A riff is not an issue of instrument-handling. The manner in which the riff is played is instrumenthandling but not the riff itself.

And what if the exact riff would be sung with lyrics, then of course you would consider it part of the songwriting and I'm saying:Why should it matter?

And what if the song is played instrumentally like say a JB's tune or a surf-rock instrumental. Is the *melody* as played by the horns or guitar not part of the songwriting? It's an arrangement? Of course not. All of a sudden, you have a dude adding vocals-BOOOOM! It all becomes arrangement, fuck that... It's based on the idea of thinking about music in terms of foreground and background where the melody by the vocals are the foreground and then this melody outlines chords I guess. However, all music does not work like that. What if the melodies and chords in *your* songwriting definition are outlined by the horn-riffs, the basslines etc., should they still be considered just part of the arrangement when they are in fact supplying the progressions? I don't think it makes sense and I find it contradictory and all types of shit.

Arrrangements to me is the type of stuff you add to an existing song (whether an original or cover is irrelevant; George Martin helped Beatles out with arrangements, those songs were already written and it's easy for the ear to separate the song from the arrangement), that's what an arranger does. That's not what JB or Clinton did-you can in many cases not separate song from *your* definition of arrangement which of course means that you have an arrangement without a song. Is that even possible???