WOW ! I believe that was totally unbelievably believable ....and eyes believe almost anything that they read......................

Thanks, Dave. I have a feeling I might have ruffled a few faithful feathers with this one. So be it.

I sang this over your linked video. I'm afraid these don't quite fall into the category of "interpret", syncopate, cue note, etc. Simply too off to sing along.

Or see the sky (4)
when the nipple is dry (6)

Or touch a leaf, or see the sky (8)
That after he die, fly to friend in the sky (11)

Even if those lines are broken into couplets:

Or touch a leaf (4)
That after he die, (5)

Or see the sky (4)
fly to friend in the sky (6)

You mentioned "singability" in your critique of a Fiddlegirl parody. One must really rush to cram the extra syllables into this very slow, precise melody and lyric. This is not singability.

Not concerned about content here, but the pacing is a 3 at best, and takes the whole parody down to that level. 333.

Not singling you out personally - ask a lot of others ;), but there has to be a choice: Be a quality parodist who thinks "technique matters", or join the crowd of "who cares?". Your call. If the former, the TT Tips to Perfect Parody Pacing would have nailed this in about 30 seconds, once you had the lyrics first draft. If the latter, just say so, and I'll not waste your time, nor especially, mine. ;)


Tech tip, for you and everyone else who (admirably) wants to link us to the OS video to which you did the parody: In the "Site name" part of the template, paste over that part the words that you want readers to see. For example,

[a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--j7wvtOi1s"]OS video here[/a]
will produce the blue, underlined words "OS video here".

Or just

OS video [a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--j7wvtOi1s"]here[/a]
will produce (standard text) OS video (blue underlined link:) here.
    Of course, substitute the angle brackets for the square ones I had to use to get the text to go through and show. You can use the Parody Submission form to test your links in "Preview'", even if you're not going to come back and submit the parody for an hour, day, or week later.


btw, you're not the first cynic: ;)

http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/frankielaine10.shtml

(that was done to a version that reprises.)

@Tommy I appreciate your characteristic hard-nosed frankness and yes, you're right, we're looking at more than an extra syllable or two here and there, making for busy lines in a slow song. I followed your link and was very impressed with your version. In fact, not only does it demonstrate the pacing problems in mine, I thought the content was superior, more down-to-earth and tangibly paradoxical than mine, which was merely nihilistic. I added an extra 555 while there. I'm on to the OS video link thing now, I think. I'll make your tech tips a priority. Thanks for taking the time to get on my back about it. I think what you're telling me is there are unwritten rules about this if I want to be taken seriously here, and not just by you.

Awesome reply. I'm stunned.

(From our e-mail chat, you'll know why.)
Actually, there are some written, well, "guides", not rules. At the related forum, www.inthe00s.com, veteran (and excellent) writer Red Ant, who also helped noob TT, posted a Guide or two on the basics of solid parody technique. I can't find it ATM, but if I can, I'll link you to it. I know there was a link to it in one of his and my many discussions on TT's early parodies.

About being taken seriously, and not just by moi: By the others who take it seriously. (This is an "If the shoe fits, wear it" thing: Nobody can feel insulted. Each can decide for themselves in which group they belong.)
    You'll notice others voted the pacing in the 2-3 range, including some who got here before TT did, but didn't comment. So it wasn't just "following TT's lead". Some do not care to leave negative comments; some are afraid of losing popularity, fans, readers, etc. (Clearly, that doesn't apply to you-know-whom. ;) Some don't have time, although IMHO a brief explanation (not TT-length one lol) is only fair for a downgrade.

Ignore the 1-1-1 voter. The pacing was nowhere near a 1, which would signal "not even close to the original". That's just someone who didn't like your message, as you expected. And thanks for picking up on "staying on point" or carrying a theme. You started and finished with a theme of "Science vs. Faith" -- fine -- but some lines in between stayed there; others went off-topic.
    Looking forward to watching the site gain another (badly-needed) top-notch parodist. Cheers.