Amadd wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 11:32pm:

At the risk of going off-topic...

Like many of Simon's lyrics these ones are vignettes... a stream of thought... of experiences and ideas latched together without any necessary causal link... like the Beatles' 'A Day in the Life'. According to Simon, he arrived at a friend's house with a partner and was greeted by someone who did not recognise them and introduced them as 'Betty and Al'.

But, yes, you could say its similar to a sudden moment of insight of a drunk... Who, in that moment, realises he's fated to be, say, 'a cartoon in a cartoon graveyard'.

I don't think our behaviour is predetermined in the same way as that of an eagle or a snake. (take your pick)

We have the ability to program our own behaviour at every single moment of our lives. We can all choose our own destiny.  Obviously we have an instinctive component in our behaviour, but our brains set us apart from any other species by that ability to self program and be aware of our own  sentience. We are as complex as we choose to be. 

I'm not usually up this late. The gales and torrential winds are keeping me awake.

Amadd wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

I think we've stumbled onto a secular equivalent of biblical interpretation.

We read into lyrics exactly what we want to read. And usually with lyrics that are racey or metaphysical that means drugs or alcohol - whether the lyricist agrees or not. This is something that always amused John Lennon. Even when he explained his lyrics, the response he received was often something like 'Well, that's all very well, John, but what you really meant by semolina pilchard was....".

I see a parallel between our exchange and Yadda's biblical interpretations...

Take 'Call Me Al'...

I have counted nearly a dozen interpretations of this song's lyrics so far (and I'm sure there's more)... Mostly opinions, but also two (differing) that the respective authors claim are quoted from Simon, verbatim.

If the world can't agree on a singular meaning for a 3 stanza song (ironically even with the author 'in the house' alive and well)... What hope for agreement on the meaning of verses lifted from the great Talmudic, Biblical, Koranic, Buddhist, Hindu, [...] 'grand narratives'?

While there has always been the problem of getting an exact interpretation of a text, the postmodern deconstructionists took this to a new level.

Take this gem from Derrida:

Quote:


It's all about "style" eh.
Called me old fashioned, but the point of writing something is to communicate a set of thoughts or ideas.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 11:11am:


Often ideas and thoughts become "fixed" and therefore have a "strict" meaning. But, obviously, ideas and thoughts are always being reinterpreted and redefined. I think we just need to be aware of when someone uses the conventional use of a term and when someone is redefining it for another end.

muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:


I must admit that I was very surprised at the explanation of why Dawkins is more prone to cancer from smoking, but in reality, there aren't too many people I know (including myself) who change their behaviour to any great extent through conscious thought alone. And if we do, was that conscious thought also a part of a behavioural pattern?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 5:34pm:


Don't know. It depends on the context I suppose.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Maybe, but the line in that song which immediately comes to mind for me is "he ducked back down the alley way with some rolly polly little bat-faced girl".
The song itself doesn't have an anxious feel to it.