Vidding chat: Lyrics and literalism

[bop_radar]

Hi guys. Vidding chats are back (although I'm running a little late with this one, hope you don't mind)!

This week I've chosen lyrics and our relationship to them as vidders as the topic, partly because it's come up several times in the comments of previous posts, and partly because it's a topic I'm personally very interested in.

For many of us, lyrics can be one of the strongest reasons for choosing to vid a particular track. As viewers, lyrics help us navigate through vids, as we absorb the images that the vidder has chosen to pair them with. In comments about planning vids, many people mentioned lyrics as determining the structure of a vid. They're certainly very hard to ignore! But it also seems like there are degrees to which different vidders, or different vids, rely on lyrics. Do some vidders ignore them completely? (I'm cheating, because I know of some instances where the answer is yes.) If so, feel free to leap in and talk about that--or talk about what it's like to work with a track without lyrics.

Lyrics can be our friends and our foes. We've probably all seen vids where the juxtaposition of a particular lyric with a particular image makes our jaw drop or gives us shivers. Pull it off and the use of lyrics can be incredibly powerful. What are your favourite lyric + image combinations, either in your own vids or others'?

The flipside of the power of lyrics is that I'm pretty sure most vidders will also be familiar with the phenomenon of being stuck with a bitch of a lyric within an otherwise perfect track. A lyric that doesn't aid, or perhaps even actively works against, the rest of the vid. How do we deal with this? What 'difficult' lyrics have you had to work with/around? How did you handle them?

Interpetation
The interpretation of lyrics can be very complex. With the purely aural version of a track, the listener is free to make all sorts of associations of their own. However, once we marry lyrics with visuals, we direct the viewer's focus for interpretation in a certain direction. I think good vidders still allow space for audience interpretation--they suggest rather than tell. And when a vid really 'sings', for me personally, the combination of lyrics and images sparks associations that I might otherwise not have formed on my own. That's magic!

This brings us to: literalism. Much discussed, much abhorred literalism. In heaps of vid meta, especially advice to newbies, you will read 'avoid literalism!' But what does this mean?

Let's take U2's overblown lyrics as an example:
'I have climbed the highest mountain' (Vidder vids protagonist climbing a mountain to this line)
'I have run through the fields' (Vidder vids same character running through fields)
'Only to be with you' (Character canons into the arms of lover)

The vidder is interpreting the lyrics literally (and we can imagine that the vid will become more and more absurd as they vid the lyrics 'I have run, I have crawled, I have scaled these city walls' in the same way). The poor old protagonist (who may well have done all those things, though not necessarily 'only to be with' the person the vidder is shipping them with) becomes more and more absurd and comical in the eyes of a viewer. Awww.

Why doesn't it work? Partly simply because it seems 'obvious'. Partly because the lyrics themselves were intended as metaphor. The message is that the lover has struggled and overcome obstacles--those could be internal, emotional obstacles. Or they could be external ones. But the 'mountains' are a metaphor. This is GOOD news for the vidder. It frees them up to use them creatively. Instead of having to find a shot of a character climbing a mountain, they can think about what the greatest achievements of their character have been, what the biggest obstacles are that they have overcome, and then how those could be represented visually. They are then expressing the intention and message of the lyrics truthfully.

As a beginner vidder I struggle(d) with literalism, and I believe many newbie vidders do. Although the example above may seem clear, and although we may have ourselves seen vids where the literal interpretation of lyrics felt 'clunky' to us as viewers, it's not as easy as all that once we start making our own vids, for a number of reasons. It's amazing how easy it is to start justifying literalism, thinking things like 'but this line is UNCANNILY perfect for my ship/character/subject' or 'but they actually do CLIMB A MOUNTAIN'. Since lyrics are often the reason we've chosen a song in the first place, it can feel like a betrayal to ignore the most obvious associations with the source.

On the other side of the equation, we may also find that what we think of as very obvious doesn't come across to our viewer at all. The association we made/saw between a lyric and an image hasn't translated the same way for our audience. Often literalism can feel like a bit of a security blanket in comparison.

One of my most memorable beta moments was when I asked my friend supacat if a draft of 'Middleman' was 'too literal'. She laughed and said 'no, not even slightly', and then explained that what *I* thought of as literal was actually not obvious at all. It's true. So in fear was I of the 'no literalism' rule, that I think for a while I interpreted it as going further than pure literalism and meaning also 'no obviousness'. (Yes, feel free to laugh at me!) So, for instance, in Middleman I vidded Lee in Black Market to 'the grey areas are mine'. I worried terribly that this was too obvious a choice. And hey, maybe it was. Maybe I could have chosen some other, less obvious, example of Lee making morally grey choices. But the reason I chose it (and ended up sticking with it) is because it is the clearest instance of him doing so. Because this point was important for the argument of my vid it stayed. Was it literal? Well it was in the sense that the lyrics described someone in 'grey' areas and I showed someone making 'grey' choices: but thankfully I didn't turn the footage grey. :p

- How do you feel about literalism? Do you struggle with it?
- Do you even, sometimes, like it (I do!)?
- Do you feel your vids are too obvious or too obscure?
- Do you feel the vids you watch are too obvious or too obscure?

Advice for the literalism-challenged
Do you have advice for those of us challenged by literalism? How do you use lyrics in a sophisticated way? What tricks have you learnt or seen for using lyrics effectively?

I don't often offer advice in these posts, but I'm going to do so here because this is stuff I've wanted to articulate for some time. It's based on my own learning experiences and those of other beginner vidders. Feel free to disagree or add to these point, but this is what I've learnt so far:
- We can be blind to the literalism in our own vids. If in doubt, ask a beta! And believe them if they say that the shot of your character getting 'knocked down', when clipped exactly to the lyric 'knocked down' is too literal.
- Make the association between lyric and image around the lyric, not 'on' it. This is best demonstrated with an example. Lithiumdoll's Big City Life contains the line 'all lined in a row' which is connected with the idea of the clones in Dark Angel. Jut before the lyric, they are shown in rows in a classroom, on the lyric 'lined' the vid hones in on an individual clone, and on the lyric 'row' it shows a barcode on the neck. That's much more sophisticated than just showing the image of them in rows in the classroom exactly on the lyric. It means by the time the lyric comes, the viewer is able to *instantly* make the connection with what they've just seen and then rapidly move past/through that concept back to the idea of identity and what it means to be one of many.
- If you are struggling with how to interpret a lyric non-literally, ask yourself: what is the emotional content of the lyric? what is it 'saying'? where is that emotional point made in the source (if vidding in canon)?
- Choose tone over lyric. There are lots of 'tricks' for difficult lyrics, but I've not found anything that can 'fix' the tone of a song (or line) if it doesn't work for your message. I personally find the tone of the music very important to me--if it doesn't resonate with my subject matter, I find the vid will only be partially successful no matter what I do. And I've found that if you vid to the tone of a track, viewers will often 'go with you' even if meaning is not immediately obvious. Whereas, one misplaced bit of literalism can throw them out.
- If a lyric is really 'bad' and doesn't work for you at all, see if you can cut it out of the audio track entirely. If you can't do that then try clipping something with a strong visual message of its own to the lyric (distract!). Chances are people will glide on by. Or just forcefully use it to progress your story regardless. If the lyric before it and the lyric after it require a 'middle' transition to link them--then feel confident to put it there. Again, if the surrounding material is strong and the narrative feels continuous, people won't care too much that the lyric doesn't ping perfectly with the subject matter of the clips.
- Alternatively, BE PATIENT. At the start of vidding projects I often find there are one or two lyrics that I really can't 'place', can't find clips for. But they usually come good eventually and since I vid organically, I'm a big believer in letting them come in their own time.
- In some circumstances, you can choose irony. :) Someone mentioned in comments a song that mentioned eating burgers that they wanted to vid to BSG (a show in which everyone seems to eat either algae or noodles!). If it fits the overall vid to make that ironical point (that food treats are rare or non-existent, life hard, pleasure fleeting), then clipping a shot of them eating for that lyric could work well.
- Related to that point: literalism works well for humour. See for instance deirdre_c's 'Things that make you go hmm'. The vidder twists the meaning of some lyrics deliberately (Sam is the 'girlfriend'), but grounds the vid by using literalism (a doorbell being pressed on 'the doorbell rang', etc).
- There are other instances in which a little bit of literalism can 'anchor' a vid, or help keep the sense of connection between lyric and image, especially when the vidder is doing something tricksy with them. The best recent example I can think of is in bradcpu's 'Tear You Apart'. The vid involves a 'reveal' in terms of point-of-view, and its visual associations are complex and disturbing. Within this context a couple of pieces of literalism ('her hand brushed up against his', 'they took a step back') really worked for the vid--they draw us back into the 'ship' plot after a moment of confronting violence, and they add to the uneasy tone because we are wondering where it's all leading--the link between lyric and image is tonally appropriate.
- Match metaphor with metaphor. This may not always be possible, but I was able to do it at least once, I think effectively (though it could be argued that it is still 'too literal'). In 'Paranoid Android' the lyric 'rain down' is repeated several times. Within Smallville, the show I was vidding, the blood rain is used as a metaphor for Lex's future. I matched the metaphor in the lyrics with the metaphor in the show, and added in some other forms of 'raining down'--the meteors falling on Smallville, and other events that Lex views as 'happening' to him ('raining down' on him) which lead him to the future, where he 'rains down' on others in the form of nuclear weapons. Yup, I milked that lyric's metaphor for all it was worth. Perhaps if I'd only done one thing to that lyric it would have got boring fast, but thankfully Smallville is rich in visual metaphor. :) Yes, the 'rain' was literal--but since it's a metaphor on the show, it works. I hope. ;)

/opinionated Bop.

I've littered questions for discussion throughout this post but basically this is an open invitation to discuss the use of lyrics in vids in any way you wish. Tell us what you like, what you hate, what frustrates you--either as a vidder or as a viewer.

ETA: This post got long. Feel free to just chat without reading all of it! *headdesk*

Comments

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I think you hit the key point though, when you said you were focused on lyric interpretation not just...the lyrics.

I really, strongly believe that lyrics are important, and what we put on them is important. We can't just ignore them and claim to be being artsy.

(That said, I've made at least one vid where I more-or-less ignored the lyrics in favour of the tone, but those were unusual choices and tied to the 'feel' of the vid because it had nonsensical, dreamy lyrics anyway and even then I did think about them sort of).

It's not being shackled to interpreting them literally with absolutely no wiggle room that's key here. Or at least, being aware that if you choose a very literal image for a lyric that does not fit in with the clips around it, the effect will not be good. The fact that that image is perfect on that line < the fact that that image doesn't fit the images around it?

For what it's worth, your vids don't feel overly literal to me, and I think that it's just as possible to go too far the other way and be too obscure?

But just as importantly, yes, you can totally skip over a line that isn't really working and just...throw tone-based and vid-story-based clips at it and it'll be okay. At least, in my opinion. Which is hardly definitive!

[chaila43.livejournal.com]

lyric interpretation not just...the lyrics.

That makes sense. And makes me feel better. I just don't quite yet consciously think about these things when making a vid. I just. . . make it. All the stuff being talked about is helpful to have in my brain at some level, but I don't feel skilled enough yet to really deal with all of this on a really purposeful level. Anyway, I'm glad you don't feel my vids are overly literal. All this doesn't exactly make me second-guess, I like my little vids, but it does sort of make me wonder if I ought to be considering stuff like this more thoroughly. Which the answer is probably yes, eventually, but hopefully it's still okay not to be quite yet.

but those were unusual choices and tied to the 'feel' of the vid because it had nonsensical, dreamy lyrics anyway

You wouldn't by chance be referring to "Hallelujah", would you? (Yeah, that's right, I fangirl your vids. Deal with it.) Because I remember being really impressed that you managed to make so many of those lyrics work, despite the fact that no Leonard Cohen-penned song is good for the logical sense-making.

It's not being shackled to interpreting them literally with absolutely no wiggle room that's key here.

This was the most helpful thing I've learned so far. It's not going to ruin the vid to have one lyric interpretation that just doesn't quite stand on its own, as long as it fits with the overall vid and the surrounding stuff. It felt kind of risky, but so far no one's been like, OMG I hate that. If you're lucky, no one will even notice. :)

[beccatoria.livejournal.com]

I still don't really think about it too much consciously. I think I'm very instinctive with my choices. I think it's similar to my writing. I just get it in my head that I need to do 'these sorts of things' and...go for it. Often if I sit down and try to justify my clip choices (which I do occasionally or retrospectively if someone asks me about them, especially during betaing), I'll be able to explain why I chose them and offer rational reasons, but when I actually choose them it's a more...instinctive "what needs to be on this line?" sort of thing?

You wouldn't by chance be referring to "Hallelujah", would you?

*blush* Well I'm flattered you like my vids, but no, actually, I was referring to "Hummingbird Song." It's really intriguing you bring up "Hallelujah" though because thinking about it, obviously yes, those are really weird lyrics and actually that was probably one of my first vids that moved into a stronger 'interpretive' stance (if that's a phrase). But I still think of it as reasonably literal, because I remember one of the reasons I chose it for my vid was because so many of the lyrics worked...bizarrely well.

I think maybe I'm sensing a pattern in my work here? I tend to go for songs whose lyrics shouldn't work but do and therefore when I make fairly obvious lyrical connections, it comes across as more interesting than daft? Eh...now I'm just rambling.

Probably over time one develops a sense of when literalism is good and when it's not is all. I think you already have a pretty damn good sense of that, but then starting with a vid like Cathedrals was probably a good choice in that regard because you couldn't be overly literal so you were thinking in interesting metaphored ways from the start? (And maybe I kind of benefitted from the same thing to a degree since my first ever vid was to Leonard Cohen, and it's actually my second vid I think may struggle with overliteralism).

It felt kind of risky, but so far no one's been like, OMG I hate that. If you're lucky, no one will even notice. :)

Yeah, you'd be surprised at the things you can gloss over! I mean, I try not to have to, but there's usually at least one line that's...less perfect than you'd like.

[chaila43.livejournal.com]

Often if I sit down and try to justify my clip choices (which I do occasionally or retrospectively if someone asks me about them, especially during betaing), I'll be able to explain why I chose them and offer rational reasons, but when I actually choose them it's a more...instinctive "what needs to be on this line?" sort of thing?

Me too! Well, sometimes. In general, my vids are still literal enough that it's probably obvious, but for the more obscure-ish interpretations (basically only in Cathedrals really), if I try to justify a clip choice, I can come up with a whole list of reasons, but when I put it there, often I did so just because it "worked." So yay for instinctual vidding?

I tend to go for songs whose lyrics shouldn't work but do and therefore when I make fairly obvious lyrical connections, it comes across as more interesting than daft?

I think this is totally true. I never watch your vids and think your interpretations were obvious or even literal, I end up thinking what interesting connections you made, things I would not have thought of but work almost strangely well. Something like that anyway!

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

I don't feel skilled enough yet to really deal with all of this on a really purposeful level
I hope you don't mind me jumping in. Your comment made me think about how I deal with the different levels myself, and I wanted to reassure you that I find it hard too and probably lots of vidders do. I felt I didn't have words for most of the stuff I was doing and thinking about in vidding for a long, long time, and I probably still don't have words for masses of it! (I'm trying in these chats, but it's still hard sometimes.) And on a practical level when I'm constructing a vid, I'm generally not thinking on multiple levels at the one time yet. I have an 'intention' with my vid and I follow that intention as thoroughly as I can. Then every so often I take a step back and think about some of the bigger issues--like visual flow or control of narrative. Sometimes I have to put my vid 'down' for a while to be able to see it clearly enough to reflect on those levels in any really useful way. Other times a beta helps. :)

I do think it's got easier over time and I feel like with each vid I get a little more conscious of something else. I worked on internal movement for aaaaages--so I feel like I'm fairly comfortable with that now, and now I'm starting to think about things like colour. Each time I add an aspect of vidding to my 'thinking box' (heh!) for each vid, I go through the same stages of dauntedness, confusion, and slowly flickering comprehension. :)

(Did that make any sense at all? Wow, I should drink some caffeine before typing next time!)

[chaila43.livejournal.com]

I do think it's got easier over time and I feel like with each vid I get a little more conscious of something else.

Oh that is reassuring. I'm pretty impatient about all of this, wanting to be able to think about and deal with all of this stuff immediately. Like I just want to roll around in all the Serious Vidding Concepts and absorb them all by osmosis. :D Totally impractical! And yeah, it's somewhat grounding to realize that it's a process for everyone, even people who've been at this a bit longer.

I worked on internal movement for aaaaages

I. . . don't even know what that means. I mean, I think I can guess, but. . . Oh vidding. :D

[bop-radar.livejournal.com]

I'm impatient too! Arrgh. I can read all the meta in the world though, but where I really learn is by vidding... the good thing is I've even learnt stuff from 'throaway'/light vids, so I counter that feeling of impatience by just ... keeping on vidding. :) It's damn slow though! In particular I am personally baffled by people that learn all that technical whizz-bangery of effects and use them well. I just... how?!! My main question is: how do they know where to use the effects they use? Two years in, i'm still drawing a blank.

. . . don't even know what that means.
Um, well, movement within the clip (e.g. a person nodding or jumping or running) and what I was working on was timing it to the music to reflect the musicality--and balancing that with clipping to the beat. And learning to control movement between shots without it feeling jarring. My vids rely heavily on doing that fairly well. *one-trick pony*