In this chapter, I reflect upon observations made during the creative process, tying them into observations made by the responders during the Critical Response Process. I have selected key observations, as some of the points raised by the responders were irrelevant to my research. Below, I provide some examples of how changing the language of my lyrics affected the text, meaning and delivery of the songs. It is worth noting that (Responder 3) had to leave early during the interview due to personal matters, and thus, their responses have been removed from this reflection.
I experienced that where I was stuck and had difficulty rewriting the lyrics, I often had to incorporate more words in order to convey the same message as in the original. This often resulted in new and different flow. A good example of this is the rewritten version of “Speed Plug”, where the line “brukte ordene feil jeg skulle holdt tyst” (translated from “It be my words that always misses”) adds an upbeat to the flow by starting earlier than the original. However, at times this process could result in something that felt rushed and incomplete. (Responder 1) noted, when referring to the song “Guitar Jerk”, that “I think the English stuck out in how, to me, it feels sometimes rushed with the amount of syllables trying to be fitted in”. Furthermore, (responder 1) later added in relation to “Guitar Jerk” that “you're trying to fill in words to have the ends rhyming and so in the lyrics there is a lack of realness”. This indicates a negative effect on its perceived first-person authenticity, an important quality described by Allan Moore (Moore, 2002, p. 214).
In contrast, (Responder 2) noted, when referring to “Speed Plug”, that “I related more to the Norwegian one”. Further to this point (responder 2) said “I felt there was more emotional conveyability in Norwegian, and maybe that's because it's your speaking language”. Along the same lines (responder 4) stated, “I felt the Norwegian one was slightly more real maybe, but it's more... Maybe because it's closer to my language”. Here, both the first- and second-person authenticity, as defined by Allan Moore (Moore, 2002, pp. 214-220), seems to have been positively affected by the rewriting of the song. This raises an interesting question related to Kari Iveland’s observations on how Norwegian listeners reactions differs regarding Norwegian language in music (Iveland, 2024, p.36). In addition, (responder 2) noted how the delivery in the Norwegian version conveyed more emotions than the English version. This might be due to the song’s heavy utilization of spoken voice, and as I speak more Norwegian it could result in a more authentic tone. This realness and relatability could also stem from the listeners own understanding of the respective languages.
When discussing the song “Do Something” delivery was pointed out as a crucial element, when (responder 2) noted:
The distortion part […] creates this dynamic in the song and helps the flow […] when you do the call and response, it almost sounds like you're having a second person throw in a line, but it's just you, but you've altered your voice a bit. Maybe you've sung it more nasally or more powerful. And that really does add something, especially when you're repeating lines.
Delivery was also touched upon when (responder 2) referred to the hook, which repeats many identical lines:
[…] three of the same lines but you're adding a an alternative way of saying the last one […] that's a very cool way of […] actually making something that could be very dull, saying something three times […] very compelling and cool
This highlights the importance of delivery when attempting to convey a feeling or emotion, and its ability to add deeper layer of meaning beyond what can be derived from the words alone. Something Allan Moore has highlighted when discussing delivery (Moore, 2012, p. 102).
I believe that unique words and their meanings within their respective languages can have a significant impact on the perceived message. (Responder 2) notes, in relation to the song “Speed Plug”, that “the Norwegian one is giving me this more openness and poetic way of framing the lyrics, which actually gives me more room to find meaning for myself than being told the meaning by the singer”. This could be due to the way words are uniquely perceived by listeners in relation to their primary language, as noted by Kari Iveland (Iveland, 2024, p.36). This point is further supported when (responder 4), discussing the song “Do Something” stated that, “there was something about the words, for example, ‘smerte’ [pain], which to me is more painful and hard to listen to in a good way”. He also said when referring to “Speed Plug”, “I particularly like ‘jeg ser syner med min opptikk’, which I've found interesting and fun way to say it”. Where “opptikk” has a broader meaning than “visions”, directly translating to optics. This highlights an interesting side effect of rewriting, where. In an attempt to find words of similar meaning that fit into a set rhyme scheme and flow, one might accidentally add a deeper or different meanings to the lyrics that were not previously present in the original version.
The timbre of certain lines got attention by (responder 2) when reflecting on the line “so I cry yeah” in “Speed Plug” saying, “that part, for me, conveyed more emotional... That was good, because you're singing about crying, and it sounds like an emotional cry while singing it”. However, there wasn’t any clear difference in timbre the between the different versions. This indicates that the vocal tone and timbre in the song may be correlated to the artists creative choices, rather than the language picked.
Interestingly, after listening to “Do Something”, (responder 2) asked:
[…] there's the instruments and then there's the vocal […], but they can also be merged […], you can actually use your voice as an instrument. I'm just wondering when you write, is that something you're... Are you aware of that?
I responded by saying:
I think I make my voice fit emotionally to the story, but not that intentionally, kind of. […] I just start out making sounds, and then... I remove a lot that I don't like and I keep a lot that I do like. A lot of time ad-libs can be very like call and response with the vocal, but I often try to put some ad-libs before also, almost like a synth, like playing notes and trying to fit.
This highlights an interesting aspect of my creative process, where Duinker writes that contemporary rap often uses autotune as an instrument (Duinker, 2025, p.4). I similarly employ this technique. When searching for the “right” ad-libs, I am utilizing my functional tacit knowledge, knowing what I am looking for. However, I do not consciously know how to reproduce or force it out, but rather I go with the creative flow, picking and choosing based on intuition.