Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
To:
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And all religion’s true
(You can hear the change for yourself by forwarding to the 5:01 mark of this video. By the way, not only did he butcher the song, but he sounded terrible doing it.)
Now I don't care where you are concerning your opinion about religion, but I think most of us can agree that changing this iconic song in this manner is an insult to the memory of a great songwriter, and tireless advocate for peace in the world.
Not to mention that it renders the song virtually nonsensical.
How in the hell can ALL religions be true?
This has really fired up a number of people, and Cee Lo has already had to start a little damage control.
Not even close to being an adequate apology in my opinion.
I am NOT a huge fan of Cee Lo by any means, but John Lennon was considered a god during my youth, and NOBODY has the right to take one of his songs, especially THIS one, and change the lyrics to suit their own personal beliefs. If you don't like the song, then DON'T SING IT!
John Lennon had a very passionate desire to see peace flourish all over the world, and he rightly recognized that much of the violence and hatred stemmed from mankind's insistence that their God was the only true God. He wrote and sang this song in an attempt to plead with people to see the world differently, and to hopefully find a common ground to love one another, and to stop the senseless killing of our brothers and sisters around the world.
I really do believe that, in some small way, his song has had that affect. And that is something to be both honored and respected. And NOT something to be altered to suit your own cowardice, or religious point of view!
(It has also been pointed out that during an appearance on "American Idol" that contestant David Archuleta left out this portion of the song altogether. I don't really give him a pass either, but at least he did not CHANGE THE LYRICS!)
Anyhow my rant is over. However I was wondering if you guys think I am being too sensitive about this, if you agree with my irritation, or if you think I am not pissed off enough.
Feel free to chime in.
H/T to Friendly Atheist.
I'm an atheist. Cee Lo's changing the lyric of John Lennon's Imagine doesn't change my strong personal connection to the song as it was originally intended by the artist.
ReplyDeleteTo me it seems like a lot of rant over nothing very important at all.
I have always liked John Lennon's music, but honestly, he fell about 10 stories in my estimation when I found out how he totally ignored his other kids and only cherished the one he fathered with Yoko Ono. As a musician, he was untouchable; as a human being, not so much.
ReplyDeleteOK, I agree that Cee Lo should not have changed the lyrics, ESPECIALLY on such an iconic song, BUT, I think you are somewhat oversensitive. He should never take poetic license so antithetical to the songs meaning, , but even the embrace of no religion can be viewed a a type of "religion".
ReplyDeleteReally, who cares. Let everyone believe what they want to believe. Last week Kelly Clarkson tweeted that she supports Ron Paul, and she ignited a firestorm of backlash. Shit, can't the girl (as deluded as she is) express an
opinion? When we start losing our ability to respect free speech and freedom of religion , or the freedom to practice no religion at all we become no better than the other side.
The religious angle doesn't bother me too much because Cee Lo may have accidentally gotten it right. If all religion is true, than none of it is. Competing dogma's and ideological impossibilities would simply cancel each other out and then the world would be a better place.
ReplyDeleteMy bigger issue is that I find it rude and irritating when people take liberties with the work of others, no matter what the 'message.' No doubt, Cee Lo would not appreciate someone else 'improving' his songs, so why does he feel it is okay for him to do it to others--and especially to someone who is arguably one of the most influential songwriters of the modern age. Cee Lo will never attain Lennon's status, so it is embarrassingly arrogant for him to have pulled a stunt like this.
I think it was a stupid thing to do. I think it's equally stupid to get worked up over it. Good grief....
ReplyDeleteI didn't hear the change or most of the song. When it started, hubby screwed up his eyes in pain and asked, "Who the hell is murdering Lennon? Please, mute it."
ReplyDeleteSounds as though he was more correct than he knew.
Some may think it's not such a big deal, then again what's to stop those new lyrics being adopted by other singers as they move forward. The song should be done as it was written, if you don't like the lyrics than find another or - GOD forbid - write your own damn song. That way you can let your message stand or fall on its own instead of trying to hitch your wagon to another's star and make changes as you like. It's like the GOPer's rewriting history. Say it enough times and Paul Revere did ride out to warn the British and maybe he should have been hanged for treason instead of having statues of him put up around the country.
ReplyDeleteIt was very wrong what he did, I agree with you Grypen. And also justin beiber singing, Let It Be, just so the audience would say his name, He would sing Let is Be, and the girl fans would say, after him Be Ber. Sickening.
ReplyDeleteHe said he just meant a world where we could believe what we want??? The original lyrics say that more than his did.
ReplyDeleteRant on.
We were singing along, so we didn't catch the change. I'm just so happy that people still love John Lennon, a personal hero of mine.
ReplyDeleteIt's not the biggest deal in the world, it was just a really bad choice for him to make. He completely negates the point of the song.
ReplyDeleteAs you say, Gryphen, ALL religions can't be true. This guy (and I admit, I don't know who he is), says he thinks people can believe what they want. I agree, but that doesn mean all religions are "true."
Secondly, to me, that line is the most important one because it is the most controversial and daring.
Finally, it pains me that some kid's introduction to Imagine is this guys version and not hear it as Lennon intended it.
But, ultimately, I just find his alteration annoying.
What a sack of shit. To change Lennon's iconic song to mean the exact opposite of what he intended is despicable.
ReplyDeleteThough, not as despicable as Herman Cain changing the lyrics to be about pizza...
I don't think it's about being "oversensitive", Lennon wrote that song to speak a personal, profound message. It's philosophy in song. Changing it is just wrong.
It would be different to change the lyrics to some vapid pop song that doesn't matter, but this song as deep meaning and a beautiful message. Anyone with an ounce of conscience should be too embarrassed to change the words to a song like Imagine, no matter HOW they're changed.
"all religions TRUE" is the same to me as "no religion too". It's all bullshit.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the rant and appreciate what Cee-Lo was trying to do. To each his own. That's the beauty of music and the beauty of personal freedoms/free speech.
ReplyDeleteYou both are right to stand up for what you believe.
Cee Lo also has performed as the lead singer of Gnarls Barkley. Here is something that some may resonate to:
ReplyDelete"You are the best. You are the worst. You are average. Your love is a part of you. You try to give it away because you cannot bear its radiance, but you cannot separate it from yourself. To understand your fellow humans, you must understand why you give them your love. You must realize that hate is but a crime-ridden subdivision of love. You must reclaim what you never lost. You must take leave of your sanity, and yet be fully responsible for your actions."
-Gnarls Barkley, in a letter to the legendary rock critic Lester Bangs
You are either intending this post to be deliciously ironic (in which case, bravo!) or you and I have a different view on Lennon's song.
ReplyDeleteIn my view, Imagine aims at your goal, Gryphen, the destruction of all sacred cows, from Christianity to the Beatles, leaving just the world of people living in peace.
As Lennon once said, "I don't believe in Beatles, I just believe in me."
or more infamously, "Christianity will go, it will vanish and shrink… We're more popular than Jesus now - I don't know which will go first, rock and roll or Christianity."
.....a statement I found logically consistent with his oriental/Buddhist perspective- it's all unreal but what it is front of you- and to my sensibility of faith not offensive at all.
To finish his quote, "Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me."
A bit crudely put, but right on, bro.
I am afraid I have to disagree with those who don't believe this is a big deal. At least to me it is.
ReplyDeleteJohn Lennon released this song in 1971 when he was considered an untouchable icon of pop music. It was a risky career move, and he suffered tremendous backlash for it, be he never wavered from the message.
Today this song is considered one of the greatest songs ever written, and it is played in countries all around the world (lyrics intact), often given the same respect that they provide to their individual national anthems.
It is a song which never fails to make me tear up, and its message is one that should never be altered by anyone.
ok, not posting well.
ReplyDeleteWe Agreed with this:
""Who the hell is murdering Lennon? Please, mute it.""
For those who wish a fuller sense of the man: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/rockandjazzmusic/3646983/The-John-Lennon-I-knew.html
ReplyDeleteI couldn't pay attention to the words because I was so horrified about the number of animals that were slaughtered to make that coat he was wearing.
ReplyDeleteAs a writer and someone who respects Lennon's work, I find it outrageous. But moreover, I respect copyrights.
ReplyDeleteCee Lo is a fucking jerk.
ReplyDeleteAlways has been.
Have no idea why he gets attention as he can't sing -- he's good for nothing except for financing the food industry as he's a FAT fucking good for nothing jerk.
He 'thinks he's BIG' - yea he is -- in girth only.
Green's a massive JackAss.
He did this for the attention as he's so stunned and stupid he doesn't see that bad attention does nothing for you. Anything Green is on -- I turn the station. He should go back to his 'hood' as he's not a black that deserves attention and surely does not deserve respect. He's done nothing to deserve either but parade his fat ass on a stage.
Get a grip there. Big wow. It's just a song.
ReplyDeleteGryphen, you are such a brainwashed tool. I confess for months now your blog has been one of my guilty pleasures, like the National Enquirer, but I am so bored with your insipid, coventionally brainwashed non-Sarah comments and observations, I have only been checking in lately once every two weeks, largely to see what your readers think. This is my goodbye, as I find your blog sad and irrelevant, just parroting the controlled mainstream media and your so 'evolved" attitude with your pedantic anti-religious stance, which is really an anti-spiritual stance. All politics is a kabuki show, and only rarely does a Kucinich, Grayson, Dean, Cynthia Mc Kinney, or even Jesse Venture emerge from it, to challenge the facade of lies you so obviously buy into.
ReplyDeleteIf you had half a brain, you'd realize the change this singer made "Imagine" makes perfect sense. You'd also realize the Lennon and the Beatles were our generation's Michael Jackson, only promoted to their prominence to control the values and direction of youth, much like today's Kardashians, most of their music was ghost written, Paul was definitely replaced in '66 by a taller, moosefaced guy with green eyes, who played righthanded. If you don't believe me, google diglander or the forensic analysis in the the Wired article on the changes in Paul's face pre and post 1966. I only regret Lennon was assassinated, as he didn't merit the honor of such attention. Ono was his Condolezza Rice. (That's an inside joke for my edification.) His killer was a clone to the guy who months later shot Reagan in an attempt to put the first Bush in the White House, so maybe he was killed only as a practice fire.
The Lennon song you think is so sacred, is as musically noxious and insipid as Octopuss's Garden, and clearly your adoration is a sign of how deeply conditioned you are. I cringe every time I hear it. In fact, there are a million bands that were more relevant and musically enduring than the Beatles, and despite all the high priced efforts to keep their tunes
relevant, people aren't buying it.
While all the Sarah shit was fun, she was a deliberate distraction from real issues, just like Joe the Plumber but with longer legs, and you admirably played your part burnishing this turd's media prominence, inspiring me and other's to waste brain cells in the process better spent on deeper issues. I'm sure the powers that be love you for this.
I decided to give money to Ron Paul, thanks to you. He is the only honest one running. If you really believed in the fairy tale song Imagine you profess to admire so much, Paul is the only anti-war candidate out there. His stated pledge to kill the Federal Reserve would be a thousand times more profound a change than the republican lead deluted compromise that was EXACTLY what the HMOs and Insurance industry wanted.
Don't worry about this "troll" lurking on your site anymore. A New Year's resolution of mine is to avoid wasting my time with lame sites like yours that add nothing to the debate. But before going, I thought I'd do a good deed and put in a final two cents just to give your followers something to think about. I hope commenting readers will start using your real names, learn to be tolerant and perhaps even open to views not akin to your current thinking, think hard before you write, and not play into the fear machine that makes you think you have to post anonymously.
Keep up the good work to think for yourselves and always question, readers, and a happy 2012.
goodbye
Robert Schoen
New Orleans
!. The original is perfect. Every note is in it´s proper place, even the silent pauses in between. Any change is a diminishment. It seems to me Cee Lo believed he was improving the lyric, and he is now being called out for his hubris.
ReplyDelete2. The beginning of the video, Kathy shirtless, was put on pause. You just know that woman is a tiger in bed. ROAR!
G, I love your healthy and appropriate outrage about so many of the "challenges" facing us. This seems not worth it to me. Just misguided artistic license. How about if you just think less of him for doing it? He sounds pretty clueless, so I bet it's an honest mistake on his part (thinking it's okay). But not worth much more attention than you/we have given it already.
ReplyDeleteLet's get back to evil people who deliberately and slyly are hurting us -- in order to maximize their own gain. You know, the usual suspects. Well, they used to be suspects, but after all I have learned by reading blogs and connecting the dots, I now think of them as PERPS! Or, "the kleptocracy."
While I agree that it was a bad idea to change the lyric, and it was especially cringe-worthy on a line that's so integral to the entire meaning of the song, I can understand and believe Cee Lo's explanation.
ReplyDeleteI'm an atheist, but it makes sense to me that someone might say "all religion's true" as an equivalent way of expressing the concept that no particular religion has a monopoly on the "truth" (i.e. Christianity isn't any more correct than Islam, and Islam isn't any more correct than Judaism, and so on). Kind of an "I'm okay, you're okay" thing. Or, you know, "whatever gets you through the night" (to borrow another Lennon lyric).
Cee Lo's rewording ended up being clumsily ambiguous, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Justin Beiber sang "Let it Be"?
ReplyDelete(shudder)
How many times did he sneak the word "baby" into it?
I think I could tolerate the song and accept his "apology" for changing the lyric if he projected some emotional involvement with the song.... all I got was a singer performing a song for the crowd and self consciouslytrying to put his own little stylistic bits in where he could.
ReplyDeleteIts all relative....how does a no talent troll like Cee Lo get famous?
ReplyDeleteMy religion is the golden rule, you don't need more than that. I truly believe religion is the root of all evil...used as an excuse or a crutch. Imagine is timeless just like the quest for peace...rant on.
To the extent that human made borders, and greed (oil, bananas and minerals, anyone?)are responsible for the deaths of more humans than any plague ever has, and throwing in greed -
ReplyDeleteReligion then comes into play as the PR bloody a shirt to convince and whip the ignorant into a blood thirsty violence lusting fury and then releasing them onto some other country's civilian population -
To that extent I absolutely agree with Lennon.
On the other hand all sorts of people intentionally mis quote famous quotes and there is no reason Lennon's songs are exempt from that practice.
Since MLK was assassinated, martyred for a social cause by a national political force that opposed him, for his political /social leadership, I, personally am offended when he is mis quoted or his quotes are used against his ideology. But that is just my opinion.
Incidentally, I owned every album (the originals, incidentally) the Beetles ever recorded for decades until they were worn out.
I agree with you Gryphen. This IS a big deal, because it's a slippery slope when people start fabricating their own view of history. Paul Revere, anyone? Founding Fathers workin' hard to rid America of Slavery? Donald Trump is not a broke loser? So here's John at his best -- "Gimme Some Truth" -- works today just like it worked then ...
ReplyDelete"I'm sick and tired of hearing things
From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocrites
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
I've had enough of reading things
By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
No short-haired, yellow-bellied, son of Tricky Dicky
Is gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
With just a pocketful of hope
Money for dope
Money for rope
I'm sick to death of seeing things
From tight-lipped, condescending, mama's little chauvinists
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth now
I've had enough of watching scenes
Of schizophrenic, ego-centric, paranoiac, prima-donnas
All I want is the truth now
Just gimme some truth"
Happy New Year, All! TRUTH and an OBAMA landslide in November!!
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a shame when someone takes something that is dear and sacred to someone else and desecrates it. smh
ReplyDeleteI'm with you, Gryphen.
ReplyDelete- ks sunflower
BTW - Happy New Year! Glad you are continuing to make a difference by opening minds and hearts through great posts.
I agree with you -- this song is an icon and for Cee Lo to change it to insist that religion's true borders on blasphemy. (I'm old enough to have seen the Beatles' concert at Olympia stadium in the Detroit area in 1965 and John was, if not a god, a true seer and wise man to most of the folks my age.) Not to mention that lyric changing to suit your own hobby horses is just plain rude.
ReplyDeleteNot bothered, here. In this week's shit storm of nut cases, a tactless call for tolerance is merely a minor nuisance.
ReplyDeleteHere's the question: What would John do?
I was more pissed off about the idea of Herbie Cain using that song to sell pizza then I am by this guy.By the way who is Cee Lo Green?
ReplyDeleteIf that was really the point the artist was trying to make, I believe it's a rather relevant point for our time, where radicals in certain religions (and just plain opportunists) are trying to pit one religion against another. They like to claim "their" religion is the only true and thus superior one.
ReplyDeleteAnd just as an aside...unlike you, Gryphen, and apparently John Lennon, I do not believe the eradication of religion would likewise eliminate human cruelty and stupidity.
Just sing it like it was intended. Same for those who sing our National Anthem at sporting events. I don't care about your own personal "spin" to draw attention to yourself.
ReplyDeleteIt's as ridiculous as Herman Cain changing it to a pizza song. They should both be sued. And I hope Yoko gets paid each time either one of them are played.
ReplyDeleteIt's Lennon. It don't need fixin'. Green does, though.
ReplyDeleteFunny how small minds think genius needs tinkering.
Personally, you are over the top. Artists sample other artists' songs all the time, making changes here and there, some good some not so good. You really seem to be holding Lennon up to be some kind of God. He was not. And whereas he may hold iconic status with many, he does not hold it with all. So, cool your heels. Don't like what Ceelo did, state it, without making it appear as if he trampled over everyone's human rights. He did not.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I like John Lennon, but he wasn't the greatest modern day song writer, in my opinion. He, just the Beetles, represented a time and an era. Talented, yes. Beloved, yes. The greatest.....no. So when you write, please state that it is YOUR opinion that he was the greatest of modern day. A few of us would disagree.
Just my opinion.
I have the feeling he meant, "and if people have a sincere religious belief they can have it and not try impose it on others or say they are right and everyone else is wrong". As in, all religions should live peacefully in tolerance and respect for one another - he just forgot to include the atheists, but that would have screwed up the rhyme scheme ;-).
ReplyDeleteI agree Mr. Lo shouldn't have changed John Lennon's lyrics, and yes John Lennon was commenting critically about religion.
I do love my Cee Lo anyway. He's a good guy and he just messed up here. He will apologize up and down, if I know him.
@RobertShoen gives $ to racist Ron Paul. Thanks for helping to re-elect Barack Obama & we're glad you'll not be commenting here anymore. Happy 2012.
ReplyDeleteHere's more:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/01/cee-lo-green-changes-imagine-lyrics_n_1178313.html#s583218&title=Cee_Lo_Green
I caught it too and it stuck with me for a while. When he started the song, I cringed, but I got over it as I decided it was a great choice given who he is, the stage he was on, and our current political climate. Then he changed the lyrics to the most poignant line of the song. It lost all meaning for me, and like the endless advertisements in Time Square (I just wanted to see the crystal ball drop- what the hell was all that other crap) it became shallow and disappointing. I understand his reasoning; the basic tenets of religion to give purpose, solace, and inclusivity are important and often consistent among religions. All religions true- believe in whatever you want- is the basis for freedom of religion. But Cee Lo missed the mark with so many concerned when religions are used as a tool for control… as with the co-opting of religion by the right and the attempts to bring religion into government for the sole purpose gsining more power and control. Lennon’s lyrics account for the contentions that arise when religions conflict- they cannot all be true when taken at the more fundamentalist level, or evoked as Palin and Perry do to win elections. We need to be vigilant of these manipulations, not gloss over them. Cee Lo should have selected a different song rather than castrate Lennon’s. Rant on Gryphen.
ReplyDeleteThat was quite a flounce, Robert Shoen (New Orleans).
ReplyDeleteSorry, Robert Scheon @8:32, I didn´t catch that. Could you please say that again.
ReplyDeletetia
Gryphen~
ReplyDeleteI am a believer but do not like organized religion. Even Jesus had told his Apostles to go off into a corner and Pray.
Jesus' only display of anger (that we know of) happened in a church/temple.
We are about the same age, you and I. John Lennon was someone I admired and looked up to~ he was sincere in his beliefs.
I agree, Cee Lo was being disrespectful, whether he knows it or not. Maybe he really just doesn't get it. There are so many people who don't get it anymore.
I felt that when John Lennon was murdered, so was a huge chunk of goodwill.
"The religious angle doesn't bother me too much because Cee Lo may have accidentally gotten it right. If all religion is true, than none of it is. "
ReplyDeleteI'm an atheist and I agree with this. I do see how he could have meant what he later tweeted that he meant-- that it would be nice if everyone could believe in whatever they want without persecution. It would have been nice if he could make that point without using the word "religion."
I also agree wiht 7:07 in that if you want to change the meaning of a song, and the author is not around to condone a one-time change, write your own damn song.
Lennon was an icon of a bygone era. Unfortunately things have changed. As were the lyrics of the song. In a bad direction.
ReplyDeleteHugs to you G-- Happy New Year.
ReplyDeleteIt's a funny co-incidence that we just happen to be going around the dial when this performance was on last night and I wondered to myself, how would the singer deal with that particular line about "no religion?"
I think he was coming from his heart in an attempt to quell intolerance BETWEEN religions. As you know, there is currently an attempt to stir up anti-Muslim feelings. Moreover, around Christmas time, anti-Semitism (yes, G- even in NYC!!) rears it's ugly head sometimes. So, no, I don't think offense need be taken here.
Moreover, it's probably unhelpful to constantly look for reasons to be angry. If there is anger lurking, it comes from within -- we only use others outside us as triggers.
It's the anger within us all that must be lovingly tended to. Why are we so hurt and enraged so that a singer, thousands of miles away, might incite such annoyance?? There's the real question.
I'm not going to comment on whether you're being too sensitive. However, I can't agree with your statement that NOBODY has the right to take one of his songs, especially THIS one, and change the lyrics to suit their own personal beliefs.
ReplyDeleteYou don't mention anything about copyrights, so I'm assuming this is your personal belief, and not a fact. As long as he didn't violate copyright laws, he has every right, under the First Amendment, to change the lyrics. Frankly, I'm a little disappointed that you'd be in favor of denying someone their freedom of speech. Like President Andrew Shepherd said, You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.
Those who think changing song lyrics is a slippery slope to changing fact to fiction, this is a GOP fear-mongering tactic. Much like "same sex marriage is a slippery slope to bestiality". Where is your outrage at Weird Al Yankovic?
I think the news article about an Indiana senator wanting to fine singers if they don't sing the National anthem to his rigorous specifications, is pertinent... That is all I got.
ReplyDeleteIf you're going to change the lyrics to a classic at least go all in.
ReplyDeleteFor example -
I was feelin' forlorn
Down at the U of A dorms
Searchin' for my Sarah Lou
When I walked in on a man
With an oboe in his hand
Kneeling above you know who
I said hey there fella
With the jersey colored yella
Whatcha tryin' to prove
Cause that's my woman there
And I don’t think she cares
To take no music lessons from you
I was scared and fearing for life
I was shaking like a leaf on tree
Cause he was lean, mean
Big and black, Lord
Pointing that oboe at me
Then I said wait a minute, mister
I don't even miss her
Don't want no trouble with you
And I know you don't know me
But I wish you'd let me
Ask one favor of you…
Won't you give me three steps
Gimme three steps mister
Gimme three steps towards the door
Gimme three steps
Gimmer three mister
And you won't see Todd no more
Buh-bye Bob
ReplyDelete"Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a shame when someone takes something that is dear and sacred to someone else and desecrates it. smh"
ReplyDelete^ this.
Ironic that the now-infamous change made is about religion. Especially given that the post you put up right before this one is a comedian taking liberties with the Bible. (I am not Christian.)
"If you are somewhat sensitive about religion, or lack a sense of humor when it is directed toward the Bible, you might want to skip this video."
Gryphen, maybe you could 'skip' the Cee-Lo video. =P
i completely agree with your post. C Lo Green is an ass hat.
ReplyDeleteJohn Lennon was killed and was too young to leave this earth. His songs and lyrics live on in a way few are able to achieve. To change his song in a way that changes the message of the song is an affront that anyone calling themselves an artist or a musician would never attempt. So C lo is a big fat ass hat...
cambridgee
I caught his performance as we switched to that channel just to see the ball drop and were early.
ReplyDeleteI can't say I paid any attention to the words he was singing he was so awful. He truly butchered that song. Since I know the song, I heard the words I know, not the words he was trying to sing.
All I could think of was "put him out of his misery". He was a very poor choice for right before the ball. So many people tuning in to hear him wail like a cat in heat.
While I am certainly no Lawrence Welk devotee (my parents are in their 80s) I can't say New Year's Eve offers anything to either of us. Not Lady Gaga and See Low Scream and not the other channel that had Dick Clark. We didn't turn into PBS but probably should have tried. But my Mom had the TV Guide and my Dad had the clicker so I just had to watch what they wanted.
At least we got to see the ball drop.
Bob who?
ReplyDeleteAren't there copyright laws that speak to this?
ReplyDeleteI heard it and it was not right.
ReplyDeleteIt changes the whole song.
I'm NOT a Cee "NO" Green fan! And when I heard him screeching John Lennon's song last night I really don't like him now!
ReplyDeleteHe sounded like shit not because he fucked up the lyrics...because he CAN'T SING!
Gryphen, I agree with you wholeheartedly, and to those who say "what's the big deal, it's just a song" you are all missing the point and I find it tiresome and a waste of time to try and explain why there are a lot of us who feel that it is not just any old song and yes it is a big deal, oh and Robert Schoen, sayonara! Good riddance no one will notice the absence of your quasi-intellectual self righteous attempts at bringing us to your imagined elevated state of reality awareness, go haunt the Illuminati conspiracy sites..Adios!
ReplyDelete@11:19 - You're not a writer or you'd know this. Weird Al is a parody artist. Parody is part of free speech. This guy was not doing a parody. He changed it it to suit his own personal beliefs about "all religions true.'
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think Heart could demand that McCain/Palin stop using BARRACUDA? Because they owned it. Lennon (& now Ono) owns the song. It's not a fill-in-the-blank greeting card or something.
Robert Schoen....just wanted to say...good luck!
ReplyDeleteOh...that's right you won't read this...NEVERMIND!
Mr. Schoen's has one of the worst cases of verbal dysentery I have seen in awhile. I doubt his New Year's resolution is going to cure it. He'll be back. They all come back.
ReplyDeleteIf the "artist" intros his song with "this is a famous song and I'm going to change some of the lyrics because I'm special", it's fine with me. That's what mute buttons are for.
ReplyDeleteIf the "artist" thinks I'm too stupid to notice an agenda being crammed down my throat, then I don't purchase the artist's product and encourage others to boycott as well.
Green was a jerk. The less attention he gets for it, the better.
Anon 12:19 PM - thanks for getting it!
ReplyDeleteRobert Schoen, looks like the kitchen got too hot for ya! By all means, do scurry away.
ReplyDeleteWe'll do our best to struggle along without your arrogant, professorial contributions in this new year.
It'll be tough, but hey, we've got it in us, eh fellow IM contributors?
Yeah, I think we've got this covered and we've also got Gryphen's back. You have entered the world of 'dick'ness with your latest screeds.
What I feel, or felt, about John Lennon or his music or his murder is not the point, nor is it what G asked us.
ReplyDeleteHe asked if he is too sensitive, or over-the-top, or whatever, with what he chose to post.
He may be becoming abit sensitive about what others think of what he posts.
Honestly, Gryphen, it's a moot point, don't you think? Why do you care? This is your blog, and I cannot imagine the personal cost to you for providing it. Post what ever you GD please, and express wtf-ever viewpoint you feel is pertinent.
I make you this promise, G: If I don't like what you're posting on, or you viewpoint (if I get that far), I sure as hell will not read it, or beat you about the head and shoulders for sharing your thoughts.
Sweet baby jebus in a cradle, WE ARE GUESTS HERE!!
1:18 - Good point. Yoko Ono owns the copyright; not Gryphen. Only she and her lawyers can determine if Cee Lo had the right to change the lyrics. If it's true that he was her guest (http://tinyurl.com/87aae7w), she must be well aware of the controversy, and can handle it as she sees fit.
ReplyDeleteGryphen gave no indication of doing any research into whether Cee Lo's guilty of copyright infringement. Even if he had put in a call to Yoko's lawyers (which he doesn't mention), I doubt they'd get back to him on New Year's Day. Perhaps he used bad judgement in saying NOBODY has the right..., but he has the freedom to say it, even if it's based on emotion and not fact.
oh no he didn't!
ReplyDeleteJohn Lennon was a visionary for world peace. He didn't have to make songs about love and peace,he could have lived off his fame and fortune. But he struggled with his demons and was finding personal peace when it all ended so tragically.
I appreciate John's works more and more the older I get. He wasn't afraid to call bullshit when it was needed and I so wish he would have been around the last 10 years. Would have really enjoyed his opinion about Chimpy and Darth Cheney.
I didn't catch this and have no idea who the singer is, but I was a huge fan of the Beetles and John Lennon (Yoko- not so much) but it was John who opened my mind to eastern cultures and religions. It was John's song and out of respect for someone else's intellecual property, it should be sung as it was written.
ReplyDeleteGood Bad or Indifferent, John Lennon spoke on behalf of a generation who needed a voice. He led the "OWS" movement of his day, only his thing was make love, not war.
I'm with you Gryphen, I get just as disgusted by hearing the elevator muzak versions of his songs without lyrics. I just don't hold John nor the Beetles as "sacred".
And to Mr Shoen, of New Orleans, can we have it in writing, on a notarized letter that you're a man of your word and won't grace the pages of this blog in the future? You've taken this stance before, and, somehow, you keep showing up.
There are some songs that aren't easy for other artists to sing--I've always felt that way about Imagine. If you turn into a big belt-it-out anthem it sounds bombastic. Lennon did it primarily as a solo piano song with an added rhythm backing. More intimate than anthemic.
ReplyDeleteIt comes right up to the edge of cliché in its appeal to brotherhood, but then subverts the feel good "we are the world" sentimentality with its no possessions, religions, and nothing to live or die for. It is slyly subversive.
Cee Lo may not have meant to be disrespectful, but I don't think he understands the song--evidenced as much by the way he sang it as the change of lyrics.
Gryphen, on your question, I think that you're not pissed off enough.
ReplyDeleteThat performer, whom I had not heard of before (yeah, I'm not very current about my musical tastes) changes the "anti-religion" part on lyrics into "pro-religion", in a country where religion is heavily mixed into politics, into what makes really terrifying results.
I'm not talking about bad fashion and strange life choices, like utterly abusing one's uterus until the babies and possibly the mother die from it. I'm talking of people being killed, in the name of religion. Bush sold the Iraq war as many things, including as a religious war.
It's claimed that Bush phoned our then-president to sell his little pet war to him (yeah, Frenchie here), whom I suppose is probably catholic by faith, since I think he made visits to the Pope when he was in exercice - private visits, mind you, none of that mixing state and church by us - Bush told him : "don't you realize we're fighting here against Gog and Magog ?" I would have loved to see the look on our then-president's face (a man I despise, by the way). He must have looked like "Er, who gave a chimp my phone number ?"
That war happened anyway. Hundreds of thousands have died. More will continue to die. Christians there, who were there before the moslims, since the beginning of christianism, they're dead or gone. All that because in America, a moron was strong on his religion.
If it were not in America and in an election year, I'd say no big deal, another day, another idiot's epic fail.
But it's America, and in an election year.
This stuff is what the World's nightmares are made of. Destroy what's left of free, non-religious thinking in America and everybody's footstep will be covered in blood. Remember those weapons manufacturers ? They want to sell. Bad.
@3:39 -Green does not have the right to change the lyric of a song unless he owns the copyright to it. He does not own the copyright to this song. It is copyrighted to Lennon. You must not understand copyright law. Song lyrics not in the pubic domain, such as this one, cannot be changed. Clearly, Green did not have anyone's permission to change it. Whether Ono will pursue the infringement case (I doubt she will) is immaterial. He DID change the intention of the song, which is also a strike against him. It was not an off-the-cuff ad lib or "interpretation." End of story.
ReplyDeleteIf Green didn't like the message of the song, he should have chosen another song he was with 100%.
@anonymous 11:54 AM lovely and hilarious lyrics !
ReplyDeleteI'd like to learn and sing it (I can be mean like that) but, err... you didn't write what it is that you spoofed, obviously everybody recognized it, but not me, you know, non-native speaker, different culture...
One thing I know is it's not Jingle Bells, but could anybody please help me further, with the name of the song and of the artist ?
And happy new year y'all !
I actually liked Cee Lo's rendition and didn't notice the lyric change, but now that you pointed it out, it does seem to contradict the premise and meaning of the song. When it was played on the PA system of my high school the day after he was assassinated it brought me to tears as I realized our gut-wrenching loss. He only asked us to "imagine." On 9/11 when all the senators and representatives stood on the steps of the capitol building and sang "God Bless America," I was embarrassed for them as their chest thumping nationalism was what resulted in the tragedy of 9/11 in the first place. They should have been singing "Dies Irae"(the version from Mozart's Requiem) instead. If I imagined that all religion was true as Cee Lo's version suggests, I would do as that robot from Star Trek did when Captain Kirk found him in an error, if I had to imagine a misogynist racist god that the fundies of all religion portray (the latest coming from the US tax payer-subsidized Israeli town where Orthodox Jewish men treated one of their female soldiers like Rosa Parks and then called her a whore when she refused to comply.)Just sayin'.....
ReplyDeleteGryphen, I agree that he should not have changed the line when he performed the song.
ReplyDeleteHowever, his sentiment isn't necessarily wrong. Each person makes up their own mind about religion, and each considers what they have decided to believe to be the truth.
My friends and acquaintances are Christian, non-Christian, atheists and agnostics. We're all capable of having a well-rounded civil discussion about religion, and respecting each other's truth and right to coexist just as we are.
I respect your right and your choice to be an atheist, however, from a number of your recent posts, I'm not getting the impression that you respect my right and my choice to be a Christian. It would be wrong for me to try to cram my faith down your throat; it is also wrong to disparage others because they have a faith you don't share.
Can we move forward into the new year together on a more positive note, in agreement that neither of us likes hypocrisy, and that morality and strength of character (or lack thereof) are independent of religion? Repeal of DADT was a good thing, but there is a lot more to be done before we have achieved equality for all, and we have some working against us who are trying desperately to take us back not only to a time where there were less rights for many, but to a time that only exists in their imaginations, where all in this country were expected to adhere to only one religion - theirs.
Sorry, Muslims not moslims. Hope nobody was offended.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, there's a common misperception that John Lennon was an atheist based on this lyric in "Imagine" and also his song "God". Oh, and his "more popular than Jesus" comment (which was a lighthearted metaphor at the height of Beatlemania to describe how popular culture had overtaken organized religion in the zealotry department) which was completely taken out of context by the rabid right wing in the US.
ReplyDeleteJohn Lennon was not an atheist -- the man who wrote "God bless our love" in his song "Grow Old With Me" was a seeker who rigorously -- and often cheekily -- questioned dogma and organized religion through his art.
"I believe in God, but not as one thing, not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong." -John Lennon
In relation to the preceding lyric in "Imagine" – "Nothing to kill or die for"-- Cee Lo's version conveys the exact same message! No religions / All religions: either way, stop fighting over whose God (or no God) is supposedly better! That's the intent of the song; it's not about the gospel according to John Lennon. He never wanted to be seen as a guru but as an artist.
Let's further consider the enormity of having this hymn (yes, it is!) for peace as the lead-in to the ball drop: "Imagine all the people / Sharing all the world" – center stage in the pantheon-of-corporate-marketing Times Square!
Happy New Year! Let's turn some things around in 2012!
I agree with you, Gryphen, about the butchering of John Lennon's song.
ReplyDeleteAs I've read about this, there is something else that I find beyond irritating--understanding John's lyrics and hearing them correctly.
Nobody in the '70s, except for people without an eighth grade education, said "There's no countries."
If people would read his lyrics, they'd understand that he sang (without a plural):
Imagine there's no country
It isnt hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
and no religion too...
That he was linking religion and the idea of 'country' together for people to imagine differently.
Only today do we hear so many people incapable of conjugating the verb 'to be'.
When people re-write songs, they begin to re-write history. It isn't far behind that they'll even re-write Lennon's politics as well. Someday, they might even assert that he was really a small government proponent and a Republican.
Yeah, right.