The witch - Writers Forum

Mystery · 05-22-2008, 07:59 PM

My favorite piece and the first one written for the album that motivated me to put more effort than I have life force for, the arrangement is not quite done, because of instrumentality, however the song is pretty much in its final form, maybe an outro or outro chorus only missing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see the witch becoming fire
I watch your kingdom as it falls
I see the trebuchet its launching
I see it breaking down your walls

Mesmerizing as you may be
I can't see your face in this mirror
[Beyond tears and makeup]
Shadows stalk behind your face
Temped to disgrace

A whore can't stone a sinner
And a sinners path you walk
[In the ancient land]
At the foot of the hill you'll find
The prayer ends along with mankind

I see the witch becoming fire
I watch your kingdom as it falls
I see the trebuchet its launching
I see it breaking down your walls

I see the crusaders as their storming
I watch thousands become streams of blood
I see the comets as their passing
The Realm of heaven beyond our Brood

Fire tempting God
Can you come down from your throne
Men are tired of storming castles
As brick by brick they fall
And they regress

We've twisted the bars in circles
We wear them as our crowns
It's a funny play of comedy
But our masks don’t smile along

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: I don't intend on explaining any of my lyrics.

T.W. North · 05-23-2008, 03:07 AM

Hmm...I can't say too much on this without you taking it as a matter of opinion, which I guess it mostly is. I just don't see the merit in alot of those verses, they're awkward and certainly not your best worded. Particularly:

I see the crusaders as their storming
I watch thousands become streams of blood
I see the comets as their passing
I see the realms of heaven beyond this brood

Fire tempting God
Can you come down from your throne
Men are tired of storming castles
As brick by brick they fail to make progress at all

Sure, great ideas...but I think it needs editing.

Mystery · 05-23-2008, 08:02 AM

Those where actually last minute changes because I felt like the rhyming scheme wasn't good enough, so they do actually need changing.

However, I'm willing to listen to your opinion-related problems.

T.W. North · 05-23-2008, 11:37 PM

Well, its like power metal lyrics in a half death metal setting...and it doesn't doesn't sit well with me. I've never been a fan of throwing in medieval references quite as handily as you have done here...just seems so tacky and immature. I mean sure, they have a fairly good direction for their meaning...but it just seems weird to be mentioning trebuchets and 'storming castles' although the last one could be done well, you've just worded it quite awkwardly. However, as pointed out in another song, its hard to catch rhythm from metal lyrics.

A whore can't stone a sinner
And a sinners path you walk
[In the ancient land]
It's as if you start to say something...and then you redirect the lyrics into nowhere. I like the first line, its original and it makes sense...but why did you continue about a sinner when it was about a whore? It had nothing to do with anything.

I just don't like it. I could rant for awhile pointing out flaws in every line..but most of them are slightly non-sensical and just me not liking it. *shrug*

Mystery · 05-24-2008, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T.W. North

A whore can't stone a sinner
And a sinners path you walk
[In the ancient land]
It's as if you start to say something...and then you redirect the lyrics into nowhere. I like the first line, its original and it makes sense...but why did you continue about a sinner when it was about a whore? It had nothing to do with anything.

Even though I'm hellbent against it, I'll explain.

There are two people in every lyric, me and you.
Now if A whore(Person A) can't stone a sinner(presumably person B) and YOU walk a sinners path, who is person A and person B? I am person A and you are person B.

The second part might seem a bit disjunct I know, but consider that I'm making a bible reference and then talking about an "ancient land", I'm not sure about you but from the top of end, the only time I remember manking coming to an end all floats around ancient times.

About it being tacky and immature, I don't really understand why.

T.W. North · 05-26-2008, 02:41 AM

Neither do I. I just get that feeling from it, it oozes it for me. Like I said, its not something I can properly explain. See, to most people, it would not be anywhere NEAR evident that you're the whore. There is no further mention, no hinting at all, all you have is that 'person A and B' stuff. Which is far too technical to give a poem or lyric meaning.

Mystery · 05-26-2008, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T.W. North

Neither do I. I just get that feeling from it, it oozes it for me. Like I said, its not something I can properly explain. See, to most people, it would not be anywhere NEAR evident that you're the whore. There is no further mention, no hinting at all, all you have is that 'person A and B' stuff. Which is far too technical to give a poem or lyric meaning.

I can't give people common logic, if you can't use such pathetic logic deduction it's better yet that you don't understand the meaning.

T.W. North · 05-27-2008, 02:01 AM

...
It's not even common logic. It's some shit YOU think. What YOU think is NOT common. Common is when many, many people think along those lines.

Mystery · 05-27-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T.W. North

...
It's not even common logic. It's some shit YOU think. What YOU think is NOT common. Common is when many, many people think along those lines.

Dude seriously, have you forgotten my age or what I do for a living? Do you seriously think I didn't show this lyric to other people? Do you seriously think I would be calling it common logic if not for only a few select saying its not? I've shown this to 17(yes, I counted them) friends of mine, and not all of them are smart or care about intelligent pursuit such as logical puzzles and shit, but out of all of them, do you know how many didn't get this, or for that matter agree with you? Three people. That makes four of you out of 18. Don't insult my intelligence like this please.

Yes, it is all common logic. To begin with, the way I presented it is in the form of a logic puzzle( a very pathetic one) which requires one skills, logical deduction.

2 subjects(I, you) 2 accusations(whore, sinner)
If subject (you) has been given accusation (sinner) and it has been made clear that the two accusations are belonging to different persons (A whore cant stone a sinner = two people), then what is left? Subject (I) and Accusation (whore).

Continuing from that, the next part will require a bit of general knowledge(if even that) and the ability to relate a specific term into it's category. A whore is a sinner but given specific nature to their sin(adultery, lust) therefor they are in a way synonyms. That is how they are related in the verse. Furthermore, which story have you heard involving sinnners, whores, stoners? Bible story, casting the first stone. IF you cannot relate these two, you fail, not me.

Finally, as to why I start with this biblical reference and break off, I don't. I said all I needed to say in the two lines(and proved they are interrelated), however, I can continue with this(and even this is logical order if you think about it, but it's not common logic). In the ancient land, and I was making a bible reference in the last two verses, what ancient land do you think I'm talking about? The hill, prayers, it's all biblical, I'm just starting with a play off a biblical story and then going into something more general.(I'm not explaining the meaning to any of this, like I said, if you couldn't figure these things out, it's better you don't know).

Now that I've explained all this, and made clear both the common logic part of the verse, as well as how everything is actually related and not just thrown at random, I'd like to tell you one more thing. If you can't see the meaning after drawing the relations, this isn't for you to be reading, I'm not going to make the meaning easier to understand, if thats what you've been arguing about then you should have understood from the start that that that is the one thing I'm not changing(which I made clear >.>)