when is a song a song
Last week, several unrelated events occured that got me wondering: what makes a song, a song. That is, when is that song, this song.
Event 1:
First, a singer hired to sing the National Anthem at the Denver state of the city address, sang the tune, but substituted the words to the hymn “Lift Every Voice and Sing” for the usual lyrics.
She’s taken a lot of flac for it. While she is claiming artistic license, most of the criticism centers on the idea that, for an official occasion as this was, this is one song you don’t mess with. If you’re hired to sing the National Anthem, you sing the National Anthem.
Now, I don’t think what she did was all that bad, especially given the vastly more inspiring lyrics of the hymn, but I can understand people not wanting the song messed with. Obviously, the Nat’l Anthem is chosen solely for its symbolic role, not for entertainment value, and so should be treated accordingly. But it struck me as interesting that people didn’t count the song as the song if it had the “wrong” lyrics. One of the first comments I saw was from a local official, whose name I don’t remember, who described at first just having a wtf? (not his words) reaction. Later, when he learned it was the so-called “Black National Anthem”, he was offended that she would make that substitution. So, it has to be the right lyrics, or it’s the wrong song. I can understand that. But I wonder what he (and others who think similarly) would have thought if she’d sung this instead:
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash’d out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
He’d have had his similar moment of confusion, I suspect. But for people giving the “wrong song” argument, would that have counted as the right song? In other words, does it have to be the lyrics one knows, or is it sufficient that the guy who originally wrote the song considers these lyrics part of the song (even though nobody since considers them relevant). And I wonder, if Marie had chosen some other hymn without a history, if the reaction would have been the same. It seems that all around this, both the attitute toward the tradtional lyric and the substitution, it’s the symbolism of the lyrics, not their actual content, that is at the root of people’s reactions.
Event 2:
Prior to the PBS Independence Day TV show, there was some discussion around Taylor Hicks fan boards surrounding one of the songs he was set to sing, namely “This Land is Your Land”. It’s a song that every kid has sung in some school assembly. Various people were sharing various versions, including this excellent one by Sharon Jones and Dap Kings (which T&Jam drew my attention to):
Here, I was struck by the fact that some people, while liking that version, felt it took too much liberty with the tune to be appropriate for a national celebration (my paraphrasing). So here’s the flip side of the first event: it’s (almost) faithful to Guthrie’s lyrics, but the tune is Jones’ invention. So same song, or not?
Event 3:
On the fourth, I happened to read in my local paper a review of a theater piece centered around Woodie Guthrie’s music. The reviewer called attention to this song in particular. For the musical rendition, which involved using the bodies of acoustic string instruments as percussion, but also for bringing out Guthrie’s voice of protest through the simple act of singing all the verses. Guthrie wrote the song in response to Gershwin’s “God Bless America”.
As I was walkin’ - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin’
But on the other side …. it didn’t say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple
Near the relief office - I see my people
And some are grumblin’ and some are wonderin’
If this land’s still made for you and me.
So, who “owns” this song now? Jones sings the latter verses, with some lyric changes for pace and modernization. Is she singing the real song? When we sing it without those verses, are we really singing the same song?
I think, in all of this, it makes little sense to sit on one version as being the right and only version. Music is communication, and people will use it to say what they want to say. That’s the point. That said, it makes me wonder what people are trying to communicate when they take a song written to promote liberty and fairness across socio-economic boundaries, and turn it into a feel-good geography lesson.
categories: music, thought
tags: Dap Kings, George Gershwin, God Bless America, National Anthem, Rene Marie, Sharon Jones, This Land is Your Land, Woody Guthrie
posted by boolz at 01:57 am
Having neither your depth of analysis nor your writing skills, Boolz, I wasn’t going to comment here. But I was thinking about it last night and do at least have an opinion. Much as I love lyrics, they are not sacrosanct to me. It changes the song, but it doesn’t upset me. However, if someone wants to change the melody, they should please write a new song of their own. Embellishments are ok, but don’t stray too far.
Ray Charles and Betty Carter did a duet album that I love, so I bought a CD by Betty Carter thinking that I’d like that too. The title should have warned me off – “It’s Not About the Melody.” Mmmmmm, yes, it is – for me, at least. I especially dislike it when an artist flattens out the melody, something that a certain someone did to one of his own songs on a recent national holiday. Sorry.
This is an interesting topic. I hope more people comment.
I don’t mind lyric changes to make a statement or to fit with a tune that’s been changed up a bit. It’s art. Art’s gotta do what art’s gotta do…
And I don’t mind a tune changed up. As long as it sounds good, well then right on. Extra points for being creative.
I was really, really surprised that so many people were put off by the Sharon Jones version of This Land Is Your Land. I was shocked, actually. It’s my favorite version!
(This topic brings to mind the bluegrass(?) version of Snoop Dogg’s ‘Gin and Juice’ by the Gourds. Oh that’s the same song alright. Completely different, but the same song…)
I guess I’m thinking about two things here. The first and most important and most interesting is what you guys are talking about. What is aesthetically right and good? I have no problems with any category of change: lyric, melody, groove. In fact, I think it’s the artists job to give an interpretation, and that means change. But, like anything else, I can like or dislike the choice they make. I might disagree with a sentiment, or feel like a groove is uninteresting or think that the artistry is weak.
In the case you bring up, Karen, of flattening out a melody, that can drive me nuts, too. Doing that rhythmic monotone scat is a great embellishment, but can lose all it’s interest and power when it’s over used. It’s like some idiotic classically trained singers who use vibrato all the time, instead of as an expressive device the way God intended. heh. I don’t remember it from Hicks’ July 4th performance, but he did that on one of those May charity gigs. Overkill.
So, for the artists, I say bring it on, go where the music takes you. It’s your job. Then, as a listener, I’ll see if I like it. That’s my job. Usually, if it’s a real interpretation and not some self-conscious training exercise, I’ll like it on some level.
The other thing I was thinking about is geeky and relatively unimportant: legally, what counts as the same song? I mean, is there a certain percentage of shift, and how is it measured. How do juries decide? Like I said, not artistically important, but now I’m kinda curious.
Yesterday I tried to think of songs where the melody was changed that I still liked. “Over the Rainbow” as sung by Kat McPhee on AI came to mind right away — I loved that. Then later in the day, I was looking for a version of just that song to complete a mix I was making, and each one that came up was changed, including I. Kamakawiwo’ole’s (which I also love). So now I’m thinking it’s about the chords rather than individual notes. Chord progressions appeal to me, especially in the minor keys. Think Barry Manilow’s “Could it Be Magic” that starts out with big chords from Chopin’s “Prelude in C Minor.”