The rule is vague enough that you all have broken it.

Isn’t Earth itself a celestial object? So, a rock being a direct part of our planet is somehow exempt? What about any object that is made of atoms directly from or around said planet/star/quark/nebula/comet? That might include… what.. everything on it?

Sorry to have brought this to light. You are all disqualified. 😉

@perfectplace, frankly, I do think an acoustic song about an envelope is pretty unmemorable. I guess a clever title worked for you in the end, but it makes more sense to remind people of the lyrics. Who needs Morrissey’s book-length song titles when it’s hard enough to remember which one “Suedehead” is?

Thanks for the kind words, Bud!

I didn’t bother to mention these when I signed up because they are basically empty shells, but see below.

My Youtube channel, but there’s very little here, and nothing Song Fu related (yet):
http://www.youtube.com/user/cph9fa

My totally empty “blog” — I’ve *never ever* posted here (yet):
http://refactoringmybrain.blogspot.com/

You can also find me talking over on the JoCo Forums.
http://www.jonathancoulton.com/forums/

To Do List:
– Actually write a post or two on the blog.
– Put up Song Fu entries on youtube (and other stuff).
– Get a “Facebook” thingy??
– Get a “Twitter” thingy??
– Link them all together, and then get Ken to add a link to them from my bio.

wow, that’s even more clever than i thought. ;-D cheers, poodlz!

@lex: i didn’t think about the bomb being disqualified because it was a bit of a technological advancement containing moving parts and all. i think your rationalization of it is good and i don’t think i’d consider it an offender. ;-P however, some of the songs definitely didn’t follow the challenge rules, as they are merely songs about an inanimate object whereas the challenge was to write a song from the perspective of said object. sadly, i would say that [while i absolutely love the song], the bad penny song is the worst offender in that respect. ;-P

still, i wouldn’t get hung up on rules and regulations, as it’s all in the name of fun and creativity. ;-D

Having more kinds of Web Presence is almost like signing your name to your work here. It lends an air of authority and credibility. It makes you more “real” if you make your virtual selves more accessible.

I’m considering building a separate MySpace presence for GöDZ PööDLZ. I’m convincing myself that it’s important.

I used to have a music site, many years ago (anybody remember IUMA? ….no?) and the main reason I haven’t made one since is because I’ve been a part writer/hired gun guitarist/lazy bum ever since, and haven’t written and recorded anything I was comfortable submitting to the public. Joining this contest was sort of a way to break that spell. But anyway, thanks for reminding me, and it’ll be done soon. 🙂

@Denise, Very classy and insightful ten word reviews. Way to go!

@Travis, @Misterovich and @Jutze, thanks also for your critiques. I tried to do this several days ago, and my daughter switched off the power-strip on my computer after two and a half hours. I was so profoundly upset by that, I just couldn’t return to the task. Maybe next round. Anyone really curious about my detailed take on their song is welcome to contact me directly. I love to kibitz.

@Berg and @Caleb Lee, your mature, polite and patient handling of the Voting Kerfuffle reflects well on you both. The same can be said for @BHBobby, you deftly and humorously deflated and put to rest the whole “original song” tizzy. Thanks.

@Caleb Hines and @Travis Norris, you guys at the very least NEED a MySpace, YouTube and/or twitter account. They are FREE! It physically pains me that you aren’t building a fan following on the Internet some place outside of Song Fu. I want to be in your social network. I want to be your fan! I just don’t know where to go and sign up!

I’m really pleased that this round got more than 200 comments and that even with minor disputes, the vast majority of them are respectful, positive, friendly and constructive! Seriously, I learned stuff about my song (ways to make it better) that hadn’t occurred to me. Thanks to everyone who mentioned “Bad Penny,” whether you liked it, didn’t like it or just couldn’t get it out of your head. I appreciate anyone taking the time to thoughtfully listen, comment and/or vote. It feels good to be noticed.

Finally, thanks again to the other Godz Poodl, Rod Durre. Working with a friend has made this Song Fu exponentially more fun.

Hopefully we’ll see you all in Song Fu #4, Round 2. Rock on!

About the moving parts thing: the bomb, I’d say, was the worst offender. I think the purpose of this rule is to have a truly INANIMATE object. One that doesn’t really DO much. I.E. no robots. Because you could come up with a lot of machines that are easy to write about. I mean, so what if a diary has a clasp or a lock. I don’t think that was the point of the moving parts rule. Pants have a zipper. An ebow has a switch. A guitar stand is adjustable. A raincoat can transform into a car. I don’t think “moving” means “moveable.” Maybe it means “emotionally stirring,” in which case we all fail. But even as far as the bomb goes, I think it depends on the bomb. If you ask me, it kind of fits, because in every movie where there’s an unexploded bomb, the whole point is that it’s sitting there doing absolutely nothing. Also, I don’t think it matters unless the rule-breaking songs somehow manage to be so great that they all get the top votes. Breaking the rules isn’t “cheating” if it doesn’t help you win. There’s always some unintentional rule breaking going on.

I’ve listened to every Song Fu edition, and this round was probably the best. Because I was in it. *dead stare* Okay, not really. It was a good challenge itself. 1-1 (TV theme) was self indulgent. 1-2 (2-column repeating syllable) was completely off the wall. 1-3 (space oddity) was brilliant, but only two people did it. 2-1 (the moon) was so blah that there was a rule against doing it again this round. 2-2 (inventor dance) was obscure and anachronistic. 2-3 (rufus country ballad) was too restrictive. 2-4 (john williams pop theme) brilliant again, but two entries again. Holiday Special was okay unless you hate Christmas. 3-1 (happy song) turned out a few clichés. 3-2 (10 words) again, pretty restrictive. 3-3 (makes sense title) I’m undecided. 3-4 (multi-part song) was hard but good (that’s what she said), but hardly any shadowers. 4-1 was specific enough that it gave you ideas and kept all the entries similar, but with enough leeway that you had a lot of creative freedom.

Or maybe I’m COMPLETELY biased. I just think “write about an object” was the best challenge as far as allowing great songs. We’re still in novelty song territory for the most part, but more of them were great this round than in the majority of past editions. Caleblee’s is great if you like that genre (I don’t). I think if Ian & Melissa’s song never existed, I would have felt hollow, become depressed for no explicable reason, and over time wasted away into nothing. So, Ken Plume, you saved a life!

Let’s just say I would have HATED to do the edition the Rifftones did. Those challenges made me fill my pants, except for the final challenge. I probably could have managed, but… well, I’ll shut up now in case the next challenge makes me wish I had hair to pull out. Such is the risk we take.

AdamLeMoine Says:
during the chorus you should put some chords in

Bobby M Says:
the bridge?

AdamLeMoine Says:
i dunno what to call it. i suck with music
know what would sound cool
something like
spanish guitar
going
DUN DUN DUN DUN
like in a skaish sounding way
man. i have no clue what i’m saying. you deff hate me right now for not making sense

AND SO, a guitar part was written and added… why it is out of tune is beyond me… probably due to my intense amounts of medication and the fact that I recorded it, added it, and sent it away in 10 minutes.
My voice was so messed up that whole weekend.

but if you don’t get the title, it’s not for you. ;-D judge the song for itself, that’d be more productive for us!