Interpretations:Broke In Two

From This Might Be A Wiki

Interpretation 1[edit | edit source]

Let's hope it's not autobiographical as this song is about another couple breaking up! Like Museum of Idiots it's based on a misunderstanding beyond the control of the narrator, but these problems are within his means to solve, not that he can think of a way of doing so. Linnell, again shows his range by singing in yet another style! Wonderful contrast between his breathy vocals and the choppy guitars. Excellent. --(Mr Tuck) 07:59, July 10, 2004

Does this song end sort of funny (all distorted and getting higher) or is my copy messed up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by c-24-13-224-74.client.comcast.net (talk) 17:32, July 12, 2004
Baby, that's art! --(Mr Tuck) 11:13, July 13, 2004

Evolution[edit | edit source]

Question: Is it possible that this song is about evolution? Talk of an orangutan and breaking in two would have to do with a Darwinian evolutionary chain possibly? I don't know. Just a thought I had. --(Necro1ite) 18:26, July 13, 2004

That does seem to work, but I find that the theme of forgetting - maybe on purpose? - is pretty prominent throughout the song, and I don't see how that would fit into the picture... --Rhinoceros Rex 07:01, July 14, 2004
Perhaps so many of us forgetting our more primitive ancestry? --Crummy 12:50, April 16, 2005

Interpretation 3[edit | edit source]

This is incredibly unlikely to be intentional, since as far as I know Linnell is no computer expert, but the song pretty accurately describes the forking model of the Unix operating system. (There are even some good references -- "scratch" is what spare memory is called and "go back to the top" sounds like popping the stack. And of course a computer program would do exactly the same thing.) The stuff about writing stuff down and the orangutan refers to the difficultly of having the two forks of the process communicate with each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by c-24-13-224-74.client.comcast.net (talk) 17:16, July 14, 2004

Interpretation 4[edit | edit source]

Possibly about a guy unable to make new memories, as in Memento (which features a scene just like the one here with the pen). This would make a nice compliment to the previous song about the girl unable to remember old memories. —Preceding unsigned comment added by c-24-13-224-74.client.comcast.net (talk) 19:21, July 14, 2004

That's exactly what I thought when I heard this song. The first verse mirrors the scene in Memento, and the part about going back to the start of the day but doing everything the same could refer to his inability to remember what he had done. However, it seems unlikely that this is what the song's about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.244.133 (talk) 01:51, July 26, 2007
I also immediately thought of Memento when I first heard this song. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the initial inspiration for the song, but that it took on a life of its own and came to be something more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.4.229 (talk) 12:32, December 16, 2008

Interpretation 5[edit | edit source]

This song continues the tradition of Forgetting, Remembering in TMBG's songs. I like the bit about the orangutan. --An orangutan 13:30, July 17, 2004

Interpretation 6[edit | edit source]

The copies I downloaded from theymightbedownloads.com were distorted at the end as well, I tried downloading again, but it was still distorted, so I came to the assumption that it was supposed to be that way. That was the second song on the spine that I heard like that. -EZ 11:35, August 3, 2004

Interpretation 7[edit | edit source]

Every time I hear this song it seems as though the part where the lyrics are "I would go back to the top of the day from scratch if I though this thing could be fixed," sounds exactly like some song I've heard before, not including the lyrics. I can't really tell what it is; it may just be that 2-5s in succession sounds similar no matter what song it's in. --Drumstick 19:45, August 29, 2004

To me, that part sounds just like The End of the Tour. But maybe that's just my crazy brain hearing things that aren't there. --PinkoPanther 15:58, September 29, 2009

Interpretation 8[edit | edit source]

A very '80-style, New Wave track. Musically and thematically, this reminds me a lot of Linnell's "love gone wrong"-themed 1988 track "They'll Need a Crane" - except that he ditches the detached observation he used in that classic song, and instead goes the first-person, unreliable-narrator route in these lyrics, with amusing results. --GR 01:40, September 5, 2004

Interpretation 9[edit | edit source]

My copy doesn't distort at the end. It fades out, repeating the chorus, with Linnell singing "I'm an orangutan."

I think it's a song about a relationship where one person is not very mature, or at least not as mature as the other. The singer is disorganized and irresponsible, and it the relationship eventually ends from incompatible frustration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.136.208 (talk) 20:31, April 8, 2005

Siamese Twins[edit | edit source]

I think it might be about siamese twins? - --PastaKeith 21:34, September 17, 2005

I agree. Has to do with twins. From the run-me-down/orangutan part, sounds like a prequel to My Evil Twin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.22.228 (talk) 15:55, November 2, 2006

It's about marriage/relationship interaction[edit | edit source]

Women seem to be very sensitive to the idea of being appreciated and listened too. Most guys tend to not listen and this guy in particular is kind of a absent-minded professor (similar to myself). The guy in the song is constantly forgetting what the wife says or just not listening properly, driving the woman to the point where she leaves him (with the threat of vehicular homicide). I'm and Orangutan could just be a joke on how he is not as evolved socially as the woman. Favorite song on the album as it reminds me of my wife :) We love each other but we do drive each other crazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.58.26.98 (talk) 11:22, November 22, 2013