Date: Dec 9, 1989
Weeks: 2
So this is basically a list of historical events that influenced Billy Joel when he was growing up. I've always been of two minds about this song and its lyrical content. On the one hand, it's a great tool for learning about U.S. history from the 1950s through the 1980s. The recent past often gets overlooked when trying to teach kids history, I think generally because adults consider anything that happened within their lifetimes as current events. I know there's a lot in this song I probably never would have learned about otherwise.
On the other hand, I've always been a bit bothered by the somewhat self-indulgent specificity of the era being covered. I'm not sure the sex scandal referenced by the line "British politician sex" is a major historical event that needs to be documented for future generations. It's also always bugged me that the lyrics spend 4 verses carefully documenting every event from 1949 to 1963, but then it covers 1964 to 1989 in a single verse. In that sense, it feels like the song is largely playing to people who are exactly the same age as Billy Joel. Or people who are the children of those people who at least consider this "the history that happened before I was old enough to pay attention to current events." I wonder how well this song will be regarded in 20 years.
So that's my ambivalence about the content of the lyrics. In terms of the construction of the lyrics, I'm impressed. Billy Joel plays fast and loose with the rhyme scheme and meter, but it never really feels like he's cheating. Wikipedia also insists that the events in the song are listed in chronological order, at least by year. That would seem to add an extra layer to the challenge of writing a song like this, so I'm kind of impressed that he managed to construct a song under all those constraints.
As for the chorus, I'm glad to see that Wikipedia echoes the interpretation of the song I've always held. That idea is that Billy Joel doesn't want his generation, the Baby Boomers, blamed for all the world's problems, because they inherited problems from the generation before. The song concludes with the implication that the world's problems will continue after his generation is gone. And yet it's not a bleak song, it's actually hopeful. The message is that the world has survived turmoil before, and it will survive whatever comes next.
The music is a lot of fun, but maintains a sort of frantically serious tone. The synthesizer keyboards are put to good use, creating a dramatic melody during the chorus that is probably the most memorable part of the music in this song. They are bold in a song that demands bold music. The bongos during the chorus also maintain the verses' frantic energy through the chorus. During the verses, there is an appealing guitar rhythm that sounds sort of like a 1950s classic rock rhythm. It's very basic and does a great job holding the song together. I also like the gradually accelerating feeling of chaos that is represented in both the guitars and the vocals. It symbolizes Billy Joel's increasing inability to understand and cope with the world's chaos and strife, and the universal feeling that the world's problems just keep getting worse and spinning out of control. And yet ultimately I still feel the song is about keeping those problems in perspective. The music really does a good job capturing all that frantic energy and turmoil.
I'm less certain about the use of occasional audio clips mixed throughout. There's a cheer for the line "Brooklyn has a winning team," and the music from Psycho plays when he references that movie. It seems a little silly to interject audio for those two things. On the other hand, the song is quite long, if not in runtime then in lyrical quantity, and those bits of audio do manage to inject some variety into the song at certain moments. Ultimately I think they are subtle but effective enhancements, rather than detractions.
My verdict: Like it. It's a fun, energetic song, and it's good for teaching history. If nothing else, its existence and popularity will keep the people and events referred to in the lyrics in the cultural consciousness longer than they might otherwise have been.
Showing posts with label 1989. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1989. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Song #702: "Hangin' Tough" by New Kids On The Block
Date: Sept 9, 1989
Weeks: 1
I promise I didn't take that week-long break just because I was daunted by the idea of trying to review the New Kids. In fact, although I had noticed a New Kids song was next, I hadn't actually sat down to listen to it. But now that I have, part of me wants to run away and hide from trying to discuss this song.
The problem with New Kids on the Block is that everything about them is inauthentic. You can see that right here. They are trying to be tough and mean, but everything about them is ridiculously gentle. The singing is alternately harmonic and shouty. Apparently the shouting was supposed to be considered rap, but one line isn't rap. It's a pale imitation of rap, and lacks even the least bit of actual toughness. Also, that "whoa, oa, oa, oa, oa" chant is obnoxious, and feels like it lacks any sense of tune or tempo.
The music is also trying to sound tougher than it is. I particularly like the occasional use of what sounds like a police whistle. I think that sound is trying to evoke the mental image of a gang of kids who hang out on corners and spray graffiti, occasionally trying to run from the police. Unfortunately, whoever thought a police whistle was a good way to convey that must have been very old, because it mostly just makes me think of the Little Rascals, and similar groups of very small children being hassled by fictional police for the most gentle crimes imaginable.
Apart from the police whistle, the overly artificial production of the music doesn't help. Synth-keyboards, electric guitars, and drum machines don't fit with the mental image of kids who hang out on street corners. It's studio-produced and fake, and sounds it. And it's not that you can't make music that way, but it's not compatible with the type of attitude the New Kids are trying to convey.
The lyrics are more of the same. "Everybody's always talkin' 'bout who's on top. Don't cross our path or you're gonna get stomped." "Stomped" seems like an overly gentle threat, and just further shows how inauthentic they are. Actually, reading over the lyrics now, it's seems more like they're talking about the Billboard chart. Don't get in their way as they rise to the top of the charts. "And if you try to keep us down we're gonna come right back." If their song sinks off the charts, they'll just have another one coming along shortly.
My verdict: Don't like it. Also, a note for people who make music-videos: making the singer play air guitar in their own music video just calls attention to the fact that the guitar is being recorded by studio musicians. Unless you're using air guitars for comedy, they're a terrible idea in a music video.
Weeks: 1
I promise I didn't take that week-long break just because I was daunted by the idea of trying to review the New Kids. In fact, although I had noticed a New Kids song was next, I hadn't actually sat down to listen to it. But now that I have, part of me wants to run away and hide from trying to discuss this song.
The problem with New Kids on the Block is that everything about them is inauthentic. You can see that right here. They are trying to be tough and mean, but everything about them is ridiculously gentle. The singing is alternately harmonic and shouty. Apparently the shouting was supposed to be considered rap, but one line isn't rap. It's a pale imitation of rap, and lacks even the least bit of actual toughness. Also, that "whoa, oa, oa, oa, oa" chant is obnoxious, and feels like it lacks any sense of tune or tempo.
The music is also trying to sound tougher than it is. I particularly like the occasional use of what sounds like a police whistle. I think that sound is trying to evoke the mental image of a gang of kids who hang out on corners and spray graffiti, occasionally trying to run from the police. Unfortunately, whoever thought a police whistle was a good way to convey that must have been very old, because it mostly just makes me think of the Little Rascals, and similar groups of very small children being hassled by fictional police for the most gentle crimes imaginable.
Apart from the police whistle, the overly artificial production of the music doesn't help. Synth-keyboards, electric guitars, and drum machines don't fit with the mental image of kids who hang out on street corners. It's studio-produced and fake, and sounds it. And it's not that you can't make music that way, but it's not compatible with the type of attitude the New Kids are trying to convey.
The lyrics are more of the same. "Everybody's always talkin' 'bout who's on top. Don't cross our path or you're gonna get stomped." "Stomped" seems like an overly gentle threat, and just further shows how inauthentic they are. Actually, reading over the lyrics now, it's seems more like they're talking about the Billboard chart. Don't get in their way as they rise to the top of the charts. "And if you try to keep us down we're gonna come right back." If their song sinks off the charts, they'll just have another one coming along shortly.
My verdict: Don't like it. Also, a note for people who make music-videos: making the singer play air guitar in their own music video just calls attention to the fact that the guitar is being recorded by studio musicians. Unless you're using air guitars for comedy, they're a terrible idea in a music video.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Song #688: "Like a Prayer" by Madonna
Date: Apr 22, 1989
Weeks: 3
The last Madonna song I reviewed did little to prove why Madonna is such a great and enduring artist. This one, on the other hand, is from roughly the peak of her career. It's a great example of what makes her so wonderful, and it's probably my favorite Madonna song.
The overall orchestration of the music is what makes this song for me. From the top down, every piece of this song just fits. Madonna's voice is perfect for this song, and she gives it everything she has. Her voice is a little sloppy and desperate to keep up with the song's pace, but that creates a very emotional performance that's perfectly matched to both the lyrics and the music. The gospel choir eventually became a trope that got overused in pop music, but it was a fairly new idea at the time. And when you consider the generally religious tone of both the lyrics and the video, the gospel choir is a perfect fit. The song wouldn't be half the song it is without the choir, and the lead singer of that choir also gives a wonderfully big performance.
Continuing from the top down, there's an organ that also conveys the religious theme. There's also a guitar and drum line that kind of fade into the background of the mix. They don't stick out, but the effect they create is a driving pace that helps keep the song well on the pop/rock spectrum. At the very bottom of the track is a bass line. I can't tell if the bass is a fat guitar or a synthesizer, but either way, it's a very appealing bass line and I think it makes the song for me. There's a lot of music happening in that bass line, and I think it's what makes the song so unique.
As for the lyrics, I feel under-qualified to really analyze them. Clearly this is a song that is conflating Madonna's love of God with her love of a man. It does so in a manner that is poetic, and yet clear enough that I was able to easily interpret it. I know the video is controversial for expounding on the same theme, but I think the video does a great job of telling the same music as the lyrics, while also adding an additional story on top of that, about Madonna's character witnessing a murder and overcoming her fear of the actual murderers to tell the police they've arrested the wrong man. And the video tackles the issue of racism on top of all of that. There's a lot going on here. This song, and especially the video, should be all the proof anyone needs of why Madonna is one of the great pop music artists of all time.
My verdict: Like it. This is definitely one of those songs that works because the whole is more than the sum of its parts. I can break it down and explain why I think each part of it works, but ultimately it comes down to each part complementing every other part until the whole just works and creates something wonderful.
Weeks: 3
The last Madonna song I reviewed did little to prove why Madonna is such a great and enduring artist. This one, on the other hand, is from roughly the peak of her career. It's a great example of what makes her so wonderful, and it's probably my favorite Madonna song.
The overall orchestration of the music is what makes this song for me. From the top down, every piece of this song just fits. Madonna's voice is perfect for this song, and she gives it everything she has. Her voice is a little sloppy and desperate to keep up with the song's pace, but that creates a very emotional performance that's perfectly matched to both the lyrics and the music. The gospel choir eventually became a trope that got overused in pop music, but it was a fairly new idea at the time. And when you consider the generally religious tone of both the lyrics and the video, the gospel choir is a perfect fit. The song wouldn't be half the song it is without the choir, and the lead singer of that choir also gives a wonderfully big performance.
Continuing from the top down, there's an organ that also conveys the religious theme. There's also a guitar and drum line that kind of fade into the background of the mix. They don't stick out, but the effect they create is a driving pace that helps keep the song well on the pop/rock spectrum. At the very bottom of the track is a bass line. I can't tell if the bass is a fat guitar or a synthesizer, but either way, it's a very appealing bass line and I think it makes the song for me. There's a lot of music happening in that bass line, and I think it's what makes the song so unique.
As for the lyrics, I feel under-qualified to really analyze them. Clearly this is a song that is conflating Madonna's love of God with her love of a man. It does so in a manner that is poetic, and yet clear enough that I was able to easily interpret it. I know the video is controversial for expounding on the same theme, but I think the video does a great job of telling the same music as the lyrics, while also adding an additional story on top of that, about Madonna's character witnessing a murder and overcoming her fear of the actual murderers to tell the police they've arrested the wrong man. And the video tackles the issue of racism on top of all of that. There's a lot going on here. This song, and especially the video, should be all the proof anyone needs of why Madonna is one of the great pop music artists of all time.
My verdict: Like it. This is definitely one of those songs that works because the whole is more than the sum of its parts. I can break it down and explain why I think each part of it works, but ultimately it comes down to each part complementing every other part until the whole just works and creates something wonderful.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Song #682: "Straight Up" by Paula Abdul
Date: Feb 11, 1989
Weeks: 3
Much like yesterday's Blondie song illustrated the 70s giving way to the 80s, this song is a great example of the 80s turning into the 90s. The synth-keyboards of the 80s are there, but the funk and dance beat, and semi-rap verses, is the sound of the 90s starting to show.
The music is fun. This is a song that has figured out how synthesized keyboards work, and how the kinds of sounds they produce can be used to create unique sounds, rather than emulate other instruments. The bass is funky and fun and memorable. This is a tight sound, carefully engineered into a well-crafted piece of music.
Paula Abdul's voice is whiny, to be sure, but her voice fits well with the synthesizers here. In the verses, she's almost rapping. It's not quite rap, but it references the sound of rap while still being kind of sing-y. That sounds like an awkward mess, but it really does work here.
The lyrics are pretty empowering. "Straight up now tell me is it going to be you and me forever, or are you just having fun?" She's not sure if the relationship she's in is just a fling or if it's going somewhere. And rather than angst and complain about it, she's making this song a confrontation. "Do do you love me? Come on now!" It's a good message to women, or really to anyone. Be assertive in your relationships and don't be afraid to ask for what you want.
My verdict: Like it. Paula Abdul's Forever Your Girl was one of the first albums I owned on CD, and it's great. Almost any song from it is a winner in my book, and this is even one of the stronger songs from it.
Weeks: 3
Much like yesterday's Blondie song illustrated the 70s giving way to the 80s, this song is a great example of the 80s turning into the 90s. The synth-keyboards of the 80s are there, but the funk and dance beat, and semi-rap verses, is the sound of the 90s starting to show.
The music is fun. This is a song that has figured out how synthesized keyboards work, and how the kinds of sounds they produce can be used to create unique sounds, rather than emulate other instruments. The bass is funky and fun and memorable. This is a tight sound, carefully engineered into a well-crafted piece of music.
Paula Abdul's voice is whiny, to be sure, but her voice fits well with the synthesizers here. In the verses, she's almost rapping. It's not quite rap, but it references the sound of rap while still being kind of sing-y. That sounds like an awkward mess, but it really does work here.
The lyrics are pretty empowering. "Straight up now tell me is it going to be you and me forever, or are you just having fun?" She's not sure if the relationship she's in is just a fling or if it's going somewhere. And rather than angst and complain about it, she's making this song a confrontation. "Do do you love me? Come on now!" It's a good message to women, or really to anyone. Be assertive in your relationships and don't be afraid to ask for what you want.
My verdict: Like it. Paula Abdul's Forever Your Girl was one of the first albums I owned on CD, and it's great. Almost any song from it is a winner in my book, and this is even one of the stronger songs from it.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Song #689: "I'll Be There For You" by Bon Jovi
Date: May 13, 1989
Weeks: 1
Bon Jovi is better than this. They are one of the bands that brought real, guitar-driven rock and roll back to the synthesizer-filled 80s. But it seems that if a band made rock with even the slightest edge to it in the 80s, they were also required to make a soft love song. And inevitably it's the soft love song that gets to the top of the charts. Thankfully, Bon Jovi has other No. 1 hits, all of which are better than this one.
The core problem here is that Jon Bon Jovi isn't much of a singer. His voice is constantly strained. His voice works with heavier rock songs because he's being accompanied by loud guitars, and his enthusiasm is more important than the actual quality of his singing. But here, with the slow tempo and relatively light guitars and drums, his voice is highlighted. And he's not up to having this spotlight. One of the lyrics is "When you get drunk, I'll be the wiiiiiiiiine." Yes, Jon Bon Jovi, you will be the whine. Ouch.
The music has a similar problem. It's.... Oh, I just realized this is a power ballad. Oh, hooray! I always struggle to come up with good examples of power ballads. So many of the ones I think of are just from hard bands making a soft song, and don't make a good example if you don't have the the context of the rest of the band's work. But this one tidily demonstrates on one song exactly what I think of when I hear the phrase: Rock music that is noticeably restrained to try to be soft. It's like a finely-tuned sportscar idling in the driveway, or a professional golfer playing mini-golf. You can tell there's power and talent present, but that power and talent isn't for this kind of work, and the contrast is jarring.
By contrast, see this acoustic performance from MTV's Unplugged. It's still not a great song, but it's a bit more sensitive and genuine and appropriate. Actually, I think the song would be better with even less. Maybe a ukulele? Thankfully, the Internet has already had that thought, and it turns out I was right. It's pretty good (audio quality issues aside).
And now to the lyrics. These are some overwrought breakup-regret lyrics. It's over, dude, move on. But here's a quick point-by-point:
"I heard your suitcase say goodbye." Seems like kind of a heavy metaphor, and it's a bit off since the suitcase probably didn't actually make any sounds. Why not "I knew your suitcase meant goodbye?"
"I know you know we've had some good times." That should just be "You know we've had some good times," but of course that doesn't fit the meter. Redundant filler to fit the meter feels like it doesn't fit the meter, either.
"I can't promise you tomorrow, but I can buy back yesterday." Or is it "I can promise you tomorrow, but I can't buy back yesterday?" Either interpretation seems valid. I can't promise that the future will be good, but I can apologize for the past. Or, I can promise the future will be better, but I can't change the past. Which is it? I really want to vote for the former, since I don't think he's in a position to promise tomorrow if he already got dumped once before.
Finally, "I'll be there for you. These five words I swear to you." Maybe it's just a pop music pet peeve of mine, but emphasizing a lyric by counting the words feels like it places a weird emphasis on the literal words, rather than their meaning. It's one thing if you're talking about "three small words," because that's a classic expression. But "these five words I swear to you?" No. Again, it feels like they wanted to say "I swear I'll be there for you," but needed something else to fit the meter.
My verdict: Don't like it. Bon Jovi is better when they are making music with a bit more edge. This feels like pandering to lovesick teenagers who are infatuated with Jon Bon Jovi.
Weeks: 1
Bon Jovi is better than this. They are one of the bands that brought real, guitar-driven rock and roll back to the synthesizer-filled 80s. But it seems that if a band made rock with even the slightest edge to it in the 80s, they were also required to make a soft love song. And inevitably it's the soft love song that gets to the top of the charts. Thankfully, Bon Jovi has other No. 1 hits, all of which are better than this one.
The core problem here is that Jon Bon Jovi isn't much of a singer. His voice is constantly strained. His voice works with heavier rock songs because he's being accompanied by loud guitars, and his enthusiasm is more important than the actual quality of his singing. But here, with the slow tempo and relatively light guitars and drums, his voice is highlighted. And he's not up to having this spotlight. One of the lyrics is "When you get drunk, I'll be the wiiiiiiiiine." Yes, Jon Bon Jovi, you will be the whine. Ouch.
The music has a similar problem. It's.... Oh, I just realized this is a power ballad. Oh, hooray! I always struggle to come up with good examples of power ballads. So many of the ones I think of are just from hard bands making a soft song, and don't make a good example if you don't have the the context of the rest of the band's work. But this one tidily demonstrates on one song exactly what I think of when I hear the phrase: Rock music that is noticeably restrained to try to be soft. It's like a finely-tuned sportscar idling in the driveway, or a professional golfer playing mini-golf. You can tell there's power and talent present, but that power and talent isn't for this kind of work, and the contrast is jarring.
By contrast, see this acoustic performance from MTV's Unplugged. It's still not a great song, but it's a bit more sensitive and genuine and appropriate. Actually, I think the song would be better with even less. Maybe a ukulele? Thankfully, the Internet has already had that thought, and it turns out I was right. It's pretty good (audio quality issues aside).
And now to the lyrics. These are some overwrought breakup-regret lyrics. It's over, dude, move on. But here's a quick point-by-point:
"I heard your suitcase say goodbye." Seems like kind of a heavy metaphor, and it's a bit off since the suitcase probably didn't actually make any sounds. Why not "I knew your suitcase meant goodbye?"
"I know you know we've had some good times." That should just be "You know we've had some good times," but of course that doesn't fit the meter. Redundant filler to fit the meter feels like it doesn't fit the meter, either.
"I can't promise you tomorrow, but I can buy back yesterday." Or is it "I can promise you tomorrow, but I can't buy back yesterday?" Either interpretation seems valid. I can't promise that the future will be good, but I can apologize for the past. Or, I can promise the future will be better, but I can't change the past. Which is it? I really want to vote for the former, since I don't think he's in a position to promise tomorrow if he already got dumped once before.
Finally, "I'll be there for you. These five words I swear to you." Maybe it's just a pop music pet peeve of mine, but emphasizing a lyric by counting the words feels like it places a weird emphasis on the literal words, rather than their meaning. It's one thing if you're talking about "three small words," because that's a classic expression. But "these five words I swear to you?" No. Again, it feels like they wanted to say "I swear I'll be there for you," but needed something else to fit the meter.
My verdict: Don't like it. Bon Jovi is better when they are making music with a bit more edge. This feels like pandering to lovesick teenagers who are infatuated with Jon Bon Jovi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)