The Riddle - Nik Kershaw

As some of you know, I'm sure, "The Riddle" is Staffan's all time favourite song. I have to agree that I've always liked the song, the intro, the music, the whole thing - and the lyrics have fascinated me because I don't have a clue what they mean. Of course, I wasn't clever enough to mention this when I was interviewing him and he actually sang it to me. [I'm not only quiet and boring, I'm also DUMB!]

Anyway, I thought I'd write MY impression of this song.

So, what do we have here. First of all we have an intro that most people recognise. First the little drum thing, then the rhythm. Anyone who's ever heard this song will know what I'm talking about. There are a couple of songs like this out there:

When you put on, for instance, "Careless Whisper" anyone who's turned on a radio for the past 15 years know which song it is. They may not know what it's called or who sings it, but 9 of 10 will probably say, "Oh, oh, oh! It's that one! Hold on now... it's... no, wait, don't tell me, I know!" and will most likely go "Ah, I knew it!" when George goes into, "I'm never gonna dance again, guilty feel have got no rhythm..."

It's the same with "Sign Your Name" - if you've heard it once you know it. First it's the intro and then most people are clueless until he starts singing, "Sign your name across my heart, I want you to be my baby..." Also, same with "Take On Me" - probably the one Norwegian song people outside Norway recognise (maybe apart from "Barbie Girl"...)

So, what we're dealing with is a song that most people recognise. Firstly because of the intro to the song, but if you look a bit deeper into it, it also has to do with the way the rest of the song is built up. Most people never think about what makes a song good. They just listen to it and say, "Man, this song is good", but if you ask "Why?" you're most likely to get an answer such as, "Cos it is!" I'm not an expert on songs or analysing, but if there's a song I really like I often want to get to the bottom of it. I want to know what it means, I want to know how the artist built it up, what the meaning is and also listen carefully to notice things I didn't even hear the first 50 times. This is a song where you notice new things all the time.

Like in the beginning. You hear what I'm guessing is a keyboard, but do you hear the bass in the background? The same bass line that is actually the same throughout the whole song? You may not notice it, but it's there and it's essential for the sound of the song. Without it, "The Riddle" would have sounded completely different. Also, if he had done it twice as slow or twice as fast it could mind as well be a slow ballad or an up-tempo rock song. The keyboard from the beginning is still being played (different notes, but it's being played), but faded a little to make us concentrate on Nik's voice, not the melody. The voice should always be the first thing we notice in a song, then the melody, then the lyrics.

What I find fascinating is when he sings, "I've got time to kill, sly looks in corridors without a plan of yours , a blackbird sings on bluebird hill, thanks to the calling of the wild, wise man's child". All the little things that goes on in the background there. The synth melody, the bass, the extra bass that comes in the end together with the flute. From there the flute plays a part of the song, as "added spice". You may not notice that it's there, but it is. It carries the same tones and the same speed as Nik's vocals - so instead of using someone to do backing vocals to make the last bit stronger, he added this flute. It works like a charm!

When you think about it, the melody IS the song. It seldom matters how good the lyrics are or if the vocalist has a great voice if the melody bores you half to death. First clue when you're making a song: Come up with a catchy melody or else it just won't work. One example:

Really great lyrics, and as usual George knows how to use his voice but the melody is so boring and so not catchy that I don't listen to it as often as I probably should. There's nothing to hang on to. I mean, the lyrics are really deep and meaningful, but there's the melody... Sometimes simplicity is best, sometimes the song demands something slightly more interesting. Maybe "You Have Been Loved" could have been slightly more interesting if he had put in a slow bass and maybe added a couple of notes from a keyboard or a synth.

The artist also needs to have a good voice. However, some artists' voices are good for the type of songs they do, but not for other types of songs. For example:

The vocalist in Depeche Mode doesn't have the greatest voice in the world, but it works perfectly for the type of songs he sings. Kind of dark, deep, synth-inspired songs. But I can't imagine him doing an Elton John song, for the simple reason that he doesn't have the voice for it. I'm not saying his voice is useless, but he's found a way he can use it without breaking glass. Alice Cooper is more screaming than singing, and even though he probably could do an average pop record, his voice is perfect for the type of music he does: Heavy rock.

Finally, if everything fits: You have a great vocalist you have a great melody, but what about the lyrics? If you really fall in love with a song and for some reason decide to look up the lyrics and see what they mean, I can promise you that you'll be terribly disappointed if the song is about nothing. For example:

Nice voice, catchy melodies but when you listen to the lyrics you can't help but thinking, "What the hell was that??" Sometimes it's funny, but if you have these great expectations to the lyrics and realise that what you thought was, "We had food and wine by the fire" actually was, "My c**k pointed in your direction with desire" you can't help but wonder what the point is. ;-)

When we speak of lyrics, let's go back to the main song here, shall we: "The Riddle". I actually have NO idea what the lyrics are about. I can read them, understand them but I don't get a meaning. I'm sure, if I sit down for a couple of hours and study the words, the sentences and try to read between the lines I'm sure that I could be able to understand. Still, it seems to me that he had a great melody but wasn't able to make sensible lyrics, so he just wrote a bunch of bullshit (pardon the expression) to use the melody for something.

Just look at it:

"...with time to carry on and try for sins and alarms, so to america the brave..."

"I've got plans for us: nights in the scullery and days instead of me. I only know what to discuss of for anything but light... "

"Near a tree by a river there's a hole in the ground, where an old man of Aran goes around and around..."

"Sly looks in corridors without a plan of yours, a blackbird sings on bluebird hill. Thanks to the calling of the wild..."

This is the only thing that makes a LITTLE bit of sense:

"It's not me, you see. Pieces of valentine with just a song of mine to keep from burning history. Seasons of gasoline and gold wise men fold"

It COULD mean that instead of burning old letters/songs/memories from your ex-lover, keep them (or "fold" as he says). Not that THAT makes much sense, but at least there's a sentence that almost makes sense.

Could it be that this song is about nothing?

 

Main