FKA twigs

well not like literally

for what it's worth this is mostly third-person to me. partly because I don't feel strongly enough about it to relate that hard, most of the lyrics are things I would feel embarrassed saying

^^

^this, like i'm reading a novel. the subject or characters may resonate with me but literally identifying as the subject/object, nope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6UAYGxiRwU

lot of x-posts now, but...

A lot of this stuff (re narrators, subjectivity vs vignettes) was brought up on this thread:

Do You Identify With Lyrics, And Ifso, How?

Personally, I don't think that relating to a narrator/object vs seeing a story externally is gendered, so much as it depends on the closeness of whether you can project/see yourself in that particular story or not. If it has become gendered, it's because of what subject positions are on offer.

I mean, obviously, I wonder, again and again, if it's harder for straight men to identify as the "I" of a song when it is a female narrator singing, because of the pressures of heteronormativity. Which is why I asked, when I had a large sample size of str8 dudes responding very positively to a female narrator as sexual subject, how they were viewing that subject in relation to themselves.

FWIW I usually view the "you" as another character within the song, usually a partly-unseen one.

Yeah, but Matt, why would you see it as weird if someone heard a song directed at a "you" and decided to imagine/project/relate to being a potential or symbolic "you" in regards to the sentiments of the song? Isn't that how art is supposed to work?

Because identifying or taking the perspective of the subject is more interesting - that's the perspective the singer has chosen to give us. If I'm listening to, say, Caught Out There I don't much care about the person being screamed at, much less about imagining myself in their place.

x-post now but...

partly because the album seems to me like it's designed for listeners to occupy the sung-at role.

Why have you made this assumption?

Because one of the things I like about these lyrics is the emotional flip of "am I supposed to relate to the 'I' here or the 'you' here?"

Like I can actually imagine really disliking these lyrics if I assumed that they were *intended* to be read just as some smutty come-on for het boys to get het-up over. (I haaaaated Madonna for many years in my teens, for the same reason. Wow, was I wrong when I went back and listened to the lyrics I had read that way.) But this album offers three subject positions to choose from, (the "you", the "I", a third person voyeur) and it's ambiguous which one "I" am supposed to take.

(And I think one of the reasons that Male Writers Talking About Twigs = such gross discourse is that they assume that it is *intended* as, and in fact, can only be read as "you, the male listener, is intended as the 'you', as the subject of sexy come-ons by the female singer." Which I think is a gross misreading of a rather ambiguous record.)

Sometimes songs or albums happen that way for me. I haven't been able to predict how for almost a decade now -- I've tried, and I'd probably be a better critic if I figured it out -- so it's not going to happen prompted by FKA fucking Twigs.

basically it's like the spinning dancer illusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinning_Dancer) -- it's obviously working one way, and though I vaguely know there are others around who see it the other way I just can't fathom how.

(yes, I know that is possibly an unfortunate choice of metaphor, but the duck/rabbit illusion doesn't work like that for me and those are the only two I know about.)

And I think one of the reasons that Male Writers Talking About Twigs = such gross discourse is that they assume that it is *intended* as, and in fact, can only be read as "you, the male listener, is intended as the 'you', as the subject of sexy come-ons by the female singer." Which I think is a gross misreading of a rather ambiguous record.

I haven't read a single male critic taking this approach fwiw. That's not to deny their existence but that's slightly bizarre projection.

You can start with that gross "natural rhthym" Guardian article linked upthread?

(granted, I've read a lot more messageboard, Tumblr, twitter than I have "Proper Critic" but this is part of the discourse, too.)

I mean, if it's going on at all -- I really don't want to turn this into a shitting-on-reviewers session, but I have noticed it in places -- it's going on subtly. this is 2014, most writers have learned not to lead with "Britney Spears extends a honeyed thigh" anymore. (yes, I know that RS feature wasn't all like that, but still.)

FWIW I don't think twigs is directly singing songs on this album to me; I am imagining some isolated lyrics in scenarios where a fictional version of myself is being talked to by a fictional woman.

And here I thought I was the only person who wrote DJP fan fiction! :-P

lol

Seriously though, any identification going on with how I'm processing these songs is happening at a remove; sometimes I'm hearing these as self-contained stories I'm watching as a remove, whereas other lines pop out has something that taps into a memory/thought/feeling and become more personalized, if still at a remove from reality. I'm not sitting here thinking "ooh this gorgeous woman is singing sex songs to me"; especially given that I have never met twigs, I can't imagine ascribing that kind of intent to her (or really, anyone's) music.

I assume all artists are speaking directly to me. Ice Cube and I haven't spoken since he released "No Vaseline."

http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/0_21_john_hinckley_450.jpg

btw with all the comparisons that have been drawn here and in reviews, i'm surprised that i don't see more (any?) mentions of Kelela.

I don't think anyone without a major mental illness thinks that songs are sung directly *at* them (well, not counting creepy fanzine or local press writers who don't realise it's performers' *job* to flirt with the audience/be friendly with interviewers) but more a fantasy / imagined thing, either with an imaginary person (or am idealised mediated view of the imagined heartthrob.)

But I kinda wonder about the assumption of thinking "oh, this is just a manufactured heartthrob/Wank object" as opposed to "I could take either role in this scenario" or "I could sing something like this to my lover" or "I could imagine a lover singing something like this to me."

haven't heard this yet but as a general thing i just do not "get" the idea of identification.

it's one of those things talked about in consumption of just about all artwork and i've never really gotten a good def of what part of the reader/listener/viewer experience "identification" is supposed to be

I can relate to that

Really? Like, you have never heard a lyric (or read a story, or watched a scene in a film) and thought "wow, I know *exactly* how that feels"?

would also probably add that I think this is an especially valid topic to discuss in regards to LP1 because most of twigs' interviews have been largely about what roles people take in such things.

Or even "Wow, I would like to know how that feels!" (even if it's not something you have experienced personally yourself.)

yes and yes. is that it? it's not what i'm after i guess, never has been. and really not on the level of lyrics. the feeling of being moved by what's happening and what commonalities might exist between the performer and me, even fictionally, i mean... who even cares? i don't care about that, in myself. people take it as a given as something worth having in art, to the point where there doesn't seem to be much interrogation of what it is

moved by what's happening VS what commonalities etc, i should say

anyway like i said i haven't heard this yet so, take it away, actually informed ppl.

ok well fyi this is a list of all the artists she sounds like

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32863603/Screenshot%202014-08-19%2018.17.51.png

hth

This album is making me want to go back to the EPs and see if I get anything more from them; previously they left me extremely cold.

I don't think anyone without a major mental illness thinks that songs are sung directly *at* them

oh sorry i should have clarified - I'm DJ Yella

hahahahahahahaaaa

looool

I bet you think this song is about you

the whole idea of identification with pop music is interesting to me. I always put myself in the mind of the singer, never the subject, whether or not I relate to the lyrics. But it's the songs with lyrics expressing thoughts/emotions I can really identify with are the ones that usually end up meaning the most to me. The gender of the singer and my sexual orientation have almost nothing to do with it

hi I am digging the fuck out of this album

that is all

^^

yeah this, and for what its worth I've really not heard the lyrics in my first 5 or 7 whatever listens. I just don't think the words are at all prominent on this lovely sounding record. But I often think that.

i still haven't listened to this album but whats wrong w/ identifying w/ subject, object, or 3rd person remove & why should your gender/orientation be determinative of any of the above?

there are a lot of lines on this that stand out, memorably phrased or not - "tell me what do i do when you're not here"; "when i trust you we can do it with the lights on"; "was i just a number to you" etc

haven't heard this yet but as a general thing i just do not "get" the idea of identification.

― goole,

otm. I've mentioned this here. For years I thought it was a consequence of being gay -- 95 percent or whatever of songs aren't about me anyway, so fictive leaps are required.

yeah totally not identifying with the 'you' of the album, clearly i identify with FKA Twigs (and i'm a straight male).

explicitly sexual lyrics delivered in (even an "arguably") erotic manner will inevitably create a sort of fantasy space, a field of play connecting the imagined performer or "voice" with the listener. not every listener will relate to this construct in the same way, of course. we all desire different things, but we're also more or less open to this sort of engagement. some listeners will choose to maintain critical distance, some will deny or vilify the invitation, while others will enter only on certain terms.

i wouldn't fault anyone for finding "two weeks" sexy or for acknowledging that their response to the music has a sexual component. better, i think, to be honest about such things than to sweep them from sight in the name of propriety. that's not a blanket license to drool in print. to the extent that the discourse surrounding a female artist is dominated by "sexual appreciations" expressed by male fans, things can get very gross very quickly. fine line, i suppose...

"numbers," lyrically, is like the other side of soft cell's "numbers"

I've never understood Alfred's "I have a hard time identifying with singers because I'm gay" line. I've always identified closely with singers straight, gay, male, and female.

I guess I should read the rest of the argument before I comment.

I really don't want to ~shut down debate~ on this, because it is obviously a topic of huge interest to me... BUT I do think this is supposed to be a thread about FKA Twigs and people should probably listen to the album, and comment on whether or not or how they relate to {this specific set of lyrics} rather than making this another general "how do you relate (or not) to lyrics?" thread, because we already have one (possibly several) of those threads?

tl;dr you should probably listen to LP1 before you comment

i'm open to people commenting on whatever they like, so long as the conversation doesn't fall too far afield of the music. a bit of digression in threads keeps things interesting, and i tend to like conversations that move back and forth between the general and the specific. doesn't seem to me that anyone here's saying anything untoward or counterproductive. but that's just me.

anyway, discussion of the sexyness of this music is a little strange to me. for one thing, i rarely relate to music & musicians that way. to use my earlier language, i hang back from the field of play, maintain my critical distance or w/e. i'm struck by the delivery of lines like "you're the only one who instigates, get your mouth open," but i don't swoon. it's not like she's singing those words to only to meeeeee. for another, the sort of whispery, upper register singing twigs typically trads in strikes me as strangely disembodied, perhaps especially when set against booming, hollowed out beats. fragile humanity stranded amidst precision-engineered future junk, evokes an inner state, but seems somehow to deny the physical. get the same thing from radiohead, tbh, and grimes too.

for contrast, the lower, fuller voice twigs uses to deliver the "how would you like it if my lips touched yours" section of "hours" seems more vivid, physical and (yeah) sexy to me than the rest of the album. it's a great album, btw. much more satisfying as a whole than the discussion itt this thread suggests.