Not getting better with time

Ok, after reading some posts in the 'it's all been done before' thread, I got to thinking about something. I think the more you learn about songwriting, the less you know, I mean it. Every contemporary songwriter from Elton to John/Paul to Billy Joel, Plant/Page, Perry/Tyler, James Taylor, Bobby D, King, and on and on all wrote their best material early on (this is up for debate, but I know most of us will agree on this). I truly think the less you know the more open you are, no rules, no structure you 'must' follow, no studying the craft and thinking too much. It's like when you're young there are no rules, too often as we grow we mistakenly think it's time to get serious and getting serious sometimes kills or maims (spelling?) or creative juices. I often wonder when people stress you must grow and learn the craft, without a doubt, I feel many if not most of my best songs were written long before I knew what I was doing, I still think to this day the best two songs I ever wrote where the first and third songs I ever wrote, before I even knew my way around a guitar or heard of the songwriters who no influence me. Just a thought

Some snipped...

< I truly think the less you know the more open

Right on. Couldn't agree more.

Dolores

<...Just a thought

i agree with this. in fact, I have tempered my formal training for years.. i rely on a little voice in my mind that tells me it's time to go learn more about X or Y... piano is a great example: if I had taken piano lessons when I was a child, I would never be writing the way I do now (weather that's good or bad is up for debate). On the other hand, some things are good, like the whole I IV V thing, or the basics of modulation...

Aaron

If it's who I'm thinking of, I don't think John can be called contemporary anymore as he hasn't written anything since at least 1980.

#1. I think you missed the point. #2. Yes, he can.

Or could it be they had a larger part of their lives to build up to the first ( or older ) songs they had written. And then after they were established they had to spend time touring , promotion,etc. And since they were established they could get away with writing differently or less effectivley and still sell millions. I mean if Billy Joel had started out trying to sell the classical sounding stuff he writes nowadays, he may not have gotten very far, but since he is Billy Joel, it sells. And someone like that can afford not to care what people think. So maybe this goes back to that 'by the heart' thread as well. I thought all of Lennon's music was equally brilliant but as you say, it is up for debate.

Reminds me of some great lines from 'The Importance of Being Earnest' by Oscar Wilde:

'I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any rate, education produces no effect whatsoever.'

(No offense to our British RMMS'ers... I'm just quoting it as written. Brilliant play, by the way... I think one of the best ever written in

He wrote a significant portion of 'The Lion King', as I understand it. That's well beyond 1980, and I think there are some excellent songs in

I'm not EVEN going there.... :^)

John/Paul : to Billy Joel, Plant/Page, Perry/Tyler, James Taylor, Bobby D, King, and on and : on all wrote their best material early on (this is up for debate, but I know : most of us will agree on this). I truly think the less you know the more open : you are, no rules, no structure you 'must' follow, no studying the craft and : thinking too much. It's like when you're young there are no rules, too often as : we grow we mistakenly think it's time to get serious and getting serious : sometimes kills or maims (spelling?) or creative juices. I often wonder when ...

I'd debate that Billy Joel wrote his best material early on. There were some standouts from relatively early, but there were also a higher percentage of clunkers than on more recent albums. Compare, for example, 'Piano Man' to 'The Bridge', and the overall caliber of songwriting makes a decided leap forward in my opinion.

I haven't heard a lot of recent James Taylor, but some of the stuff I've heard also compares pretty favorably to some of his early stuff.

A few things can come into play with this perception. The first is what we, as the listening public, recognize. Someone goes through a hit period, and everyone knows their songs. Then various factors, including changes in public tastes, business issues, and so on, come into play and they don't have hits for a long time. Does that mean their songwriting got worse? Maybe. Or maybe it got better but just isn't in the public eye for whatever reason. Just the fact that the hits aren't coming anymore doesn't necessarily reflect song quality.

Another is just what we're exposed to. It generally takes a certain amount of time to adjust to any new song (and most new things in general), so a classic that we've heard a zillion times over has instant recognition, bringing back memories, etc. Whereas a new song we are hearing for the first or second time doesn't have that going for it. For all I know James Taylor may be a much better songwriter now than he was when he wrote most of his classics

Wow Rick, that was a mouthful. You make some excellent points and debate yourself all at the same time! I enjoyed reading your post.