Two Halves - An Analysis

[cmccubbin25]

So obviously any song is open to interpretation, but when I listen to "Two Halves" I have analyzed the song in two ways.  These are just my opinions and are in no way, shape, or form meant to be construed as a fact - end disclaimer.

So the first time I heard "Two Halves" I thought Jim was talking about the "grass is greener on the other side" mentality.  For instance, Jim sings "Well I know what you want, you want the better of two halves."  Ok...that one isn't hard to figure out.  However, based on the lyrics this could be applied to dilemma of aging and getting older.  Again, these are quite obvious.

Now...the more I listen to the song and think that Jim said "Two Halves" was placed in the middle of the album on purpose I think this song could represent something else.  "Two Halves" could be about the possible division in the fan base that he knew this album would create.  For example (this is already happening), after this album the fan base will be divided into two halves: on one side you have the diehards who will always live and breath by TN Fire and At Dawn and on the other side you have the fans that will embrace the new direction of the band (I'm in no way advocating either side...to each his/her own).  

If you juxtapose this with the lyrics of aging and getting older, then Jim may be saying to us that as he has aged in years he has matured as a songwriter and a musician.  He can't give us everything we want ("You want this now you want that")  but that we should try to enjoy what we have been given ("Can't have it all you should enjoy what you have").  In the end, however, even Jim knows we will always want the better of two halves.

[mymonkeyfriend]

either way the verse sounds like that wake up september song from those shitty spares green  day.

talks alot about looks, so i am guessing its about aging. i dont get the two halves of the album thing either. sec walkin and im amazed sound like good ol mmj, as does aluminum park and look at you. and they are on different "halves"

[cmccubbin25]

either way the verse sounds like that wake up september song from those shitty spares green  day.

talks alot about looks, so i am guessing its about aging. i dont get the two halves of the album thing either. sec walkin and im amazed sound like good ol mmj, as does aluminum park and look at you. and they are on different "halves"

but couldn't "aging" be a metaphor for Jim's (and the band in general) evolution as a songwriter and musician?

[kickingtelevision]

I always thought this song was about having your cake and eating it too. Like the line "When you're older you want to body you have now." This line comes after "When you're so young, you want to be older."

[BH]

Oh, it's "Halves"?!  I thought they were trying to decide which Montreal Canandien player to start a right wing.

The better, of two Habs.

[Foxtrot76]

Don't know if it's been mentioned before, but perhaps the 2 opposing images of the band on the cover represent the 'Two Halves' of the band you are speaking of....  :-?

[bignewt]

Weakest song on a very strong album.

[cmccubbin25]

Don't know if it's been mentioned before, but perhaps the 2 opposing images of the band on the cover represent the 'Two Halves' of the band you are speaking of....  :-?

interesting observation!

[Dorothy_Mantooth]

Side A, Side B, just like it used to be

[Ive got an EVIL plan babe]

I'll get behind you cmccubbin25.... ...well, you know what I mean.

I think Jim wrote this in line with most of the other songs on the album - focusing on people's struggle to understand and get in touch with themselves and one another (or their lack of trying).  However, he either wrote, or noticed after placing it in the middle, that the song could have three meanings.  1. You can't have your cake and eat it too  2.  It's like, the middle of the album, ya know?  3. Some want MMJ to evolve as long as every album sounds like The Tennessee Fire.

[tomEisenbraun]

Don't forget the latent paradox there--the use of "better" sort of masks it a bit, which might actually be necessary to keep from being too transparent, but if you think of "the bigger of two halves," you've got yourself a paradox. The better of two halves being no good, because anything called a "half" is necessarily defined by the whole--otherwise, there'd be no reason for a half.

All sorts of implications there, especially if we stretch this even further into our understanding of this record as a spiritual journey. Think Eastern for a minute: Yin and Yang. Good and Evil. One is defined byt he other, and it is necessary to understand both to have a true balance. To try and live purely for the good ignoring the bad destroys the equilibrium and ignores a VERY important aspect of our nature as people: our evil urges. They're there for a good reason, right? If there wasn't reason behind that shit, there'd be no need for the dark half of the Yin-Yang, right?

Y'all still with me?

Maybe that's too deep, but if we bring it back to the original point of the paradox, we find someone who wants the "better of two halves." My thought is that, if he's talking about two halves, what has been halved? And can it not be understood as a whole? Is the destruction of the whole a necessity with this issue, or is it a deconstruction from someone too dense to understand that this deconstruction is completely unnecessary?

Maybe the underlying idea is that you certainly can have your cake and eat it, too--you just need to know which is the right cake to pursue...

As halving the album, that's a good concept, and it might be interesting to perhaps look at the track as a separation between "Evil" side A and "Good" side B? If we're to judge by the track titles alone, it should seem the logical division, no? ell, the fact that we're given two takes on the necessity of physical interaction should point to something interesting here:

Touch Me Pt. 1 end with "I need a human right by my side, untied..."
Jim, in his quirky, has really challenged us with the lyrical content here. He's removed all personality from this person that he needs. He doesn't need "Cheri," "Evelyn" or anyone in particular, just someone who's free to love him. Anyone. Hmm.

Touch Me Pt. 2, on the other hand, takes this sentiment past the surface. We find Jim considering the implications of his response to the touch. It's not a caress, but a "challenge" here. Not just a blind, painful "I need someone" but rather an introspective into what it means to be loved, taking into account not only the physical aspect of love, but also the genuine emotion that underlies it--that part of an actual relationship that betters you. The physical aspect is definitely one HALF of the equation, but this song finds him at the realization of the beauty of that second HALF of the intangible love in a relationship combining with the tangible act of love (not necessarily sex, it's pretty ambiguous) and taking those TWO HALVES and combining them for the WHOLE. Breaking down that barrier of half vs. half and recognizing them both as necessary to obtain the beautiful whole.

So where does that leave us? I don't know--I suppose it's a challenge. I don't have the lyrics book right here, otherwise I'd tackle the rest of this, but I think it's probably good to go ahead and challenge you guys to look at it like this, and see what comes out of looking at the two halves in this light. I'll be doing so over the next day or so and I'll certainly be posting more. Just from recollection, though, I think there'll be plenty of this kind of material to draw from and challenge us.

In closing, I want to dare you guys to take what we're given on the album and see if you can find that this holds true throughout:

EVIL = Presenting a whole as a decision between two halves, ignoring the fact that both halves are necessary to achieve the whole, and considering each half as a different whole in and of itself.

GOOD = The synthesis of the two halves into the whole, understanding the importance of both sides in the makeup of the whole. Even further, can we find any hints in the album toward the understanding of there being many more than just two halves of a situation--perhaps the too-simple deconstruction of the whole is an even bigger lampoon of the idea that such big things can be split down the middle so simply?

Sheesh, Curtis. How's that for a book for you? Thanks for getting me engaged here, though. Reading Plato last semester paid off.

-Tom

[vespachick]

Think Eastern for a minute: Yin and Yang.

Holy cow! I wish I could follow! You are writer, Tom. :-*

Here're my cliff notes:

Two Kids & A Pie - one cuts first, one picks first.
Easy like Sunday morning.

[Ive got an EVIL plan babe]

I'll tackle some of tom's questions/comments.

You're right.  I should change 1 above to:  You can have your cake and eat it too.  I believe that is what Jim is getting at.  Become good with yourself and understand that you're on a whole journey, all of which can be pleasing.   Old concept - new song...  ...er somethin.

Continuing on the same line, the whole does not, then, need to be split into halves.  In fact, he's practically begging us not to.  However, he is playing to the tendency to think of life as a young person/adult vs an adult and to compare the two.  So, one's life is often halved (in their mind) unnecessarily (actually its more like the 4th 16th vs the 8th 16th on an 80yr lifeplan.  You know Plato.  I'm a numbers guy).

I like your ideas about Pt.1 vs Pt.2.  I had previously been trying to decipher the connection and the reason for placing them on the tracklist as they are.

I'm gonna think and listen more.

[tomEisenbraun]

Continuing on the same line, the whole does not, then, need to be split into halves.  In fact, he's practically begging us not to.  However, he is playing to the tendency to think of life as a young person/adult vs an adult and to compare the two.  

Actually--you just spurred on some more thought for me:

The whole being made of two halves, but really any number of any fractions deal--whatever. The whole doesn't need to be halved to be realized as a whole. In that vein, he's challenging us to understand that the whole is whole, while he's split his album (especially if you take it as vinyl) into two halves. Perhaps the whole is most complete as a whole, but made better understandable by its parts working in conjunction with eachother?

My thought on the two halves being different may be wrong as well--it may prove that this is a resonant theme in different manners throughout the album. More on this later when I've had a chance to read through the lyrics.

[Ive got an EVIL plan babe]

It's clear to me that he's halved the album with this song.  Not just because it's cute, but because he wants to draw attention to the differences between the two halves.  He wants us to see that the two halves balance (Yin and Yang as you were saying).  Lyrically, the song may be an accidental response to his expectations of our response to each half (similar to cmccubbin25's idea of a division of the fanbase).  I say accidental because they wrote a ton of songs and I don't believe he wrote this song with the intention of putting it in the middle and sticking two or more styles on each side.

"How can a soul make the most of what is whole and what is here?" (not in the lyrics booklet by the way)

And I agree again.  I'm not sure we can simplify this.

[Dorothy_Mantooth]

tom i'm going to start referring to you as "El Profesor"

[cmccubbin25]

man...you guys took it to a whole new level!

Thanks Tom and I've Got a Plan...you guys are awesome.

However, I've always been intrigued by analyses such as these.  Do we read too much into a song or its lyrics?  I mean do we really think that Jim consciously thought about these things when he wrote the song?  

[tomEisenbraun]

Looked up this discussion today for a friend--was curious if anyone's gained anything else from the album over the past couple months. I think it's time for me to dust this one back off and have another go at it and find even more to connect with...

[DaFunkyPrecedent]

...i think it's pretty literal. I always looked at it as Jim wanting to write a fun pop song.  

....except for the song's not that good and kinda ruins the album as a whole for me...

[The DARK]

The more I think about it,

"I believe in a perfect world, you'd rule your own universe;
The only company you'd ever need would be in your brain"

Has to be one of the most bitter/heartbroken lines he has ever written.