Why "If I Had a Hammer"?

[landshark]

so I guess y'all just thought paul liked the song and had no political intent ...

me too. but I wondered. because it certainly makes more comment than different drum or mr rabbit.

[bigbak]

Smorgasberg said:

But do you really hate all politics in music?

(looks about nervously for Kathy)

It's not the politics in music, it's the pontificating in the musicians.

[Smorgasberg]

landshark said:

so I guess y'all just thought paul liked the song and had no political intent ...

me too. but I wondered. because it certainly makes more comment than different drum or mr rabbit.

Well, you know, didn't he cover "Borstal Boys" in NYC, as well? Sort of a protest song, against the modern penal system, albeit originally sung by a band who usually met Angela's criteria of singing about sex and beer.

I suspect Angela is giving us the straight dope, though, for a lot of people. I don't care what you're saying as long as I can shake my ass to it without the message getting in my face.

While in Cleveland, I also saw Audioslave in concert. The most thrilling moments came when they played two or three Rage Against the Machine songs. People went fvckin' crazy. But you know what, I would bet all the money in my bank account that for nine out of ten, it was just the beat they were responding to (and the aggression) and didn't signify in the slightest, either agreement or disagreement with Zack de la Rocha's leftist manifestos. People were not bored, and I guess there's an end to it.

[Smorgasberg]

bigbak said:

It's not the politics in music, it's the pontificating in the musicians.

Well, that's succinct, and it's an argument I can follow.

No pontificating in Paul. Semi-surreal carrying on, but no pontificating.

[angela]

Smorgasberg said:

I suspect Angela is giving us the straight dope, though, for a lot of people. I don't care what you're saying as long as I can shake my ass to it without the message getting in my face.

That's not true, in fact I feel just the opposite. I do care what the artist is saying, which is my entire point in my responses on this thread. If I didn't care what they said, I'd listen to anyone who came up with a beat I like. I just want what they say to interest ME, which is purely selfish on my part, but it's the way I feel. That's my whole bloody point, sorry is wasn't succinct enough.

[allshookup]

bigbak said:

It's not the politics in music, it's the pontificating in the musicians.

And beware the backfire! I came to prefer draining Walden Pond to listening to Don Henley's "heartfelt" rants...

[angela]

RJ said:

And beware the backfire! I came to prefer draining Walden Pond to listening to Don Henley's "heartfelt" rants...

Exactly. How could I forget that smug bastard?

[snickers]

alrighty, time to jump in the fray again....

i think there is a difference between someone like bob marley and someone like don henley.
there is an realness to bob marley's music and subject matter, because it came from his life experiences.... as opposed to someone who watched the news and/or read a magazine, formed an opinion about issues, then proceeding to go on about their opinion at length.
it seems kind of bossy and phony....
but for some artists it is really what they live and what they know (think: goddamn job). and i would argue that makes it more compelling to listen to, because it is integrated into who they are, as opposed to being a "statement".

(although i have to admit, i still cringe whenever i hear any version whatsoever of redemption song....because i attended college in santa cruz, ca someone actually played it during one of my classes on the last day and....oh, i can't go on. i can't bear to remember)

[gravy]

angela said:

. I don't want to get into the Clash because, while I like them a million times better than the Pistols, my ultimate opinion on them would probably get me kicked off this board, dragged into the street, and stoned to death.

blah blah blah...

Good idea, scooter was just trying to locate some rope & a horse while me & bhay42 collect rocks of all shapes & sizes....

I'm a big Stave earle fan & i have no problem with people who are aggravated by his political views..
I for one, am for the Death penalty, Now Steve ain't & he's pretty up front about it, but if it makes you think about something from someone elses point of view,
I don't think it's all bad...

and he did play Wild Thing when i saw him a few years back... #nosmileys

[angela]

easyheart said:

alrighty, time to jump in the fray again....

i think there is a difference between someone like bob marley and someone like don henley.

(although i have to admit, i still cringe whenever i hear any version whatsoever of redemption song....because i attended college in santa cruz, ca someone actually played it during one of my classes on the last day and....oh, i can't go on. i can't bear to remember)

I agree. I've never been a Bob Marley fan but it has little to do with any political content his songs might have. I'm just not much on reggae. However, if I have to choose between Marley and Henley, I will be your island queen.

I want to know what it is with Marley and frat guys. I used to work in a record store and frat guys would come in in white baseball hat sporting packs wanting to know where the Marley was, man. It seemed to be a requirement to get into the frat, it was weird. Last week, I was parked outside my husband's store, in a parking lot that abuts a frat house. A member pulls up, windows down, Marley pounding on the stereo. Sits in his car bopping his head until the songs over. Goes inside, opens the window, puts the same damn song on so the entire block can hear it.

[Smorgasberg]

easyheart said:

but for some artists it is really what they live and what they know (think: goddamn job). and i would argue that makes it more compelling to listen to, because it is integrated into who they are, as opposed to being a "statement".

I think that's a great point. There's an aesthetic judgment inherent in a lot of everyone's comments. There seems to be general agreement that Paul picks covers based on the fact that he likes them, not because he wants to make a statement. He likes them, so he plays the hell out of them, whether it's If I Had a Hammer or I think I Love You. Does he like the lyrics and the content as well as the tune? I'd say probably, but you'd have to ask him.

Which brings me to Angela's point. I'm sorry if I mischaracterized what you were saying. I genuinely thought, from your comments about "Louie Louie" and love and beer and sex music that you were saying rock and roll should be about a good time, not about a message. And I was saying I think it can and should be about both. I misunderstood you. My reaction to Bigbak's post was more of a, "Oh, now I get it."

Anyway, I've kept coming back to this conversation because I thought all of the points were interesting, not because I was pissed at anyone.

[snickers]

is ganja the missing link between frat boys and bob?
no clue.....

[angela]

gravy said:

Good idea, scooter was just trying to locate some rope & a horse while me & bhay42 collect rocks of all shapes & sizes....

Your Fugitive Kind vigilante posse doesn't scare me!

[Monkey]

I would draw a distinction between music that's overtly political (Rage) versus music that just engages the culture (albeit it may have political overtones), like Springsteen. I also think a big part of the problem is that it's just hard to write overtly political music that's both thought-provoking and actually entertaining, as opposed to just sloganeering. The list of artists who've managed to pull this off without coming across as idiots, self-righteous pricks, or hypocrites is fairly small. Rock concerts and three-minute pop songs are just not conducive to weighty political discussions.

I also llike Bigbak's point about artists pontificating. If I go to a Vote for Change concert or something, I know what I'm getting into. But if someone buys a ticket to see Springsteen (who was bitching about Bush in concert before the VFC tour) or Kid Rock, and halfway through the show they launch into a speech about why Bush sucks/Bush rules, I think they have a right to be pissed that the artist is detracting from the entertainment value of the show and alienating half the audience.

[gravy]

angela said:

Fugitive Kind vigilante posse

that sounds like one of the bands Scooter lists on his still UNHOLY "what are you listening to right now?" thread....

sorry scooter, I just couldn't resist...#nosmileys

[angela]

easyheart said:

is ganja the missing link between frat boys and bob?
no clue.....

I suspect you've hit that one right on the head. Frat guys, weed, Marley. Sounds perfectly logical.

[allshookup]

Monkey said:

But if someone buys a ticket to see ... Kid Rock, and halfway through the show they launch into a speech about why Bush...

Good points, Monkey, but isn't any break at a Kid Rock show a good thing?

[Monkey]

RJ said:

Good points, Monkey, but isn't any break at a Kid Rock show a good thing?

;D Touche', I should have used Nugent.

[Smorgasberg]

angela said:

And doesn't everyone laugh all the way through In the Ghetto?

Especially after you've heard it sung by Eric Cartman on South Park.

[scoOter]

let me just say that no one, no one, should be slagging on the clash.

that said, what it comes down to is finesse, dig? if political songs are done, and done well, they are good songs. if they aren't, they fuckin' suck. period. dylan's "hurricane" is definitely a socio/political song, and it still makes me well up with tears when i hear it. read: it has emotional impact as an artistic statement, and is a good song.

to me, it is totally against the roots of rock & roll to say that musicians shouldn't give voice to social issues. rock & roll is protest music, people.

"everybody smash up your seats & rock to the brand new beat..."

not every rock & roller should be a political slinger, because not every musician is good at nuance, substance, and delivery.

that's the way i see it.