Just read something shitty about one of my fav songs.

[Rum]

One of the biggest albums of the 60s was Simon and Garfunkel's 1969 Bridge Over Troubled Waters. If you don't know the album you will have certainly heard some of its songs over the decades. The duo were famously 'struggling' and on the verge of splitting up at the time. I have read about the split which seems to have been more or less about ego, but having heard 'So Long Frank Lloyd Wright' the other day I puzzled over the meaning of the words, which seem to cast the famous architect as a singer. As it happens it is one of my favourite all time songs and Garfunkel's voice has never been better.

Anyway after delving into what the Lyrics are about it turns out that Simon wrote them as a 'message' that he wanted to split with Garfunkel - or at least expressed his wish to via them. Not only that he didn't tell Garfunkel who sang the song so beautifully many many times. Some years later he was told and he was, understandably upset. Simon is notoriously egotistical and tetchy. Seemed a nasty thing to do to me and I was struck by its spitefulness.

All ancient history now of course.

Here's the lyrics if you are interested or don't know them.

----------

So long, Frank Lloyd Wright.
I can't believe your song is gone so soon.
I barely learned the tune
So soon
So soon.

I'll remember Frank Lloyd Wright.
All of the nights we'd harmonize till dawn.
I never laughed so long
So long
So long.

CHORUS
Architects may come and
Architects may go and
Never change your point of view.
When I run dry
I stop awhile and think of you

So long, Frank Lloyd Wright
All of the nights we'd harmonize till dawn.
I never laughed so long
So long
So long.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Were they lovers?

[Rum]

I think not. Mates in high school. Both I think married - not that it makes any difference. I think not though.

[tattuchu]

I know Simon was the primary creative force in the duo. Was that the source of the friction? That Simon felt Garfunkle didn't contribute enough? Because, funny thing, I think Simon and Garfunkle were greater than the sum of its parts. And what has Simon done since the split? He had a few singles, and one great album, Graceland. He needed Garfunkle, I think.

[Rum]

I tend to agree. I think Garfunkel had one of pop music's great voices. Some of Simon's songs would not have had the impact they did without him. Garfunkel is a bit of a tit mind you. If you see him interviewed he comes over as having some sort of personality disorder.

Simon, I think, simply felt the credit for the music should be all his.

[Tero]

I never liked the song. The piano arrangement especially. As superficial as McCartney was/is, his Let It Be sounds deep in comparison. Bridge was always a little cheezy to me.

Somehow I like the songs Simon leads better.

[hadespussercats]

I think not. Mates in high school. Both I think married - not that it makes any difference. I think not though.

Paul Simon was with Princess Leia.

Garfunkel dated Penny Marshall for a stint in the 70's and the 80's.

I love that song too, Rum.
But it would take something far more dickish on Paul Simon's part for me to be surprised.
Did you know he "forced" Garfunkel to wear a hairpiece for their reunion concert in Central Park?
(I don't know how exactly he went about making it an issue-- just know Garfunkel was shamed into complying.)

I told J, whose response was, "Oh yeah, Paul? You're short. Wear stilts."

[hadespussercats]

I know Simon was the primary creative force in the duo. Was that the source of the friction? That Simon felt Garfunkle didn't contribute enough? Because, funny thing, I think Simon and Garfunkle were greater than the sum of its parts. And what has Simon done since the split? He had a few singles, and one great album, Graceland. He needed Garfunkle, I think.

Rhythm of the Saints is a great album too (no Graceland, but still) And he wrote and produced "Capeman"-- which was a flop as a musical but which turned out to be a good album, imo.

But Graceland alone is enough to show Simon didn't need Garfunkel. Best album ever.

Now, if you'd said Simon was nothing without Ladysmith Black Mambazo, I might agree with you.

[hadespussercats]

I never liked the song. The piano arrangement especially. As superficial as McCartney was/is, his Let It Be sounds deep in comparison. Bridge was always a little cheezy to me.

Somehow I like the songs Simon leads better.

I thought he was talking about "So Long, Frank Lloyd Wright"?

[Rum]

I never liked the song. The piano arrangement especially. As superficial as McCartney was/is, his Let It Be sounds deep in comparison. Bridge was always a little cheezy to me.

Somehow I like the songs Simon leads better.

I thought he was talking about "So Long, Frank Lloyd Wright"?

So did I..

[JimC]

Nothing in the lyrics suggests a message of "I want to split up with you" to me...

[klr]

This is news to me, but it wouldn't be the only time that a song was involved in a musical break-up ... and certainly not the only time someone was having a swipe at one of their colleagues.

I'm watching a BBC documentary right now about the 10 songs that have earned the most money. There's usually some unpleasant detail in the back-story for each song.

[Jason]