Was Pete Sinfield essential for King Crimson?

Hi,

Not sure I would say "surrealistic" since so many of the images were REAL ... surrealism tends to make fun of the reality of things with images that ask questions about how/what you see. The IRA was not exactly throwing donkeys on pianos! Or VietNam!

Starshiper wrote: ... Without Sinfield's foresightedness, it is absolutely conceivable that the experimental tendencies of Fripp might never have found full scope. Sinfield's lyrical content was a catalyst for the musical experimentation of Fripp. This interaction between word and sound was important in setting King Crimson apart as a leading band among the innovators within the original progressive rock movement in the late 1960s and early 1970s. ...

RF, already at that time was studying Gurdjieff and some of the things inside. I think (I THINK) that the thought/idea of having some real lyrics/poetry instead of just some funky/funny/weird stuff as was the case in radio at the time, would make it better. Not to mention that a lot of the radio stuff IGNORED the news and the events, although we can't say that with the advent of VietNam, but it helped bring about the "truth" about a lot of the images that the news media was hiding from the public ... which a lot of folks took to heart and spoke out.

ITCOTCK is a perfect snap shot of the time and place, in several aspects, and I think it was an eye opener when it came to some of the lyrics, although there were many in the USA already on that bandwagon.

The innovation part I like, and think it is true, but I think that RF and the rest of the band, was able to see something that could be done within the context of a song, instead of just some poppy idea ... and I think that is what creativity is about, rather than just be topical.

The only sad thing is that the rock media, a bit later, decided that "reality" was not what rock music was about, and here came the "fantasy" and the "crap", though some of it had "meaning", but I think that the fact that it was not direct and pointed straight at the source, was the part that made it ... weak for me. Example: Genesis ... while I like them, they were only "real" (and not imaginary) on TLLDOB ... how much of this took place because the English authorities were putting their foot down? Not sure, but they had the ability to tell/shut some studios to prevent recording by someone with a big mouth! 

Starshiper wrote: ... with the OP premise on this: perhaps Fripp's explorations would stand to be less compelling in the absence of Sinfield's input. ...

RF has never really discussed that. I do think that this was a much more "group" effort, than otherwise. I don't know the words would have stood out without the music making adjustments to it, or otherwise ... I do think that it was the sense of the words that gave KC a much stronger desire to do something worthwhile .... which we/they could not possibly measure ... but it worked out really well, although in Madison, some radio folks did not like the 20th Century Schizoid Man at all, and instead played Epitaph, which was NOT exactly well received by many, in Dane County (Madison) who had several kids drafted and sent to VietNam ... and now you can see how some folks were scared some ... and there were a lot of demonstrations around the USA that some places did not want their kids sent to VietNam, which was a problem the media tended to not discuss, probably with some directives from the White House.

The only sad thing, is that, TODAY, the Internet does not exactly like poetry or artistic anything, and a band like KC would likely not get enough attention today ... as much as we appreciate the work, when we look at the listings of "top this" or "top that", not enough of the bands listed have the same/similar artistic idea or design ... and now we all go look for Metallica's next album! (... so to speak ...).  

SIDE NOTE: One of the issues with creating apiece is do the words come first, or the music ... IF THE WORDS come first, you can illustrate the words better, but too much of pop/rock music is not about the words at all, but the riff, otherwise the guitar solo would make no sense! The wording, or lyrics, would define the expression, and you can really see this in Mick Jaegger, that has been very good in interpreting the words in a lot of their work, although 50+ years later we don't even think or worry about what Mick is saying or singing about ... his time is gone, I guess, but the expression came from film and theater, not rock music! And it's not like Mick was not aware of both ... even his girlfriend was doing West End, for crying out loud ... and he would not see it or ignore it? I don't think so ... I'm pretty sure that Mick was making sure that the words stood out, which he did before, but now it's like ... it was visible!

Hi,

I think he does, or it wouldn't be there. I think his issue might be when the lyrics get beyond a certain point that it becomes really difficult to "interpret" musically, and this is an issue when things are not "real" and lyrics enter a realm of let's make believe, and/or ... fly along ... now the interpretation, musically might be a bit more difficult, but in all examples, and changes, RF has made his way through it just fine, and many times, creating some really neat bits and pieces.

To rock music, it seems like "lyrics" are important to let us know what it is all about ... however, this is a harsh illusion for an audience, who might not relate to the lyrics as expressed, or designed, and this part is the difficult area to work on and explain!