Pribek

OK, more of this posturing/whining/opportunism/publicity seeking jive because John McCain’s campaign played a song at a rally. This time it’s The Foo Fighters who are bugged because the McCain camp used the song “My Hero”. From a band statement via the NY Times….

“ ‘My Hero’ was written as a celebration of the common man and his extraordinary potential,”

“To have it appropriated without our knowledge and used in a manner that perverts the original sentiment of the lyric just tarnishes the song.”

“perverts the original sentiment of the lyric just tarnishes the song.”

So what?

Here’s the deal, if you are a songwriter, you can do one of two things…

1. Keep your songs to yourself, never release them thus, retaining all of the wonderful integrity inherent to your precious art.
2. Decide you might take a shot at making a buck and throw them to the wolves.

If you take option two, you join a society that is dedicated to collecting money when people use your song. Most songwriters join either B.M.I. or ASCAP. I like B.M.I. myself. Now, part of what these societies do, is collect money when somebody uses your song in ways that have nothing to do with the original intent that you had in mind when you we’re creating this piece of sacred art. Could be that a symphony orchestra decides to give it a go. Might be that a local news outfit uses it in a human interest story. A cover band may play it in a roadside bar. It may be used at a political rally. Now, some of these occasions, where a song may be used, are covered by a blanket license. An entity will pay a yearly fee to the societies (B.M.I./ASCAP) and the money then gets distributed to the songwriters after the societies have employed their various mathematical/probability based/flat out voodoo formulas, that weigh heavily in favor of known acts like Jackson Browne, Heart and the Foo Fighters and they divvies up the dough between those writers.

That brings up a good point actually, if Obama were to play “Munk” at an event, even though I’m with B.M.I. and the voodoo they use is far better than ASCAP’s, I wouldn’t see a dime but Jackson would because he’s on the radar.

As a songwriter, if you are fortunate enough to be in a position where people are using your song and, you are seeing money from it, you smile and cash the check. See, because you’ve already filled out the paperwork, with your collection society, that explains the various types of usage and licensing and none of it has to do with lyrical interpretation or original sentiment.

It seems that in this campaign season a week will not go by without some rocker getting bent out of shape because their song was used at as political function. This week, add Heart’s Nancy Wilson to the growing list of troubled troubadours. Nancy is upset because the song “Barracuda” has been used by the McCain campaign. From Idolator.

“I think it’s completely unfair to be so misrepresented… I feel completely fucked over.”

I guess the question is this; if a campaign uses a song, does that mean that the campaign is also implying that the recording artist also “represents” the campaigns platform and ideals?

The songs are all essentially pop songs conceived in the belly of commercial beast. They don’t exist in the public eye (ear) if not for the fact that artist did not knowingly jump on the bandwagon of opportunism.

“Sarah Palin’s views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song ‘Barracuda’ no longer be used to promote her image. The song ‘Barracuda’ was written in the late 70s as a scathing rant against the soulless, corporate nature of the music business, particularly for women. (The ‘barracuda’ represented the business.) While Heart did not and would not authorize the use of their song at the RNC, there’s irony in Republican strategists’ choice to make use of it there.”

A “scathing rant against the soulless, corporate nature of the music business”!!?? Who knew? I’ve been hearing that song for 30 some odd years and that never occurred to me. Something in there about a porpoise isn’t there?

Don Cook, who co-wrote the Brooks and Dunn song, “Only in America”, which has been used by both political parties, told Chris Willman of PopWatch this.

“For us as writers and them as performers, truthfully, we’re proud when anybody uses our song for something that’s substantial. Even if you’re diametrically opposed politically to the person who’s using your song, the fact that they like it well enough to use it at an important place in their life, you have to love that.”

Cook has it right.

The song is not the campaign. The song is not the platform. When a song is used at a political rally, it’s used as window dressing.

If these songs stand for anything, they do so in the mind of the individual listener. It’s to the point now that when one of these artists complains about how their song was used, they further devalue any possible meaning that the song may have by exposing their self importance.

I don’t know why this amuses me but it does. Frommmm…MyWay!

Amid a four-act show at Cardiff’s packed Millennium Stadium, a video interlude carried images of destruction, global warming, Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler, Zimbabwe’s authoritarian President Robert Mugabe – and U.S. Senator John McCain. Another sequence, shown later, pictured slain Beatle John Lennon, followed by climate activist Al Gore, Mahatma Gandhi and finally McCain’s Democratic rival Barack Obama.

So let’s break it down.

In Group 1 we have…

Destruction
Global Warming
Hitler
Robert Mugabe
John McCain

In Group 2……..

John Lennon
Al Gore
Mahatma Ghandi
Barack Obama

I think she’s trying to tell us something in her shrew, cagey, deft sort of way.