Jump to content

What's your unpopular GN'R opinion?


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

And it is patently false, as someone else implied, that Axl, at the time of writing the song, was focused on happy childhood memories. Axl has never been focused on that, as far as I know. 

To me, the lyrics of the song are enough evidence that at least for a moment there he was focused on happy childhood memories. But since you somehow interpret it to be about child abuse, you obviously don't agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I believe the phrase I used was 'not a far cry from' i.e. they are in the same ballpark, close enough, not a great deal in it...even with the addition of childhood reminiscences, thats not sufficient, to my mind, to elevate one into a whole other category of artistic merit.  I really don't care to argue degrees within that framework regarding more or less sappy, its just a fools errand, who decides that, how do you quantify such things, its why my initial observation was deliberately imprecise, because thats the extent of the comment I wish to make over it, I really don't care about this whole Axl vs Izzy celebrity deathmatch thing.  Remember my position throughout this debate and indeed prior to it is that rock lyrics are generally not very substantial in terms of poetic merit anyway.

If any of yous think that there is a world of difference between SCOM and say Baby Love by The Supremes or whatever Izzy song then thrash it out, be my guest, you can argue yourself til you're blue in the face about the difference between SCOM and Think About You, knock yourself out :lol:

I get that, but I asked yesterday if you at least agreed with me that SCOM is less sappy and more complex than those Izzy love songs, and you said: ''no'', hence why I thought you were trolling. That's all, it was a very simple question. Because it's not a question of subjectivity. They are both sappy, most love songs are, and that's fine... sappy has become a dirty word apparently, but it shouldn't, there's nothing wrong with sappy lyrics, movies, etc. 

But if you put both lyric sheets next to each other, one that is very straight forward and uses all the cliché words one would expect in a sappy love song, and one that doesn't do that and explores more than just straight forward love lyrics, then it's odd to give a firm ''no'' to my initial question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

To me, the lyrics of the song are enough evidence that at least for a moment there he was focused on happy childhood memories. But since you somehow interpret it to be about child abuse, you obviously don't agree.

Careful fella, you're fuckin' with the wrong bull :lol:  Before you know it you'll be dragged into Soulies groundhog day vortex :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

To me, the lyrics of the song are enough evidence that at least for a moment there he was focused on happy childhood memories. But since you somehow interpret it to be about child abuse, you obviously don't agree.

No, as I said in an earlier post, the first verse seems to point to happy memories as well, and Axl has said that memory about looking at the blues skies is one of his very earliest memories. But then the lyrics take an ominous turn...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, EvanG said:

I get that, but I asked yesterday if you at least agreed with me that SCOM is less sappy and more complex than those Izzy love songs, and you said: ''no'', hence why I thought you were trolling. That's all, it was a very simple question. Because it's not a question of subjectivity. They are both sappy, most love songs are, and that's fine... sappy has become a dirty word apparently, but it shouldn't, there's nothing wrong with sappy lyrics, movies, etc. 

But if you put both lyric sheets next to each other, one that is very straight forward and uses all the cliché words one would expect in a sappy love song, and one that doesn't do that and explores more than just straight forward love lyrics, then it's odd to give a firm ''no'' to my initial question. 

Well I was giving a simple answer to that simple question, I didn't think it required me dragging the two sets of lyric sheets out and doing and in depth investigation over the minutia of the lyrics to give one a grade above the other or perhaps declare a draw :lol: 

14 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

But then the lyrics take an ominous turn...

DUN DUN DAH! :lol:  Sweet Child O Mine, GnRs answer to Midnight Rambler :lol:

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Len Cnut said:

Well I was giving a simple answer to that simple question, I didn't think it required me dragging the two sets of lyric sheets out and doing and in depth investigation over the minutia of the lyrics to give one a great above the other or perhaps declare a draw :lol: 

This is a GnR forum where almost nothing new ever happens with this band that is worth talking about, seeing as I don't care about their social media updates or other trivia stuff. This is all I have dammit.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I find the lyrics to SCOM beautiful, with a touch of innocence that is shocking for anyone who owns the AFD album. Because you have those lyrics and you also have the "turn around bitch, I've got an use for you" :confused:

I like these lyrics not because they are the art of a super poet but because they sound honest and sincere. The "Sweet Child" does exist, she does have blue eyes and her hair is beautiful. She is not the invention of a poetic mind, she's a real human being called Erin Everly and I think Axl did a great job at describing her, both physically and emotionally.

Not sure what's the sappy thing about it.... I mean, why can't a man love a woman and express it with words of love and affection? :question: 

Maybe if I didn't know that these lyrics are about Erin, I'd find it a sappy song. For me, the lyrics take a whole different meaning when you know they are inspired by a real person and a real relationship.

It's hard to say what he means in the lines where he talks about thunders and rain. It could be a literal thing and it could be something metaphoric as well. If we analyze the lyrics, it begins saying that her smile reminds him of childhood memories where everything was as fresh as the bright blue sky. So, it's not all so bad in childhood. Then he talks about her hair, her eyes, also implies that those eyes think of "rain" and he hates to see the pain in them, which means that he's talking about Erin's life too.

IMO, he mixes feelings of love for this girl with memories from his childhood but also connected with the troubled relationship he has with her and their troubled lives. Because Erin also has a history of a complicated childhood.

 

  • Like 3
  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, killuridols said:

Personally, I find the lyrics to SCOM beautiful, with a touch of innocence that is shocking for anyone who owns the AFD album. Because you have those lyrics and you also have the "turn around bitch, I've got an use for you" :confused:

I like these lyrics not because they are the art of a super poet but because they sound honest and sincere. The "Sweet Child" does exist, she does have blue eyes and her hair is beautiful. She is not the invention of a poetic mind, she's a real human being called Erin Everly and I think Axl did a great job at describing her, both physically and emotionally.

Not sure what's the sappy thing about it.... I mean, why can't a man love a woman and express it with words of love and affection? :question: 

Maybe if I didn't know that these lyrics are about Erin, I'd find it a sappy song. For me, the lyrics take a whole different meaning when you know they are inspired by a real person and a real relationship.

It's hard to say what he means in the lines where he talks about thunders and rain. It could be a literal thing and it could be something metaphoric as well. If we analyze the lyrics, it begins saying that her smile reminds him of childhood memories where everything was as fresh as the bright blue sky. So, it's not all so bad in childhood. Then he talks about her hair, her eyes, also implies that those eyes think of "rain" and he hates to see the pain in them, which means that he's talking about Erin's life too.

IMO, he mixes feelings of love for this girl with memories from his childhood but also connected with the troubled relationship he has with her and their troubled lives. Because Erin also has a history of a complicated childhood.

 

Yes, I agree with you in regards to the verse about Erin's eyes and her troubled history. 

I would argue that he sees herself in her eyes, and that when he sees her pain he is reminiscent about his own pain. 

Just now, Len Cnut said:

If I were to cite any aspect of it as reflective of a greater (and i use that term loosely) depth it would be the 'where do we go now?' outro. 

The problem with that is that that part was tacked on from something Axl said when recording the song and it has nothing to do with the overall lyrics. Perhaps Axl thought it would fit with the lyrics, but it could just as well be that he liked how it sounded more than how it fitted the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Yes, I agree with you in regards to the verse about Erin's eyes and her troubled history. 

I would argue that he sees herself in her eyes, and that when he sees her pain he is reminiscent about his own pain. 

The problem with that is that that part was tacked on from something Axl said when recording the song and it has nothing to do with the overall lyrics. Perhaps Axl thought it would fit with the lyrics, but it could just as well be that he liked how it sounded more than how it fitted the story.

Its also plaguarized from the song Where Do We Go From Here by Jimmy Walker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, EvanG said:

When you're writing a song together in a band you often say ''ok, where do we go now, how do we end this song or what's next'' and they liked that line, so they threw it in.

Its very similar to the backing vocals on a certain part of the aforementioned Jimmy Walker song, its featured on the soundtrack to the movie Vanishing Point, which its reasonable to state Axl had seen, being as how he quotes it extensively at the end of the song Breakdown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Yes, I agree with you in regards to the verse about Erin's eyes and her troubled history. 

I would argue that he sees herself in her eyes, and that when he sees her pain he is reminiscent about his own pain. 

:shrugs:

Everything's up to interpretation, that line too. I guess we understand things in a way where they connect with ourselves too. I feel for Erin much more than for Axl, so I interpret the line as he is talking about her pain.

You always connect more with Axl's feelings, that's why you interpret it as he's talking about his own pain.

It will be debatable until Axl gives an explanation of it :P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, killuridols said:

It will be debatable until Axl gives an explanation of it :P

 

Axl will just do what we did and make that shit up :lol:  Thats the brilliant part about being a rockstar, if you keep your mouth shut fans will do the work for you and you can just pick the best one years later :lol:

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/03/2019 at 9:03 AM, Len Cnut said:

I've said before I always liked the possibilities of that line up, the Bucket, Finck, Brain, Tommy, Fortus one, they reminded me of like Parliment Funkadelic, I just wish the music they ended up making had been worthy of their individual talents.  They could've made some wild Bill Laswell Bootsy Collins crazy fuckin' music, instead they ended up making a heavily pro-tooled Axl solo album.

I don't personally get why people prefer the 2002 line-up over the 2006 one, as I think Ron was a more talented, more rock n' roll, more charismatic and relatable guitarist, that Axl's voice and overall performance were on another level entirely, also that the band had had more time playing and rehearsing together in general, so there was a lot more chemistry within the line-up as a whole. I think that version of the band had amazing potential and I'm still kinda angry that they never got to show that and came to such an ignominious end, just being lazily replaced with the crowd-pleasing old guard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Graeme said:

I don't personally get why people prefer the 2002 line-up over the 2006 one, as I think Ron was a more talented, more rock n' roll, more charismatic and relatable guitarist, that Axl's voice and overall performance were on another level entirely, also that the band had had more time playing and rehearsing together in general, so there was a lot more chemistry within the line-up as a whole. I think that version of the band had amazing potential and I'm still kinda angry that they never got to show that and came to such an ignominious end, just being lazily replaced with the crowd-pleasing old guard.

I never really much got into Bumble.  I mean its obvious that he was a prodigious talent but there was nothing in what he did that prompted me to explore him further whereas Bucket, the whole package kinda intrigued me a bit, got me to explore his work a little, I actually really liked The Deli Creeps stuff, plus there's a kinda danceable funky aspect to what he does which is right up my street.  Also, after Bucket, the addition of Bumble seemed a little unispired, like, y'know, ANOTHER gimmicky guitarist, though its unfair to call either of them that because they are both extremely talented.  I even got a Bucket album I think, he seems to me to be someone who could have really flourished in GnR or even in a context with someone like The Chili Peppers.  But I guess people choose their own musical direction.  I'll say this for Bumble though, he was a lovely bloke and I thought it was really lame of people to go 'oh he don't fit the image' cuz he don't have the personality of a fuckin' bellend.  Any musician that got time for the fans like he had I got a lot of time for, seemed a top lad, I don't require people to be fuckin' arseholes for me to like em, quite frankly it tends to put me off more than anything. 

Edited by Len Cnut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Graeme said:

I don't personally get why people prefer the 2002 line-up over the 2006 one, as I think Ron was a more talented, more rock n' roll, more charismatic and relatable guitarist

I always found Bucket more interesting than Bumble. I never really connected with Bumble's playing. A miraculously gifted guitar player, no doubt, but without any sort of signature playing style that I connected to, except that he tried to cram too many notes into his solos. You can recognize Bucket and Slash from their playing, not so much Bumble. Maybe the curse of being too good and able to play anything? Bumble really plays anything and hence, to me at last, fails at creating something that is undeniably him. with Bucket there are certain phrasings that tend to pop up and his use of killswitch.  And personality wise, Bumble always came across as too much trying to fit in, trying to be what was expected of him, rather than just being himself. He came across as somewhat of a chameleon, both in playing and image. Whereas Bucket was just Bucket, warts and all. Bumble was more posing, with his broad leg posture and facial grimaces as he pitch perfect copied Slash's solos, being the rawk guy. But he is a genuinely great guy and as far as relationship with fans go and dedication to the band, Bumble was the best. A true professional.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I disagree with you all. I thought things like the Rock Am Ring Nightrain solo where Ron was just throwing everything at it were jawdropping, and there were a lot of solos like that in his first year in the band where you had this guy who could do it all getting to treat these classic rock songs like a blank canvas and just go wild (as well as replicate the records note for note when he wanted to). I don't know, maybe I like musicians to seem a bit more human and a bit less theatrical, I found Bucket tough to relate to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just played a bunch of shows though!

- The 1985-1993 line-ups wrote and recorded four albums of original material.

- The 1998-2002 line-ups wrote and recorded (a fair bit of) Chinese Democracy, and a bunch of other songs if we believe the rumours.

All the 2006 band did was do a bunch of shows, playing largely material from the earliest of the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Graeme said:

Nah, I disagree with you all. I thought things like the Rock Am Ring Nightrain solo where Ron was just throwing everything at it were jawdropping, and there were a lot of solos like that in his first year in the band where you had this guy who could do it all getting to treat these classic rock songs like a blank canvas and just go wild (as well as replicate the records note for note when he wanted to). I don't know, maybe I like musicians to seem a bit more human and a bit less theatrical, I found Bucket tough to relate to.

I like you for liking Bumblefoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...