Talk:Jugband Blues/Archive 1

Archive 1

Clever Ordering

Despite Jugband Blues being originally released seven years earlier, this is clever ordering, as Barrett's first lines, "It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here / and I'm almost obliged to you for making it clear that I'm not here" appear to be his response to "Wish You Were Here".

As much as I agree with the above, it's clearly POV. Knight of Ashitaka 22:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Lyrics

Am I missing something in my ignorance, or wouldn't this song entry be a good place to put the lyrics? There are several sites with what purport to be the lyrics for Jugband Blues, but many have obvious errors.

This is probably ill-advised and cluttery, but the following is my best take on both words and structure. Please delete if appropriate:

Jugband Blues

It's awf'ly considerate of you
to think of me here,
And I'm most obliged to you
for m-making it clear
That I'm not here.

And I never knew the moon could be so big.
And I never knew the moon could be so blue.
And I'm grateful that you threw away my old shoes,
And brought me here in-
stead dressed in red!

And I'm wondering who could be writing this song…
(la la la la)

I don't care if the sun don't shine.
And I don't care if nothing is mine.
And I don't care if I'm nervous with you,
I'll do my loving in the winterrrrr...
(la la la la - etc.)

And the sea isn't green.
And I love the queen.
And what exactly is a dream?
And what exactly is a joke…?

--Cdavis999 (talk) 14:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Why the "Notability" tag?

I question why someone is questioning the notability of a Pink Floyd song (the notability tag at the top). The song clearly exists. It's still played (I just came from You Tube where I was referred from Facebook.) And to this layman it appears to be an important part of the history of a quite notable band, documenting the mental state of its writer which led to his leaving the band. How can that not be notable? Frappyjohn (talk) 07:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Dubious - Time Signatures

The bit at the end of "Background and recording" about the song having a three-tiered structure, going from 3/4 to 2/4 to 4/4, is incorrect. The final part of the song is most certainly in 3/4, and the part between that and the 2/4 section is just free time. Does the source make the claim that it's 4/4? I think it's very fair to call the song "three-tiered", since there are such strong and sudden divisions between its 3 sections, but for a different reason than simply the time signatures.71.224.196.230 (talk) 22:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

I've checked the source and the time signatures are correct. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

UakhdhdhHyzsjjejsj ke empat e jd hen

zjfifjgg 182.2.198.5 (talk) 02:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)