A critical view on the Commentaries and forum contributions.

Forostar

Ancient Mariner
A critical view on the Commentaries and forum contributions : The more is not always the better


This might be a controversial topic and I bet quite some people might not like the following words.

I don't mean to offend you LooseCannon. But your view on the song The Longest Day has more to do with showing your knowledge of the subject than with interpretation of Bruce's lyrics. To zoom in on every lyric line I find a bit exagerated.

Maybe my words will also not be appreciated by Maverick, but I hope you both just take the following as my personal opinion.:

The commentaries and the analyses are getting too long. In this world of easy access to information we can do with some help on the subject, and let the rest find out by ourselves. The writings are not about the songs anymore, they are about the subjects. I miss the relation between the band, the music and the subject.

It's almost becoming some kind of dogma (not very different from church) when we realize we do not look up anyhing ourselves anymore and we do not need to learn anything ourselves anymore and most important of all: there is hardly room for own interpretation anymore.

Let's be honest:
How much room is left for own interpretation on the lyrics of The Longest Day, after reading LC's post ?

Another thing that bothers me is that the balance between lyrics vs music is heading to a 90% : 10% on this forum.

Again, please don't feel offended:
This has to do with my own view on and passion with music. Yes: music. Something which Maiden is about actually.

So please continue with the ways you are dealing if you please, I have had this on my mind for a long time and it had to get out someday.

Greets
Forostar

p.s. I thought about posting this to Maverick and LC only, but I am still curious to read people's reactions. I might learn from it and get a new interpretation on the matter ! ;)
 
Just briefly, before all of the others start off: I think that music is equally important and can ignite similar passions as poetry/lyrics. I like to see things in their complexity.

I agree that some rants are a bit too long, as I prefer sparse language where much is left to imagination and your own ability to make connections.

But the name of the game is still Commentary, and luckily, Maiden are one of the bands who, if you are willing, can really make you think. That being also the aim of the IMC, as I humbly suppose.
 
I have to admit that I can also be pretty fanatic when it comes to analyzing Maiden's music. I might not be much different, indeed.
 
While I completely agree that Maiden is essentially about the music, the lyric are in my view extremely important too. As Serratia pointed out very rightly, it is about commenting the lyrics and providing some culture to a few Maiden fans who may otherwise overlook the messages contained in most of the songs.

Many of my visitors write to me to express their gratitude towards the commentaries that help them understand the songs better and incite them to look into some relevant literature. I couldn't be more happy when I receive emails like that (well, I could, but that's a different story!  :innocent:).

So, Forostar, I am glad that you speak your mind and express your concerns, thus allowing me to express my views too. Those who want to know more about my motivations to write the commentaries can read (or re-read) my introduction. I hope that I make myself clear in this little text.

As for the music, I could have written more about it had I been a musician. I simply leave it to people like SinisterMinisterX or Lib, who are more competent than me in this field. As some of you may know, I'm not a musician... I'm a bloody drummer!  :p
 
Maverick said:
I simply leave it to people like SinisterMinisterX or Lib, who are more competent than me in this field. As some of you may know, I'm not a musician... I'm a bloody drummer!   :p

Hahaha, I was a bloody drummer myself as well, you know? Didn't touch the sticks in years though. ;)

Well, from now on I will try to emphasis more on the music myself. First thing I did was something with FTGGOG.
 
This seems to be the right place to mention the following. Unfortunately due to lack of sleep I am not able to formulate and articulate most of my complaints on the new AMOLAD commentary, but this is rather easy:

Mav, you mention in a few songs the Torah as being separate from the Old Testament (you referred to it as the ANCIENT Testament). Now this may just be playing with words, catagorizing, but to religious leaders/people and scholars... it matters. The Old Testament IS the Torah known in secular academic circles as "The Hebrew Bible". I say this because on another song (again, when I get enough sleep I will be more precise with my argument and mention actual songs) you mention the fear of God  and quote The Psalms and say that it is also found in the Torah... Psalms are in the Torah... Old Testament... Hebrew Bible... etc.

And quickly because again this is rather simple to put forth, you have fallen into the trap of misinterpretation. "Fear of God" doesn't mean to be scared shitless of God, rather RESPECT him, because after all you do fear (as in scared) to some extent people you respect, but you don't respect them because you fear them, you fear them because you respect them, because you care about their opinions and authority and in a way you don't want to dissapoint them (parents being a good example).  Anywho... more later.
 
I must agree that the commentaries are getting quite long. It would be helpful to have some sort of summary (or introduction - depends on a placement :) of the song and the extended version, both visibly marked. Sometimes people (probably those interested in short review helping them buying the album) prefer shorter information :)

Oh and one mistake in 'A Matter of Life and Death' commentary: The box noting the crusades (see The Pilgrim) is partially invisible when displayed on shorter screen (try to resize the window to se the effect). I hope Maverick will read this one.
 
Personally I love the way the commentary is written.  I have learned a lot of things besides the meaning of the songs.  Things I would probably never learn.  But it seems that you people think the AMOLAD commentary to be too long?  It surprised me actually to see it wasn't.  And I must say I felt a little dissapointed that the lyrics weren't thouroughly interpreted (as compared to other albums).  I know it's none of my business,  we're talking about a lot of work here,  I just think that after the 111 comemenatry Mav didn't pay as much attention.  Still,  the commentary was really good,  and I enjoyed reading it.  Keep  the good work Mav  :ok: :bigsmile:
 
I'm with Mav on this one. Firstly, what makes the commentary unique and an online refference point is the analysis of the songs' lyrics on the commentary pages and the forums. In no other forum does this feverent discussion on lyric backround and meanings take place, and it's a process that has coughed up a great deal of backround info. Understanding the lyrics, for me, is understanding alot about what the band is about. There are many other places for having subjective music appreciation/critisism discussion, the commentary is a heaven for those who like to read between the lines though.

Also, it's true that the commentaries have been getting longer, but in no case do they consist (or claim to) a complete source of info for the encyclopedic knowledge analized within. They are just a spark of knowledge and each reader can decide for himself if he wants to look further into each subject. Even though much info on the commentary articles is not linked to directly in the redspective song lyrics, it is essential for understanding the essence of each song...
 
gor said:
I'm with Mav on this one. Firstly, what makes the commentary unique and an online refference point is the analysis of the songs' lyrics on the commentary pages and the forums. In no other forum does this feverent discussion on lyric backround and meanings take place, and it's a process that has coughed up a great deal of backround info. Understanding the lyrics, for me, is understanding alot about what the band is about. There are many other places for having subjective music appreciation/critisism discussion, the commentary is a heaven for those who like to read between the lines though.

Also, it's true that the commentaries have been getting longer, but in no case do they consist (or claim to) a complete source of info for the encyclopedic knowledge analized within. They are just a spark of knowledge and each reader can decide for himself if he wants to look further into each subject. Even though much info on the commentary articles is not linked to directly in the redspective song lyrics, it is essential for understanding the essence of each song...

In the end this is not a matter of life and death but a matter of opinion, but still:

The Commenty is focussed on the lyrics of the songs. I'd love to read more about the songs themselves. If only lyrics are important, then we might just as well think that the Commentary is about Rush, The Beatles or Pink Floyd.
To the lyric-loving readers I also say: Let's not forget that these songs are Iron Maiden songs. Let's not make the inspiration more important that the creation itself.

Please don't misunderstand me, my criticism is not about the entire site. Maverick is doing a lot to make the rest of the site bigger and broader. Look at the Toursection, the Bootlegs etc etc etc. Excellent job !
 
Well, I already explained that I wasn't a musician, and that focussing on the music was therefore a bit more difficult for me. Besides, the way you feel the music is quite subjective and everyone has different reactions to it.

Now, with the lyrics, you have a concrete starting point to try and introduce people to more culture and even digress a bit to expand the mind of the reader. The Commentary is about opening people's minds to broader horizons and make them want to look further into a topic or another. At least, that's what it's trying to do. Success is not always guaranteed!
 
gor said:
Also, it's true that the commentaries have been getting longer, but in no case do they consist (or claim to) a complete source of info for the encyclopedic knowledge analized within. They are just a spark of knowledge...
Exactly this is what the IMC is good at - rather than feeding you information that you might want to categorise and prioritise yourself, it hints, asks questions and sparks discussion. That, ever since Socrates, being one of the best ways to learn.

A formal remark: When I said earlier that some rants are a bit long I wasn't speaking about Mav's writing but about some contributions on the discussion board. Style of writing is to a great extent a matter of taste too, but being a professional with some experience in text editing, I must say that some rants would simply require cuts. Not so the body of the Commentary itself. :)
 
Guys, I feel extremely dumb and ignorant. I just found out that the new Commentary was already presented on the site.

So this topic was opened without actually judging how the recent work came out.
  :blink:

As soon as I have the time, I will read it all and get back to this. The intro starts promising and positive!
 
I only discovered the Commentary a month or so back and haven't really thought about the deeper meanings or inspirations about most of the IM songs. The lyrics have always appealed to me, especially together with the music, but once I started reading the commentary on the different albums I actuallly wasted almost two whole workdays (my boss was away) :blush: It's almost embarassing to admit that I wasn't more into this before, but now I find it really interesting. I also enjoy the discussions about the music but sometimes it gets too technical and I'm lost.
 
Now it's time for my humble opinion. The Commentary, great as it is, will not be improved by being made short. A summary may be good, but if you really are interested, then take the damn time to read the full texts. Yes, the Commentary is more focused on the lyrics. Why? Because it is, as Maverick did say, much easier to write about since it can be speculated about in a way music really can't. But, I must say that it would be nice with some focus on the music. Perhaps by assistance of SMX or Thingfish? The problem is that it might get too technical for the rest of us, and more basic explanations might be needed.

Anyway, I'll take the time of reading the new Commentary as soon as I have read the chemistrybook pages needed enough times to pass the big up-coming test...
 
Just read it.

I must confess I really enjoyed it! :)

Some nice bridges to Maiden's music were made as well, especially in These Colours Don't Run (might turn into my favorite AMOLAD-song, together with Brighter than a Thousand Suns..).

Reading this Commentary gives me the feeling that I judged all this content (and hard work!) on the site too easy. I disagree with some of my own passages in this topic.

It's true that everyone can learn about new things, discovering them via Maiden's lyrics and The Iron Maiden Commentary is a great help for that.

Maverick, Goodluck with the continuing work !
Let's hope Maiden will give you enough to do yet ! ;)
 
Back
Top