trouble with lyrics

“Quit Playing Games (With My Heart)” - Backstreet Boys

The hero of “Quit Playin’ Games” knows he’s being treated badly in his relationship.  It’s unclear what his paramour is doing to him, but whatever it is it has become so bad that he now wishes he could go back in time, presumably to either never date her in the first place or fix something wrong he did.  That’s where our story begins.

The trouble with these lyrics, like so much about the Backstreet Boys, is actually rather subtle.  Here’s how the song starts: 

Even in my heart I see

You're not bein' true to me

Deep within my soul I feel

Nothing's like it used to be

Sometimes I wish I could turn back time

Impossible as it may seem

But I wish I could so bad baby

Quit playin' games with my heart.

There’s a clue about what’s wrong with these lyrics in the song’s rhyme scheme.  Did you catch it?  Like I said, it’s as subtle as Kevin Richardson’s facial hair, so it’s hard to miss. Let’s make it easier by breaking it down with the line breaks inserted where the Backstreet Boy sings them and the rhyming words bolded:

Even in my heart

I see

You're not bein' true to me

Deep within my soul

I feel

Nothing's like it used to be

Sometimes I wish I could

turn back time

Impossible as it may seem

But I wish I could

so bad

baby

Quit playin' games with my heart.

 The Boy emphasizes four words in this section as if they rhyme.  The first two and the fourth one (“me,” “be” and “baby”) are what we call perfect rhymes. “Baby” is a little off in print, but the way he sings it emphasizes the second part and it does rhyme perfectly. The third “rhyming” word, “seem,” is a slant or imperfect or near-rhyme.  

Now, I know it’s a pop song and lazy rhyming is not even remotely frowned upon in the genre.  But the fact that the word “seem” doesn’t exactly rhyme forces the thoughtful Backstreet Boys listener to consider why the Boys chose to use the word “seem” there.  Especially because there is a perfectly rhyming word with a very similar meaning, i.e., “be.”  To be fair, it could be the Boys didn’t want to repeat the word “be,” which they had already used in line two.  That’s called an “identical rhyme” and their avoiding it here is somewhat admirable.  But the big problem with the line as it stands is that although “seem” and “be” seem close in meaning, their meanings are different. And in this context, “seem” is seemingly incorrect.

To “seem” is to give the impression of being something or having a particular quality.  While all that can also be said of the word “be,” the word “seem” has an additional nuance. “Seem” refers to having an appearance of something that may or may not be the truth.   Think of it in terms of magic.  It seems as if the magician can read minds, but he cannot. So here, when our hero says he wishes he could turn back time, he doesn’t then follow that up by saying “impossible as that may be” thereby acknowledging that turning back time is impossible.  Instead, he says that turning back time “seems” impossible, which leaves open the possibility that it actually is not...  

Think of that line coming up in a conversation.  Here’s how that would go:

Backstreet Boy: “I wish I never trusted her enough to even date her, you know?”

Me: “I know man, she is really messing with you.”

BB: “I wish…  I wish I wasn’t so stupid in those days.  I was so naïve.  I made such a terrible mistake back then.”

Me: [growing bored] “Yeah.  Live and learn, right?”

BB: “Sometimes I wish I could… turn back time.”

Me: [stifles a yawn]

BB: “Impossible as it may seem.”

At this point I perk up.  Upon saying the word “seem” the Backstreet Boy arches his eyebrow and lowers his chin conspiratorially.  He looks around to make sure no one else is listening and then leans close to me.

“Rich Girl” - Gwen Stefani (feat. Eve)

The trouble with these lyrics is Gwen’s misunderstanding of what “rich” is.  

There are a few ways to define “rich,” but generally someone who is “rich” has an abundance of wealth or possessions.  Yet here’s what Gwen says:

If I was rich girl (na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na nah)

See, I'd have all the money in the world, if I was a wealthy girl

No man could test me, impress me, my cash flow would never ever end

Cause I'd have all the money in the world, if I was a wealthy girl

 Quite the fantasy.  

Gwen gives us a lot to think about here but I want to start with one odd phrase.  Gwen curiously tells us that if she had “all the money in the world” her “cash flow would never ever end.”  This is not true.  The second Gwen acquired that last penny her cash flow would end for good, by definition.  No more money could possibly flow in once she had all the money in the world.   I suppose she could then just continuously spend it, but that would be negative cash flow and not really in the spirit of what she’s saying. In her fantasy she not only will have reached the end of her cash flow, she would be the first person in history to do so.  So it’s an odd thing to say.  It would be like Neil Armstrong saying in 1969 “if this mission goes well I will never ever walk on a celestial body that isn’t earth.”

But that odd line may just be Gwen’s misunderstanding of accounting terminology, so we’ll give her a pass on that.  There is a bigger problem with these lyrics...          

While it is true that having an “abundance” of money could conceivably mean having all the money, that’s not what we typically think of as “rich.”  Normally, we only consider someone rich in relation to other people.  Unlike being “dead” which you either are or you’re not, being “rich” requires some context.  We could all die and I would be dead and you would be dead, but if we all had equal amounts of money, would you and I both be rich?  Would everyone?  Being “rich” is like being “tall.”  It’s a relative concept.  If a man is 6’4” he’s considered tall because he is taller than the average man.  In the absence of the existence of other people could a person be tall?  Was Adam “tall” before Eve was created?

The issue Gwen raises is metaphysical.  If one person has all the money in the world, what is money?  

Let’s leave aside the fact that money now exists digitally such that people don’t physically “have” anything when they “have” money in a bank account.  Let’s assume, for purposes of this inquiry, that if I transfer all of the money in my bank account to Gwen, she now “has” the money that was formerly mine even though the actual corresponding dollar bills may exist in some bank (or not at all).  

The problem with Gwen’s hypothetical is that if Gwen were “rich,” so rich that she had “all of the money in the world,” does that money still have any value?  And if someone has all the money in the world, but that money has no value, is she still rich?  

Let’s consider what would happen if one day Gwen did acquire all the money in the world.  If none of the rest of us has any money anymore, either:

A.      We would all become homeless and starve to death since we would no longer have the means to pay our rent or buy food; or

B.      We would employ a different system of acquiring goods and services that doesn’t involve money.

Neither of these results is good for “rich” Gwen.  In scenario A, Gwen would have all the money in the world and a bunch of fancy things and the rest of us would die of hunger.  That can’t be what she wants.  Would she sit in her Hollywood mansion while we all starve?  Would she even want to wear a Galliano gown if no one could be jealous of her for wearing it?  In scenario B, Gwen’s money wouldn’t do her any good either because we would all be bartering or farming for ourselves and sewing our own Galliano gowns.  She would have her piles of cash, but they would be as valuable as piles of regular paper since none of us operates in a system where we have or use money.

Gwen also says that if she were rich, so rich that she had all the money in the world, she would “buy everything.”  But how would this work?  She couldn’t give away any of her money in exchange for a thing because if she did she would no longer have “all the money in the world.”  If she did spend any of it the clerk at the Galliano store or Nordstroms or wherever would then have $2,500 (suddenly becoming the second richest person in the world) when Gwen buys the gown.  Would she then immediately take the money back and keep the gown?  If that’s her plan, why not just steal the gown in the first place and cut out the worthless cash middleman?  And if she did steal the gown and the Galliano clerk tried to get the security guard to stop her the guard would just fold his arms and say “No way.  I haven’t gotten paid in months.  I’m not doing anything else for this damn Nordstroms until I get my damn paycheck. And besides, I am too weak from hunger to stop her.”  In other words, why even involve money in that transaction at all?  Gwen should have just made a song fantasizing about the ability to steal Galliano gowns without repercussion while the world burns around her.

“No More Parties in LA” - Kanye West (feat. Kendrick Lamar)

As often happens when a song features Kendrick Lamar, his verse in Kanye’s “No More Parties in LA” has garnered a lot of praise.  Kanye himself calls it "scary" (in a good way, I assume).  But make no mistake, there is trouble in these lyrics.

While talking about a "country girl" who is in the process of being seduced by the Hollywood lifestyle, Kendrick says:

"...it's damaging for you, I think

That pussy should only be holding exclusive rights to me, I mean

He flew you in this motherfucker on first class

Even went out his way so you could check in an extra bag

Now you wanna divide the yam like it equate the math?"

(Emphasis added)

What Kendrick is trying to say, I assume, is that because he flew this girl on first class, and helped her check in an extra bag, he should be the only person that she has sex with.  An arguably reasonable request, I suppose, if that's what he actually said.  But what he actually said is quite different...   Apparently Kendrick Lamar did not pay close attention in his contracts class in law school.  I will explain: If entity "A" holds exclusive rights to entity "B" it means that A can acquire the benefit and/or permit others to acquire the benefit of B, but others cannot acquire the benefit of B without A’s permission, and A is free to acquire the benefit of other entities of A’s choosing.  

So, here, if that pussy (entity A) holds exclusive rights to him (entity B), as he says it should, that means: (i) that pussy gets to decide whether to have sex with him or not, (ii) no one else can have sex with him without that pussy's permission and (iii) that pussy is free to have sex with any other entity it chooses.

This is a bad deal for Kendrick.  

My guess is he just has his terms backward, of course.  But it’s better for our purposes to assume he has the concept backward and he always negotiates from this perspective.  

So if, let’s say, Tidal approached Kendrick seeking exclusive rights to his next video, Kendrick would say "No deal!  You need to be able to have other videos on your service in addition to mine or no one is going to subscribe!  That shit don’t add up!"  Or, if Kendrick licensed a sample and was given exclusive rights to use a song, he would then feel bound to make music using nothing but samples of that song the rest of his career.  “This is making me mad as fuck!” Kendrick would exclaim.

“Thinking Out Loud” – Ed Sheeran

Like many love songs, “Thinking Out Loud” is filled withpromises about a love that will last for years. It has some depressing thoughts about what a seventy year old’s body is like (hairless, with hands and legs* that don’t work anymore), but the basic message is that even when these lovers are old and decrepit they will still be in love.

So that’s nice, but the trouble with these lyrics comes when he stops talking about their bodies and describes her soul:

“Cause honey your soul could never grow old, it's evergreen”

The term “evergreen” typically refers to a type of plant. So, assuming he’s using it metaphorically, what exactly is he saying? He’s saying that even when she’s a broken down old woman her soul will remain young, like a young evergreen plant, of course.

But why include the “evergreen” part at all? The word “evergreen” adds nothing. He might as well have said:

“Cause honey your soul could never grow old, it's a tortoise”

-or-

“Cause honey your soul could never grow old, it's a resident of Okinawa Island off Japan, the legendary ‘healthiest place on earth’ with the highest concentration of 100 year old people in the world”

You’re probably wondering why I would pick two super old things for those alternate lyrics, when clearly he is describing her soul as young. I was just thinking out loud, of course, but the thing is that neither of those terms is any more inappropriate than “evergreen.” While it’s true that young evergreen plants are green (usually), the actual word “evergreen” does not mean “young.” An evergreen plant is simply a plant that has green leaves throughout the year, whatever its age. An evergreen may look young, but he’s not saying her soul looks young, is he? The term “evergreen” just means not “deciduous” (plants that completely lose their leaves during the winter or dry season). There are old evergreens and there are young ones, just like there are young tortoises and young Okinawa Islanders.

One last thing, there is a tree in California called Methuselah that is over 5,000 years old. It is possibly the oldest tree in the world. And that makes it one of the oldest living things in the world. Methuselah is so old that it’s famous for being old, and it’s so famously old that its exact location is kept a closely guarded secret in order to protect it. And you know what else? Methuselah is a bristlecone pine tree. And bristlecone pine trees are... evergreens.

So, honey, that tree could grow older than basically anything else on the planet, it’s evergreen.

“Don’t Tell ‘Em” – Jeremih feat. YG

This song is about a secret relationships.  Although it starts out with Jeremih’s lukewarm assessment of the girl in question (“I need a companion/Girl, I guess that must be you?” (emphasis and question mark added)), Jeremih seems happy with the way this girl makes him feel.  However, despite his enjoyment Jeremih also insists that “what [they] do” must remain a secret.  The reason for all this secrecy is not explained but no matter what the reason the song’s message is clear: don’t tell ‘em.

The trouble with the lyrics comes in the third verse, the rap by YG.  Unlike Jeremih, who is insistent that the girl not say anything, YG is focused more on trying to convince the girl that he “ain’t telling.”  There are two problems with the way he does this.  The first is this line:

“I keep a stack of hundreds like I keep a secret.”

This is an ineffective way for YG to convince someone that he can keep a secret.   The reason it doesn’t work is that we have no idea whether YG keeps a stack of hundreds or not or how he keeps that stack of hundreds if he does indeed do so.  In other words, if I were to tell you that I keep a stack of hundreds like I keep a secret I would be telling you that I rarely keep a secret unless I need that secret for some particular purpose, like a deposit for my mom’s 60th birthday party (which is the last time I had a stack of hundreds in my possession that I didn’t immediately deposit in the bank) and that I generally think it’s a dumb idea to keep a secret when that secret would be safer and much better off collecting interest elsewhere.   You’d know that keeping a secret makes me nervous and that I don’t even know where to put it and when I do find myself in a position where I’m forced to keep a secret I start irrationally worrying that there will be a fire in my apartment or someone will break in and look in my freezer (of all places!) for this secret which I really wish I didn’t have to keep anymore.

Now, it may be that YG is known for safely keeping stacks of hundreds and I just don’t know that about him, which is fine.  Rappers’ personal lives can certainly inform the meaning of their lyrics.  Like in the song “Holy Grail” when Jay Z says “Blue told me remind you [n words]” we know he isn’t talking about the color blue, but rather he is saying that his infant daughter Blue gave him an instruction (and that she uses the “n word,” which is disturbing).  So, maybe YG has that reputation.  Maybe everyone knows that if you give YG a stack of hundreds he will keep it close to his heart until he dies and not tell a soul about it, and therefore if you tell him a secret he will keep it the same way.  Maybe.

 Anyway, the second problem with YG’s verse is the way it begins:

 “9-3-4, 8-6-1-6

I got a missed call from your bitch

She been plotting on me for a cool minute

She wanna suck my dick, and I'm cool with it”

See the problem there?  In a song about keeping secrets, a song called “Don’t Tell ‘Em,” a song where YG himself uses a terrible analogy to specifically try to convince a girl that he can keep a secret, the first thing he does is tell the girl’s boyfriend that she called him.  And what’s worse is that he uses her exact phone number!  And tells him what her sexual goals are (in detail!)  And how long she’s been planning to do this to him!  And even how he, YG, feels about it!!!  This is unbelievably bad secret keeping. 

“Save the Best for Last” – Vanessa Williams

The subject of this ballad is a fairly common occurrence: two people were initially friends but then fell in love.  Yet here are the first two lines:

“Sometimes the snow comes down in June

Sometimes the sun goes round the moon”

These lines are similar but each makes a slightly different point.  Let’s look at them one by one:

“Sometimes the snow comes down in June”

The meaning of this statement obviously depends on geography.  Snowfall in June is (i) rare and notable but possible in a lot of places (in 2012, eight states got some snow in June); (ii) very common in other places (like a mountain in Alaska); and (iii) essentially impossible in other places (there has never been recorded snowfall in Honolulu).  But let’s not be so literal for a change, let’s go with what she likely means here: “sometimes the snow comes down in June” means “sometimes unusual and unexpected things happen.” 

Fine.  Next? 

“Sometimes the sun goes round the moon”

No it doesn’t. 

The moon goes around the Earth, which goes round the sun.  So the moon’s relationship to the sun is always that the moon goes round the sun due to the sun’s gravity’s effect on the Earth and the Earth’s gravity’s effect on the moon.  Now, to be fair, it could be perceived that the sun goes round the moon, because (if you take causation out of it) whenever one thing goes round another thing that second thing also goes round the first thing, depending on your viewpoint.   But that explanation doesn’t really apply here.  If she had said “sometimes the sun could be thought of as going round the moon; for example, those times when you view it from the moon’s perspective and don’t consider the reason why those bodies move in relation to each other” then this line could refer to changing perspectives (although it wouldn’t really fit the meter of the song).  But she doesn’t say that, she says “sometimes the sun goes round the moon,” which it never does.  This line must mean “sometimes impossible things happen.”

So, the first two lines of this song can be paraphrased as “sometimes unusual and unexpected things happen” and “sometimes impossible things happen.” 

And the trouble with these lyrics is that those two lines have nothing to do with the rest of the song. 

The rest of the song is about her friend who started, you know, liking her liking her.  The “best” that he “save[s]” for “last” is simply this shift in their relationship.  Don’t get me wrong, that’s a nice occurrence.  A lot of people have experienced that at some time or another.  In fact, I’m willing to bet that as you were reading this you actually thought of an example from your own life (or a movie) where this happened to some people.  It’s really pretty common.  So, as a common occurrence, it has nothing to do with those two odd opening lines about unusual snowfall and an impossible reordering of the solar system.

Even odder is the fact that the song ends with a repetition of those two misplaced lines.  The callback gives the lines extra import, like in a TED talk when the guy smugly restates his original thesis at the end to show that he just demonstrated its truth with the rest of the lecture.  The thing here is that never once in the middle of the song does she say that falling in love with this guy was even unlikely, much less so unlikely that it was counter to the immutable laws of astrophysics.  She says a couple of times that she thought their “chance had passed,” but that makes it seem even less impossible that they could fall in love, since she assumed there was a chance before. 

“Saturday Night’s Alright (for Fightin’)” – Elton John

This song is about, well, Saturday nights and what they’re all right for.  I won’t get too into the details, but to summarize: Elton tells us that Saturday night’s all right for fightin’ and drinkin’ and lookin’ for a “dolly,” and basically everything you’d expect. 

The trouble with these lyrics happens toward the end.  Here are the song’s final (non-chorus) lyrics:

"I'm a juvenile product of the working class

Whose best friend floats in the bottom of a glass"

In context, these lines serve as a faint lament and/or social commentary.  For the first time we now see that the song isn’t necessarily actually about Elton’s typical Saturday night, it’s really more of a character study.   Reginald Kenneth Dwight (who changed his name to “Elton Hercules John,” (which I rate as “wash/huge upgrade/wash” in terms of the coolness of those names)) did not come from the working class and he was no longer a juvenile when this song came out.  So he’s now tipping us off that the song is about a fictional character who likes to do these things.  I guess the message is that a poor kid, without options or discipline has to turn to bad behavior to the extent that his “best friend” now exists in a pint glass and he has to keep drinking to find/rescue this friend.  Interesting, but wait a second… 

Float, of course, means: “rest or move on or near the surface of a liquid without sinking.”

Bottom, of course, means: “the lowest point or part.”

“Bedrock” – Young Money

The trouble with these lyrics is the line that gives the song its name:

“Call me Mr. Flintstone, I can make your bed rock”

It’s the kind of wordplay that feels clever at first (“bed rock, like Bedrock!  Where the Flintstones live! Brilliant!”), but upon closer examination reveals itself to be pretty dumb in at least a couple of ways.  Let's take a look…

The first problem is the magnitude of the claim.  Rap has a proud history of boasts, of course, especially of the sexual variety.  But what he says here is an odd micro-boast.  He tells her that he can make her… bed move? 

He’s not saying he’ll do it particularly well or vigorously or for a long time or extra attentively or better than her current man or in some new way she hasn’t seen before.  It’s like he’s saying “hey girl, I am capable of having sex.”  Except it’s not even that!  I suppose that’s implied, but he doesn’t even go so far as to say that he can have sex with her in her bed causing it to move back and forth.  All he actually says is that he is capable of making her bed move back and forth.  Besides owning the bed, she doesn’t figure into the equation at all.

Let’s think about that some more: the thing he’s bragging about, causing someone’s bed to move back and forth, is something that literally everyone in the history of the world could do, with the possible exception of that guy from Metallica’s “One” video (I don’t remember all the details, was he even fully paralyzed or did he just have no senses?  Wait!  I just looked it up.  Even he could make her bed rock!  (If he were placed in her bed and did the “s.o.s.” motion with his head it would probably rock a little.))  Basically any even-slightly-able-bodied person could easily make a bed rock, if given access to the bed in question.

So maybe access is the issue?  Maybe he’s actually bragging that he has the ability to be physically present in her bedroom in order to move her bed back and forth?  That doesn’t seem boastworthy (it seems creepy). 

“Call me Mr. Flintstone, girl.”

“Why?” 

“Because I secretly had a copy of your house key made and I have studied the floor plan and can get into your bedroom with sufficient time to move your bed back and forth a few times before the police arrive.” 

No, that mock conversation proves that he pretty clearly isn’t bragging about his access to her bed either. 

The fact is that it’s simply a dumb lyric.  And it’s in there specifically, and solely, so he can make the Flintstones reference. 

So let’s take a look at that Flintstones reference, shall we?  Is it really so great a reference that it justifies building an entire song around the weakest boast imaginable?

No, sadly, the Flintstones reference itself is a problem too.  In fact, this particular problem is something of a staple for Li’l’ Wayne (I took the liberty of adding apostrophes for him).  It’s basically a lazy type of wordplay that looks like a metaphor but actually has a slightly different grammatical form than a metaphor, a form which I’ll call “just saying vaguely related things that appear clever but don’t make sense.”  I’ll explain…

Fred Flintstone was a cartoon character who lived in Bedrock.

Fred Flintstone was not someone who was known for making beds rock (except inasmuch as he was a person and every single person can make a bed rock, including someone who is a quadruple amputee who also lost his eyes, ears, mouth and nose in World War I (see discussion above)). 

So saying “call me Mr. Flintstone, I can make your bed rock” is nonsensical. 

You know what I mean?  Why would she call him that for that reason?  No one is ever called another person’s name because he (person A) can “do” the thing that sounds like person B’s hometown!

I find I often need to resort to Mad Libs to explain myself, so to put this in Mad Lib terms: the Mad Lib for this would be “Call me _____________ (person), I can make your __________ (person’s home town)” which would be a pretty ineffectual Mad Lib 99.99% of the time and would result in things like “Call me L’il’ Wayne, I can make your New Orleans” and then everyone at the slumber party would be disappointed and would want to stop playing Mad Libs for the night and move on to gossiping about people from their school or maybe watch a movie.

Also, there are lots of other people in Bedrock, aren’t there?  Why would she need to call him after that one person?  Why not “call me Mr. Rubble?”  Or, better yet, “call me Bam Bam!”  That would have been a good one.  Or, worse yet, “call me a bird who functions as a record player and makes wisecracks about it all the time, I can make your bed rock.” 

“Do They Know It’s Christmastime” – Band Aid

This song was written to raise money for Ethiopian famine relief.  A worthy cause, to be sure, and upon first listen the lyrics of the song are quite uplifting.

The problem is that no one has the luxury of hearing this song only once.  In fact, studies have shown that between Thanksgiving and Christmas every year, the average human hears this song approximately 17.4 times each day.* 

And, sadly, after so much exposure the flaws of the song become abundantly clear.  Which leads us to the trouble with these lyrics: the many, many, many terrible flaws.  Let’s take a look:

I. The Importance Of Christmas

First, let’s consider the song’s concept: people in Africa are suffering so much they might not even realize it’s Christmastime.  At all. 

The problem with that concept is: so what if they don’t? 

There are good things about Christmas, obviously.  And the song does start out describing Christmastime as a time when people “let in light and banish shade” and “spread a smile of joy.”   But when it talks about those things it is referring to what Christmas means to the singers, i.e., European Christians living in a “world of plenty.”   What the song doesn’t do is tell us why it should matter if people in Africa who are suffering through “dread and fear” know it’s Christmastime, at all, or not at all.  In other words, if Christmastime is nice because it makes European Christians act more kindly to each other, why does it matter if Ethiopians know that that’s happening?

This is extra confusing when you consider that the population of Ethiopia is about 37.5% Christian.  That leaves 62.5% percent of the people in Ethiopia who would answer the question “do you know it’s Christmastime at all?” with either:

“No.  And I don’t care, I’m Muslim.”

Or

“Yes!  It’s funny, normally I’d have no idea since I practice ancient tribal traditions that my family has honored for thousands of years, but I actually just heard that it’s, how do you say it? ‘Christmastime?’ because this guy I work with is a Christian and he just mentioned last week that he’s taking off on Wednesday to celebrate.  So funny that you just asked me that now!  Do I get a prize or something?” 

Because they aren’t Christians, the fact that it’s Christmastime is essentially no more than the answer to a trivia question to 62.5% of the people in Ethiopia.  It’s like going up to a preacher in Alabama and saying “do you even realize today is Purim? At all?” 

And as for the other 37.5%, the actual Christians, you’d have to assume the answer is either “yes,” because they’re Christian and Christmastime is an important time for them, or some version of “maybe, but I really couldn’t care less about Santa right now, I’m literally starving to death.” 

Let’s give the benefit of the doubt for a second though.  Let’s assume that there are Christians in Ethiopia who would normally celebrate, but this year have not realized it’s Christmastime, at all, because of all the suffering they’re busy doing.  Would knowing that it’s Christmastime make them feel better?  Why?  So they could decorate?  I don’t know that the peripherals of Christmastime are any consolation when you’re suffering through a famine. 

To illustrate what I mean, at one point the song tells us that the “Christmas bells that ring there are the clanging chimes of doom.” (emphasis added).   

I don’t know what “chimes of doom” are, but they sure sound scary!  I’m guessing they’re when some warlord has slaves ring warning chimes before he’s about to go out and slaughter some people as a show of strength?  And in that case is the only reason these dreadful noises are technically “Christmas bells” because they are bell-like noises that happen to be “ringing” during Christmastime?   That’s absurd.  And not helpful for some poor Ethiopian to know!

Imagine Sting going up to some guy who has just heard the sickening noises that he knows are indications that his family is about to be slaughtered. 

Sting: Hey, I know you’re scared, but do you know that those chimes of doom are technically Christmas bells?

Ethiopian: No

Sting: You don’t know that at all?

Ethiopian: I said no.

Sting: Well they are!  Look at the calendar, my friend!  It’s December 19th!  Black Friday was like, three weeks ago!   That means any clanging noises you hear between now and the 25th are officially Christmas bells!  Yay!!! 

Then Sting goes back to England, and this guy’s family gets slaughtered, while he’s now fully aware that this slaughter is happening during Christmastime.

II. African Geography

The next problem with this song is its weird concept of what Africa is.  Africa is a massive continent made up of multiple regions each with its own weather patterns and climate.  Yet, despite all that, here are a few lines from this silly song:

“There won’t be snow in Africa this Christmastime”

Even not including the fact that it just snowed in Egypt last week (smack dab in the middle of Christmastime), it pretty much snows constantly in Africa.  There are ski resorts in Morocco, there are snow covered mountains in Kenya, and the kingdom of Lesotho has the highest low point of any country in the world (meaning it is freezing there a lot of the time). **

(Also, side note: so what if there won’t be snow there?  There won’t be snow in Southern California this Christmastime either, and I bet plenty of kids in Orange County are well aware it’s Christmastime, at all.)

“The only water flowing is the bitter sting of tears.”

Again, nice image, but there are literally hundreds of rivers in Africa.  Including like forty in Ethiopia alone.

“Where nothing ever grows”

Did you know that there’s a place in Africa called the “fertile crescent”?  And that people commonly refer to it as the “cradle of civilization” because the earliest known western civilizations grew there.

“No rain or rivers flow”

Right.  Except the rain in the dense rainforest regions, or in the so called “rain belt,” or the Nile River, or those hundreds of other rivers we mentioned, or whatever happens to the condensation that refuses to come down as snow because parts of Africa are hot (inadvertently keeping the poor people from knowing it’s Christmastime at all…)

III. The True Teachings of Jesus Christ

Ok, it’s Christmastime, and I feel like I’m being too cynical.  So I’m going to end my diatribe by looking at this song in the best possible light.  Despite all the odd things about geography and the clanging of torture chimes, the basic message of the song is a good one, right?  While some people are celebrating others are suffering, and we should be aware of that.  Say what you want about Christianity, but the Bible has some nice ideas about how people should treat each other.  Maybe that’s what they’re getting at here.  Let’s all think about those less fortunate than ourselves for a change.  Take it away Bono:

“Well tonight thank God it’s them, instead of you.”

Huh?

Did Bono just say that the best use of our night is to consider the plight of some poor people, and then say “welp, better them than me!” and then raise our glass and do a “toast to everyone” with Simon LeBon and George Michael? 

This is definitely not a Christian sentiment. 

I think it’s not anyway.  Admittedly, I haven’t read the Bible in a while.  You know what, that just made me realize that I’m not sure exactly what the Bible really says.  Maybe Jesus didn’t actually teach “do onto others, etc.” but some sort of “watch others get done onto and then be happy you didn’t get done onto in such an awful way yourself.  Then cheers!” 

I’m going to go look up a few passages to see if Bono’s thought is expressed in some way… 

Well, I’ll be, look at this!  It’s right there in Luke 14:12-14:

"When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid.  But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind.  And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.  Then, when the poor people are all there at your banquet (gross!) take a good look at them.  And tonight, thank God it’s them instead of YAOOUUW!!!"***

Merry Christmas everyone!!!

-TWL

    * - Note: There are no such studies.  But in keeping with the spirit of “Do They Know It’s Christmastime” I have decided to just say whatever comes to mind without regard for factual accuracy.

** - This all came from an article I found from a google search for “does it snow in Africa” where a woman describes how she had to answer this question for her young son.  It’s a good thing the kid didn’t ask Boy George.

“Free Bird” – Lynyrd Skynyrd

This song started as just a song, then became the song that people requested that Lynyrd Skynyrd play at their concerts, then became the song that people jokingly requested that other bands play at their concerts, then became the thing people yelled out as an ironic reference to that joke, and then, finally, (hopefully) most people got tired of doing that and now it’s pretty much just a song again.

The trouble with its lyrics is the famous opening line:

“If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?”

At first glance, the line seems like a nice(-ish), sincere question that someone would ask his girlfriend right before he leaves her to go ride his motorcycle across the country or whatever.  But the syntax is sort of… strange.  Something about the use of the words “still” and “tomorrow” in this way makes it not quite make sense.  But, rather than getting into it in a sentence-diagramming way, I will explain what I mean by way of a thought experiment, wherein a hypothetical guy says the line (and only that line, so we can really focus on it) to his hypothetical girlfriend, and how she’d react:

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

What?

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

You’re asking if I would still remember you, by tomorrow? Of course, that’s one day from now. 

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

Yes.  I think I have the capacity to remember you for the next twenty-four hours.  That’s idiotic. What are you really getting at here?

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

Yes.  Definitely yes.  That really makes no sense.  We’ve been dating for two years, how could I forget you by tomorrow?

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

Oh wait, you’re saying if you leave here tomorrow would I remember you… at some later point?  Like ten years from now?

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

I don’t think it will have any bearing on how much I remember you if you leave here tomorrow or you don’t.  You are a significant part of my life.  I probably won’t ever forget you, or if I do it will be because of some brain injury or dementia and that will happen regardless of whether you leave here tomorrow or not.

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

You know what?  Since you insist on asking me this nonsense, how about this answer?  If you just up and leave here tomorrow, asshole, I may even remember you more!  Like if we just kind of drifted apart I may someday forget you, but if you leave here tomorrow when things are going well between us and right after we had our “date night.”  A date night that you insisted be at the Outback Steakhouse, even though you know I’m trying not to eat red meat, by the way, in that case I may remember you forever, you insensitive prick.

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

I don’t know!   I really don’t know.  I don’t even think that’s a fair question, to ask someone if she would “remember” something at some indefinite point in the future.  Who knows that sort of thing about herself or even how memory works generally?  That is what you’re asking right?  Because I think we’ve already established that if you leave here tomorrow I would still remember you by tomorrow.  But if you’re asking about some distant time in the future that is an absurd question, offensive actually.  I’m so sick of this conversation.  Wait, are you on drugs?

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

Wait, did you drug me?  Did you give me something that is going to erase my memory?  This is such a weird question!  Such a weird question.  Can you just get ready for dinner?  You’re freaking me out a little here.

If I leave here tomorrow, would you still remember me?

“Hypnotize” – Notorious B.I.G.

This is one of the many Biggie songs in which he brags about his frequent criminal exploits.  It’s also one of the few Biggie songs that addresses how he manages to stay out of jail despite his frequent criminal exploits.  Turns out he is willing to go pretty far to protect himself… 

Here’s a series of lines from the second verse in which he describes a method he uses to “stay filthy (not guilty)” when he’s brought in to court:

"At my arraignment, note for the plaintiff

Your daughter's tied up in a Brooklyn basement (shh)

Face it, not guilty, that's how I stay filthy (not guilty)"

So basically, he says that if arrested he will kidnap a little girl and lock her up in a basement in order to threaten her parent into dropping the charges against him.  Whoa.  That’s some national news-level, Ariel Castro-style depravity. 

I know it’s a rap song and it shouldn’t be taken as fact but consider what he’s saying here, on a human level.  Whether it’s true or not, he’s bragging that he’s willing to commit the truly heinous crime of kidnapping an innocent child in order to avoid prosecution for his drug offenses.  Pretty dark.

Anyway, the point of Trouble With Lyrics is not to criticize the morality of pop songs.  Nope, our focus is on criticizing the logic and grammar of pop songs!  So, kidnap away, Biggie!  We couldn’t care less about that.  The actual trouble with these lyrics is as follows:

An arraignment happens in a criminal case;

The “plaintiff” in a criminal case is the State or Federal government who brought the charges; and

“Gold Digger”  - Kanye West

This song uses three stories to examine the idea that some relationships are based on monetary interests rather than love and trust.  The second story is about a pro football player who gets involved with a lady who claims he is the father of her child.  (SPOILER: on the child’s 18th birthday the man finds out the child isn’t his!)

The trouble with these lyrics is a series of misstatements and oversimplifications of the law.  Don’t get me wrong, as far as unsolicited legal advice from rap songs goes, “holla ‘we want prenup’” is actually pretty sound.  But, considering the facts given, it seems that the legal advice in “Gold Digger” may not be totally reliable.  I’d even go so far as to say that it may be wise for a person in this situation to consult an actual attorney instead of solely depending on the “Gold Digger” lyrics for guidance.  Let’s consider it line by line:

18 years, 18 years

She got one of your kids, got you for 18 years

Here Kanye is talking about the fact that legally a man is required to pay child support for his children.   The “18 years” refrain likely refers to the age of emancipation, which is generally 18 years but may shorter or longer depending on the jurisdiction and certain circumstances not addressed in “Gold Digger,” such as the level of schooling achieved, health issues, etc. 

Additionally, even using “18 years” as a shorthand for emancipation, the scenario described here is still missing a crucial detail.  In most states, paternity must be proven before child support is ordered, unless a woman is married when she becomes pregnant, in which case it is presumed that her husband is the legal father of the child and paternity is established.  So, to be clear, if she got one of your kids she doesn’t got you for 18 years unless you’re married to her at the time of conception, you’ve signed a Declaration of Paternity Form (or equivalent, again depending on jurisdiction), or a case is opened and a court order is issued determining paternity.  A listener of “Gold Digger” should consult an attorney to better understand his rights.

I know somebody paying child support for one of his kids

His baby mamma’s car and crib is bigger than his

If a non-custodial parent (here, the football player) suspects that the custodial parent (the “baby mama”) is spending money unwisely or the child is not being properly cared for, the non-custodial parent can ask the court for a modification of payments, although it is his (difficult) burden and he is unlikely to prove such modification is appropriate.  Again, this depends on the jurisdiction and other factors which are not properly considered in the “Gold Digger” lyrics.

You will see him on TV any given Sunday

Win the Superbowl and drive off in a Hyundai

Child support payments are primarily based on the parents’ expected earnings, so if the football player is earning an NFL salary (plus a Superbowl bonus) the payments will be based on that income.  It’s unclear why he has to drive a Hyundai here, since his child support payments would likely be calculated by adding together the parents’ incomes and setting aside a percentage for their child’s needs.  This means if his salary was the NFL minimum of $405,000, plus Superbowl winner’s bonus of $83,000, and assuming for simplicity’s sake that she earned nothing, the amount of child support would be a percentage of his earnings, leaving the balance for his own use. 

In California, for example, that payment would be approximately $3,619 per month, leaving him approximately $16,714 per month (after taxes) for himself.  This should get him a better car.  Maybe he needs to consider other choices he makes (expensive dinners, etc.) and adjust his lifestyle.  Best to consult an accountant and financial planner, and not rely on “Gold Digger” for legal and/or financial advice.

She was supposed to buy your shorty TYCO with your money

While child support payments are technically “supposed” to cover food, housing, and clothing, there are no strict requirements for its use (as long as the child’s needs are taken care of), and the custodial spouse is generally not required to submit an accounting.  However, it should be noted that there is also no requirement in any state that child support payments be used to buy toys, or a particular brand of toy, or, specifically, TYCO brand toys.  The football player should consult an attorney for clarity on what he should expect in terms of how his child support payments are used and not rely solely on the “Gold Digger” lyrics for information on proper uses.

She went to the doctor got lypo with your money

She walking around looking like Michael with your money

See discussion above.  It is likely that proving child support payments were used for liposuction procedures will be difficult.  The term “Michael” likely refers to legendary singer Michael Jackson who was rumored to have had several expensive plastic surgery procedures.  If the custodial parent is spending large amounts of child support payments on elective medical procedures for herself and the child’s needs are not being met, there may be cause for an adjustment of the payment amount or closer monitoring.  However, should the football player decide to pursue legal action, he should consult an attorney before going to court and not simply submit a piece of paper with the “Gold Digger” lyrics printed on it as evidence.

Should’ve got that insured got GEICO for your money, money, money

According to its website, Geico currently offers insurance in twenty categories (Auto, Motorcycle, ATV, Umbrella, Homeowners, Renters, Condo, Co-op, RV, Life, Boat, Personal Watercraft, Flood, Mobile Home, Overseas, Commercial Auto, Business, Identity Theft, Snowmobile, and Collector Car).  Geico does not currently offer any form of “child support insurance.”  In fact, it would most likely be considered a “moral hazard” for an insurance company to provide child support insurance, such that no insurance company would offer it.  Child support insurance would also likely raise ethical and public relations concerns.  For more information, the football player should consult an attorney specializing in insurance and consider calling Geico customer service to discuss his options.   If the Geico customer service representative asks where the football player got his information about the forms of insurance available, it would be best for the football player to not mention the “Gold Digger” lyrics and instead to say “I dunno, my friend told me?” 

If you ain’t no punk holla we want prenup

WE WANT PRENUP! Yeah

It’s something that you need to have

'Cause when she leave yo ass she gonna leave with half

This is a simplification of the effects of divorce, which vary from state to state.  In California, upon divorce the wife would leave with half of the community property, but none of the football player’s separate property.  But, with that clarification, Kanye is generally right here vis-à-vis the effects of divorce on a spouse’s property. 

The rest of this advice is seriously flawed however.  The major problem here arises out of the difference between alimony and child support.  While it is true that two people can enter into a prenuptial contract (in some states, under certain conditions) that limit spousal support in the event of divorce, no states allow any limitation on child support, which is statutory, i.e., defined by state guidelines.  So, holla-ing “we want prenup” may have in fact limited the football player’s alimony payments (assuming that “holla” was in writing and signed by both parties after consultation with separate attorneys), but would not have affected the child support payments that this verse is addressing.  Of course, before entering into any form of prenuptial agreement, both parties should be represented by competent counsel and not rely strictly on the lyrics of “Gold Digger.”

18 years, 18 years

And on her 18th birthday he found out it wasn’t his

In some cases, paternity can be voided where there is strong evidence that the man in question is not the father.  On these facts, it is unclear how he “found out” “it” wasn’t his (also, really odd/cold to refer to this child as an “it” when she is now 18 years old…).  Assuming the football player did find out with certainty, through a paternity test, that he was not its father, he would have some options.  Again, this depends on the jurisdiction and a multitude of other factors.  However, in general, if a man has been paying child support and it turns out the child was not his, he is entitled to sue for repayment of the money.   He should consult an attorney and consider his options more fully beyond the advice given in what is essentially the punchline of the second verse of “Gold Digger.”

Overall, I ain’t saying Kanye West is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law,

“Crooked Smile” – J. Cole

The purported theme of this song is: despite pressures from society to conform to ideals of beauty, a woman should be comfortable with however she looks.*  The song’s title refers to J. Cole’s own “twisted grill” (bad teeth), but the message repeated throughout is some variation of “love yourself, girl, or nobody will.”   Here’s a sample of some sympathetic lyrics:

To all the women with the flaws, know it's hard my darling

You wonder why you're lonely and your man's not calling

And then there’s this:

Take it from a man that loves what you got

And baby girl you're a star, don't let 'em tell you you're not

There are a lot of positive and uplifting lyrics like that throughout.  And it’s not just hypotheticals for J. Cole either.  No, he has dealt with insecurities about his own physical appearance too.  In fact, he starts the song off by telling us about one of his struggles:  Essentially, people often tell him to fix his bad teeth because now that he’s rich he can afford a dentist.  He even admits that he has considered going through with it!  It’s tempting, after all, to fix what God already put his paintbrush on in order to please others. 

But, deep down, J. Cole knows that no one should have to do something like that.  So after discussing his bad teeth and temptation to change them, he boldly declares that he has decided to keep them as they are.  He even goes so far as to claim he kept them that way in order to be a good example for the children:

I keep my twisted grill, just to show the kids it's real

We ain't picture perfect but we worth the picture still

Nice thought.  But the trouble with these lyrics comes in the very next line, in which J. Cole completely undermines his whole message:

I got smart, I got rich, and I got bitches still

And they all look like my eyebrows: thick as hell

See that kids?  If you get smart and use those smarts to get rich you don’t even need to fix your terrible teeth!  In fact, you don’t need to worry about your appearance at all!  Even if you have a twisted grill and thick eyebrows you can get all the perks of life.  What are those perks you might ask, children?  Well, one of them is bitches.  Thick bitches.  Bitches that are thick as hell.  You know, physically attractive bitches that were blessed with an attribute that society deems attractive that they couldn’t possibly achieve via confidence alone.  Yes, kids, look at J. Cole and learn.  If you just accept who you are with all your flaws and get smart and get rich as a result, then you too can get multiple bitches that match your eyebrows!   I’m talking thick as hell, kids! High five!!!!

“Red” – Taylor Swift

This song is like a collection of horrible similes.

Actually, no, that’s not what this song is like, that’s what this song is.

For example, here’s one she uses twice:

“Loving him is like driving a new Maserati down a dead-end street”

I assume she’s saying that loving him is fun and fast but will end badly?  But if that is what she’s saying, the simile she chose is a really odd way to get there.  I can think of at least two problems with it:

First, driving down a dead-end street doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll hit something at the end.  Plenty of people live in cul-de-sacs and drive down dead-end streets all the time to get home. 

Second, and more importantly, isn’t the point of a simile to illuminate a characteristic of something by comparing it to something else that the listener understands?  Like when Einstein said “life is like a bicycle, to keep your balance you must keep moving.”  That’s a useful simile because probably 95% of the world’s population knows what riding a bicycle is like. In contrast, how many people know what it’s like to drive a Maserati?  I’m guessing there’s Taylor Swift, probably a few hundred rappers and movie producers, a few athletes, Jay Leno, and that guy from the Eagles.  They sell around 7,000 Maseratis each year.  Jay Leno probably buys a few hundred of those, leaving the rest of the world’s seven billion people with 6,500.  And of those people who have driven a new Maserati, how many have driven down a dead-end street?  Chris Brown, I’m assuming, Leno again, and then a few drunk athletes maybe?  So there are maybe six people in the world who have experienced this thing Taylor is referencing.  Now consider that the average guy has seven to ten relationships in his life.  So, statistically, someone listening to this song has about as great a chance of actually having loved the particular guy she’s talking about as doing the thing she’s comparing loving this guy to.   

In conclusion, this simile is pretty useless, like a shoehorn for Taylor Swift’s favorite shoes (which are made out of solid diamond).

But anyway, that’s not the real trouble with these lyrics.  No, my friends, there is an even more troubling line in Taylor Swift’s Red.  The lyric we’re about to consider is like the Babe Ruth to “Loving him is like driving a new Maserati down a dead-end street"’s Lou Gehrig.

Here it is:

“Fighting with him was like trying to solve a crossword and realizing there's no right answer”

I’ve done a few crosswords in my day, sometimes purely by choice and sometimes under duress (i.e.,  while on an airplane after I finished the magazine I bought and had to turn to the in-flight magazine for amusement).  I’ve done easy crossword puzzles and hard ones and I may have even tried the famous Sunday Times one a few times.  I’ve certainly done many where I’ve gotten four or five words and then given up because it was too hard/daunting/boring.  That’s happened a lot, I’d be going through picking up a few words here or there and then I’d get frustrated (or too drunk) and I’d stop.  I’d say I’ve probably finished about ten percent of the crosswords I’ve started (I drink a lot on planes). 

Sometimes I’ve felt dumb when I can’t finish one and sometimes I’ve felt completely overmatched, but never, ever, ever, ever, in all those crosswords I’ve done and been frustrated by have I ever come to the realization that I can’t get the right answer because there’s no right answer.  Maybe I’m naïve, but when I can’t get a crossword clue I assume it’s due to my own failings and not that the crossword puzzle itself is flawed.

What would that even look like?  In order for Taylor’s line to make sense, there’s a two-step process of unlikely things happening:

First, there would have to be a crossword with no right answer, which is odd and surreal.  Why would someone make one of those?  I suppose some disgruntled editor on his last day at  Hemispheres may decide to mess around and do that, but I’m guessing that’s not likely.  They probably outsource their puzzles from some reputable source anyway, and it’s really unlikely that that source would risk losing the lucrative Hemispheres contract by not double checking.  Maybe as some art project someone could make a crossword puzzle with no right answers (and title it “Man’s Search For Meaning” or something, to make a point that life is meaningless…), but I’m not sure why you’d encounter that one and actually try to solve it.  You’d probably see it in a gallery and say “Ah, I get it.  That’s clever.  I like this one.  Honey, look at this one, do you see what he did?  There’s no right answers, like life.  Get it?  I like this one.”

Second, even if there was a crossword puzzle with no right answer and you were in the middle of trying to solve it, would you ever “realize” that fact?   You’re doing a puzzle and struggling with one of the clues and then instead of thinking that you are too dumb (or drunk) to go on you’re somehow smart and sober enough to realize that there is actually no right answer to it?  Does anyone have that mix of perfect vocabulary and rock-solid confidence?

But for argument’s sake, let’s say: (i) a crossword puzzle with no right answer exists; and (ii) a supremely confident/well-spoken person is playing;  and (iii) she realizes this fact… 

“Ex-Factor” – Lauren Hill

This song is the second single off Lauren Hill’s universally beloved solo album, The Miseducation of Lauren Hill.  It’s about a couple that just can’t seem to make it work.   They suffer when they are together but they can’t stand being apart.  So, even though loving him is like “a battle” and it’s “painful,” Lauren keeps coming back for more.  It’s heartbreaking. 

But anyway, the trouble with these lyrics is this line:

“No one loves you more than me

And no one ever will.”

What she means to say here is really sweet: no one loves him more than she loves him and no one ever will.  But what she actually says is pretty different.  Instead of referring to herself with the pronoun “I,” which would make her the subject of the clause, she uses “me,” which makes her the object.  So, instead of saying no one loves him more than she [loves him], what she actually says is that no one loves him more than that person loves her.

This is fun to think about if you imagine this couple in the midst of one of their fights.   He says something painful to her, screams her name and pretends that he can’t stay, all his usual tricks.  But then she deals a particularly low blow.

Lauren: “No one loves you more than me!  And no one ever will!”

Guy: “That’s sweet.  Thanks babe.”

Lauren: “No you idiot, I used the object pronoun ‘me.’  That means that there isn’t a single person who loves you more than he loves me!”

Guy: “What? That’s ridiculous!”

Lauren: “No one!”

Guy: “What about my mom?”

Lauren: “Even your mom loves me more.  She told me she’s disappointed in you.”

Guy: “Ouch, although I guess that’s fair.  What about my grandma?  She was dead before we started dating!”

Lauren: “Right, so she doesn’t love you more than she loves me either.  She’s dead, she doesn’t have the ability to love.”

Guy: “Ouch again, but good point.  What about my high school girlfriend.  She never even met you!”

Lauren: “True, she doesn’t love me, but she really doesn’t love you.  She’s kind of embarrassed when she thinks about you. So her neutral feelings towards me are closer to love than her negative feelings about you!”

Guy: “Alright, so I guess you're right that no one loves me more than you, but no one ever will?  You mean, if we break up and I go on to meet another girl and we fall in love and get married, even she will never love me as much as she loves you?”

“Runnin’ Down a Dream” – Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers

Not much happens in this song.  It’s basically a description of a particular moment in time; a recounting of the positive feelings inspired by a drive on a beautiful day with the sun beating down.  During this drive Tom understandably felt good, like anything was possible.  He was picking up, whatever was his.

So that day seems great and what he says about it is all fine.  The trouble with these lyrics happens when he talks about the three days preceding this momentous drive:

The last three days the rain was unstoppable.

I get that it was raining for three days relentlessly, but isn’t all rain “stoppable” via umbrella?  Or, say, the roof of your car?  It’s just water.

Or if he’s talking in the more general sense, in terms of making the rain stop entirely, isn’t all rain essentially “unstoppable?”  Saying “the last three days, the rain was unstoppable” is the same as saying “the last three days it rained.”  It’s not like it can rain in such a way that it’s noteworthy that this particular rain couldn’t be stopped.  Rain can never be “stopped.”   

Unless… 

Ok, I wasn’t going to bring this up but…

Fine, I have no choice.

It is true that rain is unstoppable, unless you believe this theory that a cabbie explained to me once.  I promised him I would not repeat it, but I don’t see how I can address this song without it, so here goes: Russia controls the weather, with help from the Chinese.  Together they have the ability to create and manipulate storms.  You have to understand that the Chinese have vast stretches of land – areas that our satellites can’t monitor because of Russian cloaking technology -- where they conduct scientific experiments and house massive weather controlling devices.  The Russians help the Chinese do this by providing technological support and funding, in order to drive global markets in ways that help the Russian royal family (still secretly in command! The Russian Revolution was staged!) and its investments, which have been strategically placed in secret global hedge funds that are designed to only hold investments that fluctuate in value dependent on the weather.  So they buy and sell their positions based on storms that they and the Chinese then create!!!  The tsunami?  Katrina?  Global warming generally?  All Russian/Chinese creations, my friend.  While the U.S. and its allies were forced to spend billions on remediation, the Russians were profiting!  The Chinese think they are leading this effort to control the weather, but they are essentially pawns of the Russian royal family (as is Al Qaeda, but forget them for a second, this is bigger than that) and the Russians let the Chinese believe they are an independent and emerging global superpower so that they will continue controlling the weather in ways that help the Russians, who face no risk of global retaliation if this plot is discovered since the world will blame the Chinese, PLUS the Russian Hidden Czars use the resulting financial advantages to retain the upper hand on America, whose leaders know about all this but are all either secretly working for the Russians or are powerless to stop it!!!

“Holy Grail” – Jay Z (feat. Justin Timberlake)

Before we get started analyzing these lyrics, I want to tell a story:

One time I was over at my friend’s house and we saw that his neighbor Fred was building a wooden covering for his oil burner.  My friend asked Fred how it was going and Fred said something along the lines of “Not good.  I keep cutting this piece of wood and it’s still too short!”

That happened probably fifteen years ago but I still think about it from time to time because it was so odd.  I didn’t know Fred well, but he didn’t seem dumb.  Or at least he didn’t seem dumb enough to not realize that cutting something that is already too short won’t make it any longer. 

--

Back to the lecture at hand, “Holy Grail” is a pretty catchy new song by Jay Z and Justin Timberlake, the self-proclaimed "Legends of Summer."   The trouble with its lyrics are in the chorus. Take it away JT:

“sipping from your cup 'til it runneth over”

I don’t know if JT wrote this line or Jay Z did or The-Dream or whoever, but it’s pretty dumb if you think about it.  It feels like they took two unrelated thoughts and cobbled them together without considering whether the resulting sentence makes any sense.  Which gave me an idea: maybe people should act out the lyrics of songs before they record them, to see if they’re physically possible and prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future. 

Picture Jay Z and Justin at the studio.  They're ready to record, they just need to troublewithlyrics-proof a few lyrics first.  Someone instructs Jay to hand Justin his cup.  Jay’s cup is pretty full, but not quite runneth over… yet.  Justin sips from it and they all look at it to see if it has started runneth-ing over. It hasn’t.  Justin sips again.  This sip is a bigger sip.  This time he wants to be sure to sip from the cup ‘til it runneth over, further burnishing his legend.  They all look again.  Now the liquid is even further from the top of the cup!  Everyone is getting frustrated.  “The words sounded so good!  Why isn’t it happening in real life?”  Justin whines to no one in particular.  He sips again and looks down, distraught.  There is almost nothing left in the cup.  Jay Z is now in the corner with his arms crossed scowling at him.  The-Dream is threatening to leave the studio and go work on Rihanna's album if they can’t make this work soon.  Justin tries one last time.  Just then my friend comes by and asks Justin how it’s going and he says: “Not good.  I keep sipping from this cup, but it still isn’t runneth over!”