Punk and hardcore are often touted for being brash and blunt and direct. But the canon of lyrical approaches in our community has always been more diverse than that.
It’s funny to think of isolating out that one line from New Direction, and then using it as a critique against other things rather than taking it in context of the entire song. I don’t think I ever read it as a judgement about poetic or verbose lyrics, but rather the question the comes after the answer of the previous line. This one thing makes me feel more than this other thing is hardly a criticism of obtuse “coded messages.” As an adult it’s so much more of a both/and than an either/or.
This isn’t a critique of your article by any means, but more thinking of the absurdity of that lyric being used as a criticism against less straight forward lyrics. Hardcore is beautiful because, lyrically and musically, it lives in so many lanes simultaneously.
About 5–10 years ago, someone pointed out the duality of the Judge lyric “those drugs are going to kill you, if I don’t get to you first”. For so long I took that to being written in anger—if the drugs don’t kill you, I will. But then someone pointing out, what if it’s coming from a place of love, of trying to save someone? I need to get to you before the drugs kill you is so much stronger of a lyrical meaning. I don’t know if anyone would refer to Judge’s lyrics being coded, and yet that line in particular is less straightforward than you’d think upon first reading especially when put it context of who we perceive Judge to be.
I think your final paragraph sums up, for me, the role of the listener in the situation. The intent of the artist can be (but obviously not always) absolutely straight forward in their writing, but the listener brings their own perspective, their own mood, their own understanding to the song.
Reminds me of a phrase I've come across a bunch recently that I first read in Radical Candor, though I'm not sure from where it originates...
"Communication is measured at the listener’s ear, not the speaker’s mouth."
For most of my teens and twenties, I hated when a songwriter wouldn't go into detail about their lyrics and instead would only offer up, "The song is about something different to everyone; it's what you make it and what it means to you." I used to think that was such a copout. But as I got older I really started to appreciate that line of thinking and how cool it was that a song could mean completely different things to different people.
Of course hardcore isn't always blunt or direct (I'm pretty sure the number of people who know exactly what Ian Mackaye was singing about in "It Follows" is pretty small), but I think, regardless of mode, there's an emotional directness or sincerity or earnestness to it. "Well-Fed Fuck" by Born Against is witheringly sarcastic, but the anger behind that sarcasm is genuine. Maybe hardcore doesn't always say what it means in a strictly literal way, but I think something that makes hardcore hardcore regardless of the music is that it means what it says.
It’s funny to think of isolating out that one line from New Direction, and then using it as a critique against other things rather than taking it in context of the entire song. I don’t think I ever read it as a judgement about poetic or verbose lyrics, but rather the question the comes after the answer of the previous line. This one thing makes me feel more than this other thing is hardly a criticism of obtuse “coded messages.” As an adult it’s so much more of a both/and than an either/or.
This isn’t a critique of your article by any means, but more thinking of the absurdity of that lyric being used as a criticism against less straight forward lyrics. Hardcore is beautiful because, lyrically and musically, it lives in so many lanes simultaneously.
About 5–10 years ago, someone pointed out the duality of the Judge lyric “those drugs are going to kill you, if I don’t get to you first”. For so long I took that to being written in anger—if the drugs don’t kill you, I will. But then someone pointing out, what if it’s coming from a place of love, of trying to save someone? I need to get to you before the drugs kill you is so much stronger of a lyrical meaning. I don’t know if anyone would refer to Judge’s lyrics being coded, and yet that line in particular is less straightforward than you’d think upon first reading especially when put it context of who we perceive Judge to be.
I think your final paragraph sums up, for me, the role of the listener in the situation. The intent of the artist can be (but obviously not always) absolutely straight forward in their writing, but the listener brings their own perspective, their own mood, their own understanding to the song.
Reminds me of a phrase I've come across a bunch recently that I first read in Radical Candor, though I'm not sure from where it originates...
"Communication is measured at the listener’s ear, not the speaker’s mouth."
For most of my teens and twenties, I hated when a songwriter wouldn't go into detail about their lyrics and instead would only offer up, "The song is about something different to everyone; it's what you make it and what it means to you." I used to think that was such a copout. But as I got older I really started to appreciate that line of thinking and how cool it was that a song could mean completely different things to different people.
Rearrange and see it through
Stupid fucking words
Tangle us in our desires
Free me from this give and take
Free me from this great debate
Of course hardcore isn't always blunt or direct (I'm pretty sure the number of people who know exactly what Ian Mackaye was singing about in "It Follows" is pretty small), but I think, regardless of mode, there's an emotional directness or sincerity or earnestness to it. "Well-Fed Fuck" by Born Against is witheringly sarcastic, but the anger behind that sarcasm is genuine. Maybe hardcore doesn't always say what it means in a strictly literal way, but I think something that makes hardcore hardcore regardless of the music is that it means what it says.