehat on February 04, 2011, 03:54:02 AM I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Not so, both are in F. Brian didn't need much more than two sections being the same key to weld them together, so it's not completely out of the realms of possibility - imagine the last bass note slotting into the 'Mahalo Lu Lei' section of Worms... Harmonic similarity, but not melodic similarity. That they share two similar (but not exact) chords doesn't seem like enough to suggest a correlation, especially given AGD's and VDP's remarks. This is a particularly odd remark, i think. By that logic, putting Bicycle Rider in Worms is completely insane! The melodies aren't similar at all! It belongs in H&V! etc This welding of disparate sections (particularly on H&V/'Americana' sections) is the sort of thing Brian did with Smile. And HGS/Mahalo is a change that could fit, musically. I myself have attempted it back when i could be arsed to make Smile mixes. Sounded good.... As for Brian's writing method during Smile, if i knew that I wouldn't be here! ;D To get boring/technical (if I haven't been already), Verse of Worms is F - Bb, the chorus is F - Gm, Bicycle rider is Gm - C, and the Mahalo Lu Lei section is Gm - Cm. HGS is F - Gm - C all the way thru. They ARE similar. But then, the bridge to GV shares HGS' chords. Brian likes those ones, so that could just be the extent of the link. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: bgas on February 04, 2011, 05:40:36 AM This is unfortunately true - I don't like peppering my posts with smileys, hence I can come across as something of a humorless pedagogue when you can't see the raised eyebrow or the wink. I'm much nicer in person (although I expect someone who's initials are CK might debate that...). :) What have you done to Calvin Klein to make him think so? Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: guitarfool2002 on February 04, 2011, 08:49:41 AM As for Brian's writing method during Smile, if i knew that I wouldn't be here! ;D To get boring/technical (if I haven't been already), Verse of Worms is F - Bb, the chorus is F - Gm, Bicycle rider is Gm - C, and the Mahalo Lu Lei section is Gm - Cm. HGS is F - Gm - C all the way thru. They ARE similar. But then, the bridge to GV shares HGS' chords. Brian likes those ones, so that could just be the extent of the link. Brian seemed to be on a writing kick with those chord changes at this time. Was it because he was writing similar chord progressions into these "fragments" to eventually thread the whole thing together and make them interchangeable, or was it just something he was stuck on at the time like he was the "Be My Baby" groove, the "Shortnin Bread" groove, and any number of boogie-woogie riffs that would appear and re-appear in his writing? I will say Brian was ahead of the pack in a way with those motifs, and I wrote an entire analysis which touched on this. It was a Miles Davis-John Coltrane trademark which would soon be adapted by many bands like Santana, The Doors, Allman Brothers, Quicksilver Messenger Service, etc who would use those same chord sequences Brian was plugging into Smile to launch instrumental jams. For better or worse, mind you... :) Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Austin on February 04, 2011, 10:38:57 AM This is a particularly odd remark, i think. By that logic, putting Bicycle Rider in Worms is completely insane! The melodies aren't similar at all! It belongs in H&V! etc This welding of disparate sections (particularly on H&V/'Americana' sections) is the sort of thing Brian did with Smile. And HGS/Mahalo is a change that could fit, musically. I myself have attempted it back when i could be arsed to make Smile mixes. Sounded good.... As for Brian's writing method during Smile, if i knew that I wouldn't be here! ;D To get boring/technical (if I haven't been already), Verse of Worms is F - Bb, the chorus is F - Gm, Bicycle rider is Gm - C, and the Mahalo Lu Lei section is Gm - Cm. HGS is F - Gm - C all the way thru. They ARE similar. But then, the bridge to GV shares HGS' chords. Brian likes those ones, so that could just be the extent of the link. No argument here that the progression is similar. But there's something about Bicycle Rider -- similarity to H&V, production style, whatever -- that makes sense in the context of Worms in a way that HGS doesn't. And I think pointing out the similarity to GV just proves that two similar chords doesn't really mean anything when it comes to finding ways to merge sections together. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Roger Ryan on February 04, 2011, 10:49:58 AM The other thing to consider is that since we have full lyrics for both WORMS and SPEECHES, we can see that the two don't match very well thematically. For as cryptic as Parks lyrics are, there is a consistency in viewpoint and tone within each song. "Cabin Essence" provides the biggest shift in subject matter within a single song, but it's not too much of a stretch to connect a "home on the range" lyric with one describing an early locomotive. SPEECHES just doesn't sound like it fits into a song concerning Manifest Destiny and displacing native people; the tone, in fact, fits better with "Wonderful".
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: OneEar/OneEye on February 04, 2011, 12:04:34 PM Years ago I recall reading a thread (perhaps even here on SS.net) where the initial poster was making the case that HGS was about a baby. It was rather interesting and actually made a lot of sense when one examines the lyrics, however the Twain idea works too.
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Bicyclerider on February 04, 2011, 06:57:16 PM this might be my least favorite Brian Wilson song of all-time. The melody is boring and repetitive, and the words always seemed silly to me. your analysis has made me rethink my position somewhat, so thanks. I think the Mark Twain connection is very plausible. Has Van Dyke never commented on these lyrics? I hear a real similarity in the background part Brian sings on "Speeches" and the tag on the end of the Cantina version of "H&V", which is one of my all-time favorite Brian Wilson moments. If "Speeches" contributed to that tag, then I appreciate it even more. I also get a big chuckle out of "She's Goin Bald", particularly the lines "she made a beeline to her room and grabbed all kinda juice" and "it's too late mama, ain't nothin upside your head"... pretty funny stuff. so I guess the song isn't so horrible after all. also, don't let Andrew get you down. he likes to appear the expert that he is, apparently even in matters of pure conjecture. Not sure if his tone is meant to be as condescending as it comes across... maybe it just appears that way in print. Yeah, I think She's goin' Bald is definitely a case where Mike improved on the original Parks lyrics. Makes me wish he had taken on some other Smile songs, like Cabinessence! Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Mahalo on February 04, 2011, 07:50:22 PM No Way, HGS is Brian having fun. The lyrics are great in their Parks-Scurity...I love this tune, probably more so than SGB...
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Camus on February 04, 2011, 08:33:52 PM HGS and the tag to the early H&V are musically the same idea, but it's an idea that runs through many Smile fragments.
I can't hear HGS ever being part of DYLW, or that one grew out of the other. The two have a completely different feel to each other. I thought Bicycle rider only became part of H&V when the single mix was produced. I thought originally it was never intended to be part of H&V. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: A Million Units In Jan! on February 05, 2011, 06:59:58 AM HGS and the tag to the early H&V are musically the same idea, but it's an idea that runs through many Smile fragments. I can't hear HGS ever being part of DYLW, or that one grew out of the other. The two have a completely different feel to each other. I thought Bicycle rider only became part of H&V when the single mix was produced. I thought originally it was never intended to be part of H&V. Someone made a point ( I think it was Cam) that early on, half the SMiLE songs were probably parts of H&V. 'Half' seems like a big number, but I imagine quite a few sections at least had their origins in H&V. I always thought Bicycle Rider was also the middle section of Worms. I always thought it was neat how the BV's of 'HGS' were the same to the BB's vocals on the tag of the Cantina H&V. Must have been a tune Brian couldn't get out of his head. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: The Song Of The Grange on February 05, 2011, 04:37:35 PM HGS and the tag to the early H&V are musically the same idea, but it's an idea that runs through many Smile fragments. I can't hear HGS ever being part of DYLW, or that one grew out of the other. The two have a completely different feel to each other. I thought Bicycle rider only became part of H&V when the single mix was produced. I thought originally it was never intended to be part of H&V. I am glad someone pointed this out. The backing vox on He Gives Speeches is the exact same melody as the fade section of the cantina version of H&V. And since the fade to H&V has links to You Are My Sunshine, I always figured that HGS was an early fragment of H&V. Remember that in Al Kooper's book he mentions hearing an early version of H&V that sounded like a bunch of strange versions of You Are My Sunshine. HGS is so early in the primordial ooze of the early Smile project, that it's impossible to guess what BW's intentions were. It is obviously VDP's lyrics. Who else writes like that? But HGS was only worked on that one time in August 1966 and then never touched again until Wilson was searching for material for Smiley Smile (the bulk of Smile songs having been vetoed by the group or him or both). Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: bho on November 04, 2011, 03:55:03 PM I thought the silken hair was corn silk as he's walking through a cornfield.
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: runnersdialzero on November 04, 2011, 04:07:41 PM Don't understand Brian "junking" this one in 2003. It's not brilliance along the lines of "Heroes" or anything, but it's good and it's a lot of fun. Worst Brian song ever? Are you daft, Stuffington?
And hay, we got "She's Goin' Bald" out of it. There is no way Brian wrote these lyrics. I'll believe a Parks co-write credit on "She's Goin' Bald" over a forty years later "I didn't write them" and a Brian credit on TSS. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: trismegistus on November 04, 2011, 05:39:55 PM I love Speeches. When I first heard Smile 10 or so years ago, it was one of my favourite tracks. It could probably be shoehorned into Heroes or Vegetables without too much trouble.
I'm also surprised that Brian gets credit for the lyrics since it feels very "Parksian". Of course, I've always also felt that Vegetables lyrics don't sound "Parksian" at all, so I guess it can be chalked up to confusion. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Wirestone on November 04, 2011, 05:45:37 PM The credits are different for the 2-CD set. Parks is a co-writer of the tune there.
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: runnersdialzero on November 04, 2011, 05:49:56 PM With stuff like "Vege-Tables", you have to keep in mind that some of this stuff, lyrically, were Brian/Van Dyke collaborations, and I'm sure Brian wrote more lyrics on some songs than others (and vice versa, obviously).
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: tygerbug on November 05, 2011, 02:32:15 AM Seems to me that it's at least partly about a famous old man [writer?], now being taken care of and condescended to by a female family member [younger wife? Or daughter with a child of her own] .... All his famous bluster that once moved the crowds now being shouted to an empty room.
Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Summertime Blooz on November 19, 2015, 05:04:47 PM Ghosts of Smile Threads Past! I'm hoping some of you may chime in with your own thoughts on this matter. Mujan, where are you?
A few of you may remember a couple of posts on the old Smile Shop board speculating that He Gives Speeches is about Mark Twain and may at one time have been intended for Do You Like Worms. I've long believed in that theory, but haven't been able to solve the complete puzzle. While some of the lyrics are fairly easily understood, others are difficult. Here are the lyrics: * He gives speeches but they put him back in bed * Where he wrote his satire (Twain liked to write in bed, but did others in any way "put him" there?) Maybe it means, that the speeches themselves put him back in bed from exhaustion. Mark Twain didn't enjoy the lecture circuit, and quit it when he was able to afford to. He only did it for the money. * He gives speeches always reaches out a lot * Led him to discover (Probably a reference to Twain traveling a lot, and to his evolving views on various issues.) Seems to fit, I concur. * Silken hair more silken hair fell on his face * And no wind was blowing (This certainly seems to fit Twain.) I don't think the silken hair is Twain's own, but more like a seduction. No wind was blowing? Some say it means corn silk, but How does silk from corn fall on one's face? * Stepped across the golden fields (Twain visited the California "gold fields," where many were mining for gold, and wrote about them.) I've always taken this to mean fields of grain. Could just mean traveling across the country across the range. Twain after his wilder days moved back East and married. * And saw that she was soon trailing after I don't get this line. * She was nice and didn't fight * He fell into her friendly persuasion (A reference to his wife? She had a big impact on his evolving views.) If only we knew who or what this "she" is a reference to. It seems to me to be the whole key to this song's riddle. Maybe it is his wife who he met at a reunion for passengers of 'The Quaker City', a ship he traveled on for research on the Holy Land lectures. 'Friendly Persuasion' is a novel and movie about a Quaker family home on the range. Maybe "didn't fight" is a reference to Quaker pacifism. So maybe, the subject falls in love with a Quaker? * Late that night while by a street light * Little hands shadowed on the ceiling (I'm stumped by these lines.) Maybe Twain's children? A symbol of childhood innocence that the subject has lost? Or maybe this is all a kind of "based on Mark Twain" situation. Totally made up subject with some of Twain's life mixed up in the stew. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Emily on November 19, 2015, 07:41:39 PM Ghosts of Smile Threads Past! I'm hoping some of you may chime in with your own thoughts on this matter. Mujan, where are you? The value of this is probably less than the proverbial two cents, but "friendly persuasion" is a rhetorical term that predates the book, movie and song of that title. It refers to winning over your audience by "siding" with them, establishing common ground, before discussing something they may not agree with, giving them a social predisposition to agree with you. A few of you may remember a couple of posts on the old Smile Shop board speculating that He Gives Speeches is about Mark Twain and may at one time have been intended for Do You Like Worms. I've long believed in that theory, but haven't been able to solve the complete puzzle. While some of the lyrics are fairly easily understood, others are difficult. Here are the lyrics: * He gives speeches but they put him back in bed * Where he wrote his satire (Twain liked to write in bed, but did others in any way "put him" there?) Maybe it means, that the speeches themselves put him back in bed from exhaustion. Mark Twain didn't enjoy the lecture circuit, and quit it when he was able to afford to. He only did it for the money. * He gives speeches always reaches out a lot * Led him to discover (Probably a reference to Twain traveling a lot, and to his evolving views on various issues.) Seems to fit, I concur. * Silken hair more silken hair fell on his face * And no wind was blowing (This certainly seems to fit Twain.) I don't think the silken hair is Twain's own, but more like a seduction. No wind was blowing? Some say it means corn silk, but How does silk from corn fall on one's face? * Stepped across the golden fields (Twain visited the California "gold fields," where many were mining for gold, and wrote about them.) I've always taken this to mean fields of grain. Could just mean traveling across the country across the range. Twain after his wilder days moved back East and married. * And saw that she was soon trailing after I don't get this line. * She was nice and didn't fight * He fell into her friendly persuasion (A reference to his wife? She had a big impact on his evolving views.) If only we knew who or what this "she" is a reference to. It seems to me to be the whole key to this song's riddle. Maybe it is his wife who he met at a reunion for passengers of 'The Quaker City', a ship he traveled on for research on the Holy Land lectures. 'Friendly Persuasion' is a novel and movie about a Quaker family home on the range. Maybe "didn't fight" is a reference to Quaker pacifism. So maybe, the subject falls in love with a Quaker? * Late that night while by a street light * Little hands shadowed on the ceiling (I'm stumped by these lines.) Maybe Twain's children? A symbol of childhood innocence that the subject has lost? Or maybe this is all a kind of "based on Mark Twain" situation. Totally made up subject with some of Twain's life mixed up in the stew. Van Dyke Parks talks like someone who made a study of rhetoric. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Ron on November 20, 2015, 12:14:30 AM I've always subscribed to the theory that it's about a baby. It's up to interpretation, though.
Brian's humming like a baby crying in the background the whole time. "Wahhhh, hahhhhh, ahhhhhh dum be dooby doo...." He gives speeches, but they put him back in bed where he wrote his satire (Baby babbling, nobody knows what he's saying, they put him back in the crib, he keeps babbling away) He gives speeches, always reaches out a lot, led him to discover (Baby reaches out for his mom from the crib, as babies are ought to do) Silken hair, more silken hair fell on his face, and no wind was blowing (No wind was blowing, so it's not his hair, it's his mother's hair lying on his face as she holds him to her chest) Stepped across the golden fields and saw that she was soon trailing after (Baby runs off somewhere, mother goes following as mothers are ought to do) She was nice and didn't fight, he fell into her friendly persuasion (Baby loves his mother, lets her pick him up) Late that night while by a streetlight, little hands shadowed on the ceiling (Baby lies in his crib at night making hand shadows on the ceiling above his crib) Brian's crying in the background seals the deal for me... Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Micha on November 20, 2015, 01:56:03 AM The value of this is probably less than the proverbial two cents, Come on, be a bit less humble! (http://smileysmile.net/board/Smileys/default/cool.gif) but "friendly persuasion" is a rhetorical term that predates the book, movie and song of that title. It refers to winning over your audience by "siding" with them, establishing common ground, before discussing something they may not agree with, giving them a social predisposition to agree with you. Van Dyke Parks talks like someone who made a study of rhetoric. First thanks for explaining this to me (not a native English speaker). But I wouldn't be surprised at all if VDP had BOTH meanings in mind, the literal meaning that you pointed out, while at the same time referring to the book/film in order to rise visual connotations in the listener's mind. Remember the holocaust/hall a costly double meaning and the bicycle rider image probably referring to the Bicycle Rider Back gambling cards brand. Even though I'm 100% certain that Brian never intended HGS to sit at this spot, in my own mix I've put it here (http://www.michael-fredrich.de/CIFOTMicha.mp3) and I like it. As the song's title is a citation from a poet, the child imagery and the innuendoes to another author quite fit and gives the track more depth. HGS starts at 1:39. What do you think? Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Emily on November 20, 2015, 06:57:06 AM The value of this is probably less than the proverbial two cents, Come on, be a bit less humble! (http://smileysmile.net/board/Smileys/default/cool.gif) but "friendly persuasion" is a rhetorical term that predates the book, movie and song of that title. It refers to winning over your audience by "siding" with them, establishing common ground, before discussing something they may not agree with, giving them a social predisposition to agree with you. Van Dyke Parks talks like someone who made a study of rhetoric. First thanks for explaining this to me (not a native English speaker). But I wouldn't be surprised at all if VDP had BOTH meanings in mind, the literal meaning that you pointed out, while at the same time referring to the book/film in order to rise visual connotations in the listener's mind. Remember the holocaust/hall a costly double meaning and the bicycle rider image probably referring to the Bicycle Rider Back gambling cards brand. Even though I'm 100% certain that Brian never intended HGS to sit at this spot, in my own mix I've put it here (http://www.michael-fredrich.de/CIFOTMicha.mp3) and I like it. As the song's title is a citation from a poet, the child imagery and the innuendoes to another author quite fit and gives the track more depth. HGS starts at 1:39. What do you think? Regarding the sequence, yours makes great sense to me. I think the interacting reference increase the interest. Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Emily on November 20, 2015, 07:04:00 AM The value of this is probably less than the proverbial two cents, but "friendly persuasion" is a rhetorical term that predates the book, movie and song of that title. It refers to winning over your audience by "siding" with them, establishing common ground, before discussing something they may not agree with, giving them a social predisposition to agree with you. Van Dyke Parks talks like someone who made a study of rhetoric. The obvious just occurred to me: using a rhetorical term would make particular sense in a lyric that begins with "he gives speeches." Title: Re: Deciphering \ Post by: Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard on November 20, 2015, 02:06:06 PM Someone called me? ;D
The other thing to consider is that since we have full lyrics for both WORMS and SPEECHES, we can see that the two don't match very well thematically. For as cryptic as Parks lyrics are, there is a consistency in viewpoint and tone within each song. "Cabin Essence" provides the biggest shift in subject matter within a single song, but it's not too much of a stretch to connect a "home on the range" lyric with one describing an early locomotive. SPEECHES just doesn't sound like it fits into a song concerning Manifest Destiny and displacing native people; the tone, in fact, fits better with "Wonderful". Its not a stretch at all. CE is about the once beautiful landscape ruined by the loud and tumultuous trains. What was once a peaceful meadow filled with reindeer is now a pretty chaotic path, but paradoxically, its this RR that allowed people to travel and build their homes on the range to enjoy those same meadows in the first place. At least thats my take. Totally agree about Wonderful. Thats where I put HGS, either as the original Wonderful insert or perhaps a second (or first?) half of the song. Once again, Im not musically trained, but the instruments for the Wonderful insert sound like they could go well with the HGS vocals and even backing vocals. HGS doesnt really fit with Wonderful now because the pianos are so different, but a simple rerecording of HGS on Harpsichord or something couldve solved that. The melodies sound similar to me, and the lyrics make sense together as male and female perspectives of a relationship. Heck, the idea someone said about the man in HGS being old and essentially incapacitated and cared for by a young relative could make him the father to the girl in Wonderful too. W's lyrics does mention her getting closer to them after the traumatic experience with the boy. Maybe the HGS lyrics could then lead into H&V or something. Like, we go from the girl's perspective to her fathers as he reflects on his life thus far--in the town of Heroes and Villains. Just an idea. If you take the HGS lyrics to be allusions to Twain, and thus a metaphor for Americana then that could fit with Wonderful too, as many speculate that the girl there is a metaphor for America getting raped by the Europeans. Seems to me that it's at least partly about a famous old man [writer?], now being taken care of and condescended to by a female family member [younger wife? Or daughter with a child of her own] .... All his famous bluster that once moved the crowds now being shouted to an empty room. Very interesting, plausible analysis. I've always subscribed to the theory that it's about a baby. It's up to interpretation, though. Brian's humming like a baby crying in the background the whole time. "Wahhhh, hahhhhh, ahhhhhh dum be dooby doo...." He gives speeches, but they put him back in bed where he wrote his satire (Baby babbling, nobody knows what he's saying, they put him back in the crib, he keeps babbling away) He gives speeches, always reaches out a lot, led him to discover (Baby reaches out for his mom from the crib, as babies are ought to do) Silken hair, more silken hair fell on his face, and no wind was blowing (No wind was blowing, so it's not his hair, it's his mother's hair lying on his face as she holds him to her chest) Stepped across the golden fields and saw that she was soon trailing after (Baby runs off somewhere, mother goes following as mothers are ought to do) She was nice and didn't fight, he fell into her friendly persuasion (Baby loves his mother, lets her pick him up) Late that night while by a streetlight, little hands shadowed on the ceiling (Baby lies in his crib at night making hand shadows on the ceiling above his crib) Brian's crying in the background seals the deal for me... Ive heard this interpretation before and I like it. It seems to further corroborate the connection to Wonderful, perhaps. The innocence suite thing. Perhaps the girl in Wonderful was impregnated by the boy, and the baby is theirs. Its cool how, depending on how you read it, the boy in HGS could either be her lover, father or child and in each case its plausible and adds a lot to the song, but in different ways. I love Speeches. When I first heard Smile 10 or so years ago, it was one of my favourite tracks. It could probably be shoehorned into Heroes or Vegetables without too much trouble. I'm also surprised that Brian gets credit for the lyrics since it feels very "Parksian". Of course, I've always also felt that Vegetables lyrics don't sound "Parksian" at all, so I guess it can be chalked up to confusion. Disagree. It doesnt fit in Heroes because its describing either the narrator in the third person, or some random guy who has nothing to do with the narrative. I used the lyrics over the fade for fun in one of my mixes, but that was more for fun and because the backing vocals matched as others have pointed out. It doesnt have anything to do with Veggies so doesnt really fit with that either. Speaking of which, I think the Veggie lyrics are very Parksian as you say. Its full of really interesting wordplay and double ententes which neither Mike nor especially Brian seemed capable of. HGS and the tag to the early H&V are musically the same idea, but it's an idea that runs through many Smile fragments. I can't hear HGS ever being part of DYLW, or that one grew out of the other. The two have a completely different feel to each other. I thought Bicycle rider only became part of H&V when the single mix was produced. I thought originally it was never intended to be part of H&V. Someone made a point ( I think it was Cam) that early on, half the SMiLE songs were probably parts of H&V. 'Half' seems like a big number, but I imagine quite a few sections at least had their origins in H&V. I always thought Bicycle Rider was also the middle section of Worms. I always thought it was neat how the BV's of 'HGS' were the same to the BB's vocals on the tag of the Cantina H&V. Must have been a tune Brian couldn't get out of his head. Agreed. It has nothing to do with Worms, and if it was shoehorned in I think it would have been to the songs detriment. Its a completely unnecessary addition. Im not sure I agree with that about H&V. We know OMP started off there, and IIGS. As far as I know, thats it. The reason so many pieces have an association with it now is because of all the single-related meddling in '67. If Im wrong, please someone give me a source. Don't understand Brian "junking" this one in 2003. It's not brilliance along the lines of "Heroes" or anything, but it's good and it's a lot of fun. Worst Brian song ever? Are you daft, Stuffington? And hay, we got "She's Goin' Bald" out of it. There is no way Brian wrote these lyrics. I'll believe a Parks co-write credit on "She's Goin' Bald" over a forty years later "I didn't write them" and a Brian credit on TSS. I agree. Its definitely bottom tier SMiLE, but thats still better than most other music ever composed. I also agree that Parks wrote those lyrics. Theyre undoubtedly his style and no one else's. Compare Brian lyrics like Wind Chimes and Busy Doin Nothing to HGS and the difference is undeniable. Yeah, I think She's goin' Bald is definitely a case where Mike improved on the original Parks lyrics. Makes me wish he had taken on some other Smile songs, like Cabinessence! I wouldnt say improved so much as made better for a specific circumstance. HGS is better for SMiLE, without the Americana context tho SGB is better for a funny laid back album. Incidentally, although it's doubtful that HGS would have been in a final mix of DYLW, it actually works fairly well as a part of the song. To me DYLW drags a little bit without lead vocals, but adding in HGS livens it up to the point where the missing vocals aren't really noticeable. Given that the lyric for "Worms" was entirely different, yes, most doubtful. Thanks everyone. Just a single response, and a negative one at that. Once again, I expressly said that I did NOT think that the finished version of DYLW would have included HGS. But remember, HGS was recorded early on - 9/1/66, so we can't know what it was intended for. It certainly could have been part of another song; maybe DYLW even grew out of it. Anyway, I was hoping to stimulate discussion on what used to be the subject of this board. Obviously a silly idea. I'm no muso, but I don't see how "Worms" grew out of "Speeches", given that there's no melodic similarity whatsoever. As to it being part of another song, or even part of Smile at all... well, I'd say the fact that Brian didn't return to it until he was hurting for album material some ten months later is strongly suggestive of the esteem in which he held the piece. Not so, both are in F. Brian didn't need much more than two sections being the same key to weld them together, so it's not completely out of the realms of possibility - imagine the last bass note slotting into the 'Mahalo Lu Lei' section of Worms... Of course, AGD's second point is more pertinent, but Brian obviously didn't forget about it and favoured it over more 'canonical' Smile material for Smiley, which surely says something, and possibly not that he held them in low esteem - Wonderful and Vegetables were songs he obsessed over, for instance. I enjoyed the lyrical analysis of it, too - I don't have much clue about those lyrics, so them being about Twain would slot it into the Americana vibe into some sort of tangential way.... This is why we need a comprehensive article and/or an in-depth interview about Smiley. Its just as mysterious as SMiLE, and since that album has been talked about to death (guilty :P) its actually Smiley thats more interesting to me now in a lot of ways. I wanna know what Brian's motives were for the aesthetic, song choice, title and album art. I wanna know what the other boys thought at the time in detail--were they pissed or relieved or indifferent that SMiLE was canned, and did their attitude change when they heard the new Smiley material? Were they reluctant or thinking "f*** it, we need to get something out"? It does seem odd that certain songs were salvaged but not others, and some of those were top tier while others were bottom of the barrel. If I had to guess, maybe it was the songs that could conceivably work outside the SMiLE context. Veggies was part of Americana, but it works outside that box where Worms and CE do not. Wonderful is part of that Innocence/Life suite, but it works as a standalone ballad where Surfs Up and CIFOTM seem really tied to it. |