I unfortunately was not yet a fan of MMJ when It Still Moves came out. Has anyone seen Jim's interpretation of the lyrics to "Steam Engine"? If not, does anyone have their own opinion as to what this song's about?
Love.
(caring deeply for someone kind of love)
I think that Jim is sending us secret messages through that song that Jesus is either the savior of all mankind or a child molesting bowler. But that's what I think they're all about.
But seriously, I think Eisey summed it up. Do you have an opinion Marino?
Yeah, it's definitely about Love
i had typed something else out, but my computer froze, so i lost it all.
i think the most important thing about this song is that it captures something completely beyond words, and that it's real meaning lies in that. i think the song is best summed up in the last line "the fact that my hearts beatin, is all the proof you need" bot lyrically and emotionally. from there, the way the song explodes says absolutely everything that needs to be said and more. the tricky thing is, there are no words that can describe the feeling at the end of that song. you can just feel it.
but to me, it sounds like its about a true kind of love, with the "none of this is physical" line and "the fact that my heart's beatin is all the proof you need".
but if you want to delve deeper, please let's do it. just let's not drag bush or anything completely obtuse into this one.
and might i add that i love the fact that i'm still "Eisey" here, even though i definitely changed my name :)
I love this board :)
Quote
but to me, it sounds like its about a true kind of love, with the "none of this is physical" line and "the fact that my heart's beatin is all the proof you need".
but if you want to delve deeper, please let's do it. just let's not drag bush or anything completely obtuse into this one.
excuse me, but, are you sayin' that anyone who has compared an MMJ lyric to anything about Bush is making an "obtuse" statement?
I'm sorry but if I happen to think that "Old Jeezub" is really just Tony Blair then I have every right to say that that's what the song is about for me
And besides, isn't that what these discussions with regards to lyric interpretation are all about? What you think is what you think? Nobody is right or wrong? I happen to think that weird intrepretations are more interesting regardless of whether I agree with it or not.
sorry, but I didn't want this discussion to become "obtuse" by keeping it within certain parameters of interpretation.
Steam Engine is not about George Bush.
Steam Engine is about James Watt and being in Greenock, Scotland.
here's my beef with the Bush stuff in the Gideon thread.
We've been given two sources continually from Jim in interviews (and I've even heard it straight from the band) that the song was written half about his frustration with organized religion and also about a story about a parrot who became so defensive of his owner that he attacked her own children.
Bush isn't a part of the song, no matter how you look at it. Bush is not part of the interpretation.
However, if you find something in there that you find relatively inspiring and makes you think about something Bush has done or something not related to the song, then by all means, that's great...but that's personal meaning. I'm not sayign it's invalid, but it's pretty important to not confuse what you get out of the song with what the song is about. It's two different things.
Now, look up there. I said the song is about love. I don't have any information from Jim on this, but the imagery of the song evokes an imagery of that emotion.
Hell, this song is above Bush bashing. I think i'm just pretty sick of "oh its about Bush" because they mentioned somewhere that Z is more about the state of the world than the other albums. That doesn't mean they put anything directly about Bush in the music, and it doesn't mean we need to dig for it.
I forget who's profile its in, but "love a song for the way it makes you feel." Steam Engine is one of those. There are no words that you can ascribe to the sheer dynamic of the end of this song, and i think it's so far above any kind of political analyzation, particularly because it doesn't seem to appeal to any such senses.
I'm not slamming you if you hate Bush. I'm partial to him. I don't love him, he's no great president, but he is president and I respect that fact. I'm not going to go into detail about what I think of the man, because i will be dessimated by those who believe I am blind. I think it's a waste of brain power to play what-ifs and go into semantics about something that we have no control over, especially when it will run its course in two years. Well crap, there's my opinion again.
Back to Steam Engine, just feel the song. Don't try and tear it apart, but appreciate it for what it makes you feel. Maybe we coudl get Jim to comment at some point, to find out what his intention was with it, but I think that a lot of times, over-analyzation gives you nothing but a bunch of pieces, rather than being able to truly appreciate the song as a whole.
I almost don't want to know what it was written about.
But I guess Tracy already spilt that can of beans. 8)
listen dude,
no one was ever going to say that steam engine was about bush because how could they? I mean it has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Bush in any way and I don't think that anyone could say it is....but, "Gideon" on the other hand, you could say that that song is about Bush because it wasn't just me who said that...so it's totally valid.
I was just pissed off that someone told me and whoever else that my comments and other people's comments were "obtuse" and that's total crap...because they are not!!!
So, I do agree that the song is about love and I agree with you on that Eisey, but it's just not right to call my or anyone else's comments "obtuse" about the song "Gideon".
that's all I'm trying to say.... I think I'm pretty right on about this too
hey saki, there have been numerous arguments about this before on this board. some people have talked to the band about certain songs, so heaven forbid if you say something different. personally, im one of those people who respects what an artist's vision is in writing a song, but we can all take our own specific interpretations on it. don't let one or a few people's label of "obtuse" put you off from speaking your mind about what you feel from a song. all of love this band, but we're all different people, and we feel different thing and get different thoughts from the arrangements and the lyrics. some people tend to forget that, but don't stop speaking your mind!
:)
sorry bout that, i think i made a post round here somewhere about the two different types of song interpretation.
the reason i made the bush comment in the first place was pretty much joking. i knew there was absolutely no way to bring politics into this one...so i threw that in there.
sorry for the rant, i had just woken up and my roommate was cranking some odd playlist that included "gold digger", matchbox20, and "stacy's mom," so my irritability factor was up.
readin back on the comment though (which i had remembered as being a bit more fiery, but i suppose it wasn't) that's pretty much how I feel about the stuff. I'm not saying personal interpretation isn't important. i got choked the first time i really listened to "Golden" and that has nothing to do with Jim's intent of writing the song. I just found a certain hope and beauty in it that I hadn't heard anywhere else before in a way that was completely non-cheesy. If Gideon gets you pissed at Bush--great! But it's not the meaning of the song. It's your personal interpretation. Which is completely valid, but a different thing altogether.
So end of ragging. I don't hate you, would love to hear your opinion on this song. No hard feelins, Saki or Rats, i was just tired of reading about bush in the other thread.
(where's tracy when you need him ;))
i think its just difference of opinion about music in general. almost immediately after posting and thinking about this topic, i read an interview with elbow where guy garvey (the lead singer) was talking about hearing some fan's personal story about one of his songs, and he said one you put a song out there, it's almost like it's not yours anymore. thats the sort of mindset i have. i don't think it's taking away from the songwriter's intent or ideas, but people morph certain songs and get those feelings inside that may have nothing to do with the original idea. basically, i think if music speaks to you well enough to make you wonder, that already says a lot about the song itself. we all agree in some way that a lot of mmj songs make us ponder, so let's just marvel at the power of a band that can do that with so many songs.
:-*
I agree, ratsprayer. I believe that once any work of art, including a song, becomes released to the air, the hearer becomes part of the process. What the writer means by his/her words is of course interesting, but ultimately means less that what the hearer perceives or feels about it. I don't know how Jim or any other song writer feels about that but I think that, on one level, once you let other people appreciate your work then they are in on the act whether you like it or not.
An example for me is when I mis-hear the lyrics of a song and it still has meaning for me.
I'm not sure if any of this makes sense.
(But that never stopped any of us posting before ;))
I have a hard time believin that my interpretation of the song (being about Jesus Christ and Jesus Quintana) is somehow more valid than what Jim believes the song is about. This issue of the subjectivity of lyrics interpretation has been discussed on this board already and most seemed to believe that their interpretations were more valid than Jim's intent. I think that does Jim and the music a disservice. Oh, and I think you're wrong (how's that for objectivity)!?
Perhaps that is why all the song interpreation threads on this board don't really go anywhere. People begin to fight and then everyone agrees that all music is subjective so essentially the song doesn't mean anything, and we go on discussing Pat's beard. If the songs don't really mean anything then we all might as well be listening to the Mary Poppins soundtrack and waxing philosophical about freewill.
But if someone wants to attempt to actually pay attention to the music, here's a question for those still attempting to interpret this song. I agree that the song is about love, a certain kind of love, that isn't physical. But how does the title of the song fit into that interpretation?
Steam Engine -
"The Fact That My Hearts Beating Is All The Proof You Need"
It's almost as if the love is what physically makes his heart beat. The same way that steam makes a steam engine run. Right at the end of that line you can almost see a huge Steam Engine coming around a Mountain with huge white billowing smoke streams rising from it. Then the rest of the song just feels like when your standing to close to the railroad track and the train is racing by you. I used to go out to this spot on the lake that had a train track going right by it. I would lay there at night with my head right next to the tracks (not in a suicidal way) but it was pretty awesome because first your looking up at the stars and then comes this Fucking FREIGHT TRAIN BLOWING THROUGH, that's some kind of intensity right there, much like the song, much like LOVE!
i don't think anyone is implying their interpretation is more important. it still seems this issue is being viewed as an attack of jim for not caring what he intended for a certain piece of music. ask most normal level-headed musicians what their songs means, and they wont answer you. they want the fan to take their own meaning. yeah if you don't want to sit down and really think about your favourite songs and albums and what they mean, listen to mary poppins. i think the good challening music out there begs for questions to be asked.
you know as far as steam engine, the lyrics 'its a voice, and it's a choice, to call you out, or stay at home' for me, i love to get outdoors, go hiking, travel, drive just for the fuck of it. i feel there is something calling me to see the world and enjoy it as much as possible. my dad, the crack smoker, sits at home all day and doesn't leave the house except to go buy more crack. so to me, that song exhibits a difference between me and my dad and leads in to many other thoughts. did jim think about that when he wrote the song? fuck no, but that doesn't mean im an idiot for thinking what i think. i can't imagine someone who likes a complex, deep band like the jacket can think music is so cut and dry, but to each their own...
to me 'steam engine' has always been about friendly alien mechanical life-forms visiting me at night and telling me secrets. that's valid to me. if you think it's about a beard, that'll be valid to you. questioning what meaning is more valid is an invalid question.
Okay, maybe I didn't understand the argument, but I was not trying to say that lyric interpretation should be cut and dry. I just think that the interpretation cannot be purely subjective. Like most things is life it's probably not black and white but some shade of gray. My point is that artist's intentions should play SOME role in interpreting the lyrics. My other point is that duscussions get watered down when any and every analysis is fair game. For example, you may think that "Amazing Grace" is a song about white sumpremcy (either because you heard the words wrong or because you're an idiot) but that doesn't have anything to do with the actual meaning of the song. Everyone's interpretation is not right. Like the people who thought Wonderful Man was about Jesus. That may be what the song means to you, but that is neither here nor there. The song is about Tim Cushing on an objective level. Subjectively, I still say it's about Jesus Quintana.
Quoteto me 'steam engine' has always been about friendly alien mechanical life-forms visiting me at night and telling me secrets. that's valid to me. if you think it's about a beard, that'll be valid to you. questioning what meaning is more valid is an invalid question.
thank you, riny. i have ALWAYS thought it was about a beard, and now you made me feel valid. :)
i just realized that i've always had a really strong connection to this song, and there's a lot of images and feelings i get from it, but i just tried to type those out, and i can't do it. because i don't think my interpretation can be typed out. interesting....
I don't know who this Hallihan dude is but here's a little q and a from american songwriter....
(http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8852/songs7op.jpg)
Thanks, CC. It's always nice to know where the boys weigh in on things. I still think that there is an objective and subjective meaning to some songs. Like Wonderful Man or Give Peace a Chance, but unlike Louie Louie and Steam Engine, apparently. I guess I've spent too much time analyzing lyrics by Bob Dylan and others who have a different approach to writing lyrics.
It's just the way that he sings...
*struts*
exactly...if Jim didn't want anyone reacting to his songs or feeling something subjective, he wouldn't record them or release them or play them in front of people.....
Ramblings
What about instrumentals? Instrumentals (and music, in general) evoke feeling, no need to argue over the interpretation of words and lyirics, right? I can't really argue that In Memory of Elizabeth Reed (Allman Brothers) does not make you feel a certain way when you hear it, that would be silly. So the "meaning" is subjective. Unless you want to find out what the writer's mood was during writing and recording or if there was intent. (And when I heard that ELizabeth Reed's name was on a tombstone where the Allman Brothers used to hang out in a cemetary, it did change it a little).
Can the same not be said about lyrics? Does language make it too concrete? I mean, is "Yellow matter custard, dripping from a dead dog's eye" really to be taken at face value? Or was John Lennon implying something?
Words have to have concrete meaning in order to communicate (in some situations). So do some sounds (a car horn, a phone ringing). Now, a phone ringing may mean a couple of things or it may evoke a feeling from the past or a memory (it's limitless). Words can do the same.
Steam Engine probably means something different for everyone here, depending on what was going on in your life when you heard the song the most, or used the song the most, or discussed the song the most, or what it reminds you of, or core stuff, etc...
It's like trying to interpret the Bible. You can argue over the semantics, then the message is lost.
So, is the lesson here, never argue religion, politics, and song lyrics?
(http://www.repriserec.com/fleetwoodmac/covers/mystery.jpeg)
no, it means everyone has their own way of interpreting this or any other song. kinda like arguing that coke tastes better than pepsi because someone says so. everyone has their own take on the meaning of the lyrics, the writer himself as well. there might be agreement among people on what they think it means, but is that more valid than someone thinking steam engine is about having a frankfurter in august at the state fair? i think not.
Quoteno, it means everyone has their own way of interpreting this or any other song. kinda like arguing that coke tastes better than pepsi because someone says so. everyone has their own take on the meaning of the lyrics, the writer himself as well. there might be agreement among people on what they think it means, but is that more valid than someone thinking steam engine is about having a frankfurter in august at the state fair? i think not.
But if no interpretation is right or mre valid than any other, what's the use in talking about it. As Dylan says, "What's the use in talkin to me, might as well be talkin to you". But then again those lyrics are up to "interpretation".
I agree with you, aMD. I find it surprising, I guess, that so many people, including Jim, seem to think that a listener's interpretation of a song is more important than the artist's intent. What's the point of following Madonna's advice to "Express yourself" if you don't care if the audience understands what you are trying to express about yourself?
Tundra, that's the beauty of it though; to express yourself, throw it all out there, get it out (John lee Hooker said, "It's in me and it's got to come out"). Who cares what the audience understands and gets? Not being tied down to having to explain why you did something or what it means, etc...is a beautiful existence. Let it be.
Take Iggy Pop and his early days with the Stooges. Iggy was geting all that weird shit out of him, and I guarantee not many in the crowd felt exactly like Iggy, but, they could relate.
It's about relating, not feeling exactly what the band or singer feels (or worrying if the audience understands you).
That's why so many people freaked out when little Bobby Dylan went electric. People wanted to crucify him because they did not understand Dylan's expression of himself. Screw that (and that's what Dylan said).
Expressing oneself is liberating, it frees you. Expressing yourself and being worried if your audience doesn't get it is binding and forced. (IMO).
(http://www.godprod.com/vision/mickrock/images/iggyJPG.jpg)
Ah your Dignan quote is killing me. So lovely.
I think the thing to remember in this argument, as well, is that every songwriter feels differently. Some people really want to be clear and expressive and have people understand what they're doing. Other people like to be mysterious, if they even think that far in depth about it. I was on stage the other night and our bass player asked me what a song was about, and I told her, and she had thought it was something totally different. That happens with me and Shelby at home all the time. And it might be that Shelby really wants people to know what a song is about, and it might be that I know where it came from from me, but know that other people might find something different in it, or vice versa, and it's just the way you work. If we go back to Steam Engine, I think it's pretty safe to say that the images I've got in my head are not what Jim James had in his head when he was making that song, but because it's my body that's taking it in, that's just how it manifests itself there.
But so many people feel differently about this. My aunt and uncle are poetry doctors (they have their doctorates specializing in certain poets), and they are ALL about analyzing poems and trying to figure out what the real meaning is behind what was written. And I hate that because I like to think about what I think about it. But it doesn't matter - that's how they like to experience poetry, and I have my way of how I like to experience poetry. It doesn't mean it's not interesting to talk about, or that it leaves no room for discussion, it just means that people have different ways that they like to experience art.
That's my take on the sitch at hand.
I get what you're saying, Tracy. I can see how an artist has to know that his/her work is subject to interpretation, esp. if lyrics are left intentionally vague.
And I can see how the artist can't worry too much over whether he is understood, or he'll go mad.
And I can appreciate that it would be satisfying to know that your song has moved someone, regardless of whether that someone completely understood you.
Like EC's Aunt & Uncle, I am a poetry fan, and maybe I place too much importance on the lyrics, though I try not to dissect, or analyze, so much as feel and understand.
Jim says, "It doesn't matter what I want you to get out of it" But I can't believe that he's being completely truthful. If that's so, he might as well be speaking gibberish. He writes songs, and, I'm sure, agonizes over them to some extent, in order to communicate something, and I really want to understand what he wants to communicate.
By the way, CC, I think I recognize that quote from the Velocity interview. I remember reading it and being a little troubled by it. In fact, during that whole interview, I had the feeling that Jim was playing games, Dylan-style, with the interviewer, who just didn't seem to get it.
Isn't there a lot of gibberish going on in Steam Engine? It's my favourite part.
Why does my mind blow to bits every time they play that song?
It's just the way that he sings,
not the words that he says, or the band.
Im in love with this soul, it's a meaning that I understand.
QuoteBy the way, CC, I think I recognize that quote from the Velocity interview.
no, it's not.
like I said, from american songwriter.
no gameplaying.
QuoteIsn't there a lot of gibberish going on in Steam Engine? It's my favourite part.
There's a lot of gibberish in many of Jim's songs. But they're still beautiful. Like abstract paintings can be beautiful.
Some of this reminds me of a Bible study I went to once.
A passage from Luke was read and we were all going around in a circle, talking about the passage. There were a lot of seminary students in the room, and they were all pontificating about Paul, and what Paul was struggling with when he wrote this, and what Paul was meaning to say, etc...When it got to me, I talked about what the passage made me feel and how I use this passage for strength in my every day life.
As with Steam Engine, why argue over what Jim is saying or meaning? Stick with what's important, what it makes you feel.
I know it's fun to agree/disagree about lyrics and meaning, but it's a fruitless venture. Focus on what it means to you and what it makes you feel.
I mean, does it really make a difference that Steam Engine is about James Watt and being in Greenock, Scotland? No. What matters is what you feel (to borrow from Jay Farrar).
(http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~macfie/james_watt_engine.jpg)
QuoteIt's about relating, not feeling exactly what the band or singer feels (or worrying if the audience understands you).
QuoteYeah, I really agree with that Tracy. Like that song, "A Simple Twist of Fate" by Dylan - I think this song is about Bob's break-up with his then wife as is most of the other stuff on BOTT. Even though I'm pretty sure I know what the artist was writing about and what it means to him I can also relate to the song and relate to the feelings expressed in it. But, then again Dylan and James are pretty different in their styles of writing.
As for Steam Engine, I was listening to it earlier today and when I listen to it I'm often reminded of Bonnaroo 04 and how fucking awesome it was to be alive in that place and time. So, I just think Steam Engine is about being stoked to be alive whether it's because of love for another, or because you're at Bonnaroo, in the rain, freezing and loving it, or whatever else...
What's so cool about "Steam Engine" (and many other songs, of course) is that the first 100 times you hear it without looking at the lyrics, you might project all kinds of things onto it. Ultimately, whether you've got the lyrics in front of you or not, this song has an emotional quality to it that grabs you by the heart and shakes it about. I'm sure we can all agree on that.
absolutlely, John! This argument has gone all Ratt on this forum (that is, 'round and 'round)....the main thing to remember is that both the listener (or viewer) and artists' meaning of a work is valid. simple as that.
in that interview, Jim is trying to tell all of us to use the songs to feel something. Don't worry about some absolute meaning unless that suppossed meaning helps you to feel something about the work .
this is art thoery, folks. has been debated for eons.
kudos to the forum for keeping it healthy!!
Quote
no, it's not.
like I said, from american songwriter.
no gameplaying.
Oops! I really wasn't trying to second-guess you. I didn't notice that you had told us where the interview was from. :-[
QuoteUltimately, whether you've got the lyrics in front of you or not, this song has an emotional quality to it that grabs you by the heart and shakes it about. I'm sure we can all agree on that.
Definitely agreed!
For the rest, I'm not convinced, and I'm sure I'm not convincing anyone else - so I'll shut up.
:)
QuoteDefinitely agreed!
For the rest, I'm not convinced, and I'm sure I'm not convincing anyone else - so I'll shut up. :)
tundra, of all the people, in all the world, you should never shut up.
I didn't have access to a computer this weekend, so sorry for my failure to respond until now. Wow, I didn't envision setting off this type of reaction with my post. I assume Jim has not ever thrown out there what might be behind these lyrics. I thought maybe he had made some comments, as he had with "Gideon", that gave some idea to the "Steam Engine" lyrics.
As for my opinion, I'm still trying to piece that together. I guess what sparked my question was listening to Jim's interview at the end of ACL about spirituality. I am trying to apply that to this song. But, Jim was very very vague in that interview also. Religion is such a heated discussion, that I think most artists are afraid to clearly state where they stand on the topic. I also think that some artists are still trying to figure it out for themselves. I have a great deal of respect for Sufjan Stevens for that reason. He knows that many of the fans on the indie scene would dislike his religious stance, but he still throws himself out there and wins over the fans with his music. He is a rare breed.
Jim commented on this songs origination at a show I saw at the fillmore in '04.
He said that while he was writing it he envisioned david bowe in a canoe traveling around in the clouds.
I don't know if that helps with interpretation but it is interesting
My favorite song. Glad to see a discussion.
I love the 15 minute version that I have from Toronto 5-18-04. 15 minutes!!!!!
But not as much as the Rolling Stone solo acoustic version. Wow.
brain melts in the twilight is my personal favorite line
I always thought that jebus saved him somehow or at least showed him the way.
to anyone who wondered
what old jebus meant to me
..................................
the fact that my heart's beating
is all the proof you need
Question, this may be obviuos, but what does Jim start singing over and over again after this final lyric? Sounds kind of like think about it but I know that's not right. Anyone's thoughts?
Where can I download this acoustic version from rolling stone?
QuoteQuestion, this may be obviuos, but what does Jim start singing over and over again after this final lyric? Sounds kind of like think about it but I know that's not right. Anyone's thoughts?
He is saying
Be in Greenock...that's where James Watt invented the steam engine.
ahem...from Wikipedia:
QuoteThe first steam device, the aeolipile, was invented by Hero of Alexandria, a Greek, in the 1st century AD, but used only as a toy. Incidentally, 700 years earlier in Corinth, Greece, rail tracks were invented; however the Greeks never thought of putting the two together.
In 1663, Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquess of Worcester published designs for, and may have installed, a steam-powered engine for pumping water at Vauxhall House. Denis Papin, a French physicist, built a working model of a steam engine in about 1687 --with the help of Leibniz--, a paddle steam boat and is credited with a number of significant gadgets such as the safety valve. Sir Samuel Morland also developed ideas for a steam engine during the same period, he built a number of steam-engine pumps for Louis XIV in the 1680s. Early industrial steam engines were designed by Thomas Savery (The "fire-engine", 1698) and Thomas Newcomen (1712). Humphrey Gainsborough produced a model condensing steam engine in the 1760s, which he showed to James Watt. In 1769 Watt patented improvements to the Newcomen engine that made it much more fuel efficient, which finally led to the general acceptance and use of steam power.
So really he's saying "aeolipile" ;)