| re: re: |
|
Posted by:
 |
rockfenris2005 04:16 am UTC 03/28/07 |
| In reply to: |
re: IT'S CALLED A FUCKING INTERPRETATION - pidunk 06:20 pm UTC 03/27/07 |
|
> I believe I could assure you that the interpretation is
> not fucking.
>
The song could be.
I'm just saying that it's my interpretation. The original poster made his with his excellent piece of dialogue. We all know that Jim wrote the songs with a certain imagery and purpose in mind, but we can't help what we take from the music as we hear it. I'm not trying to say mine's the definitive image, or that I should have written it instead of Steinman (how presumptuous and rude) I'm just saying that's what I see, I saw it working at the climax of "Rhinegold".
Surely there's nothing wrong with having an interpretation? Because that's all I was saying.
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: IT'S CALLED A FUCKING INTERPRETATION - pidunk 06:20 pm UTC 03/27/07 |
| Next: |
Cool Comment ! - Scaramouche 02:39 pm UTC 03/28/07 |
|
| Thread: |
|