What are some “sore thumb” lyrics for you?
I’m calling a “sore thumb” lyric a bad line (or lines) in an otherwise good, well-written song. Something that sticks out like, well, a sore thumb.
It’s something that’s bad enough to be noteworthy, potentially even bad enough to ruin the entire song if it’s really potent. It is, of course, also entirely a matter of personal taste and preference. One person’s “sore thumb” lyric might be another person’s highlight.
Of note: it’s not a sore thumb lyric if you don’t like the song or think it’s poorly written in the first place. The point of the topic isn’t to highlight bad songwriting but to highlight misfires in otherwise good songwriting.
What are some examples of these lines in songs you like?
Explain why they stick out like a sore thumb for you personally.
Down with the Sickness - Disturbed
I normally prefer to listen to an entire album with Interludes and silences all. But when this song plays and I hear the "No mommy, I won't do it again".... Im skipping to the next song. That's a No from me bruv.
I forget who I stole this from, but I've taken to calling that the domestic abuse solo out of mockery.
At some point I found an edit of the song without it and added it to my Google Play Music (RIP) library and listened to that version instead.
I have always hated "Take The Money And Run" simply because of the last verse.
Bobbie Sue, whoa, whoa, she slipped away
Billy Joe caught up to her the very next day
They got the money, hey, you know they got away
They headed down south and they're still running today
Two of the four lines completely ruin the flow of the song by not even having the right number of syllables after already being stuffed with filler. Plus, look at the rhymes: they rhyme "away" with "away" and "day" with "today". It makes me irrationally angry.
At least it's not rhyming "things" with "things" like Kid Rock in the not even trying to be clever rip off song that is "All Summer Long."
(I know this isn't the point of the thread but I couldn't help myself.)
It's a great song for when you've been driving too long on a road trip, though, 'cause clap-clap-clap-clap-CLAP!
Emerson Lake and Palmer's "Still... You Turn Me On" :
I love that song, but that ladder line makes me cringe every single time. Just hits me like a something written by a 13 year old stretching too hard for a rhyme.
Is it possibly an allusion to suicide?
That's a good one, lol. It reads like a temp lyrics that got left in because they couldn't come up with anything better.
Not exactly a lyric, as it's part of the song's intro.
On Jay-Z's The Blueprint2 album, the title track samples Ennio Morricone's Ecstasy of Gold. The track was his highly anticipated comeback in the aftermath of a very damaging loss to Nas in their battle the previous year (pretty much the same way Drake lost to Kendrick in 2024) and he tried to use it to criticize public perception of their spat, repair his swagger, and re-establish himself as the top dog (pretty much exactly what Drake is trying to do right now).
In the intro, he sets the scene by referring to how much the media and other rappers have been grumbling about him. As the music begins to swell, Jay yells,
Firstly, it just sounds corny in his voice. Jay's voice is probably his main weakness as a rapper; he generally gets around it by sticking to his effortless cool persona, but whenever he doesn't it doesn't land well and this is no exception. Secondly and more importantly, though, there are no flutes at all anywhere in the song. He was talking about the iconic melody from the original song, which was originally performed by an opera singer, horns, and strings but is included solely as a vocal sample in Jay's version. It's pretty notorious as a bad lapse on his part, and I can't help but shake my head every time I hear it.
Apart from that, the song's up there among his best!
America — A Horse With No Name
First off, huge respect to the band, they’re one of the legends of classic rock. I like the vibe of this song and it’s catchy as heck. But those verses are the pinnacle of r/im14andthisisdeep energy. Lazy and cringe.
One that immediately comes to mind is that song by Kanye where the line is:
“I keep it 300, like the Romans”
300…Spartans…they were Greek. TBF it ruins the whole song for me.
He claims he purely meant it as a pun on keeping it 100, where to the Romans 300 is CCC, Cool, Calm, and Collected.
Obviously, he probably meant to reference the Spartans, because that makes more sense in the context of a song called Black Skinhead, on a noise-y album, during the period where his biggest concern was how the fashion industry was fighting to keep him out.
I never watched that movie, but according to Wikipedia, it refers to the number of soldiers in a fantasy army? What would it mean if the reference were corrected?
The Romans in 300 BC were conquering central Italy, so I suppose you could imagine it as referring to them? What is the song actually about?
I got that already but I was asking about the song.
At the time, Kanye was trying to go into the fashion scene, and the song is Black Skinhead. The whole album is framed as though he's on some problack crusade and being hunted for his genius, so I imagine it's supposed to evoke the cornered but righteous struggle for sovereignty of the Greeks versus Persia.
Must remember, this was when he was beginning to develop bigger issues in his mental health.
I love Janelle Monae. Bisexual Queen that they/she is.
But in Wondaland's song, "Yoga," which features her and Jidenna, she sings the following lines:
The first time I heard it, and honestly anytime I listen to this song, it sounds like she's saying, "Scratching on my gash." Which is like, wtf did she just say :o She's doing what to her lady parts? And I know I'm not the only one who's perceived it that way. Doesn't help that the lyrics surrounding the line are intentionally vulgar. Which she even says she can be.
I don't know if that's intentional, where the line sounds ambiguous and even more vulgar, or what. Either way, that line throws me every time. But I still like the song. So not the biggest sore thumb.
I like the first few albums by The Mars Volta, particularly the first two. But there's one part in Tetragrammaton that I have never been able to take seriously:
Just... huh?
Listening to rap/hip-hop songs from like 1990-2014 is a minefield. You'll be listening to a song and just out of nowhere, and seemingly out-of-place in the song, you'll just hear someone drop the f-slur. The one that hurts the most is "Favorite Song" by Chance the Rapper ft. Childish Gambino. I need to find a version of the song that censors just that one line and leaves the rest unchanged. It has been a staple of all my summer playlists since I was in high school, but I always have to be mindful of audience when I go to put it on so I don't unintentionally harm or upset anyone. The song fills me with so many happy, chill summer vibes of hanging out with my friends...... minus one line.
Sadly, that is kinda par for the course with music from that time period, especially rap.
If you're playing it around friends who know your stance on the subject well, they would hopefully know that listening to this one song doesn't demonstrate your views. Obviously, as you said, audience matters.
Something that makes me feel similar is the movie Idiocracy. While everyone continually jokes about how it is unfolding in real life, those who have not watched it recently may forget how many times the characters throw around the word "retarded." It was tolerated much more when the movie came out, but now it has climbed up the yikes scale. Perhaps the best justification for it is that the characters have been dumbed down enough that this is their primary insult and the best they can come up with. But if you recommend it to someone who hasn't seen it, it's worth telling them about this to let them know that specific word isn't the funniest part of the movie.
I haven’t watched the movie in ages but that’s how I remember its use of that word being framed. Not that it should be normalized, but that normalizing it is a sign of stupidity.
Yeah that's basically what I was getting at. When I was writing this, the situation I had in mind is like, I wouldn't put that song on a playlist that is going to be playing loudly on a speaker in a campground where strangers and children are around because I don't know them. Or I have friends who have a lower tolerance for slurs than others (what a sentence to write), and so I wouldn't play it around them. Or there are some days where myself or my wife are feeling less safe in the world around us and so hearing a homophobic slur hits harder than usual and so I would avoid that. But if I am driving around the car with friends I know well, I would probably put it on.
There is a whole additional complicating layer around queerness and the use/reclaiming of the slur that is just a whole different can of worms.
It's nice of them to normalize the homophobic slurs too. /s
Everything that is the r-slur is the f-slur. Or it's both. Plus the movie is flat out based on the idea of eugenics.
I see where you're coming from, and I'm inclined to agree with your perspective that music that incorporates slurs is normalizing them. But in the context of the main comment, I get the impression that the commenter has decided that they will listen to the song despite this.
My comment was framed under the assumption that their desire to listen to the song is greater than their disapproval of the one line. I didn't argue if they still should listen to the song, but I probably should have.
Regarding Idiocracy, I disagree that it has a pro-eugenics message. I don't think it really has anything to do with eugenics. The premise is introduced as an unintentional side effect of differing perspectives on responsible parenting.
Mike Judge responded to this in an interview.
I was referring to Idiocracy, not music. I'm not advocating for the OP to listen or not to the music they choose. Idiocracy uses the f-slur slur quite a bit.
https://youtu.be/sP2tUW0HDHA?si=4G_Rmt5JLFf-DRaP
But in the first ten seconds we mention evolution at a tipping point, and natural selection leading to a dumbing down.
"Without natural predators to thin the herd, we began to simply reward those who reproduced the most and left the intelligent to become an endangered species."
There are active eugenics supporting pro-natalists today who argue they must have more kids to make sure there are more "smart" (white) people born, and advocate for others to do so.
Let me just say, he can say it's a "mix of nature and nurture" but that's not the text of the film he made.
I think it's the same story with all of the offensive language in the film. He actually mentioned that in the same interview:
So it's highlighting that only stupid and immature people talk like that. (Unfortunately there are educated people who do use these terms, but in the context of the film it is insulting those who use them.)
I obviously can't read Mike Judge's mind and tell you if he had hidden motives. Much of his writing is "stupid" humor for the sake of being stupid - we're talking about the creator of Beavis and Butt-head after all. But if nothing else, I think he has taken the opportunity to use the King of the Hill reboot to demonstrate an overall acceptance of a more conscious society. (There's probably a better word than "conscious" but hopefully you understand where I'm going with this.)
Minor spoilers for King of the Hill S14E01
Near the beginning of the episode, Hank comes back to Texas after a long stretch of time elsewhere. He runs into many things that reflect ways society has changed but conflict with his traditional values, such as gender-neutral bathrooms.
As the episode wraps up, Hank becomes more accepting of these changes, even if he doesn't fully understand them.
(Keeping this vague to limit spoilers.)
I'm not really ascribing motive so much as outcome. The movie has this as the premise and, because of the choices he made it's really homophobic and ableist. For some the art may outweigh that. When I first watched it, those things didn't click for me. But much like the FedEx arrow, I can't "unsee" it now.
I worry when people talk about it as a cautionary tale, because the things it cautions people about are about wanting better genes. I think there's other things to get out of the film, but it's all built on that presence and should, IMO, be acknowledged.
This comment was borne out of a place of open-minded intrigue and a desire to challenge personal assumptions, but I want to caveat that as the writer, I am a member of generally accepted majority in society and therefore may have an unconscious bias to downplay eugenics in its various forms.
The outcome of the movie is that the world learns and adapts to new information, and for the better. President Camacho is one of the first individuals to overcome his ego, eventually abdicating his own position for the greater good.
It may not be a super compelling argument against eugenics, but I think the fact that characters (and the general populace) show some growth at the end tips the scale towards “nurture” in the nature vs. nurture debate.
That overall message may be done through crude humor and now-verboten slurs, but as I’ve dissected the film I don’t think the premise was inherently eugenicist. It’s ultimately the lopsided population distribution (to low socioeconomic status) and environmental destruction (due to lack of expertise) that causes a vicious cycle that leads to the idiocracy, not a “poisoned” gene pool. You could argue that “poor people over-producing” aligns with many eugenicist beliefs, but the film isn’t advocating for murder or violence against these people either.
I started to get deep into this and wanted to understand what constitutes genocide, to see if it strictly had a genetic component. According to the Genocide Convention, it involves an “intent to destroy[…]a national, ethnically, racial, or religious group”. I don’t see the lower socioeconomic status group in Idiocracy as belonging to those since the eventual governing body of the US (/world?) is itself a racially diverse group. However, if I were to be more fast and loose with definitions and instead claim that the descendants of the low socioeconomic progenitors are themselves one of these qualifying bodies, then the education of “low IQ” individuals could qualify as genocide under:
But even then we are talking about people evolving into improved human beings…not being destroyed/murdered. So from this perspective the film is not advocating for eugenics.
Outside of the film, there’s relatively strong evidence to indicate that socioeconomic status is a far more likely of predictor of outcomes than genetics. Some of the counterfactuals to those studies (e.g. that adults can increase IQ over time) continue to give credence to the “nurture” side of the debate as they imply the environment is the primary limiting factor to IQ rather than genetics.
I didn’t start this comment to downplay your interpretation. I saw the film a year or two ago and some elements definitely did not age well by modern standards. That being said, I have personally used the film as an allegory for some of the current decline we’re seeing in society and I wanted to reassess whether my memory clouded my judgement in its message (to the extent that I looked up the full screenplay to be certain of the ending narrative). There’s definitely some ambiguity still left in interpretation, as most art tends to have, but the concrete examples I found led to my ultimate evaluation that it’s not genes but the social environment that deserves critiquing.
I disagree with your dissection, because IMO it fully ignores the literal script of the movie's opening. The premise is blatantly eugenicist. IMO the clear messaging at the beginning of the movie means it's operating on a premise of eugenics. The world only gets better when a genetically superior (to them) person shows up. Then that growth happens. Evolutionary theory has been used in racist and genocidal ways - removing "bad blood" from the gene pool, social Darwinism, scientific racism - so it's use here doesn't preempt eugenics, it's one of the strongest reasons I argue my point. Belief that if the wrong people - poor, dumb, whatever - reproduce then we de-evolve as a species is literally based on that they have worse genes than the other people.
You also don't need to murder or commit genocide to be engaged in eugenics. But the idea that "educating people with low IQ" qualifies as genocide is IMO a near offensive take on the topic.
You're free to have your opinion, I'm not saying you can't enjoy the movie. I'm not even saying that eugenics is the overarching message of the movie or that it's a "pro eugenic" message. I'm not at all talking about real world IQ. My point is always that eugenics is bullshit racist science so I don't need to read about how nurture is a stronger argument. But they could have started the film with a "nurture" based premise and didn't. It's a eugenics based premise because the script says so.
I've read critiques of my position, that suggest I'm missing the subtle "show don't tell" messaging of how it's the capitalism thats bad actually, and yes the capitalism is bad, though I think that's "told" too. But the set up for the movie doesn't work without the idea of eu/dysgenics.
We don't agree and that's fine. I'm not that interested in this movie.
Well, it's satire and a cautionary tale. Or it was supposed to be until it got turned into a blueprint.
The "cautionary tale" part is the eugenics part.
It isn't satirizing the eugenicist beliefs, it's satirizing society using a premise that is eugenics based.
Well I have not seen that movie for ten years, and remembered it as people getting dumber because dumb things were rewarded, rather than people getting dumber because dumb people reproduce more. Ouch. You are absolutely right.
Gang Starr is one of my favorites but my god Guru's all over the place. From DWYCK:
I don't listen to Ken Carson super often to be fair, but one of the lines in i need u always sticks out to me:
I'm guessing he means counterfeit money, but the line is just strange this way imo.
There's also my favorite example of this ever (from Lil Yachty's song Peak A Boo):
Which he tried to justify on Genius
Squidward, famous flute player.
I wouldn’t call myself a Swiftie, but I would say that I’ve been fond of Taylor Swift's songwriting ever since Speak Now came out. I was impressed at the richness of its lyrics. Swift was a teenager when writing most of them, but her writing had a maturity and perspective that felt older than her years. She has a fantastic ear for melody and can land resonance in pop song lyrics like few else.
But there is one line that has bothered me ever since Speak Now came out fifteen years ago. In "Better Than Revenge", the chorus starts like this:
Not only is the "actress/mattress" rhyme tortured on its own, but the last two lines feel juvenile in a bad way (and more than a little bit slut-shame-y). Those lines were the bane of my many repeated Speak Now listens, blemishing what I think is otherwise a nearly flawless pop album.
Well, in a remarkably rare case of a sore thumb line being fixed, Swift actually changed the lyrics when she re-recorded "Taylor's Version", tweaking the chorus to be:
It is a genuine improvement in my eyes. A fantastic bugfix, now with 100% less slut-shaming! Even besides that, it hits the ear better; the rhyming is more thoughtful; and it strengthens the song's theme.
It's not often that artists get a chance to 'fix" a song but Swift took that opportunity with her re-record and I think the song and album are much better for it.
Dance Gavin Dance - Nothing Shameful
Most of the song is pretty straightforward relationship-y stuff. Lamenting that the person they love(d) doesn't return their feelings, or at least not with anywhere near the same intensity. 2 of the 3 harsh vocal verses are pretty much unrelated and utter nonsense. Honestly I like the music and the other lyrics enough that it's still my favourite song by them. I just have to turn off my language parser when the screaming starts.
This is pretty standard fare for Jon Mess lol seriously, go back and look at the lyrics from Downtown Battle Mountain. He's been doing this forever.
Maybe that one line speaks to it - they "tried out comedy" and that's the result.
Eve 6 - Inside Out
Find nothing but faith in nothing
I think if they knew how big of a hit that song was gonna be they’d have tried a little harder with this.
Funny, I actually love the way this lyric sounds and it's one of my favorite lines to sing along to. Something about the rhythm of those words and even the repetition itself just feels satisfying to my ears.
Huh, I actually like that lyric a lot. Not because it means anything, it's just really pleasing to the ear the way it's sung. Actually a lot of that song is like that - the lyrics don't mean anything particularly deep but they feel really nice to sing and they scan really well.
It just really bothers me that they rhyme nothing with nothing
My ear doesn't hear the "nothing/nothing" line as an attempted rhyme. The rhyme scheme in this song is a little loose but it makes pretty heavy use of unrhymed stanzas punctuating the verses and chorus. It's been a long time since I've done much formal analysis of poetry, and it was never my favorite thing to do in the first place, but I've made an attempt - I think the first verse would be something like:
aA, xA, bB, xX, cC, xX, dD
It's a little easier to see what's going on if you highlight the rhymes, I think.
https://i.postimg.cc/jjK5VWtW/Eve6-Verse-Chorus.png
Now, your ear is your ear, there's no right or wrong way to hear poetry or music, but from my perspective I don't think lines 4 or 6 are meant to rhyme, either internally or with other lines.
Also, just for fun, the bridge in this song is really well written, IMO:
https://i.postimg.cc/3RZ7g9v9/Eve6-Bridge-2.png
I love that you brought an annotated counterpoint to the table.
This is such a high effort post on such a low stakes topic and I am here for it. 😁
Thanks! I've always loved that kind of comment - it was one of my favorite things about early reddit, and I had fun putting this together.
I totally get it.
In thinking about my own answer to the question, Vanessa Carlton’s “Hands on Me” came to mind.
I love the whole song: its lyrics, its composition, its feel, the brightness of Carlton’s voice. I also have a soft spot for the video, which was explicitly queer-inclusive back in 2007 when mainstream representation was still quite hard for us to find.
But in the chorus, she sings:
Multiple times.
It’s not technically a rhyme in the structure of the song, but my brain can’t hear it as anything other than rhyming “me” with “me”.
I know that song and I have the same issue with it! My brain just hears it as something that was supposed to rhyme.
I agree with the other commenters and like this line a lot too.
This song falls in the "alternative rock" genre, and a lot of alt music (especially as it has progressed through the early 2000s to now) is tied to getting emotions out. Inside Out is almost a series of stammering words one would write in a journal if they didn't overthink it and wrote down a flow of consciousness. But of course, this is has been transformed into the clever and somewhat cliche lyrics I know and love Eve 6 for.
Another Eve 6 song from their next album, Enemy, reinforces this stream of consciousness idea - he talks through part of his day in excessive detail and then admits to where his current emotional state is:
Its just that they rhyme nothing with nothing. That bothers the crap out of me lol
Rush - Countdown
I used to listen to a lot of Rush as a teenager. This is a song about watching the first launch of the space shuttle, which I quite liked at the time, except:
"Excitement so thick you could cut it with a knife."
Been a while since I listened to this song. Is it the performance of the line? Cause that is an idiom that gets some use.
It seemed like a corny metaphor and not one that young people would use unless you’re trying to sound old-fashioned. It’s an abrupt transition from enthusiasm about an awesome experience they had to dinner at grandma’s.
Honestly Rush is a good band but they've always struck me as pretty corny in general, lyrically speaking. Also I have a hard time listening to Geddy Lee's vocals but that's a me thing.
That's definitely not just a you thing. I find them mildly interesting musically but the vocals are just nope.
Invisible by D-Side. The lyrics in general read like a stalker's anthem, and it's a bit weird that Clay Aiken did a cover of this song for the US crowd after being the runner-up of American Idol.
Two examples of what I mean, one from the very first verse
And the chorus...
Do I even need to spell out how that's creepy as fuck? I mean I get what the songwriters were trying to go for here, the song is basically about falling for someone who doesn't even notice you. But I don't think there's a context where you could tell a lady that you want to be a fly on her wall or to watch her in her bedroom unnoticed without being labelled a creep.
Maybe the early 2000s were a different time? Or... these lyrics hit different when the guy singing them is actually physically attractive and a genuine chick magnet?
Besides, Radiohead did the whole unrequited love song better with Creep, and theirs was intentionally meant to have obsessive stalker vibes.
Unrequited love is sort of inherently creepy. You have feelings for someone that you know they don't share, and you know you think about them far more than they ever think about you.
It feels creepy being in that situation and I think most people can identify with having to consciously think about whether something you want to do would be perceived as creepy or not if you've been in that situation.
I don't think there's really anything wrong with writing a song about it.
I think there's maybe a fundemtal value mismatch with me on that. Personally I don't think thoughts are wrong; they're natural, and they're difficult if not impossible to control in many cases. Actions, however, are controllable, and are what have actual consequences in the world.
I think that if you're in love with someone that doesn't love you back, you are going to have thoughts and fantasies about them no matter what. You can try to control them, but that is probably only possible to an extent. It's also very normal and natural, and I don't think there's anything wrong with it. Is it creepy? Yeah, kind of, and I think that's what so many of these songs are trying to explore. I don't think creepy = wrong though, necessary.
When you start actually doing creepy things, that's when it becomes wrong. If you're a dorky frumpy girl who is in love with the most popular guy in school who doesn't even know you exist, you're probably going to wonder what it's like to kiss him or lie in bed with him. Having those thoughts isn't wrong. Sneaking into his house and actually lying in his bed? Yeah, that's wrong.
I think this is an interesting disagreement. Some people think their private thoughts should be governed by ethics, others think that what’s important is keeping one’s actions ethical, but that thoughts don’t matter. Is it possible for a thought to be immoral (or unethical or evil)?
I think there are valid arguments to be made for both, and I don’t think there’s any value in trying to persuade anyone else that they’re doing it wrong. It’s just an interesting way different people are wired differently, as far as I’m concerned. I do wonder if there’s correlation between a person’s stance on this, and whether they’re willing to play an evil character in video games with that option. I’ve noticed that some people are able to do so easily, while others have a visceral reaction that prevents them from it.
To pick at something massively popular, I find Toto's Africa to be, from a songwriting/musical angle, a well-crafted song, I think it has some great melodies and songwriting, but the lyrics definitely are a massive flaw of the track.
They're overall a problem but particular lines like the clueless one about Kilimanjaro really stand out
It's as "clueless American white man writing about Africa" as one would expect. Its video didn't help things either. Also even some of the instrument/synth choices could be seen as really on-the-nose/overwrought but I think without considering the lyrics it's a decent track.
I am having a hard time thinking of songs with good lyrics where a single line really stands out. It's an interesting thing to consider though. I am positive I have encountered some and just can't think of them. Most of the ones I can think of, when I reflect on them, I just realize all the lines are bad, not just one.
Maybe this information will save the song for you:
Jeff Porcaro, Co-writer and drummer, on the song:
The narrator is meant to be uninformed, performing an ode to something he's ignorant of. I don't know if that improves the song for you, but it helped but a lot of the lyrics into context for me.
Yeah I am aware of their reasoning but I don't find that it helps that much. Maybe slightly, but it's an unnecessarily cringey perspective to immortalize in song that I kinda just didn't realize for a LONG time and just kinda passively accepted- but once it's pointed out it sticks out so much lol. Even the entire missionary angle itself is cringeworthy on its own.
Like even if that reasoning is honest, I find the choice to write that way a weakness in the craft of the song.
And I am certainly not just trying to jump on it as an easy target for criticism (it has been criticized already ad nauseam), but I felt this fact about it makes it match very well with the topic here- in that it legitimately worsens the song for me (the music video does too) which I otherwise have really enjoyed historically (as a fan of some Toto releases).
It's just one of those things where from time to time it really "pulls me out" of experience of listening to the song, through a kind of second-hand embarrassment
Maybe one other thing does help me a bit- and that's that the band members even in recent years are self-critical about the goofiness of the lyrics. I don't think they had any ill will, to be clear- I am just talking about it from a song quality angle. I wish such catchy and enjoyable songs could have a better story to tell
And I am no stranger to cringeworthy lyrics either (as someone with nostalgia for nu-metal, for instance)
I'd find it just as believable that this intepretation is a post-hoc rationalization. From everything I've heard this was a song that the band had mixed opinions on and didn't really take seriously (if I'm remembering right it was tossed on as the final B-side track of Toto IV, maybe even as an afterthought?).
I'm definitely not saying it's a certainty, but them putting out the narrative that it was meant to be bad after the fact does smack of trying to cover up a lil' bit of embarrassment.
This section of chorus from Eminem's White America just irks me.
It just feels like such a repeat to use Eric and then Erica. He is such a good wordsmith that I kind of expect better, but I may just be a little overly critical on the Eric/Erica thing. Either way, it irks the heck out of me when I hear the rhyme.
I think in interviews he has mentioned just using names that fit the rhymes, so I am unsure if Eric or Erica/Erika are a direct reference to anything. If the name or names are indeed references though, I am not sure it would help me get over how repetitive I find the rhyme unfortunately.
I've done zero Googling, but I'd almost wonder if using the names is a dig at how unoriginal "white" names were at the time, especially middle- to uppermiddle-class names. Erica and Eric were both in the top 50 child names in the '90s. And I had several (well-off) Erics on my hockey teams, and actually knew a pair of twins who were Eric and Erica (Dad's name was also, obviously, Eric).
I adore the song Wooly by Breathe Carolina, but the line
"Come back to me,
Your heart's not breathing"
takes me out of the song every time. Just say beating, dang it!
I'm breaking the rules and submitting a song with a sore thumb bridge/interlude. Namely, this guitar solo makes me insane. It is what I would consider as close to a perfect song UP UNTIL this waste of a guitar solo. It's lazy.
Here, start the song from the beginning and listen: Sufjan Stevens - Springfield
The aforementioned cat scratching at my eardrums starts at 1:25. What the hell Sufjan!
I always took the crazy guitar as Bobby's emotions. He's living in Springfield, if one can call living in Springfield, Illinois "living," and knows that he's going nowhere quickly. Just like his dad. But then he has a chance to do something crazy. Does he do it? Should he do it? Even though it's wrong? But it's exciting! And he's wrestling with all of this inside his head. And, to me, that's what we're hearing. That's always been my interpretation.
Yeah it's fine there.
OK, this one is super stupid, so brace yourselves.
My kids listen to Parry Gripp, which is mostly annoying earworm pop music. But the songs and lyrics are whimsical enough that it normally doesn't bother me too much.
But one song has a line that moves the needle from tolerable to grating for me. In the song Neon Pegasus at right around the 1:35 mark, we get this line:
"George Clooney" has one too many syllables to fit along with the music, and it drives me nuts. Especially since there is never a callback to this line, so something like "Brad Pitt" would have worked perfectly well. It's reigniting my ire just thinking about it!
Florence + the Machine - "South London Forever" from "High As Hope"
I love of Florence + the Machine in general, and her lyrics are usually super moving and emotional. But then there's this singularly bizarrely unpoignant line in the middle of "South London Forever"
While it matches the theme of the song and album, I've just always felt like the line clashes so much with the rest of the song. It also forms a weird slant rhyme with 'own,' and it brings me out of the song really hard.
I am just baffled that they couldn't find a better line to replace it. You could even remove it from the song and it would flow just the same. It feels like a first draft remnant that they didn't replace.
I really appreciate this topic, it's been something that I've thought about on every road trip where I've played the album!
Sunflower by Swae Lee and Post Malone. Honestly one of the most catchy songs I've ever heard and it was my first introduction to Post Malone (even though he's not the primary vocals on it). The lyrics aren't amazing, but even still I can't help but laugh at how profoundly stupid "ride me like a cruise" is.
And a less serious one that doesn't really bother me, but I find amusing is the nonsensical route taken in Wagon Wheel by Old Crow Medicine Show. He goes west through the Cumberland Gap to get to Johnson City, TN, which is east of the Cumberland Gap. All the while this massive detour is insanely out of his way, given how relatively close Roanoke, VA and Raleigh, NC are.
Obviously lyrical flow matters more than efficient route-taking or geographic accuracy, so I give it a pass. Plus the guy's hitchhiking his ass all the from New England to N Carolina to get laid, so he can do w/e he wants.
Two songs immediately spring to mind:
Jimmy Buffett - Mental floss
The song is nearly perfect. It starts with I'd like to be a jellyfish, 'cause jellyfish don't pay rent. It's got steel drums and Buffett's Caribbean vibe. It advocates for a stoic sort of outlook in a catchy tune. Pretty great.
But the second line of the song is They don't walk and they don't talk with some Euro-trash accent, which, I feel like completely undermines the entire message of the song. "Be chill, be happy, don't fret about stuff... except the French. Here's a completely unnecessary dig at an entire continent." Very chill, Jimmy.
Morrissey - Spent the Day in Bed
Another banger I could almost consider a personal theme song. Another song about disconnecting from reality, treating yourself to being absent from it all, with beauties like Life ends in death, So, there's nothing wrong with, Being good to yourself, Be good to yourself for once.
But the closing of the song - so close, Morrisey, so close - extoling the benefits of spending the day in bed - No emasculation, no castration. Did you really need to make it about your fragile masculinity and your wiener?
In the end, two songs that get so close to hitting the Epicurean way of life only to sneak in little threads of insecurity and lameness.
Kind of surprised no one mentioned this one yet, but for me the line “Doc told me to travel, but there's Covid on the planes” from Noah Kahan’s “Stick Season” is jarring every time I hear it.
Something about “Covid” feeling like a current event and expecting songs to either be entirely about an event or be more nebulous? Not totally sure, to be honest.
This one random line in the chorus of the Carolina Chocolate Drops' "Country Girl":
First of all, when I listen to it, the line sounds like, "I wanna shut your mouth," and so I'm constantly like...why? I'm just here listening to the song! I didn't say anything! The actual line makes more sense, but it's still weird to me. I otherwise like the song quite a bit despite being a white guy from Michigan. And it's actually sorta fun making fun of that line, especially if I'm listening with my son.
Filter has a song "Dose" on the album Short Bus. Their lyrics are generally pretty good, and I feel at least earnest, but a line that bugs me in one of the choruses is:
The second line just seems unnecessarily obscene and out of place. It just sticks out for that in an otherwise good song. I'm not particularly prudish it just... kinda sticks out like a sore thumb (ha).