CDA is consolidated here as a three-dimensional framework where the aim is to map three separate forms of analysis onto one another: analysis of (spoken or written) language texts, analysis of discourse practice (processes of text production, distribution and consumption) and analysis of discursive events as instances of sociocultural practice. A characteristic of the framework is that it combines a Bakhtinian theory of genre (in analysis of discourse practice) and a Gramscian theory of hegemony (in analysis of sociocultural practice). (p.2)
The distinction between what is explicit and what is implicit in a text is of considerable importance in sociocultural analysis. Analysis of implicit content can provide valuable insights into what is taken as given, as common sense. It also gives a way into ideological analysis of texts, for ideologies are generally implicit assumptions. One might also include on the presence-absence scale, the relative foregrounding or backgrounding of explicit textual content. (Fairclough, 1995: 5)
--------
The meanings of writers are the traces and effects of innumerable prior acts of reading, realized only through text, again produced in specific contexts and conditions. Readers and writers are antagonistic and interdependent to different degrees, and no analysis can afford to forget either dimension. However, it is also proper for analysts to have strategic reasons for being more interested in one direction than another, tracking backwards down the chain of intertextual connections or forwards along the series of textual effects that flow from a chosen text or discursive moment. (Hodge and Kress,1993: 176)
-------
Instead of talking about meaning-making as something that is done by minds, I prefer to talk about it as a social practice in a community. It is a kind of doing that is done in ways that are characteristic of a community, and its occurrence is part of what binds the community together and helps to constitute it as a community. In this sense we can speak of a community, not as a collection of interacting individuals, but as a system of interdependent social practices: a system of doings, rather than a system of doers. These social meaning-making practices are also material processes that bind the community together as a physical ecosystem. (p.9)
We orient our meanings toward prospective audiences and we orient them within a system of different viewpoints available in the community toward our topic. These orientations involve value preferences; they commit us to a political stance and a social point of view on our subject and toward our audiences...(p.12)
There are the persistant habits of speaking and acting characteristic of some social group, through which it constructs its worldview: its beliefs, opinions and values. It is through discourse formations that we construct the very objects of our reality, from electrons to persons, from words to 'discourse formations'. We necessarily do so from some social point of view, with some cultural system of beliefs and assumptions, and some systems of values, interests and biases. We do this not as individuals alone, but as members of communities, and however we do it, whatever discourse formations we deploy to make sense of the world, our formations always have systematic sociological relations to their formations.
(Lemke, 1995: 24)
----------------------------------
What follows is essentially an example of how linguistic analysis, specifically
that based on a systemic-functional approach, and the aims of critical discourse
analysis in particular, can be used in order to reveal some of the processes
of interpretation that can be brought into play in looking at any text. Such
an analysis should not be considered to be the meaning of the
text, rather it claims to look at social conditions as an illuminatory backdrop
to linguistic analysis, trace some of the assumptions relied upon in a social
context through a discussion of some of the more evident intertextual references
and metaphors which would be available to the projected audience of such a text,
as well as highlighting its other formal features which could be seen as claiming
a solidarity with such an audience, while at the same time expressing distance
towards certain groups represented in the text through other linguistic means.
In other words, analysis hopes to draw relationships between the text itself
as a linguistic object, the material social conditions in which such a text
was conceived and which are in some way inserted into the form through the projection
of a subject position (or a reader position, for the text), and the processes
of semiosis itself; the making of signs and signification through the marshalling
of social resources which of course includes the linguistic. Such an analysis
becomes an interpretant itself, but readers will bring their own reading to
bear on the text so that it is hoped that a purely static object, an interpretation,
is not the only result, but a juncture in an ongoing dialogue about the limits
of linguistic interpretation.
Lyrics of the song "Washington Bullets" from the Clash album "Sandanista"
released in 1981, form the text under discussion, songs remaining as an indication
of an ideological formation or set of assumptions prevalent amongst people who
may be defined as members of a subculture to which the songs were addressed
at a particular time. This is not to say that the ideology itself is necessarily
outdated, or no longer prevalent amongst people in various walks of life even
years later, but that the feelings of solidarity engendered in and by in such
songs have passed, due to other social factors: the music industry is reliant
on fashion, and on new generations who find music gives them a sense of identity.
Also, this text, being an example of a broad genre which could be categorised
as "protest song" addresses itself not only to an audience, but also
to an issue which was historically contemporaneous with the song's release.
In other words, the conditions of consumption have changed since the song was
released. Therefore, analysis should take account of this twin orientation to
both the propositional content of the text, its view of 'reality' as constituted
in the text, and its construction of a reader/subject position, its interpersonal
dimension.
The discourse formations behind the actual lyrics of songs are pretty much unconstrained
by conventions, even within particular song genres such as that of 'pop song',
except that length and some rhyming may be of a predictable nature, as well
as the actual themes, treated here as forming the main defining characteristic
of a song genre. Of course this does not mean that some types or genres of songs
do not have lyrics whose linguistic forms (as well as general thematic elements)
do not conform quite strictly to certain patterns (Country and Western songs
come to mind, and Japanese Enka seem to employ a somewhat limited lexical pool),
but implies that formal elements, or texture do not always contribute to the
categorization of songs as members of a particular genre.
The history of the Protest Song as a genre can be traced almost unbroken back
to the Black American Blues of the early part of this century. Not only the
lyrics mark this musical form, of course. Indeed, to discuss the lyrics as separate
from the musical form does a particular type of violence to the 'meaning' of
the songs as whole texts, but for the purposes of discussion here, aspects of
the music itself can only be addressed very briefly. Music identified with this
genre has a certain structure; it uses recognisable technical mannerisms, and
the use of particular instruments and vocal styles also contribute to the identification
of a variety of styles within the genre (cf. Oliver in Bigsby (ed) 1976). To
make a complete critical analysis of a particular song, and especially one stemming
from this tradition, would require a more detailed reference to the conditions
of the society which gave rise to such songs and in what ways the tradition
has been handed down. The musical form and its various performance styles and
the way in which technical features of the music are complemented by lyrics
in this genre is unfortunately beyond the scope of this paper.
What is needs mentioning, however, is that occasionally, a form of protest song
becomes popular to the extent that it becomes saleable. In other words, the
conditions of production and consumption result in the curious paradox of having
what is at first conceived of as a protest against market forces in general,
the institutions which make for power structures which are resisted in these
types of discourses, also provide the means for their distribution and wide
dispersion. Such times seem to be marked by the existence of disaffected subcultures,
comprised of people who are generally between fifteen and thirty, who are fairly
well-informed and who have some disposable income which can be used to purchase
these recordings, or who will be the target audience for advertisers in magazines,
televison and radio programs which play or refer to such types of music.
Another way of looking at such processes is to note that mass culture tends
to value 'information' so that people become competitive over how much they
know, and who knew it first: information-producers compete with each other to
give the public more and better 'news'. The intended audience therefore needs
disposable income, because otherwise such music would not become widely available,
or 'known about' - fashionable - due to the workings of the means of production
and distribution of 'popular music'. This also seems dependent to a large extent
on companies and organisations whose existence requires that their activities
be profitable.
The specific cultural context of this particular text is twofold: the mass culture
of Britain in the late 70's and early 80's, and the reactionary subculture to
whom the song is addressed, and with whom the singer/songwriters identify. The
British milieu is important, because the means of production and distribution
were in a state of flux at the time, with independent record labels flourishing.
These labels supported alternative styles of music, and British-based radio
stations (there were only two of any significance, the BBC was one) were not
afraid to give airtime to any song or music which they perceived had some popular
support. The way had been made more open by the earlier and concurrent popularity
of Punk Rock, whose 'anarchic' technical style and disdainful lyrics would never
have been acceptable for example, with big radio companies in the United States,
who have always seemed fearful of the withdrawal of sponsorship should offence
be given to either conservative audience members, or large sponsors. Once chart
success in the UK had been observed, however, other countries began to give
the products airtime and magazine space.
Personal experience living in London during the years 1978-1979 leads me to
believe that the election of a conservative government in the UK at the time,
provoked some measure of distress in younger disaffected, and from their perspective,
perhaps disenfranchised, consumers over the direction of politics and mass culture.
These groups were no doubt eager to find a voice in the face of a power machine
over which they felt they had little control, and from which they felt alienated.
People with menial and meaningless jobs seemed to feel most betrayed by the
ideas and rhetoric of Thatcherism, and sought identity elsewhere.
The instance of the genre from which the text is taken, flourished from about
1978 to 1985, and was generally referred to as 'New Wave' music to distinguish
it from Punk Rock, with which it had many obvious technical and ideological
similarities, and to intimate that it represented a change from the emptiness
of the other musical forms popular at the time, forms such as disco and commercial
pop whose themes remained steadfastly ignorant of any serious social conditions.
Who named it this? Those with the most to gain: music critics of the subculture
and the musical publishing industry who were intent on knowing it and defining
it first, and for a price. This is not to detract from the received 'power'
of such alternative ideology as a manifest means of expressing solidarity with
others sharing similar worldviews, but it nevertheless points to the contradictory
nature of mass resistant readings of perceived hegemonic power structures, as
it ponts to the nature of the dissemination of resistant ideologies which are
in turn dependent on at least sections of these same hegemonic structures.
That the text is directed at a specific audience only, is evident from the musical
form itself: basic rock, with some subtle differences in mannerisms which set
it apart from other rock forms. The actual musical form erects an effective
barrier against any listeners not familiar with, and positive towards such musical
style. Harsh rhythms, strident guitar riffs and gutteral voice quality help
in maintaining this solidarity-distance relationship( or 'disaffiliation') with
respect to those who might also find the lyrics offensive. This particular song
is somewhat 'light' in musical texture, however, and may be more easily approached
as a whole text by listeners unfamiliar with this particualr genre, mainly due
to musical intertextuality: the melody and instrumentation make use of Latin
American techniques and instruments in an overt reference to the theme of the
song which addresses, initially, social conditions in Nicuragua.
The lyrics also refer to the subculture's own self-evident truths, or common
sense assumptions; for example, that the USA interferes in the domestic affairs
of other countries without being asked, and indeed without being welcome. Resistant
readings would naturally arise in anyone resistant to the musical form itself,
however, but any 'patriotic' American, for example, might find the lyrics objectionable,
because the inference is very plain that America interferes in the affairs of
other states with only its own interests at heart. The songwriters have obviously
assumed that its listeners will share knowledge regarding the 'culpability'
of the USA. It also presupposes a shared knowledge of recent world history:
their aim is not to teach us anything, but to set up a feeling of recognition
and solidarity, especially with the other 'oppressed' people of the world.
The general tenor of the text is that we all know what is really going on in
the world, we can't be fooled, and we are not alone. This is contradicted slightly,
however, with a certain stance in relation to the audience which manifests itself
in the last part of the text, which will be taken up later.
The main examples of intertextuality in the text, apart from the overt musical
references, are made through signifying a background related to Latin America.
In the actual performance of the work, through the use of a mock Latin-American
accent in the pronunciation of the word 'America', for example, which seems
reminiscent of the the song "America" in the musical 'West Side Story",
the bands manages to allude to another host of associations related to the experiences
of Hispanic people in and of America.
A more notable intertextuality, or manifest interdiscursivity, occurs in the
use of Spanish during the song. A spanish-speaking informant thought that the
phrase used as a type of refrain in the song might be one of two things: <disparadas>,
which means '(bullets) were shot' (ie, in the passive voice) or <das varada>,
meaning, 'the truth was spoken'.
Process types evident in the text seem to be weighted towards material processes
and the relational. This is not surprising, given the tenor of the text, and
the presuppositions cited above; relational processes are consistant with the
writers' assumptions that the audience is able to agree with their attribution
of qualities to the participants named or referred to in the text, and express
a high degree of certainty, which is teamed with very little use of overt modal
operators:
What is responsible for an earlier cited (in the lyrics) killing of a 'youth of fourteen' are ' the cocaine guns', not of course made of cocaine but financed by the sale of cocaine.The metaphor by ellipsis is effective: the question does not need forming: to whom is the cocaine sold? ie, Where does the money come from? And furthermore, the use to which the money is put is implied as a two way indictment of forces using such guns. As well, the guns 'are jammed', an exaggeration, we feel, which is not so far from 'the truth'.
The money in question is partly used to pay men to kill: they are 'blood-money men'. Furthermore, they are 'killing clowns': not a pretty metaphor, combining as it does, the image of a humorous children's entertainer, and 'killing'. Use of the definite article the marks the epithet as a foregone conclusion, even though this is the first reference we meet to these people as agents; previously the killing had been done by weapons bought by unsavoury means, or people had been killed ('got shot') in an agentless passive construction. As stated above, these men are not killing for an idea, but for money - money paid in exchange for blood: they are characterised in this way through these attributive devices, as having no morals, which would be bad enough, but also the reference to 'clown' connotes people who are not so much funny, as stupid. These terms tend to characterise the actors as small, and take away some of their power.
Not only are the bullets supplied by Washington, in an indirect, but well-understood
reference to the government of the United States, but the declarative 'those'
serves to indicate that we have heard of them before, through the use of anaphoric
reference, despite this being the first mention of 'bullets' in the text, although
lexical cohesion is supplied through the obvious relationship of guns to bullets.
This is further underlined by the use of again : We all know about
how America supplies bullets, either literally or metaphorically, to organisations
who do not necessarily use them for the good of the public, and here, it is
happening 'again'.
Later on in the text, we can see another instance of attribution
teamed with relational processes which leave no room for disagreement:
The set phrase of the first line here, cues us to expect that there were many
previous instances of what the actor involved was said NOT to do in this instance.
Another similar reading could lead us to believe that Nicuragua has 'had' many
revolutions, but yet, each time that they did, America did not raise a finger.
We are left to wonder what the difference is this time. This time, 'there
was no interference from America': it's a statement of fact. The
writers assume that we KNOW what is different this time, assumed knowledge needs
no explanation. Furthermore, if we take this section of text as a unit utterance,
in terms of the grammar, it is comprised of a long hypotactic clause in the
Theme position, which is marked in English, as it does not function as the main
clause, which is 'normal' in the Theme position. It thus functions as a temporal
orientation for the Rheme in which New information is given. This second clause
begins with an existential 'there' in the subject position, again serving to
introduce a participant -in this case 'no interference' attributed to America
- and this deferring to the end of the utterance gives the impression that this
new information might be something unexpected under normal circumstances.
Material processes in the text are more in evidence than any other processes, probably because the writers
wish to remind us of what has happened: the facts/history, from which we should
be able to draw our own conclusions. But 'history' is a reported thing, and
therefore open to distortion: each hearer draws a different conclusion, each
reporter selects what s/he thinks salient. In the case of this song, however,
the selected occurrences are to be told to the converted. They are presumed
to already know their history, and these lyrics are here to reassure the audience
that their world view is also shared by others. The text infers by an absence
of explanatory material as much as by deixis. Most of the references to actors
and participants are made through metaphor using references that are dependent
on such shared knowledge. By listening to this song, and others like it, the
hearers can experience a sense of 'fellowship' or solidarity with others who
not only understand the references themselves, but also the allusions made through
metaphor.
Material clauses are characterized by Martin et al (1997: 103) as " clauses
[which] construe doings and happenings..[..]..changes in the material world
that can be perceived, such as motion in space..and change in physical make
up...[..].. The one inherent participant is the Actor - the one doing the material
deed. In addition, there may also be a Goal - a participant impacted by the
doing.."
The 'innocent' have nowhere else to play, so even though they know it is dangerous they keep doing it. This section is an example of manifest interdiscursivity - the singer/songwriter is not speaking this or telling us this himself, but has co opted another voice, that of an unidentified youth telling his 'Mama' what others of his peer group are still doing despite what happened earlier:
Passive voice indicates the youth's innocence, as the recipient, the goal of the action, if his age does not already do
so; it was done to him by an unknown Actor, perhaps
one of the 'killing clowns'.
In the following case, the Goal, what is acted upon or used in the material
process, are Washington bullets, in the simple present continuous tense, active
voice, to use traditonal grammatical tags, and this attributes the origin of
the bullets to the state of America, while the process continues in the present:
The last stanza of the text neatly turns the focus back on the listener, directing
an understood 'you' in the subject and theme position to do the things mentioned,
to become the actor in this process, and in the process, be reminded that specific
ideologies are not the property of the governments of any one nation. The writers/singers
are British, so they most closely identify with, and direct their song to a
British audience. The last line reminds the listener that their own government
is not so clean either, but to this audience, such a reminder may represent
something hopeful, because most of the listeners would have been opposed to,
or resistant towards their governments' interests anyway.
In effect they have used a theme in the text which has introduced a set of Given,
or assumed knowledge items on the part of the audience about an Other in the
form of an imperialist America making unwanted interference in world affairs,
usually through underhand means. The last part of the text aligns their own
government, and the power structures against which they assume others are also
struggling, with those larger forces in the world who are represented as having
antithetical morals, who kill for profit, and who do not respect human rights.
The choice of imperative mood realising, in effect, a series of commands to
do something, is also significant in that it sets up an interpersonal
relationship between songwriter and listener which construes the listener as slightly
passive, and may carry implications of power vis a vis the listener, which indicates
that the singers are not only claiming solidarity, but also distancing themselves
from such passive people who may think that America is the only one to blame
- in this case the implication may be that members of the audience themselves
may be also blameworthy for knowing it to happen yet doing nothing.
Furthermore, verbal commands, where others tell one what to do
without any face-saving politeness conventions (cf. Brown and Levinson, 1987)
are known to be means of incitement in interpersonal relationships because
they foreground a distance relationship, i.e. one of power.
The few mental processes represented in the text are in a similar vein:
Other verbal processes are performed by inanimate objects; the Sayers are "every cell in Chile" which "will tell the cries of the tortured men". The brutality of the Pinochet regime is aptly referred to by the inanimate nature of the informants. These informants are full ('every cell'), and what's more they are full of tortured men (another relational attribute).
As was seen above, metaphor, metonymy and synecdoche are used as way of introducing
inanimate objects into the text as perhaps "neutral observers" or "reliabale
informants" in participant roles.The characterisation of other participants
is generally achieved through naming them in conjunction with some process or
attribute.
A child opens the text with a cry to its mother, in an example of "manifest"
interdiscursivity that draws our attention to the plight of the children in
his/her neighbourhood, who are likely to get shot at any time, by another of
the participants, the "killing clowns".
For three stanzas, the main protagonist, America, is merely alluded to through
the naming of its capital city, Washington. This device of alluding to "the
state" through the naming of the city where it has its government, is used in
two other places to refer to Cuba, and the former Soviet Union. In some ways,
this could be taken to be another instance of interdiscursivity, using a type
of "newspeak". The media in general are often seen by groups of the socially
sensitive to be responsible - or irresponsible - for reporting that supports
received ideology associated with capitalist hegemonies, and indeed many critical
discourse analysts have turned their attention to the discursive formations
evident in newspapers and other forms of journalism to investigate the linguistic
means by which people are encouraged to believe in the validity of certain ideologies.This
metonymic device also ironically draws attention to the fact that America's
arch enemies are also politically organised along similar lines, despite protests
that they may be diametrically oppposite - all have central governments ostensibly
set up for the protection and service of their own constituents. In addition,
the use of the name of the capital city of a nation state seems to imply an
impersonal aspect to their activities, and refers also to a political agenda.
The 'army' that 'came' in Chile, although the country is not named, is one of
the actors, and we are left to understand that this is the well-known army of
Pinochet, backed by Washington. If we 'remember Allende in the days before'
the army came, we will remember that his government was socialist, and therefore,
anti-American.
Victor Jara is an actual named 'participant', if we can 'remember' him:
This common knowledge presupposed by the songwriters, was not known to me, nor
most of my friends. A little research revealed that he was a singer of little
note until he dared to sing songs of protest against the military rule (in
the Santiago stadium ).
'They' attempted to stop him by cutting off his hands, presumably to prevent
him from accompanying himself on guitar. When he continued to sing, the army
representatives proceeded to cut off his feet, and according to my informant,
he continued singing until he bled to death. Here, Washington bullets are blamed
again; their function here is to symbolise the links between these types of
incidents and an America which did nothing to stop such activities, and indeed
may have backed the regime. Further indication of solidarity with the Spanish
speaking victims of these army manoeuvres, is given when Spanish (the national
language of Chile - but of course, we know) is used in the song to express the
link between the army's behaviour and the bullets of Washington -the <disparadas>
or <das varada> cited earlier.
And in the Bay of Pigs in 1961
Havana fought a playboy in the Cuban sun,
Reference is also made to Havana fighting a 'playboy', a rather disparaging characterisation of President Kennedy, whose exploits were well-known but generally ignored by the American public who tended idolise JFK, and this constitutes an obvious dig at one of America's sacred idols. In this manner listeners can enjoy the vicarious slandering of one America's heroes, without him even being mentioned by name. However, the presupposition that the audience will readily be able to idenitfy the referent, is bolstered by the mentioning of a time and place which firmly identifies the participant (here, the Goal of a material process) in this case. Nevertheless such metaphorical epithets introduced into a text as 'common knowledge' point to a subject construction of the reader/listener who is projected as having such extra-linguistic knowledge and presupposes also that such addressees will agree with the attributive nature of the term.
Castro is mentioned by name, and cynically referred to as 'redder than red'.
We understand what the word 'red' refers to in this instance, but its use here
underlines the trivial and self centred nature of the reason Washington 'wants
Castro dead': no more than because of his political colour.
It may be enough to say that the term 'Washington bullets' can signify a range
of interpretants in a metonymic relationship to the whole of the state, in political
terminology, of America, as was posited earlier. Also of course, the reference to
cowboy shootouts with 'spray of lead' seems likely to be made by most listeners:
Not many people are actually familiar with bullets or what they are made of, yet we are doubtless all able to make the connection required between "spray of lead" and a "hail of bullets". The reference here, again outside the text itself and pointing to other discourse domains owes much to the genre of the American Western, and gains significance with its suggestion of the wild west and the 'gung ho' thinking that most people might associate with it.
If we do not know our recent history, we would have no idea what incident this
refers to, who was involved, or even where the Bay of Pigs is. We need to be
aware that Havana is the capital of Cuba, that Castro is the leader of the Cuban state,
that Cuba is a communist state, that JFK tended to enjoy the high life, and
that Communism is signified by the colour red, in order to understand anything
at all in this stanza. All these references are assumed to have some common
significance in the minds of the audience.
That the whole text relies on this shared knowledge to achieve its effect seems
obvious at this point, and for this reason the text is a good example of how
texts are 'fissured' by a myriad of matrices of both knowledge and projected
readership:
The text (any given text) ceases to be a self evident unity, but appears as a relatively accidental site that marks where a series of discursive processes have briefly collided. Producers (authors, speakers) likewise lose the semblance of unity, and become channels through which various authors and agencies speak and act: the fissured authors of fissured texts. (Hodge and Kress, 1993:181)
In other words, the degree of probability is very low, an expression of opinion
by the writer regarding the 'facts' of history.
However, as modality in general refers to the degree of investment the speaker/writer
has towards either his/her propositions or proposals, in grammatical terms,
or towards the mimetic plane in social semiotic terms, it may be possible to
infer from the text as a whole the level of commitment towards the areas of
knowledge - their relative 'truth' or validity - by examining the finiteness
of the verbal processes in the text which indicate the speaker's certainty.
Therefore, the lack of any other indicators of uncertainty attached to the verbal
processes indicates a high value of modality in the text. In other words, almost
all the verbs are finite, and the tenses, another indicator of modality are
generally simple present or present in the present (usually called present continuous
tense, the unmarked, most certain or usuality-expressing form of the verb). Furthermore,
in the last stanza, these simple present tense processes are in the imperative mood, marking
a phase shift between more or less simple recount in the first stanzas to direct address of
the audience in the last. In this case, the interpersonal relationship between the listener and the
singer/songwriter is signalled by this shift in tenor.
Mercenaries, we all know, are morally inferior to those who fight for an ideology. Mercenaries are indeed 'blood-money men', paid to kill. Who else might gain from their activities? Here, British interests are named, in a parallelism which echoes the metonymy associated with the bullets from Washington:
The implication is that you will find some, and that while we are quiet about
it, while we the audience do nothing to prevent this, we are none of us 'blameless'.
The text is therefore a neat combination of expressions of high affinity with
the mimetic plane (thus semantic-meaning network) -- the discursive formations
which realise the social conditions with which the songwriters and the projected
audience identifies, and the propositions they make about their own world view --
and at the same time, it expresses a low affinity with this social 'reality'.
Through the device of the imperative mood in the last stanzas, the addressees
are cast at the same time into a subject position of identity also with those
'reality' conditions which have already been characterized as a recognizably
unethical state, something with which listeners would not wish to identify.
The contradictions inherent in such a text, which is fissured along lines of
ideation and interpersonality, which slides or oscillates between statements
of high and low affinity with both the projected audience and the propositions
and proposals introduced in the text, mark it as a site signifying areas of
social change in process, and as such seems to characterize a certain mood which
was prevalent at the time of the song's release.
Alexanne Don. June. 1998