This is really tough ... I tend to the odd stuff and more experimental, and in that material, the "lyrics" are often a joke, and just a bunch of letters and reminds me of Eno/DBowie way back when putting up what we call 52 pickup ... throwing the card deck up in the air and where it lands, so it is!!! ... and there were a lot of lyrics done by many folks that defy any ideas. I always loved that stuff, because we were all way too inclined to follow the religiosity in the book for its "meaning" ... with total disregard to the fact that these were translations that had been corrupted for years to create an imaginary world for us to believe in ... and guess what is happening here?

I'm not sure that there is/are enough "poets" out there that write stuff and all of it is special ... I'm partial to folks like Roy Harper, where the wording is special a lot of the time ... but that is not something that is appreciated by people that think "meaning" is important ... in the end, it isn't, I never thought ... but a well placed lyric or set of words will always stand up ... and it all kinda becomes a sort of Prufrock ... women, come and go thinking of Michelangelo ... and we do the same thing!

Some think that Peter Hammill is another one way out there ... but his ability is endless and his images are well done, however personal ... genuflection in church ... so to speak ... and some folks don't like it and don't think of it as poetry, or lyrics. Bob Dylan is another ... I think he cares more for the poetry side of it than he does the meaning, knowing that tomorrow he is going to say and sing it differently ... the same song!

Likewise, how do we explain that folks loved Can with Damo, and he had no lyrics ... he was not about lyrics per se ... but the sounds and feelings that came through added something to the music that was neat. BUT, we forget that at the time, there was a HUGE theatrical element experimenting with sound and voice in the theater, and how far to take it ... to make it "real", if possible. But for that to happen we had to throw away the ideas about "meaning", and that is something that we feel we need, and in reality, we don't. We have enough for ourselves in our lives as it is.

Hi,

I'm not sure that you are getting the gist of what I'm saying.

There is no such thing as good or bad in lyrics, though we might think that some things don't seem right ... any actor KNOWS that one word can be said in 100 different ways, and something written this way or that would likely sound great sung this way, and horrible that way and we would say the lyrics were bad.

And these days, with the Internet, it is even "worse" ... in earlier days we had what was thought of as education, and then literature, and since then it's like ... it doesn't matter ... it's just weird to think that Neal Morse or anyone listed is about bad prog lyrics ... they would not be doing their work if they did not believe in what they do and how.

And "prog" is not the worst offender, if there is such a thing ... I would imagine that yummy yummy I got love in my tummy is really bad ... and almost 60 years old, too! Heck some folks find Chuck Berry lyrics offensive, though you're going to say it's not prog.

BTW In general I'm against negative threads. They are divisive and hopefully this will be shut down.

Come on, Mosh -- whatever your "gist" is, I would suggest that you don't even believe in this simplistic notion. There are certainly good and bad lyrics (hell, even horrifically awful lyrics), just as there are good, great and utterly trash novels -- or plays, for that matter.  Given your dilettantish adherence to high-art principles, I find your statement at odds with your constant bashing of music you deem inferior. It seems to be downright hypocritical.  

It's a real shame that some of you can only imagine that this is all some idealistic concept of mine about high-art, or better yet ... internet art!

For the longest time, up until the Internet age not everything was "known" and there seemed to be a distinction between the artistic stuff (as defined by academia more or less) and the rest ... today, there is no such thing, and honestly, I'm glad of it ... but some folks still go around thinking that the "high art" stuff is not as important as some of the other crap ... I'm don't think of it that way ... what might be considered "high art" by some of the folks here, is not me!

Lyrics, like a lot of literature, are gloriously illusive ... and folks here are not happy with someone saying something they do not agree with because it is not the popular ash kissing sentiment ... not to mention that tomorrow's expression will be totally different and a new "art" form. One could even suggest some of these folks are experimenting with words to add to their music in some cases.

You are the most illusive though, despite your long posts. 

Can you be on topic for once and be on point?! 

Foolish?!  Bad lyrics can ruin the listening experience no matter the genre. it's no different with prog. 

And Yes lyrics are problematic, half of the time people don't know what they mean . Even the lyrics above fall in this category. 

A movement is accomplished in six stages

and the seventh brings return

seven is the number of the young light

it falls when darkness is increased by one

It might be as uncomprehensible as some of Jon's lyrics, until you realize that Syd is talking about the "I Ching"

You don't have to get all sarcastic and rude because someone disagrees with you. 

I agree with hrychu here, i think the Madrigal lyrics are not good. 

I don't know who wrote Greg or ELP's lyrics before Pete Sinfield arrived, but in general, him, Keith Reid (Procol), Pete Brown (Cream, and J Bruce) or Palmer James (Crimson, Supertramp & Emergency) had obscure poetry talents, which I won't condemn on the account that it doesn't make sense to me.