DaveJonGilmour

But I told you, Bonny, I also value the music first and foremost, and I like TNT as well, but where there’s not only music but also valid lyrics, not trivial (and this is certainly not the case with Whole Lotta Love but with many other Led Zeppelin songs that don't recycle old blues lyrics), why not acknowledge it? The grave mistake would be to generalize, lumping all hard-rock lyrics together and comparing them to lyrics from entirely different realms, for example, singer-songwriter lyrics.

Alright, alright, young man... you're quite perceptive... 4 to SYD BARRETT and 5 to Oasis and U2... yes, yes, I like you, come to my house and I'll let you sleep with my sister.

Oh my God.. they're just too categorical.. "the most popular of the genres of commercial music, equal only to pop in the stylistic sense, that is, to the most traditional light music song".. if this isn't shocking! Well, we also have to try not to take everything we read at face value, but rather to discuss it objectively.. Well, I'm off, it was a pleasure.. bye!!!

One certainty is, precisely, when assessed in the hard-rock context, and not compared to the greatest songwriters in history, as some have done to climb up the mirrors.

I usually focus more on the musical aspect, also because I don’t always have the opportunity to search for the lyrics, translate them, and try to understand them. In the case of Led Zeppelin, I was able to do so, and I noticed that often the lyrics held the same importance, the same value as the musical part, except in the cases where they drew from past blues lyrics (sometimes trivial, sometimes vulgar, as in "Lemon Song"). I tried to discuss this with someone who generalized all hard rock lyrics, putting "Stairway to Heaven" on the same level as "TNT," and who also referred to dubious personal mystical experiences to explain what he considered the "false" meaning of those lyrics. This irritated me, but, as I see, there are reasonable people like you. That the lyrics are worthy of note is not just our opinion, but a certainty.

It's your opinion.. for me, someone who considers the blues revival a "nonsense" is either a provocateur or ignorant, and in this case, it seems to me that he is both, especially because he uses Google and leans on music books for his flimsy arguments.

Thank you, macciopiccio, I enjoy wandering around this site at night. Let me start by saying that I don't have other users to disguise myself as, because I have no reason to do so since I'm here to express my thoughts, not those of other personalities that I don't have. I will tell you: I have noticed that among the people you have appreciated, there is one of those many-faced insects, and generalizing about the site as a whole would not be fair, especially since many people like me—and I think like you—want to discuss and possibly learn something. The discussions and their subsequent degeneration on this page were due to one of the most well-known provocateurs of this site, and among these beings of low morality and us, there is indeed a significant difference.

Well, it all started from a post by a pathetic self-proclaimed fundamentalist who disparages the blues revival without any specific reasons... do you also dislike those who don’t agree with him?

??? What do you mean? Growing up with a narrow-minded and TV-compressed mentality? Have you seen the new generations??? A little bit of openness, damn it! How are you raising your child? Making them believe that everything is sunshine and rainbows? I just hope you're provoking, because if that's the truth, you'd just be another demoralized victim of this world, buddy.

But who, Jack or Danny?