Awesometastic

Fair enough, I know I was being a tad hyperbolic there. I will maintain that that doesn't really add much value to the song for me. It's still just the same dimestore philosophizing he was so fond of, where he'd talk down to his listeners with preachy advice straight from Eastern Spiritualism 101. Hence the faux depth.

It grates on me when George does it too, but I'm not usually as frustrated with it, because unlike Tomorrow Never Knows, George's work maintains the Beatles' musical sensibilities.

See for me, the real problem with Tomorrow Never Knows, and one that cannot be explained away is the complete lack of any harmonic or melodic sensibilities. The song literally never moves beyond oscillating a whole step down and then back up.

It could have been saved by a strong melody or even a well developed solo; modern jazz does this all the time. But here there's barely a melody to speak of, and certainly not one as strong as say that of Eleanor Rigby from the same album.

Though the Beatles were great pop musicians, they were not the kind of band that could make coherent musical statements without a harmonic structure or melody. Instead, it sounds like a jumbled mess of white noise and distortion with a driving rhythm that's not taking it anywhere, because it doesn't have anything to say.

bungalow

Yes, a guitar solo. That's what Tomorrow Never Knows needs.

And if the lyrics are so shallow and simplistic, why did you specifically request that I explain them to you?

Awesometastic

I didn't say it needed a guitar solo. What it needs is to go away and not come back till it has a chord structure. And a melody. And loses some of the headache inducing background dissonance.

The lyrics aren't complicated or deep, just obtuse.

bungalow

Then again I ask why it wasn't until you had me explain them to you that you saw "Eastern Philosophy 101" in the lyrics. They were clearly deep enough that they had to be explained to you. You should stick to discussing chord progressions or something...things that can be broken down and analyzed mathematically and don't require much creative thought.

Also, just as a refresher:

Engine

A lot of my favorite music is just like that - no wonder I like the song

__________________

Like an arrow,
I was only passing through.

Awesometastic

See, thats fine for some people. I just can't stand it.

Awesometastic

Yes. Modal music in general can be made to work by a well developed solo, because something is being said musically even if the the harmonic structure is not doing the stating. See the works of Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Herbie Han****, Keith Jarrett, et al. The Beatles aren't really capable of composing a modal solo over changes like that though, so that option is pretty much off the table for them.

Look, if you're ok with your music literally not going anywhere or saying anything either harmonically or melodically, then you'll have no problem with the song. If those are things you look for in music then Tomorrow Never Knows will bother you.

Edit: Lol, it censors Herbie Hancock? That's kind of ridiculous.

Awesometastic

Obscurity of meaning does not necessarily translate to depth of that meaning. Take, for instance, the lyrics to Led Zeppelin's Kashmir. Their meaning is not readily apparent, but this doesn't mean that they have any depth to them. Because really they're just about Plant getting stoned off his ass.

Neapolitan

To me "Within You Without You" is one of their better songs. The one song out of the whole entire Beatles catalogue that I care very little for is "Why Don't We Do It in the Road?" It drives me crazy because "it" has no antecedent. "Do it" could mean anything from changing a flat tire or whacking someone like if they where Tony Soprano. What do they mean by "do it?"

__________________

bungalow

I don't care about any of this. The point is that the lyrics were "meaningless" to you in your first post. When pressed further you still maintained they were meaningless and even dared me to explain them to you. And then I did. And now the lyrics aren't meaningless anymore, they're just simplistic/shallow/not profound/dimestore philosophy/Eastern Philosophy 101 and whatever else you've said that you didn't say at first. It seems to me like the point where they switched from 'meaningless' to 'not meaningful enough' is when I explained them to you. I just want to know why such stupid meaningless lyrics went over your head, that's all.