The Meanings Behind Classic Songs

Photo Source:

Photo Source:

Writing is about expression and often, especially in song lyrics, the meaning can be hidden under obscure depths. I’ve often been fascinated by the meaning behind some of the classic songs, so I did some internet detective work. This is what I uncovered.

    • American Pie – Don McLean: The song describes the death of music which, according to McLean, started after the death of Buddy Holly.
    • Brown-Eyed Girl – Van Morrison: Some have held that the song is about heroin. “Brown-eyed girl” is drug slang for brown heroin. The song is about his love for the drug. “Slipping and a-sliding” is a description of using a needle for injection. However, this ISN’T the case. It’s actually about a white guy making love to his black girlfriend. The original title for the song was “Brown-Skinned Girl” but because it was being released in the 1960s, he had to rewrite the song because interracial relationships were a big deal back then. The record company worried that radio stations would have had a problem with it otherwise.
    • Hey Jude – The Beatles: For many years, people believed this song was about heroin addiction. The line “The minute you let her under your skin then you begin to make it better” seems to denote shooting up. However, after years of telling only John Lennon what it was about, Paul McCartney (who wrote the song) finally revealed that it was actually about Lennon’s preteen son, Julien, after his parents broke up. The lyrics, apparently, do not hold double meaning.
    • Hotel California – The Eagles: The popular belief is that this song is about a whore house, but the truth is it was intended to be a song about the excesses of American culture, as well as the uneasy balance between art and commerce. (Source:
    • Let it Be – The Beatles: Popular interpretations of the song range from it being about the Virgin Mary, the Mother of Jesus, coming to Paul McCartney as he prayed to her, to being a song about marijuana (“Mary” is slang for the drug and McCartney was well-known to be fond of it). However, the true meaning is that it is about Paul’s mother. Her name was Mary and she died when he was a child. Paul said he dreamed of he one night and she said to him in the dream to: “Let it be.”
    • Puff the Magic Dragon – Peter, Paul and Mary: Many believe this song is about smoking marijuana. There are, after all, a lot of lyrics in the song that might hint at that: “Jackie Paper” referring to rolling the paper around the drug; “Dragon” referring to “draggin’” (slang for inhaling the smoke); and “Puff”, which some thought meant taking a “puff” on a joint. However, it isn’t called “taking a puff”—it’s called taking a “hit” or “toke” on a joint. Peter, Paul and Mary insist the song is about nothing more than a little boy who grows up and no longer plays with his favorite toy anymore. |

    • Landslide – Fleetwood Mac: The song is about a father-daughter relationship. Stevie Nicks wrote it in Aspen, Colorado when she looked at all the mountains and marveled at how they could all come tumbling down and there was nothing she could do about it.
    • Mary Jane’s Last Dance – Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers: Yes, the clear answer is that this song is about marijuana, and Tom Petty hasn’t come out and just said what it’s about. However, it is interesting to note that he had recently divorced a woman named Jane, so some believe it may be a farewell song to her. Also, the first take of the song was called “Indiana Girl,” but that didn’t feel right to Petty, so he changed it.







Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Time Tornado (Adult – 2016)

Photo Source:

Photo Source:

See “The Dream Factory” for a full list of my shared dreams.

I’ve been itching to have another dream worthy enough to include on my Dream Factory page, but either I haven’t been remembering them well enough (I always remember that I’ve dreamt the prior night) or they’re just ho-hum. Well last night I had a cool one I’d like to share.

In this dream, I was playing a video game—sort of. I wasn’t controlling a character on a screen or anything like that. It was myself and a few friends and we were on a rundown road in the slums of some city and trying to get through an area that was laden with dudes with guns who wanted to kill anything that moved for whatever reason. But somehow I knew that if I got shot I wouldn’t be hurt…like it was a game or something. It felt like a video game in that way and some of the physics worked like a video game, too. For instance, we could jump really, really high and almost float at times. We also had guns, though I don’t remember what kind.

So anyway, we started off by hiding behind this small building, like a modular job shack—there was a lot of construction equipment around, though nobody was actually doing any work at the moment. We were devising a plan as the baddies stood, stared off into space and occasionally walked around, as tends to be the routine for baddies in video games. We never got to a plan, however, for one of the baddies spotted us, started yelling and firing his weapon. This prompted a mob of more baddies to come running over and start shooting at us, too (which, in the video game world, is called aggro).

So we’re spreading out, seeking cover and shooting back with our guns, dropping them off one-by-one. We get past the first wave of them, and as the second wave is almost upon us, they stop…the ground starts to shake and suddenly they’re retreating, running as fast as they can in fear of whatever’s about to happen.

From the ground emerges this super tall and beefy badass dude—and that’s really the best way I can describe him. He’s fully armored in something that looks kind of futuristic with shiny, reflective space armor and a helmet that hides his eyes behind a dark visor. The armor is a reddish hue, but seems to change colors a bit as he moves, reflecting the colors of his surroundings. He doesn’t speak, but kind of stands there—or hovers there—as if taunting us. Moreover, when I say this guy emerged from underground, I do not mean he dug himself out of the ground or anything like that. I mean he appeared from the ground, kind of like a ghost. Only, when he was above ground he was notably solid.

When the first of us fires a gun at him, he dodges the bullet easily. Then the rest of us start firing and he keeps dodging these bullets as if they’re moving at slow motion. At a point, he falls back into the earth.

He reemerged behind us, but only up to his sternum—it looked as if he was wading in water, only the water was the asphalt of the road. He was still donning that reflective helmet, only it had changed its shape slightly to kind of look like a wild cat—a panther or lion or something. The ‘cat’ roared at us and there was a flash that came from his body, shooting into the sky and stirring up some intense lightning. That lightning shot back down several yards behind him, striking the ground with a crash. From where the lightning had struck, a small tornado began to spin. That tornado quickly grew until it was roughly the size of a small silo, and a web of yellow lightning spiraled around inside it with the wind. Then this tornado start moving toward us, following our movement as we attempted to flee.

Remember, this is video game laws of physics, so when we jumped we jumped high…well above this tornado so that we were looking down into it. We would descend slowly and could change directions in the air, and this worked for a bit, but ultimately the tornado was faster and more powerful than we were and it sucked us in.

I awoke slowly inside the living room of my house (the old house we just moved out of). Or rather, I understood that this was my old house, but really it looked nothing like it. That’s how my dreams work: the architecture is always understood to be one thing but really isn’t.

Anyway, my two-year-old was there with me, and he must have been there with me fighting the baddies and the helmet dude. He was older than two, however, but still young—maybe seven or eight or even a little older.

When I was fully aware of my surroundings, I realized that this was the past…one year into the past. I also realized that time around us hadn’t exactly caught up yet, meaning the pace of time was still running a little bit at super speed, though our movements felt normal, at least to each other.

Before time settled, I could see on Kyle’s face that he also understood that we were in the past, and he seemed to like this idea very much. His eyes lit up and a huge smile crept onto his face, one that seemed to say, “This is SO cool!” He put his hand up for me to meet it with a high-five. I obliged, but didn’t share in his thrill. I was still in a bit of shock.

A moment later and everything around us returned to its normal pace. We walked through a door that led to the front-most room of the house. My wife was sitting there in a chair, reading something.

“What are you doing home?” she said, looking up at us. I realized then that it was midday. I was supposed to be at work and my son was supposed to be at school. Instead of responding, I just hugged her tight, not knowing what else to do.

“This came in the mail for you.” And she handed me a letter, one without a return address. I opened it and, true to its weight, there was nothing but a scrap of paper inside. It gave an address and said to sit at a table and wait—that someone would meet me there to explain our situation.

My son stayed at home with his mom, and it wasn’t until I had left that I realized what a risk that was: what if there were two of him in this world? Himself from the future and then the one from the past. It was too late to worry about it, though, and continued to drive.

The address led to a restaurant. I don’t recall its name, but inside it was very dark with soft glows coming by candlelight at each table. I was escorted to a table by a waiter. Around me were all these people in dark outfits—actors. They were making odd movements and giving hammy facial expressions that were almost creepy, but only one spoke. He was on the stage with a spotlight on him reading some kind of monologue into a microphone. I don’t remember what he said or what it was about, only remember thinking it was a peculiar thing to want to watch while eating a meal. At a point, these actors pulled out white, almost luminescent feathers from their pockets, each placing the feather on their hand and blowing it into the air. As each feather fluttered downward, another actor in dark would blow the feather back up into the air. This continued until their actions gave the illusion of hundreds of white, luminescent feathers floating about the room on their own. It was mesmerizing to watch.

The speaker had stopped speaking at this point—the spotlight had turned off. There was some non-lyrical music being played, something simple and eerie.

I never met the person who was supposed to meet me—I woke up too quickly—but I thought what I remembered was kind of cool. Cool enough to share, anyway J.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Recommended Reads: Three Plotting Articles by Janice Hardy

Janice Hardy

Janice Hardy

My current writing project has been stripping down the story of a past project I love in order to simplify and really focus on building up a strong character arc. In doing so, however, I’ve scrambled a few other parts of the plot, which compelled me to look more into plotting and how to do it most effectively. This naturally led me to romance author and my good writing friend, Noelle Pierce, who is brilliant at that stuff. She immediately recommended these blog articles by Janice Hardy and, I must say, they’re wonderful. Janice really paints a clear picture of what makes a strong novel and helps you map out (at least in your head) how to go about writing yours. Even if you’re leery of these kinds of guidelines for fear that they might make your book too formulaic, you should give it a read–she addresses that fear, too.

Each of these blog articles gives a look at a different style of plotting structures. Great reads.



Posted in Recommended Reads, Tools for Writers | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Review of (Discontinued Fall 2015)

Photo Source:

Photo Source:

This review probably doesn’t help anyone, since is no longer in existence, but for a long time it was my writing home. I met a lot of people there and learned a lot. This review is in part for me, to set a bar of some kind to compare other writing community sites with, and for my ol’ “Autho” friends who may read these reviews, to grasp that bar to be able to understand my views on the other sites I review.

Photo Source:

Photo Source:

For those who never partook in Authonomy, you should probably get the scoop on why it failed–or at least this writer’s opinion of why it failed…an opinion that was commonly shared by many.

I’ll give you a second to read that.

Done? Good. Or perhaps you don’t care. That’s fine, too :).

So with that in mind, here are two simultaneous reviews of before it was taken down. One was the revamp version, which was terrible and drove down activity; the second was what was in place before it, a site that wasn’t perfect–it certainly had its problems–but was innovative and very addicting. They had a system in place where you were always competing, which sounds awful and people did complain sometimes, but–love it or hate it–it sure did motivate. You could put up to five books on your “shelf” and, depending on how much you reviewed (and perhaps some other factors) your “shelving” gave that book an unknown score that affected a race to the Editor’s Desk. Every month, the top five books by this formula earned a review by one of Harper Collin’s editors. Some people weren’t so happy with the review they received, but mine was really helpful and a great experience getting there.

So anyway, without further ado…

Audience & Features

The audience changed at Autho after the revamp, or at least that’s how it seemed. Part of the problem was that they went from a simple, easy-to-navigate layout to one that caters to the younger generation: busy, flashy and full of glitz. And maybe that’s the way to do it. Maybe the newer generation of writing sites has it to a T. But it isn’t for me. It’s all flash, less function, and I feel like that’s how the more experienced writers there took it, as well, like we/they were getting pushed out of the way for a younger audience.

That said, the features were still in place and very effective to a point, but much less so for whatever reason. Or at least that’s how it seemed. Some of the things that didn’t work hadn’t been addressed or had been addressed, but in a way that worsened the problem (I’m thinking of the rating system and some other things) in spite of the constant feedback of users. It was clear their intention of the new direction didn’t mirror what the current users were looking for from there–and that’s OK. Only, what they did come up with clearly didn’t work, and now Autho is sadly no more.

Ratings: Old Autho–Audience=5, Features=4; New Autho–Audience=3, Features=3

Community & Review Traffic

This is a tough one, because there was always SUCH a great community in place on the prior version of the site. It’s hard to assess the revamp version, because it felt as though there was huge fall off with this after the revamp as users seemed to leave by the droves. Now, had the site had more time to settle, things might have been different, but as it is, I’d have to say the community element worsened after the revamp. Also a factor is the trolling that when on there. Part of it was the competition aspect with folks trying to reach the Editor’s Desk, but there was more trolling there than I’ve seen anywhere else.

The review traffic was excellent. Again, you could expect some worthless feedback from time to time, but there were enough experts there to make it worthwhile. This aspect seemed to worsen after the revamp, and I’m not sure why, to be honest.

Ratings: Old Autho–Community=3, Review Traffic=5; New Autho–Community=2, Review Traffic=4

Technical Aspects (Site Navigation, Control, User-Friendliness, Portfolio Organization/Management)

The site navigation was much cleaner, simpler on the old version. The new version wasn’t so much. Again, Autho went to more of a modern style that I don’t get. Think of Netflix, for those who have it. The browsing function has gotten better, I think, but it’s still kind of cluttered. It’s like they think they’re a grocery store and want to make you sift through all sorts of crap to actually find what you want. This might work for Netflix or a grocery store, but for a writing site that should want to put its best foot forward? I don’t know. I suppose I could come up with a good argument for why they’d do this, but it made it much less user-friendly and more frustrating.

You actually had more control over uploading in a lot of ways in the newer version, and your MS might have even been more protected, but uploading files to read and review became much more cumbersome.

Profiles also became a bit busier.

Ratings: Old Autho–Site Navigation=3, Control=2, User-Friendliness=4, Portfolio Management=4; New Autho–Site Navigation=1, User-Friendliness=1, Portfolio Management=2


No cost, so that was a boon for the site.

Ratings: Old and New Autho=5

Writing Help

I really liked the professional development opportunities on the site. There were LOTS of articles covering various topics and genres and they were really easy to navigate. I kind of wish I would have saved more of them before the site went under.

Ratings: Old and New Autho=4

Overall Score

In my humblest opinion, the older version of kicked the new version in the tale, with a score of 3.92 to 2.75. I’ll just say it: I thought the new version was terrible. They took in a lot of feedback, and it wasn’t terribly hard to gauge the consensus on certain things–folks were all to eager to share their thoughts. Yet they didn’t really listen to their users, and it begs the question if that was intentional. It seems like they were trying to redefine themselves and, in doing so, alienating the core of their user base. It felt like a slap in the face, because so much was made of the revamp that was coming, and a few months into things got so bad that HC announced they were dropping the site altogether. That’s a pretty bad revamp. Again, there was probably more to this story, but on the user end it stunk to high heaven. It had its faults, but the older version of Authonomy was a wonderfully unique experience for writings.



  • Score: 3.92 out of 5
  • Strengths: Audience, Review Traffic, No Cost
  • Weaknesses: Trolling, Limited Control of MS


  • Score: 2.75 out of 5
  • Strengths: Review Traffic, No Cost
  • Weaknesses: Trolling, Site Navigation, User Friendliness



Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Review of

Photo Source:

Photo Source: (or BC) is where I ended up after Harper Collin’s Authonomy went under. It’s hosted by Penguin Books, which is very cool, but certainly has a unique flavor to it.

Don’t forget to check out the explanations of the categories if you missed it before.

Audience & Features

As BC is a place to showcase novels, and not other forms of writing, it stands to reason that most of its participants are somewhat serious about their craft. After all, writing a novel is a hard endeavor to undergo. The feedback I’ve received there, as well as the contributors to conversations I’ve been involved in the forums, has been mostly insightful, which gives me the impression that there is a quality audience here, filled with individuals who know what they’re talking about.

On the Features side of things, the focus is a bit unique. The variety of features aren’t so robust when it comes to say, community interactivity, but there are a lot of features in terms of publishing options. Yes, you can actually publish your book as an e-book through BC and set up prices and payments. Kind of cool, actually.

Ratings: Audience = 4 Features = 4

Community & Review Traffic

BC has created a safe environment for novelists to connect. Really, I’ve been there a short while now and haven’t come across any trolling. The forums are well attended and there’s some great conversations that happen there.

On the flip side, and maybe the reason why there’s little to no trolling, is that there review traffic is pretty weak. It’s really hard to get constant reviews on that site, because there isn’t much emphasis on reader incentive. I received about two or three reviews for every twenty-plus I gave out, and that was in spite of requesting return reads. Perhaps my works simply weren’t interesting enough, but I’ve had better success on other sites. A definite weakness of BC.

Ratings: Community = 4; Review Traffic = 1

Technical Aspects (Site Navigation, Control, User-Friendliness, Portfolio Organization/Management)

The site navigation works, I suppose, mostly because it’s a simple setup in many ways. However, in other ways, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. An author’s profile is somewhat buried and there’s a few cross-navigation routes that didn’t make sense to me.

In terms of its user-friendliness, the biggest gripe I have is that it doesn’t work well with Internet Explorer. While Chrome and Firefox are better and becoming more standard for such things, it was really a bugger when I was trying to do stuff with my account from, say, a library computer that only allowed for IE. Also, there were often big glitches even when I went through FF or Chrome.

Ratings: Site Navigation = 2; Control = 3; User-Friendliness = 2; Portfolio Organization = 3


There’s no cost–at least not to have a profile and be active from that vantage point. There may be in regards to publishing and other support services (I recall seeing something about this), but nothing that concerned me so much.

Rating: Cost = 5

Writing Help

There are some nice reference tools and the likes available.

Rating: Writing Help = 4

Overall Score

By my calculator and from the scores above, I give a score of 3.25 out of 5. Remember, I don’t expect any site to get close to a perfect 5 for various reasons. 3.25 is a decent score, I think.

BC is a nice site if you’re looking to showcase your work or are looking for a host to publish your work for money. It’s got a great community, too. Just don’t expect much review activity–at least not without a LOT of pushing on your part. It’s more relaxed/less demanding than some other sites, but less activity, too.


  • Score: 3.25 out of 5
  • Strengths: Audience, Community, Features
  • Weaknesses: Low Review Traffic, Odd Site Navigation, Glitches (or at least I keep running into them)
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Review of

Photo Source:

Photo Source:

I feel a bit indebted to (or “WDC”). After all, it’s where I began…sort of (I did have a short stint in college–early 2000s–at another writing site that hasn’t been active for years). The site has its shortcomings, but it’s also unique in many, many ways, and may just be the perfect fit for you.

So, without further ado…

…ahem, if you get lost with the categories, be sure to check out the explanations

…now, onward…

Audience & Features

I’ve lumped these two categories together, because they kind of effect one another in a push and pull kind of way. On the one hand, WDC has more interactive features than any other online writing community I’ve seen to date. Contests, campfire stories, forums and clubs, merit badges, awards, community-use currency (that you earn and don’t necessarily have to pay money for–but can)…the features on this site are impressive and make it an addictive place to linger. Adding to that is the fact that you can showcase more than just one kind of work. That’s right, WDC isn’t just for aspiring novelists: poets, essay writers, etc. are all welcome. On the surface, this is fantastic! The only problem for me was that it sort of diluted the skillset and focus of those you interacted with. In other words, if I’m looking for quality feedback and guidance on my work from others who are serious about the kind of writing I’m trying to get better at–visa vie, writing a novel–more often than not I may not get it. Additionally, the environment feels a bit like high school, what with all the clubs and glitz. Nothing wrong with having younger writers around but, let’s be honest, older, more experienced writers usually have more wisdom and insight to offer. So there’s that element.

Ratings: Audience = 2; Features = 5

Community & Review Traffic

The community interaction is excellent–a direct result of how many features are available. Really, if you can’t find a click here, you either don’t want to (which is a valid approach) or you’re just not making any kind of effort. WDC uses a community driven approach to helping writer’s improve.

Likewise, the amount of reviews one can expect from this site is awesome. Even though I’m not so active anymore, I still get the occasional review. When I was active, I could expect them all the time–whether they were directly asked for or not.

Ratings: Community = 5; Review Traffic = 5

Technical Aspects (Site Navigation, Control, User-Friendliness, Portfolio Organization/Management)

The site navigation was always a bit of a mess, and it doesn’t seem much better these days. There’s so many things to be involved in at WDC, yet finding these tools and making sense of what you’re looking at isn’t clean and easy at all. It takes some time being there.

In addition, the site isn’t always so user-friendly in that it requires that the user know a bit of code that’s unique to the site. There are plenty of tutorials on this and the community is always eager to help, but it may be an element some aren’t as comfortable with.

On the other hand, because of the requirement to know some coding, you have a lot of control over editing. Also, since the coding makes things less graphic intensive, opening items to read works very well.

Ratings: Site Navigation = 1; Control = 4; User-Friendliness = 2; Portfolio Organization = 5


Basic membership is free, but it’s very limited. You’re only able to showcase like five items, which is not good considering that an item can’t be a novel and that participating in contests and other interactive features on the site requires you to have your writing as an item in your portfolio.

The next level of an upgraded membership isn’t so bad, only $20 per year, but it’s still pretty basic. Most of the really active folks I encountered had upgraded memberships, which is $50 per year ($4/month).  I had an upgraded membership for a few years and didn’t regret it in the least. As I said, it was a great place to be for where I was in my writing at the time.

Rating: Cost = 2

Writing Help

WDC lists a lot of recommendations for classes to take and books to buy on many different topics, but not a lot of free guidance from what I could/can see.

Rating: Writing Help = 2

Overall Score

My calculator is cranking and from the sub-scores above I’ve set, placing emphasis on the categories I find most important, I give a score of 3.33 out of 5. Remember, I don’t expect any site to get close to a perfect 5 for various reasons. 3.33 is a pretty darn good score, I think, though it’s my first review, which means there isn’t any basis for comparison yet.

WDC is a great, GREAT site if you’re looking for a strong community and a lot of variety in your writing interactions. It’s also great if you’re just starting out as a writer, or are looking for a place to help get you out of a writing funk. Prompts are aplenty here with so many ways to showcase your writing.

The downside, at least from my vantage point, is that it feels best suited for a younger audience. The feedback I’d typically receive was hit or miss, with more misses than hits. That’s not to say there aren’t a lot of talented writers on the site–I’ve met some FANTASTIC writers there–but for every one great bit of feedback I’d get (by great I mean insightful and constructive), I’d say I got four or five useless reviews (where everything is gum drops and rainbows, if you catch my drift). Again, that’s not really a problem if it’s not what your emphasis on…and of course this may not be everyone’s experience, but it’s something I thought was worth noting.


  • Score: 3.33 out of 5
  • Strengths: Community, Review Traffic, Variety of Features
  • Weaknesses: Audience comprised of more casual writers, Messy Site Navigation, Fee for Upgrades


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Recommended Reads: “Learn the Elements of a Novel” (Website)

Peder Hill, Learn the Elements of a Novel

Peder Hill, Learn the Elements of a Novel

I’m trying to kick-start my writing again, but this time I’m doing more reading of articles on how to do it than anything else :). Specifically, I’m trying to amp up my character arc skills. In my perusing of the internet for good articles on the subject, I came across this website that does a great job of simplifying certain elements of the writing process, including character arc development. It doesn’t have everything, but it’s pretty solid, I think. Check it out, and thanks Peder Hill for sharing your expertise.

Posted in Recommended Reads | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment