To me, that's about the only explanation that would make any sense.
Well, I can think of QUITE A FEW explanations that make sense. And, undoubtedly, lots of other explanations that neither I nor any of the rest of us have thought up make plenty of sense as well. Bottom line is, we simply do not know. And the band isn't saying, likely for the same reason they do not spell out a lot of things in their music: the point is for us the fans to grapple with it and come up with our own meanings.
It is my personal opinion that ODTOE was meant as a homage to I&W in
some respects. I do not believe that they took ANY song and duplicated the exact structure. There are many who have said that it is "undeniable" that the structures are identical. In my opinion, it is absolutely deniable because I do not think the structures ARE identical. They aren't. Yes, you can describe the structures in terms that make them superficially SEEM identical. But I don't think they are ACTUALLY identical. HOWEVER, some structural aspects are indeed the same, and I think that goes beyond mere superficial similarities that lots of songs share. In my opinion, I think that was intentional. I think they paid homage to I&W in many different ways, and using some structural similarities is only one. They use other musical devices, and use general "sounds" and "feels," to also pay homage. Songs or parts of songs that are structurally
dis-similar may still have a similar vibe, or mood, or feel that calls back to another song on I&W. So that tells me that if there are a few similar songs that pay homage to a few songs on I&W, there probably
are other similarities we may not have picked up on to where you can draw similarities between all 8 songs on I&W. I mean, if LNF is meant to evoke UAGM, OTBOA is meant to evoke PMU, and Far From Heaven into Breaking All Illusions is meant to evoke Wait For Sleep into Learning To Live, why assume they stopped at only half the songs and didn't do the same thing with the other four? That isn't how this band generally operates. I
suspect (although I cannot
prove) that they intended the entire album, on a specific song-by-song basis, to be a homage.
That said, I think they were simultaneously make a statement that this album is not a COPY and is different and original in its own right, which it is. I think that statement is made loud and clear by the many, MANY differences and new concepts in these songs. I think they also intended to make that statement by simply including a ninth song. That, to me, says "this is a
homage, but not a copy. There are lots of similarities to our first album because we WANT to draw that connection and very visibly make the statement that the roots of what we did back in 1992 are STILL the band's roots today. But we also want to show that we are renewed and current and are not out of things to say by any stretch."
To me, that makes sense and is consistent with everything I see and hear on ADTOE. And it is consistent with the band's message and how they have tried to brand themselves since Portnoy left. And it is also consistent with how the band has always paid homage to different things in their music and how they use various types of "nuggets" in their music. Agree or disagree, but that is my takeaway.
tl;dnr version: IMO, they paid "homage" to I&W (in its entirety); they did not "copy song structures." And that distinction is important, even though it may seem minor.
Topic: Check up on the ADToE/I&W-Conspiracy (Read 10445 times)
