Does anyone else really not get the appeal?

[Damn!t]

The appeal for Syd was never completely a thing in which you could appreciate his music or his words without seeing him as a wacky and slightly different person then the rest of people.
Meaning - Syds personality made them like him. He was cool and allways stood litlle bit out of the frame. Even in the context of those times. He did made some good music and wrote some good lyrics but that's as far as I'm ready to go with the judgement of his work.
Good. And I allways felt like that.
Then he became a legend like Morrison or Cobain. We all know that story.
And there was alot of unknown territory that people have been discussing for years, making that legend even bigger.
I understand why people have developed a personality cult towards him... same things are happening to every story that is unusual and romantic and left untold to some great extent. Becouse no one really knows the whole story so it kind of leaves your imagination to run free.
In all that romanticism people tend to see Syd as a great musical and lyrical genious. He was groundbreaking to some extent at the beginning of his carreer, but later on he was no more then below average.

[mosespa]

I really, really dig "Flaming."

The rest of PATGOD varies from "quaintly interesting" to "ugh" for me.

*shrug*

[thehumanzoo]

Totally agree with Smithy. Aside from the more instrumental and jamming stuff on Piper (Astronomy Domine, Interstellar Overdrive), a few rhyming couplets and a couple of the solo songs, I don't really get it either. In fact, I would go as far to say that most of the second half of Piper is terrible: I really can't get any enjoyment from Chapter 24 or Scarecrow at all.

I'm sure the guy was massively talented, but I don't see how you can listen to the solo albums as enjoyment when they sound rhythmically wrong and timing is out - I'm really not convinced that was the effect he was going for. Additionally, the off key performances make them tough listening. However, when arranged well, I do agree that some of the songs do stand up reasonably well. David Gilmour has pulled off Dominoes, Arnold Layne, Terrapin and Here I Go pretty well and Astronomy Domine was staple through all the early tours and was a highlight of both the Division Bell and the On an Island tours.

Had Syd not had his problems, I really don't believe that he would have gone down in history at all as he has. In fact, I have always maintained that Pink Floyd would be nowhere as big today if they had carried on with him. I think they would have become one of those 60s/70s band that would be known but didn't have a massive fanbase. Similar to, say, the Small Faces or the Moody Blues. Actually, I'm not convinced they would have got past the psychedelic jamming and dispensable pop song stage.

Again,this is not meant to be a Syd bashing post, just that I think his 'legend' status can be a little overrated, partly a result of the guilt of the other band members making many subtle and not so subtle references to him in some of their later works.

[nosaj]

1. The lyrics don't seem to have a whole lot of depth beneath their surrealism
2. PATGOD has not dated particularly well
3. i guess it just doesn't hold a candle to the atmospheric and powerful roger efforts to explain the human condition.
4. i'm wondering what the syd fans like so much about his music

1. Found this on the inter-webby-thing:
"Surrealist music is music which uses unexpected juxtapositions and other surrealist techniques. Anne LeBaron[citation needed] cites automatism, including improvisation, and collage as the primary techniques of musical surrealism. Discussing Theodor Adorno, Max Paddison (1993, p. 90) defines surrealist music as that which "juxtaposes its historically devalued fragments in a montage-like manner which enables them to yield up new meanings within a new aesthetic unity," though Lloyd Whitesell calls this a gloss.[citation needed] "Insofar as surrealist composing makes use of devalued means, it uses these as devalued means, and wins its form from the 'scandal' produced when the dead suddenly spring up among the living." (Whitesell 2004, p.107 and 118n18)."

I like the bolded bit, and I guess it requires the listener to create a unity if they so choose. Perhaps you could say that the listener has some work cut out for them to complete this "unity" or not.

2. Opinion of course. I think it has dated much better than Neil Young's Landing on Water, to be all arbitrary...

3. Roger is fairly literal, so clocks and a song about time, cash registers and a song about money...not much work for the listener (see point 1.)

4. Don't know if I am a "Syd fan" per se (or any member of PF, really...as a matter of fact, it is all pink), but I suggest looking at point 1 again, and thinking about what the listener brings to the music - for instance, the Wall kind of hits you over the head and leaves little to the imagination...
----------
Seems it is a question of open-sign systems and closed-sign systems...what do you want? To get it? That seems a little boring...imo...

Have you got it yet? Bru-ha-ha, bolderdash, these are words that start with "B"...its only talk...elephant talk? hmmm...I thought it was effervesing...oh well, you may never find it, but who cares?

[danielcaux]

A nice stab of elitism there. If we don't think Syd's stuff is up to much it is because we don't 'get' it, not because there is nothing to 'get'?

Just remember, there's no good or bad music (or art), just good or bad relations with music. Not everybody should like a song, despite how "good" it is. Each music has its own audience. There's no such a thing as "universal acclaim" for any piece of art, some people will like it, some others don't, and that's OK.

Now, that said is OK too to wonder what is what people like about some artist's music. In the case of Syd, I like his voice and unique guitar playing style (or lack of technique if you want). I like his odd metric phrases and free flowing lyrics that most of the times appear to have no sense but still always leave an emotional and sensual mark in your mind. I like the childhood imagery and impish sensibility so prevalent through out all of his work, the way he celebrates the little pleasures of life. I like the lack of melodrama and self pity, so common in Roger Waters era Floyd, when he is expresing sadness in his songs.

I think most people who these days like Barrett's solo work are not so much "Astral Pipers" but people who like the type of ragged indie whimsical pop-folk music that sometimes he is thought of as being a precursor. When you look at the 60's footage you can clearly see that he was already the member of the Floyd least inmersed in the whole flowery power fad aestethics. And just like Waters and co. he moved on. His solo albums were a big departure from the swinging '67 sounds. Still, PATGOD is THE british psychedelic masterpiece, above both Sgt. Pepper and Disraeli Gears. For me the only problem with Scarecrow is that is too short.

[oldperfume]

Syd did say that he hoped his songs would have more than one meaning so it could reach more people.The term "genius" is used too off hand now a days. I will always put Syd in that category. I get more outta him than any other musician/lyricist I've listened to. I love Lennon,The Pretty Things, Arthur Lee & Roky Erickson & Ray Davies too. Syd wrote about the world WITHIN him, Not Around him. I always wanted to live in that world, w/ Gerald & Grimble Gromble & the Scarecrow, et all.When Syd left I think PF lost ALL their humor,whimsey & Experimental side. It became more conformed, regimented & depressing. I LOVE the Floyd stuff they DON"T play on the radio. I am SICK of DSOTM & The Wall as well as parts of WYWH. What I don't understand is why they never play Syd's Floyd on the radio unless it's some obscure college station, but "Money" is played 10x's a day. But that's what the public wants soooooo...
We all have different feelings on what Syd's lyrics mean or not. I think he was a very pure artist,almost too much. His solo albums I like, but I believe he had no direction musically after leaving PF & he was mentally ill for whatever of 1000 reasons.But "Piper"....I 1st heard it @ the age of 14 with my father beating the shit outta me daily. It got me thru some very tough times.I was using chemicals then & still smoke the occasional joint, but even straight it's my favorite of all time!.
As far as original, nothing touches it but I want readers to let me know what they're fave album is. To me, he was so original it hurts. Of course my friends, this is just how I feel....Thought I oughta bear my naked feelings, thought I oughta tear the curtain down-plagerized!!

[Steph22]

I like PATGOD musically. I really do, with the exception of Take up Thy Stethoscope and Walk, it's a brilliant album for the time period. Actually as an album, I like Piper a lot better than Saucerful.

It's Syd's solo stuff I can't get into. It leaves me a bit disappointed and feeling like there could be more. If he was such a genius, then why does his solo stuff suck?

I'm not gonna go all googly over him and say he was great just be cause I'm a Floyd head. It's the rest of the band that made him stand out. They were a vehicle for his whimsy that coudn't stand on its own.

I guess that's why I consider Syd to be a flash in the pan. Just My opinion

[30yrsydfan]

I am a little surprised to see that on a Pink Floyd site there are so many folks who do not like Syd's solo stuff. It's interesting.

[Damn!t]

I am a little surprised to see that on a Pink Floyd site there are so many folks who do not like Syd's solo stuff. It's interesting.

Alot of the people who do like Syd's solo stuff didnt make a post in this thread I'm sure.
Dont judge the whole forum by couple of semi-negative statements.

[oldperfume]

To all of you & ESPECIALLY Steph 22 about Syd's solo stuff: Everyone has an opinion on what they like & don't like. Syd's solo stuff to me is sad. A "what coulda been" type thing. The one thing I can say is that it shows emotion like I've never seen, even more so than PATGOD. This is a sick man trying to put the pieces of a beautiful puzzle back together again & can't & I suspect that after a while he doesn't want to. Compassion, honesty, a sense of loss are a few emotions I see & feel everytime I listen to Syd's solo stuff. I too much prefer Syd's Floyd stuff; it came for the most part in a happier time in his life when all things seemed possible.
If he's such a flash in the pan Steph 22, why are they doing Barbican tributes for him, putting up statues or dedicating park benches & have a trust fund set in his name. His belongings were auctioned off & they SOLD!! This from someone who hadn't done anything in 35 years, YEARS!!! For so little an output, it's amazing. They sell his artwork....,etc. Don't see a John Bonham trust, John Entwhistle, keep naming them. He was one in a million, Syd was. We here like everything Syd & you don't have to; that's your right. But "FLASH IN THE PAN"?....CHOOSE YOUR WORDS WITH A LITTLE MORE CLARITY.
And listen to "Dominoes", maybe you'll change yor mind

[oldperfume]

some IDIOT said that PATGOD doesn't stand up to MODERN pop music?! You say this as if today's music is any good. It's Crap, for the most part. Let's see I like Radiohead because they always push the envelope(gee, who else did that 42 years ago?!?!?!) & they're talented musicians. Muse is pretty cool. Modest Mouse is good too.Modern Pop music is not from the heart, mind or soul. Lady !@%$# Gaga? Taylor Swift can sing, but it ain't Country, folks. She's Kelly Clarkson unplugged. ANY American Idol winner is dreck. Look what passes for country music today....Brad Paisley???????????????? Keith Urban is Paul %^&* Hogan without the knife & a better voice. It has become so slickly produced, packaged & managed that it's like processed cheese & no one will wake up. My opinion folks, but if you don't admire/love/worship/ adore Syd, you really shouldn't be here. Especially if you've come to diss him.But the fun is we all have diffferent opinions so bring em on(LOL!!)
There are more groups out there today that I like, I just can't remember. The guy from "Keane" has a great voice & I like what Chris Martin stands for. Sometimes integrity helps make the lyrics & music better. I feel that way with all Syd's stuff.

[J Ed]

a lot of Syd fans I remember from this site havent posted in this thread
folks dont be intimidated by Davids opening post, he's an intellectual and puts logical arguments together very well
to generalise, most of the Syd fans Ive seen tend to fancy themselves more as poets, but look at the thread as an invitation to articulate to the rest of us what it is you are getting out of the music
go on you can put it into words if you try and I know Id be interested to read it

to repeat one thought Ive been mulling over lately, I think Syd might have been better suited to Soft Machine than his own band
they were friends before either cut their first album, and Soft Machine was lacking a guitarist after Daevid Allen left
based on those improvisations we heard on the ...In London soundtrack I think he would have colloborated well with the Softs, as they too had no interest in being popstars and with each succeeding album got deeper into their deconstructed improvisations
and imagine having Syd, Kevin Ayers and Robert Wyatt all writing and singing in the same band?
only flaw in my scenario is the timing: by the time Allen had left Soft Machine and they were starting their 1st album as a guitarist-less three piece, Syd had already gone all wiggy and got hisself kicked out of his own band

[Steph22]

We here like everything Syd & you don't have to; that's your right.

. But if you don't admire/love/worship/ adore Syd, you really shouldn't be here.

First I am allowed my own opinion and then when it dosen't match yours, I should leave? Wow.

What I do admire/love/worship/adore is the Floyd. I respect that Syd was the genesis of it all, but his music is just not my cup of tea, so I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[my breakfast.]

some IDIOT said that PATGOD doesn't stand up to MODERN pop music?! You say this as if today's music is any good. It's Crap, for the most part. Let's see I like Radiohead because they always push the envelope(gee, who else did that 42 years ago?!?!?!) & they're talented musicians. Muse is pretty cool. Modest Mouse is good too.Modern Pop music is not from the heart, mind or soul. Lady !@%$# Gaga? Taylor Swift can sing, but it ain't Country, folks. She's Kelly Clarkson unplugged. ANY American Idol winner is dreck. Look what passes for country music today....Brad Paisley???????????????? Keith Urban is Paul %^&* Hogan without the knife & a better voice. It has become so slickly produced, packaged & managed that it's like processed cheese & no one will wake up. My opinion folks, but if you don't admire/love/worship/ adore Syd, you really shouldn't be here. Especially if you've come to diss him.But the fun is we all have diffferent opinions so bring em on(LOL!!)
There are more groups out there today that I like, I just can't remember. The guy from "Keane" has a great voice & I like what Chris Martin stands for. Sometimes integrity helps make the lyrics & music better. I feel that way with all Syd's stuff.

Is it bad of me that I can picture this written in human excrement on the wall of a cell somewhere?

[ddebil]

No, it shows great insight.