Re: Vintage WHO ARE YOU Review

["Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>]

> If you're wishing for a return to more simplicity, that may be the same 
> thing I've been complaining about with the "overworked" comments.  The 
> lyrics on WAY sound artificial in many ways--too thought out--while the best 
> Who lyrics are sketchy and suggestive.


We've argued this before.  Some of Pete's best lyrics, I think, are found on
TOMMY & QUAD.  And those could hardly be described as "sketchy &
suggestive."  There's plenty of concrete realism there, too:  "fried eggs," 
"blue Rolls Royce," etc.

That's not to say there are parts *within* TOMMY & QUAD that contain 
suggestive, vague lyrics.  I'm not saying there aren't.

And there's a lot of nice realism in lyrics found on WAY, also.  Nice imagery:
"nightmares & cold stormy seas," "volcanoes explode through the snow," etc.

Pete's always been fairly skillfull with his lyrics.  I think it's the subject matter
of the later songs that sometimes make them seem heavy & cumbersome.  
Too awkwardly honest?

He thought he could break away from that with PSYCHODERELICT but
it was way too autobiographical for there to be any separation.  And IRON
MAN just plain sucked.  Mostly musically, but lyrically as well.

He's gotta be careful with the subject matter.  That's what will precipitate
the lyrics, moods, & images.  His word choice I'm not too worried about.
He's usually fresh & inventive when it comes to that.  Very underrated.

Gotta watch that subject matter.
 

- SCHRADE in Akron