Play for Today

[sorry, I accidentally hit "submit" in mid-sentence; then I tried to post the rest on my phone, but it turned out that it never went through] ...perhaps a little selfishness could be partially rationalised by the how irritating the narrator finds the situation has become to him, if the way he has been treating his partner were not so, well, reprehensible. As I read it, he has ceased (if he ever did in the first place) to take into account either standards of right and wrong or anyone's feelings but his own, even his lover's ("It's not a case of doing what's right; it's just the way I feel that matters"). He seems either not to get how hurtful this is to his partner, or to get it but resent that she [the parties' genders aren't mentioned in the song, so I'm just labelling the narrator "he" and the partner "she" in order to avoid having to type "s/he" repeatedly!] suggests he should try to give and not just take ("It's not a case of share and share alike: I take what I require / I don't understand, you say it's not fair"). The third verse in particular suggests that he may even be sexually assaulting his partner; in addition to the "I take what I require" bit in verse 2, "You expect me to act like a lover...wait for something to happen" seems to imply that he doesn't bother to wait until she's ready. The impression I get is that the narrator's completely selfish, amoral attitude is what triggered the various behaviours he finds so intolerable in his partner (saying "it's not fair," "always crying," and generally making it clear that he's not living up to her standards) in the first place. "It's hard to blame her for always crying!" If someone I knew were in a relationship like this (in the role of the partner, that is), I'd recommend dumping the sociopath! (I don't use the word "sociopath" lightly, BTW; as I noted, this character doesn't care whether his actions are morally acceptable or give a &*£# about anyone else's feelings — pretty much the definition of "sociopath.") (Maybe I should make clear that I don't think Robert is trying to suggest that this, err, approach to relationships is okay! I don't know him personally, but from what I know of him it's very hard to imagine him ever having been a manipulative sleazeball type. Rather, I think he's painting a picture of an unhealthy relationship from the POV of the exploitative party.)

It's at this point that get stuck. I love this song (especially those fantabulous [wow, my spellchecker doesn't have any complaints about that one!] guitar riffs...ahhhhhhhhh!), and listen to it all the time. The 4th and 5th verses are the parts that I can't figure out. I can't be positive about anything (such is the nature of song lyrics), but I think the phrase "It's not a case of..." at the beginning of each verse means that whatever follows isn't an issue, or at any rate not a relevant issue (according to the narrator, that is), in which case he's saying in verses 4-5 that honesty is yet another thing about which he doesn't care (verse 4) and so is trying to please his lover. One possible interpretation is that he is saying it doesn't matter if he tells her the truth because she always calls him a liar, and likewise it doesn't matter if he tries to please her (even if he cared about her feelings). because she's "always crying" anyway. Of course, it is true that song lyrics often don't really mean exactly what they say, but rather are suggestive or symbolic, but I can't come up with an explanation for "Some lines just fit the situation" that fits in with all this. (If it were in isolation — that is, if it weren't part of a song, but just a statement by itself — I would be tempted to think it referred to what I just noted about song lyrics: some lines just fit!) The other part that I find baffling is the last two lines: "It's just your part in the play for today." I've talked to several people who think that this means that the relationship has gotten to a point at which it is just going through the motions, each person does what they always do and the other reacts the way they always react. If that is it (I'm not at all sure if it is or not), the narrator is acknowledging to an extent that the situation exists, though he still blames his partner for it without accepting any responsibility himself. The trouble with the "going through the motions" part is that it implies a sort of repetitive situation, with both partners being stuck in their roles in the relationship. The trouble with this is that what makes it a "play for today?" As kagi points out, the '70s show "Play For Today" (with which Smith would be liable to be familiar — not sure but I seem to recall vaguely that he was born around 1960) featured a new play every day, which seems more consistent with the phrase "play for today" than does the idea of a relationship in which each partner is stuck in a particular role. (I mean, let's face it, it would just be too weird if Hamlet were to show up in Romeo and Juliet (speaking of doomed relationships).)