Artists always talk about music bringing people together, but ironically I feel like a lot of the time artists are so competitive with each other in our own industry,” she says.
“We want to do that for the world but we don’t do it between ourselves.
“I remember when I went to an awards show for the first time and I expected for everybody to be like, ‘Hey how are you’, but everybody was with their own team and unless you’re already friends nobody really talks to each other.
“If we’re trying to unify the world, why can’t we just start with the room we’re in?
—  Camila speaking to the BBC while in London

anonymous asked:

Hi :) I know everyone's going on about Kiwi being about babygate, but I really think it might be about the music industry in general, using stunts as an inspiration. If you consider the female in the song being the industry it makes sense because it appears in a way tempting and desireable (but in the end it's really not as great as it seems), but he is also being pushed and has no control (and will in a way regret getting involved with it). I love your blog and I hope you'll consider the idea!

Hi!

Thank you for your kind words.

Your point about the music industry is a really good one. I think “Kiwi” is, in a way, about the unsavory aspects of the industry.

“MMITH” expresses the ambivalence of being caught in between– wanting to advance, but knowing there are consequences. It can be interpreted as an addiction of sorts (with mentions of morphine).

“Kiwi” offers another take on this addiction. The metaphor is an addiction to the sort of girl/ love that everyone likes.

The cigarettes, the intellect, the hard liquor, the marks of a glamorous rock ‘n roll life– the groupies, the available sex, the available drugs (so much cocaine, it can constantly fill up the Holland Tunnel!)– they all seem like irresistible lures. All the boys (the musicians) are drawn to it. These are the goodies associated with a rocker’s life, and glamorized by journalists like Cameron Crowe.

But the beautiful girl is an illusion. The music industry is a façade, like a beautiful girl who goes home to a cactus– a plant that requires no maintenance. It’s a plant for lonely people who want companionship without the work. It’s an empty life.

The girl is an actress, someone whose warmth is completely fake.

She’s like the music industry executives, managers, PR machine who talk about taking care of musicians, but really just want their baby– their music, their revenue.

“I’m having your baby, it’s none of your business.”

The music executives seduce the musicians and take their babies. They behave like prostitutes. But instead of a straightforward sex transaction, where a customer pays for sex, and the sex-worker gets money, in this case, the executives just want the product. They want the music and the revenue. They don’t care how they get it.

“It’s none of your business.”

Once the baby is conceived, the industry takes care of business, the financial aspects. It’s out of the musicians’ hands.

The ironic, bitter reference to babygate isn’t so different from this interpretation, really.

Stunts are a way for the industry boosts revenue, through PR.

Fans are interested in stunts. Stunts fan the fandom flame. Stunts keep the fandom alive when there’s no music. Stunts stir emotions.

This isn’t limited to the 1D fandom. Almost every celebrity pairing can represent a stunt, always tied to selling something– an album, a movie, a project.

Fake relationships are par for the course. We’ve seen many of them. In fact, reviewers and interviewers can’t stop referring to Taylor Swift. Stunts have legs (pun intended). A two-month stunt can create news for years. Pathetic, right? But there’s money in it.

Can stunts go too far? Fake babies, for instance?

“I’m having your baby.”

Do these words refer to a real-life situation?

The words are so specific, and so connected to the One Direction fandom, that I don’t see how they can represent an innocent metaphor. Every reviewer states that these are strange words.

But they’re not RANDOMLY strange. They’re pointedly, knowingly, bitterly, coyly strange.

The words are savage, and sung in a savage way.

The words sound like a threat and a boast.

I’m having your baby. What are you going to do about it? Nothing, because it’s out of your hands. You signed on the dotted line. You’re going to pay and pay, and there’s not a damn thing you can do.

I don’t think Harry is making fun of Louis’s situation, at all. I think he’s FURIOUS. Louis is suffering unimaginably, and Harry sees it. He suffers too. It’s a call-out to the people who put them in this situation.

Who pushed the Babygate narrative hardest? Who was earliest with the news?

Answer: the media associated with 1DHQ.

Who in the celebrity gossip media most associated with 1DHQ?

Dan Wooton.

Where is he from?

New Zealand. He’s a Kiwi.

I don’t know if this is the correct guess, but it’s something @larry-god-mother told me, and I think it’s pretty brilliant!

GUYS

today i spent the day with my grandma because i cant stay home alone anymore and she asked me what kind of music i was into and i told her about all the bands i liked and 5SOS especially and she loved them. like, she asked me all sorts of questions and she wanted to know the meaning behind every song and everything and we talked about fanbases too and i realize that things havent changed that much since she was my age when it comes to bands and music fandoms. she said she used to feel like she was the only one who understood herself other than the artists. she said her and other fans would keep notebooks and write everything down about their favorite bands or members. she said she still had one somewhere and she remembers every time someone got a haircut or a girlfriend she would write down every detail and what she was feeling about it and her thoughts on it and she said when they released songs she would fill entire journals talking about them and i told her things were exactly the same now. we document everything online. she told me that as i get older people will tell me to grow up and stop obsessing over bands and she said to never listen to them. she said if she had stopped listening to the music she did when people told her to that she would be an overall unhappier person today. shes in her 60′s and understands me better than my parents and some friends even. she fell in love with 5SOS today and she said she felt like she was 15 again, listening to The Beatles in her room on her new record player. again, my 60-something year old grandmother was moved and felt young again listening to 5SOS. thats what music is all about. 

her fav was ashton btw 

@5sos

please boost this, i want 5sos to see their impact is huge and i need them to see how important they are

“they are not going anywhere anytime soon and damn it Emily if you stop listening to them i will raise hell until you pick them up again.” 

The story of Phillip Phillips

I don’t know if you guys know Phillip Phillips - he sang those songs “home” and “Gone, gone, gone”. I don’t know him that well but I like his songs. He was the winner of American idol and has since then got into a massive legal battle with 19 entertainment who produce the show and run the record label he is signed to as a result of winning (so like what Simon Cowell/Syco is to the X-factor/5H). 

I know we are talking about American idol here and not X-factor, but they are basically the same thing and this whole thing has everything to do with Fifth Harmony. In fact, the two shows are so similar that Simon Fuller (owner of American Idol) actually tried to sue Simon Cowell by claiming the copyrights to the X-Factor format, and as a result, Fuller is actually now a partner in the X-factor. Basically Simon Cowell worked with Simon Fuller on American Idol but then sneakily fucked off to produce his own show that did exactly the same thing lol. No wonder Fuller tried to sue him!

Anyway, in January 2015, Phillips started a legal battle to basically get out of his deal with his management. His management company was the same as his record company - all run by 19 entertainment. So basically, Simon fuller had set it up so that he can control and reap the benefits from everything in the winning act’s career (similar to what simon has done to 5H). Apparently 19 entertainment  “Manipulated” him into accepting jobs that didn’t benefit him and his lawyer said the contracts were "oppressive, fatally conflicted.“ . 

Some of the ridiculous agreements included being forced to perform for no money and literally not even knowing the title of his album before it was publicly announced!!!!. He claimed that 19 entertainment repeatedly withheld information regarding his career (I think we all know 5H have been in similar situations of being kept in the dark regarding their careers…)

Basically, before phillips actually won the show, he signed a contract with 19 entertainment that allowed them to govern his management, merchandising, recording and publishing. You can assume a similar deal with 5H - From what I understand, the X-factor also makes contestants sign with Syco before the show finishes, making them remain with syco for 3 months after the show finishes… And during those 3 months, Syco/Sony can decide whether they want to exercise their option of signing the act to a full-on record deal. So what I’m saying is that all the bullshit reality TV style contractual stuff that they are able to get away with in that format, probably still applies when they go into the full record deal. These things are set up so that the labels get a lot of passive rights (where syco get a percentage of everything the x-factor contestants do for years) and active rights (where they also get to control everything about the artists’ careers so that the label can benefit the most). Syco/sony still retain a ridiculous amount of control over the artist’s career - probably way more than a normal record deal.

Phillips tried to use the Californian Talent Agencies Act to void his contract with 19 entertainment. (It’s quite a technical thing thats not that interesting). 19 entertainment then tried to sue Phillips’ manager, basically for turning against them and ‘manipulating’ him into trying to get out of his contract. Then, also, in summer 2016 (after 19 entertainment went bankrupt lol) 19 entertainment tried to sue Phillips for millions because he wasn’t carrying on with his contractual obligations to them while the whole legal battle was going on. The latest article I saw on the story from the end of last year was predicting that the label would not been able to sue him because of their bankruptcy. However… I only skimmed through the articles so if you find some more updates on the story please let me know. 

The details aren’t really that important - the important points are that these reality TV shows that artists sign record deals off of are notoriously horrible. The contracts give the label active rights to control almost every aspect of the artist’s career. And even when Phillips tried to get out of his management contract, his new manager was hit with a poaching lawsuit, and he himself was hit with a 6 million dollar lawsuit. It literally took actual bankruptcy of the company for him to not get sued in this process. Usually getting into a legal battle with a label is suicidal - they just have so much more power, money and resources, and have usually covered their backs in iron-clad contracts. i think another really important point to take from this is what Phillips said about how his label treated him - that they repeatedly withheld information from him regarding his own career - that he didn’t even know his album title before the public did. i think this stuff is particularly relevant to 5H. The execs are pulling the strings and the artists are the puppets. At times the girls may know just as much as we do regarding their futures. I’m sure as a coping mechanism they’ve learnt to just roll with it and pick their battles.

Anyway I’m not sure on the latest details of the legal battle… I assume he legitimately managed to get out of his management contract in the end, but here is his twitter is you want to support him.

WTF Is Going On In This Fandom: Camren, Epic, Jauregui Family, Social Media Rant/Theory

If you peeped the reblog I just posted from @backstage-meg this won’t seem like it’s coming out of left field. I doubt they (5H, Mila, their families and friends etc) are at liberty to truly discuss what has gone on behind the scenes so we are left with inuendo and scarce clues to try and piece together some semblance of an explanation for what has gone on over the last few months/year…I’ve learned not to trust anything that is being blatantly thrown in our faces. Hence Laucy, 5H drama between the girls, the families shading each other on sm, all this epic/syco label BS. None of them are saying or doing what hasn’t been scripted for them to say or do. Now of course I don’t mean literally scripted but more like dictated instead. I do believe all the girls have private AND public sm ACCTS…except for their twitters because there is really no point. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they have secondary Instagram accounts📱💻. And we already know they all have private snapchats. We are focused on the wrong things. Mike liking and unliking a tweet, Lauren following and unfollowing Mila, Candece Campbell’s radom tweet about Instagram messing up her followers at the same time Lauren was having her “follow debacle” happen, was like a whistle blow to pay attention to the details. Laucy was brought out and shoved down our throats while Camren has been denied and destroyed by mgmt, the label and even the girls themselves. Dinah’s last message to Mila “no matter what they say. No matter what you do…” 👀🐸🍵Come on Dinah was warning us just days before that shit was about to hit the fan and that we should know better than to just believe what we hear and see in the media. It’s all sensationalized. Mila saying she hasn’t seen or interacted with the girls since leaving (even though they all admitted to lying during interviews) was hard for me to believe, even with the current narrative💅. You don’t just sever nearly 5 years of a bond. No matter how tight things got in the end. It was always designed for mila to be the break out star💃 (or at least the first one) hell Demi called it years ago while they were still on x-factor. Now I know people and situations can change. Egos can grow and resentment can start to fester. But I also know enough to know that egos don’t destroy groups bad business practices do. All artists have major egos although some have learned to tame the beast. Your ego doesn’t make you a bad person your actions do. And honestly if the original members of Destiny’s Child can get over being robbed financially💲💰💵 and rekindling their relationship with Beyonce and Michelle and New Edition can welcome Bobby Brown’s crazy ass back in the fold and the Spice Girls can get over themselves to deliver a crazy performance at the 2012 Olympics then hell anything is possible.😮🙌 And I doubt Mila missing meetings would be the final straw to break the camel’s back. She received her gold plaque the same night she left/was kicked out of the group. And we all know there is no such thing as a coincidence when Camren is involved. I know this is long winded. But I had to speak my peace as I watch this fandom panic yet again over this staged bullshit. You’d think by now we could smell it before we see it…😂😂 I said all that to say, trust and believe all contingency plans have been put in place and if you hear the girls saying something especially in a well known publication or media platform📺🎤💻📰 understand those words passed through a dozen mouths before it left theirs. And anyone affiliated with them can’t take a shit around the girls without getting permission to use the toilet and signing their name on the tissue paper. And those who can’t be controlled will be removed. Probably why the laucy interactions have dialed down. Oh and don’t forget it was just in December that Lucy liked Camila’s tweet about the BT video and “bringing the characters to life” and then a couple days later she randomly unfollowed her ….really😒? And the Jauregui siblings pretty much unfollowed around the time she left too…smh. In the right light🔦 it looks like the story makes sense and is on the up and up. But start pulling at the loose strands and details of this narrative and you’ll see how quickly all this shit unravels. And on that note I’m done! This was just a flow of thoughts …So it may make sense. It may make me look crazy, but I’m willing to risk the credibility of my sanity for the sake of voicing my opinion and getting these thoughts down on paper. 📝Speaking figuratively of course. Love you Munchkins.😘

Dean Munch🎓

(Nikki)
npr.org
The Struggles Of Austin's Music Scene Mirror A Widened World
As the face of Austin's music office prepares to depart, the city's problems and successes may offer a lesson for the world at large about globalization and technology.

The Austin music industry isn’t whole. The business underlying “The Live Music Capital of the World” stands bifurcated between its lucrative festivals (SXSW principally, but Austin City Limits, Fun Fun Fun Fest and others, too) and, as studies have found, a dwindling local music scene. Austin didn’t become the self-styled “Capital” solely by hosting a handful of gargantuan events, which were first born from and since have capitalized handsomely on Austin’s brand to increase their now-global footprints, drawing outsized attention to the city. These large events and a rapidly expanding population have put an unintended strain on the infrastructure of the local music scene which helped create them and on which they still rely — it’s hard to throw innumerable shows, as during SXSW, in a city with fewer and fewer venues to put them.

Austin musicians’ “main source of income,” says Don Pitts, is “through live performance. Anyone who’s been keeping an eye on live performance on a local level sees that it’s continuing to go down year after year.” As the founding face of the city government’s Music and Entertainment Office, Pitts has been in a centralized orbit around the problem of trying to balance these disparate sides of Austin’s coin.

anonymous asked:

So Meg, what did you think of Lauren's tweet saying 'FUCK YOU' to the media? I love her, but come on. She did a photoshoot w/a professional photographer w/another girl, her bff & apparently ex, & the photographer talked about L & LV's personal relationship in an interview. Of course the media is going to pick up on it & talk about it. This is something completely different than the leak of the kiss pics, which were taken at a private family event. I sometimes wonder what is going on in her mind.

Ok I’m about to go off on a rant lol. All I am seeing on my feed is stuff about how Lauren is a “hypocrite” and “she put this out there so how can she not expect a reaction”. But people need to understand that the reason why the whole things SEEMS contradictory is because THESE ARE NOT ALL LAUREN’S ACTIONS. You can call someone a hypocrite if they are individually in control of all the contradictory actions, but she’s clearly not! On the one hand we have what Lauren wants - how she wants to be seen, what she values, how she wants her image to be used, her will to keep her private life private. BUT on the other hand we have what her PR team wants - they want headlines and money, and they are paid to know how to create a buzz out of something

So what does this leave us with? - Two different images of Lauren which sometimes line up with each other, but also sometimes contradict each other. Lauren may not always like the tactics her publicists use, but she can’t do anything about it! Please read the last post i wrote on this blog - It’s so relevant to this debate! When Lauren signed her contract she legally granted her Label the exclusive right to use her image, likeness, name and biography for publicity. This is just a fact. It means that her publicists can feed whatever they want to the media and it’s not in Lauren’s control. It means that Lauren is not allowed to publicise stuff about herself without doing it through her label.

I think part of the reason why people see this as all within Lauren’s control is because the shoot itself was very Lauren. It was done with people she trusted in a quiet location, it was very tumblr pretty and the way she showed her body was classy and elegant. Lauren has to do a certain amount of publicity appearances, photoshoots, interviews etc… She contractually has to co-operate with her PR team, and my feeling is that she’s been able to negotiate and make a lot of compromises recently. By playing along and cooperating, she’s been able to do things her way a little bit. BUT this does not mean she is in total control! 

This shoot was clearly not something totally ‘organic’. 1) Billboard didn’t just report on it - they literally released one of the pictures on their instagram. So (once again) they were they were obviously a part of the whole thing. 2) This indie photographer who publishes their stuff online obviously has no reason whatsoever to release their photos MONTHS after they were taken and do an interview with bloody MTV to go along with it!! The timing and the way it was done means that it was obviously co-ordinated by 5H’s team. 3) Do you really think that that Lauren would choose to give the media specific information about the exact state of her love life???!!!!! Come on people! As if Lauren would explicitly tell a media outlet who she is/isn’t in a relationship with! It’s so fucking obvious that her team fed the media ‘info’ on her relationship/breakup. These journalists don’t know who Lucy is or that the fanbase was starting to feel that she didn’t seem to be spending time with Lauren any more. I repeat - the media was FED this information by Lauren’s PR people. 4) Lauren tried to make this hers by using her body for art and to make a statement, but her team of course knows what the media wants and they KNEW that this shoot would end up being about objectifying Lauren in a trashy way. They KNOW how to get clicks. This is what it was about in PR terms for them. Again, we have two different images/stories - the way Lauren see’s things and the way her team uses her to gain publicity for the product they are trying to sell.

^^^ So Lauren is not a hypocrite. She’s an incredibly strong person who is trying to assert her values in a situation, where she has very little legal control over how her image and personal life is used to sell records. THAT’S  why we see two contradicting sides to the story. If she was submissive and went along with everything without complaining through indirects, then she wouldn’t look like a hypocrite because we would only see one side of the story - the PR side, not Lauren’s side. 

This applies to soooooooo many things, especially the ‘break-up’. Fans are always calling out the girls for being hypocritical and self-contradictory when their actions don’t add up. “How can Dinah say that she loves Mila no matter what two days before she posts something accusing her of being a selfish diva?”. “How can Lauren say she’s a feminist who supports other women but then shades Mila?”. “How can the girls not support Camila in her solo stuff but now support each other whole-heartedly?”. 

BUT IF SOMETHING DOESN’T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE, IT’S BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY DOESN’T MAKE SENSE !!!

ALL OF THIS STUFF SEEMS CONTRADICTORY AND DOESN’T ADD UP BECAUSE IT IS NOT ALL IN THEIR CONTROL !!!!!!!!!!!! They are not hypocrites, they are just people are not contractually able to control the narratives that are presented to the public about them. The small opportunities they have to express their real selves contradict the images of them that their team sells to the media and the public for publicity purposes. That’s why they ‘seem’ like hypocrites. It’s that simple.

Sorry I used this ask to go on a long rant (it’s general - not aimed at you anon), but please please please people read my last post about how the artists grant the label the right to control their public image. This is so important to understand. 

We live in a world where: 

  • Chris Brown got away with the most minimal sentence after horrifically beating Rihanna. 
  • Roman Polanski raped a 13 year old girl but still won an oscar to a standing ovation. 
  • R Kelly raped several under-age girls but was acquitted on all charges. 
  • Woody Allen had an affair with his wife’s 17 year old daughter only to end up getting away with it and beginning a relationship with her shortly after. 
  • John Lennon is one of the most worshipped artists to have ever drawn breath but has admitted to battering the shit out of women. 

And in that world it’s no surprise that Kesha’s freedom was denied. That her psychological and sexual safety were reduced to nothing. That she’s been forced to produce six more albums with her abuser. That she’s been forced to remain the creative property of the man who drugged and raped her. Because in this world our courts and culture still have a hard enough time believing women’s accusations of sexual assault even in the most clear-cut of circumstances. And when a woman as powerful and high status as Kesha can’t win, the rest of us stand even less of a chance. 

anonymous asked:

Hi hope you're doing well today. The HSA Inc. company It had seen listed before, someones blog awhile ago, but just sat there I believe, but now what does that actually mean to Harry? What do they publish? Do they get money separately from the things he does in print (i am so ignorant about this.) The Erskine Records Limited, what do they do with his career. I do not understand how HSA, ERL and the touring company work together, why three separate things?

Hi anon! The three companies will control and manage the rights, assets and revenue from different areas of Harry’s business. So Erskine Records will probably manage his recording rights & revenue, HSA Publishing will manage his publishing copyrights, and Erskine Touring will manage his income from tours.

He needs three separate companies because….well, basically he’s hella rich and there’ll be a huge amount of revenue coming from lots of different directions and they’ll need different entities to deal with them.

HSA Publishing deals with Harry’s underlying copyright to the songs he writes - for anyone, not just himself. Every time a song gets played on the radio or used on TV or used in an ad or a public event, Harry will get a royalty payment. We know that Harry has signed a deal with Universal Music Publishing (UPMG) for his song publishing, so that was probably signed via HSA Publishing. 

Incidentally, remember when the hacked photos from Anne Twist’s phone were being removed from the internet? The copyright notices sent to people demanding they take the pictures down were from HSA Publishing. So that’s probably the company that will deal with all Harry’s copyright such as image rights, photos, artwork, merchandise etc

Harry’s record deal with Columbia was probably signed via Erskine Records rather than Harry directly (for his exclusive services) and who knows - maybe one day he’ll use it to release his own music directly, or even sign other artists. 

And Erskine Touring will look after all his touring business.

Hope that clarifies things a little bit :)

Not only do labels control their artists’ social media, but they also make the artists pay for it!!!

I want to share an extract from a book i read…

“During the term, the company will have the exclusive right to set up the artist’s website and control social media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.). Their argument is that they want to present a coordinated marketing campaign across all platforms and, oh by the way, we’re the big record company and you’re not. Some companies, if you ask, will allow the artist to set up an “unofficial” website during the term. After the term, the rights go back to the artist, although companies keep the right to have an artist section on their company website… 

…Companies want to recoup the costs of creating and maintaining the artist’s website and social media. It’s hard to make this go away, but sometimes you can limit the amount they can charge, to, say, $25,000 over the life of a deal” (Passman, 2015:140)

This fact isn’t really surprising considering that social media is a key part of marketing, and artists have to pay the label back for the money they spent on marketing… but it is particularly absurd to think about. Like theoretically, as an artist, you could be in a situation where you don’t like the way that you are being portrayed on social media, and you can’t do anything about it. And then you actually have to pay your label for this !!!!! If you are lucky you can maybe limit this amount to 25 grand. It’s just another perfect example of the absurd and potentially unreasonable contractual obligations that artists are put under.


Source: Passman, D. S. (2015). All you need to know about the music business. Simon and Schuster.

Today I got an ask about Harry and Niall’s record deals, saying that lots of people have concluded that they have distribution deals with their respective record labels, and how Larries have taken this to mean Harry isn’t “really” with Sony. I answered it briefly here and here.

I was curious what had prompted it so I took a quick look in Larrieland. It only took a few minutes to find the post - written by Aaron Butterfield - given that it had over 1,100 notes. He answered some questions on it here.

The posts are full of misleading simplifications and inaccuracies. For example,

The music industry is made up of RECORD COMPANIES. There are three of them, with unequal shares of the market.

No, there are a great deal more than three record companies in the music industry. There are three major labels.

Sometimes artists will have DISTRIBUTION DEALS….. Only high value artists have distribution deals (Beyonce has one.)

Wtf?? No, mate. Countless artists have distribution deals. A distribution deal isn’t in itself a rarity in the music business, it’s the nature of the distribution deal that determines its rarity. 

Harry Styles is signed to Columbia, which is owned by Sony, and has a distribution deal through his own Erskine Records.

Says who? Your Larrie pals? 

We do not know the nature of Harry’s record deal with Sony Columbia. As far as I can see, Larries have based this conclusion solely on the fact that ‘Harry Styles’ is copyrighted Erskine Records under exclusive license to Columbia. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to them that Harry could have a licensing deal, despite the very large hint in the line above. Maybe they’ve never heard of licensing deals?

Industry trades reported that Harry signed a massive multi-million dollar, 3 album deal. We know Rob Stringer has been personally involved in Harry’s development at the label. To me, that points to a worldwide licensing deal rather than a distribution deal. 

With a licensing deal, Sony would pay Harry a (massive) upfront fee for the rights to his album(s) for a set period of time on set terms in certain territories. That means that although copyright remains with Harry (Erskine), Sony control the rights to his records during the term (reverting when the contract ends). They take all the financial risk, and in success, they reap the financial reward. 

This is different to a distribution deal where the artist gets a distribution advance and then recoups their percentage of income from distribution sales.

I could be wrong, maybe Harry has merely signed a distribution deal and all the industry trades are completely mistaken. But unlike the big Larrie blogs, I can accept that without knowing the nature of Harry’s deal, we simply can’t know. 

Ma quanto bello sarebbe tornare indietro

e invece oggi, oggi, oggi non ci sei

non ci sono neanch'io

io mi sono fermato poco tempo fa

a chiedermi che combino?

che non combino?

niente di buono, il mio buono eri tu.

Ho messo via le cose

la tua mia maglietta che usavo sempre io

la mia, sempre per dormire

e ho avuto un crollo.

Non ho nemmeno una foto con te,

che non mi è mai fregato niente delle foto,

eppure adesso ne vorrei una per ricordarmi

che la felicità non è una truffa

e non me la sono mica inventata oggi che non c'è.

Ma quanto bello sarebbe tornare indietro

e invece oggi, oggi, oggi non ci sei

non ci sono neanch'io

io mi sono fermato poco tempo fa

a chiedermi che combino?

che non combino?

niente di buono, il mio buono eri tu.

Oggi mi sento come quando tu eri ad Amsterdam,

io son tornato a casa che non c'eri

e ho avuto paura che non tornassi.

Quanto matto mi sono sentito mentre piangevo

e quanto matto mi sento ancora

mentro penso che è stato tutto meraviglioso,

persino litigare, persino piangere,

persino i pugni sul muro in via Castiglione

persino sanguinare.

Ma quanto bello sarebbe tornare indietro

e invece oggi, oggi, oggi non ci sei

non ci sono neanch'io

io mi sono fermato poco tempo fa

a chiedermi che combino?

che non combino?

niente di buono, il mio buono eri tu.

Che oggi non ci sei,

che oggi non ci sei.

Perché a me le cose

piacciono dolci come le torte che cucinavi piano,

ed era sempre domenica, ed era sempre pomeriggio

anche di mattina, di sera e di notte,

ed era pomeriggio all'alba in via Torella, ad Istanbul.

Ed era pomeriggio e c'era il sole, c'era il sole con la pioggia,

il sole con la neve, il sole di notte

era sempre pomeriggio, c'era un grande sole

ed era come stare a casa

anche quando non eravamo a casa,

persino sul bus,

sotto un portico,

in mezzo al mare, al mare.

Ma quanto bello sarebbe tornare indietro

e invece oggi, oggi, oggi non ci sei

non ci sono neanch'io

io mi sono fermato poco tempo fa

a chiedermi che combino?

che non combino?

niente di buono, il mio buono eri tu.

Che oggi non ci sei,

che oggi non ci sei.