Prog's Most Controversial Lyricist

I would pick Ian Anderson, especially in the early years, with his views on religion and British society. in the later years he change a little, not his way of thinking, but the way he expresses his opinions.

Peter Hammill. I understand from a philosophical perspective, that a lyricist can only write 'poetry' from his own experience, but I swear this is all that Peter does! He talks all the time, and never about in anything in particular. In this respect, I have to say he's so unrelatable in what he says, other than by intangible emotions, and such.

Jim Garten wrote: La Villa Strangiato

And what lyrics did he write for that? 

Ambient Hurricanes wrote: HarbouringTheSoul wrote: Those are some good points, but I think the problem isn't so much that he's being "self-consciously intelligent", but rather that his lyrics try to be intelligent but really aren't. The best explanation I've seen of what's wrong with Peart's lyrics is by John McFerrin: John McFerrin wrote: A lot of rock lyricists choose to write about "shallow" things in a dumb way; a lot of great lyricists write about "shallow" things in an intelligent way; a select few have the ability to write about "deep" things in an intelligent way. Simply put, Neil Peart routinely committed the cardinal sin of writing about "deep" things in some of the dumbest ways imaginable. [...] a lot of his lyrics read as Western Philosophy and the Human Condition for Dummies [...] Too often, even in a lot of songs where I like his lyrics, I feel like I'm listening to the poetry of a high school Freshman who just bought The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy and a thesaurus [...]   I see how you could say this about Peart's early lyrics, but I can't understand how this would describe the majority of his work from the 80's and on.  I can name a few songs that I feel this way about (Freewill and Bravest Face to name a couple) but I think that, by and large, most of his post-70's lyrics are quite insightful, such as Limelight, Distant Early Warning, Open Secrets, Cold Fire, War Paint, Scars (especially Scars), Halo Effect, How it Is...

Actually, I absolutely agree with you. My problems are almost exclusively with his 70s output. His lyrics from the 80s onward don't always make for the greatest poetry, but for the most part he stopped writing about topics that make him look like a fool.

^All good to me.

CordofLifeA11 wrote: Peter Hammill. I understand from a philosophical perspective, that a lyricist can only write 'poetry' from his own experience, but I swear this is all that Peter does! He talks all the time, and never about in anything in particular. In this respect, I have to say he's so unrelatable in what he says, other than by intangible emotions, and such.

Thanks ... I am not sure that you/we/I can compare Peter's vocals to almost all of these mentioned here, which are ... for all intents and purposes, just pop music! There are very few examples in these mentioned in this whole post that deserve the mention as "literature" or "poetry" ... and treated as such. They are just "lyrics" ... and rock music "lyrics" at that, which means that are even less meaningful! In general, quoting Ayn Rand, is no different than JP Sartre, of Novalis, or Schopenhauer or Bertrand Russell!

Another way to approach the problem with Neil Peart's lyrics is to think about one of the basic "rules" that pop up in creative writing classes: show don't tell (or, as Henry James put it, "Dramatize! Dramatize!").  I don't think the issue is with the content of the lyrics, but with how he expresses the ideas.  Rather than create a dramatic situation in which ideas are brought to life, in the clunkiest moments the lines are presented all too literally, reading like cod philosophy notes.  ("Free Will" is the ultimate example of this; I have a friend who is a professor of philosophy who just cringes and cringes at the thought of those lyrics.)  But he has been far less guilty of this kind of thing on the two most recent albums.

man I love The Trees.

In my opinion, that is exactly what makes Jon Anderson such a fantastic lyricist (oh, and that voice). His ideas are somewhat window-dressed in abstract language but it paints such colourful pictures, doesn't it? He's not always talking about nothing in particular, i.e. "A seasoned witch could call you from the depths of your disgrace and re-arrange your liver to the solid mental place" I find it all very thought-evoking and brilliant.

Dayvenkirq wrote: HarbouringTheSoul wrote: kevin4peace wrote: <span ="apple-style-span"="" style="font-family: Arial; line-height: normal; font-size: 13px; "></span><span ="apple-style-span"="" style="font-family: Arial; line-height: normal; font-size: 13px; ">There are some classic songs and King Crimson is one of my favourite bands, but theres no denying that Sinfield could go a bit over board sometimes.</span> Haha yes, "stake a lizard by the throat" and such.  +1 on Sinfield. Some sexist implications and open statements bug me on some really good tracks:  "All you know of the girls of the road, Oh, like apples we stole in our youth." "I smiled and just unzipped her".   ...

What are you talking about?! I love those lines!! I guess its the Zappa freak in me.