Comments on: UCLA Seminar: The Music of Rufus Wainwright #3 http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/ Roger Bourland writes about music and life Thu, 21 Aug 2008 23:41:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.10 by: rdaley http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-159 Thu, 09 Feb 2006 08:27:49 +0000 http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-159 I'm usually lyrics first but not with Rufus---I just revel in the music for the longest time and only after then do I get my second high by getting into the lyrics. And I still have a 3rd round I guess, as I need to research more to find out what HE was thinking when he wrote certain lines, etc. I’m usually lyrics first but not with Rufus—I just revel in the music for the longest time and only after then do I get my second high by getting into the lyrics. And I still have a 3rd round I guess, as I need to research more to find out what HE was thinking when he wrote certain lines, etc.

]]> by: Roger Bourland http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-152 Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:33:11 +0000 http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-152 Good idea! I think the songs we're discussing are "Old Whore's Diet" and "Gay Messiah." The theme of the week is "Over the Top?" I think I'll take your advice and this week do close listenings instead. As you probably know, some people gravitate to the words first, and some to the music. I'm in the latter category,so I come to Rufus music first and foremost through the music. Good idea! I think the songs we’re discussing are “Old Whore’s Diet” and “Gay Messiah.” The theme of the week is “Over the Top?”

I think I’ll take your advice and this week do close listenings instead.

As you probably know, some people gravitate to the words first, and some to the music. I’m in the latter category,so I come to Rufus music first and foremost through the music.

]]> by: slvrlark http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-147 Sun, 05 Feb 2006 20:45:08 +0000 http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/02/02/ucla-seminar-the-music-of-rufus-wainwright-3/#comment-147 I was wondering if Roger’s Rufus class was going to be entirely about the lyrics to his songs, so I was glad to see some musical discussion show up this time. It made me want to express the things that drew me to Rufus’s music in the first place, and all of those things were musical (and a phrase here and there of lyrics): 1. his melodies: I often refer in my own head to his “opulence of melody,” or his “generosity of melody.” It’s just so wonderful to hear melodies that have interesting, unique shapes to them, that have sweep, that have an unconfined range—especially after decades of horribly narrow, unremarkable, deadly-dull melodies in pop, classical, and jazz; 2. the variety from one song to the next—it’s truly remarkable how different one song is from another, something we have not heard from a single song writer in a very, very long time; 3. accompaniments: I was taken almost immediately by the variety of textures of his accompaniments, not to mention the ever-surprising details that include contrapuntal lines, exotic instruments, sounds that don’t usually go together, etc.; 4. unusual phrase structures and meters: sometimes measures group together in most unusual lengths, and though there is nothing at all wrong with a four-measure phrase, it’s nice to hear in “non-classical” music (for want of a better term) phrase lengths and meter changes that take your ear by surprise. As far as lyrics go, though I find Rufus’s lyrics intriguing and often beautiful, my experience is very much like it is with classical music songs and opera: I can utterly fall in love with a Schumann song or an aria from Carmen without knowing at first what it is about. Partly that is because of not understanding the words (sometimes even if they are in English), but partly it is because the music really does convey so much of the song, and that’s what gets me all caught up. It’s ironic that I say that, since in my own songs, I am intensely in love with the words and am very concerned about conveying what they are about through my music. So I guess my point here is the fact that, if it were the lyrics that mattered most, we’d be talking about Rufus’s poems. But given that they are songs—which by nature are, of course, a wonderful union of words and music—it is the music that matters most, at least to me. I was wondering if Roger’s Rufus class was going to be entirely about the lyrics to his songs, so I was glad to see some musical discussion show up this time. It made me want to express the things that drew me to Rufus’s music in the first place, and all of those things were musical (and a phrase here and there of lyrics):

1. his melodies: I often refer in my own head to his “opulence of melody,” or his “generosity of melody.” It’s just so wonderful to hear melodies that have interesting, unique shapes to them, that have sweep, that have an unconfined range—especially after decades of horribly narrow, unremarkable, deadly-dull melodies in pop, classical, and jazz;

2. the variety from one song to the next—it’s truly remarkable how different one song is from another, something we have not heard from a single song writer in a very, very long time;

3. accompaniments: I was taken almost immediately by the variety of textures of his accompaniments, not to mention the ever-surprising details that include contrapuntal lines, exotic instruments, sounds that don’t usually go together, etc.;

4. unusual phrase structures and meters: sometimes measures group together in most unusual lengths, and though there is nothing at all wrong with a four-measure phrase, it’s nice to hear in “non-classical” music (for want of a better term) phrase lengths and meter changes that take your ear by surprise.

As far as lyrics go, though I find Rufus’s lyrics intriguing and often beautiful, my experience is very much like it is with classical music songs and opera: I can utterly fall in love with a Schumann song or an aria from Carmen without knowing at first what it is about. Partly that is because of not understanding the words (sometimes even if they are in English), but partly it is because the music really does convey so much of the song, and that’s what gets me all caught up.

It’s ironic that I say that, since in my own songs, I am intensely in love with the words and am very concerned about conveying what they are about through my music. So I guess my point here is the fact that, if it were the lyrics that mattered most, we’d be talking about Rufus’s poems. But given that they are songs—which by nature are, of course, a wonderful union of words and music—it is the music that matters most, at least to me.

]]>