Jack of All Trade by Bruce Springsteen

Optimism is difficult.

 In a world that so often shows us that people are selfish and mean, being pessimistic and cynical is the logical result. Unless you are ignorant of the darkness in the world, it takes work and effort to be optimistic and hopeful. One way to do this is to simply ignore the fact that innocent people are dying and unimaginable acts of evil are occurring right now in this world.  Or we take the more difficult road and try to reconcile all of the pain and suffering with the blessings in our own lives.

“Jack Of All Trades,” one of the new songs from Bruce Springsteen’s latest album, Wrecking Ball is about the struggle to maintain optimism and hope.


It is one of Springsteen’s most beautiful songs and is also one of his most disturbing works. After four and half minutes of reassurance and hope, Bruce’s final lyrics are of violence and hate: “If I had me a gun, I’d fine the bastards and shoot them on sight.”

Springsteen paints the portrait of a man who is reassuring someone he loves that things will be all right. He’s a jack-of-all-trades. He knows how to do a lot of different things and he’s willing to do them all.

He looks on the bright side of life. As the hurricane blows he thinks of the blue sky breaking and how “we’ll star caring for each other like Jesus said that we might.” He contemplates the economic inequality of bankers growing fat while the workingman grows thin.

There is no anger in these words just a quiet acceptance of how this is part of life. Some people see this line as a attack on Wall Street, I simply see it as a reality of our history and a necessary evil to the growth of our country and the economic cycles that shape our lives. Even though he knows that this will happen again, he says, “we'll be all right.”

They’ve stood the drought, so they can stand the flood, they can handle anything. Along with his partner he will just make do, because they have in the past. But this man is just a man. He’s angry, he’s sad and he’s frustrated.  In the end of the song, he simply has to let it out.

There’s no anger in these words. Just a quiet surrender because there’s no one person to blame for the economic hardships of our times. This impulse is one that he is powerless to make a reality but it haunts him and it’s undeniably part of his life.

I have impulses to lash out to go on rants against people that frustrate me.  We all do.  I have been tempted over and over to use to blog as a forum to vent and rail against people. Part of me knows that if I go in that direction I will probably get more readers, but I can’t. I’m made my choice for this blog and my life.

Every time, I make an optimistic statement I have to brace myself against others who would be cynical, who would rather have their fears confirmed than their hopes proved wrong. I also have to prepare myself against my own doubts and fears that tell me that things can’t happen, that people aren’t good and that the world isn't a good place. But you can’t give up and Bruce doesn’t let us. He shows this not through the words but rather through the instruments.

In the middle of the song there’s a hopeful horn interlude. These notes comfort like a lullaby and give a feeling of security. As we are left shocked by Springsteen words of violence, the horns come back with a beautiful arching melody.  This juxtaposition raises questions and Springsteen has a full minute of music to help us understand what is happening in this song.

Tom Morello provides a guitar solo that starts fiercely and slowly rises up like frustrated cries of anguish and despair. The horns, the hope returns and doesn’t let the pain take over. As the guitar reaches it’s peak, supported by the horns, it releases all of the anger and let’s us forgive the singer for his anger.

Like optimism and hope itself, “Jack Of All Trades” is a difficult song to understand. It takes us to places that are uncomfortable and challenges our assumptions about ourselves, the feelings we hold dear and the feelings we try to ignore.

Optimism is not about denying the bad things in life.  It's making sure we don't miss the great things that happen every day.  If you don't fight for this perspective, when the blue sky breaks you will not be able to feel the warmth of the sun.

BP Protest song: God’s Counting on Me, God’s Counting on You by Pete Seeger

“The oil spill makes me wish for the first time that Superman actually existed. It would take him approximately 10 minutes to plug it up and another 30 minutes to clean it up the spill . . . sigh . . .”
-my facebook status during the second week of the oil spill in the Gulf.

One of the most disheartening sites in recent memory was flying into Panama Beach, Florida and seeing oil floating on the top of the water. At first, there was a sense of disbelief and then a sinking feeling of horror.  Diana’s cousin was getting married down there.  In all the excitement, I almost forgot about the whole oil spill until walking on the beach and seeing tar balls collecting on the sand.

It’s hard for me to know how to feel about all of this. Being angry at BP, politicians and whoever else we can blame this catastrophe on really doesn’t get us anywhere. Where do we look for guidance? Yesterday I found some answers in a man who has acted as the consciences of America for generations, Pete Seeger.

Pete Seeger is 91 years old and one of the most influential American musicians.  Without him there would we wouldn’t have Bob Dylan, Springsteen, the conscience of rock music and the spirit of hip-hop. Continuing the tradition of Woodie Guthrie, Seeger is a cultural treasure carrying on  some of our most important songs like “We Shall Overcome” . . .



 . . . and composing some of the most powerful songs like “Where Have All The Flowers Gone?”



What does this old man have to tell us about the oil spill? Simply that we can get through this if we join together.



There’s some political shading in this song,  “drill baby drill turns to spill baby spill."  But it's more humorous then critical and “it’s time to turn things around trickle up, not trickle down,” isn’t so much political but a call to all of us to change our way of thinking.

Like “We Shall Overcome” this is a song for the people, and it warms my heart how Seeger teaches the song to the audience as he performs.  Sometimes we forget that protest music isn’t so much about anger but calling people to change and there’s no better way than to encourage people to change through optimism: “Don’t give up, don’t give in, working together we all can win.”

The chorus ends with the statement, “hoping we’ll all pull through” and if after 91 years, Seeger is still believes in all of us, than who am I to become disheartened?

My favorite part of this song is the last verse: “when we sing with younger folks, we can never give up hope.” It’s so true. Sharing music, songs and life with young people rejuvenates you like nothing else and maybe that’s why Seeger is still active in his 90s. 

I don't know if we're all to blame for this disaster but as Seeger suggest we all have a role in the solution.  When Seeger opens the songs singing "God's counting on me, God's counting on you,"  he's not talking so much about God but about us counting on each other.   If we come together and face our problems not with anger but with hope we will pull through.

Thanks for the hope Pete.

American Heart by Jonathan Kahn aka Jon David

The Wall Street Journal is good at a lot of things, reporting about music is not one of them. Neil King of the WSJ transformed the fascinating story of Jonathan Kahn, the artist who composed and perform "American Heart" the anthem of the Tea Party movement into a one-sided criticism of liberal intolerance.  Could I do better job?  Yes, read on. 



What is story "American Heart" really about music, politics, or something different altogether?

A couple days ago a friend of mine e-mailed me about the song "American Heart"  He also sent me this link to a Wall Street Journal article about this song.

Here’s a quick summary of the article: Jonathan Kahn, a Hollywood screenwriter, director and songwriter has been performing his song “America Heart” at Tea-Party conventions. Until recently he has been hiding his identify with a hat and sunglasses and performed under the pseudo-name “Jon David.”

Because Kahn was afraid of being “ostracized in a the town where he peddles his songs and scripts,” Kahn created identity because as he states “In Hollywood, being a conservative is the kiss of death.”

Music producer Afanasieff (responsible for hits like "A Whole New World") is quoted in this article stating, "I mean, he's a member of a huge, Democratic, liberal organization called the Los Angeles entertainment business."  Of course, this is a gross over-generalization. 



Is this any different than when the country music community reacted to the Dixie Chicks by blacklisting them off radio stations when Natalie Maines criticized George Bush?

Should the Dixie Chicks have gotten as much heat as they did for expressing what they thought? No, and should Kahn be criticized by his peers for having a political belief that doesn’t line up with people in his industry, of course not.

What’s fascinating about all of this is there is nothing inherently conservative, Republican or “Tea Party” about “American Made.” (Follow this link to the lyrics). Except for the second verse, this song rings pretty true to my own personal liberal-tilted political viewpoint.

Musically this song has a nice “Bob Seeger” sheen. It works well as an anthem balancing out the more introspective verses with a more declarative chorus. However, there’s nothing “Tea Party” the melody or the harmonies.

This isn’t a knock against the quality of this song but rather an observation that the political nature of this anthem has less to do with the song itself and more to do with the phenomenon of musical meaning coming from outside the music.

This situation is less a political issues but rather a symptom of a general lack of acceptance of political pluralism in certain people's minds. It's sad that both liberals and conservatives have displayed this insidious lack of acceptance, which I do not believe characterizes the majority of people in both of these groups.

What's going to be the most telling part of this story is whether or not Kahn revealing his identity will actually have similar ramifications as it did for the Dixie Chicks. If it does and Kahn is ostracized in a business sense then there is shame on the film industry.  If not then this is a story more about the feeling of political victimization rather than the reality of political intolerance.

We Are The World

“We Are The World” has always held a special place in my heart. As a young music geek, the original 1985 version of this song was a sampling of who was relevant and important at that time. Some of those artists who participated in the original like Bruce Springsteen, and Bob Dylan continue to produce important music however many participants like James Ingram, LaToya Jackson and Peter Cetera are not known now to most people.



This song written by Lionel Richie and Michael Jackson and produced by one of the greatest producers of all time Quincy Jones never claimed to feature all of the greatest artists of the time. There are many people that you can point to at the time who were absent like Neil Diamond, Madonna, Johnny Cash, who were relevant back then and whose influence is still felt right now. And of course there were no British guys, I know it was “USA for Africa” but c’mon where was Mick Jagger and Paul McCartney?

“We Are The World” featured incredible “dream team” duets like Billy Joel and Tina Turner, Dionne Warwick and Willie Nelson and Springsteen trading ad libs in the end with Stevie Wonder still gives me chills.

This song was a huge success, was a top selling single and a cultural phenomenon. And now twenty-five years later “We Are The World” is back. Lionel Ritchie, Michael Jackson and Quincy Jones had considered remaking “We Are The World many times but the tragedy in Haiti provided the greatest reason to make this remake happen.

Ritchie and Jones decided first off that they would get a whole new crop of artist, people who participated in the original were not going to be in the cover except for Ritchie himself and Michael Jackson. As news of this remake broke there was a lot of skepticism in the news. Arap verse was going to be added, artist which many see as not “legit” like the Jonas Brothers were spotting walking into the recording studio and for some reason Lil-Wayne and T-Pain being asked to sing.

And this is what they came up with:


Love it or hate it, this cover of “We Are The World” is very much a spiritual child from the original. There are some legends like Tony Bennett, Barbara Streisand and LL Cool J as well as teen idols lot like Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus. Before you go crazy about how theses people shouldn’t be there keep in mind in the original recording, Cyndi Lauper, Springsteen and Huey Louis were more teen idols than anything else.

There are some beautiful moments Josh Groban's classical touch. Tony Benntt is a gentle elder statesman and Mary J. Blige proves that she really is one of the greatest soul singers of her time. Michael and Janet. . . there’s really not words. Wyclef singing for his own people is inspired and Usher singing the bridge with Michael his hero is a fitting tribute. Jamie Foxx doing his best Ray Charles was a fun and I’ll even give Celine Dion props, Fergie on the other hand well. . . whatever.

As much as you may not like Lil’ Wayne, T-Pain and this whole auto-tune thing, it is an important and relevant way that people express themselves through music and featuring it in this song is putting this sound in a times capsule so that people understood that it's part of music. “I’m On A Boat” is good stuff people.

The rap section led by living hip-hop legend, LL Cool J with Will.i.am, Snood Dogg, Busta Rhymes, Kanye West and many others. They wisely to chose to make this section most chant like and focused on the clarity of the rhymes and lyrics as opposed to rapid fire delivery. It’s a declaration of values and solidarity that proves that the art of rap isn’t tied down to the themes of drugs and gangster life.

Quincy Jones opened up the song creating a more dynamic background. The ending in brilliant having the instrumentals drop out and letting Wyclef’s voice echo out. This song rejuvenates the original but there is a rejuvenated dynamic which reflects how much pop music has changed in the past twenty-five years. What remains the same is also what continues to make the pop music relevant: great melodies, powerful messages and beautiful voices.

I don’t what it is about Michael Jackson. His death still feels unresolved for me. Seeing him featured prominently in this new version makes me happy but also a little sad. I don’t think he’s a martyr. I’ve acknowledged the darkness in this life but there were great things that he provided this culture and “We Are The World” is one of them.



The demo of “We Are The World” revels the soul of this song which really is Michael’s view of the world. His intentions musically truly were something amazing. It’s an amazing thing how the 1985 version captured this spirit and I’m glad to see it carried on 25 years later.

Jeremy by Pearl Jam

Pearl Jam - New Music - More Music Videos

Violence in schools sadly seems like a commonplace occurrence in our society. Not just in America but across the world stories of students acting out in unimaginable ways seems to emerge every couple months. While there are many more people in this world who are killed in horrific battles in war-torn countries, they don’t get to me in the same way. I don’t work in a war-torn environment. I work in a school and every time I hear of a school shooting, I feel physically sick.

“Jeremy” is a nightmare. It’s horrific and scary on a visceral level. Is it beautiful? That depends on your definitions of beauty. However, what is indisputable is that “Jeremy” expresses darkness in the human heart that is uncomfortable but very real.

“Jeremy” is an amalgamation of two true stories: Jeremy Wade Delle, a 15 year old who committed suicide in front of his English class and a shooting at a school that lead singer Eddie Vedder attended. The lyrics tell about a boy at home drawing disturbing images of death with parents who don’t seem to care.

The second verse is the narrator telling about how he used to pick on Jeremy and later realizes “we unleashed a lion." Between the verse the haunting line, “Jeremy spoke in class today." While the lyrics never explicitly say that Jeremy got up in front of the class and committed suicide. Most people know the story from the controversial music video.

After watching the video, you realize that Jeremy “speaking” is not so much a reflection on something he said but on what he did. Even if you’ve never seen the video, there is something unhinged about the way that Eddie Vedder sings the chorus that foreshadows a tragic ending.

The words “Jeremy spoken” rise up and down in a smooth contour but the words “in class today” are awkwardly crammed together. Vedder dips into a full baritone for this line with singing it like a man possessed. You can see a young boys hands shaking in anger in the uncomfortable intensity of Vedder’s voice.

Pearl Jam, thought initially characterized s a grunge/alternative rock group, arranges their music with a clarity and intricacy that transcends the distorted punk chords that characterize most grunge music. The melodic bass line in the beginning, the slick use of vocal overdubs to create a schizophrenic feeling are advanced music devices that add to the feverish energy that permeates this song.

I don’t get any joy from listening to “Jeremy.” I somehow feel hurt, sad and at a loss when this song is over. I don't understand why I feel this way. I don’t understand how someone could feel this alone, this hurt and this angry. I don’t know how someone could contemplate let alone act in such violence.

We fear what we don’t understand, and I am afraid of "Jeremy."

American Triangle by Elton John

"American Triangle" by Elton John

The following is a version of a letter I recently sent to Rep. Foxx of North Carolina.

Rep. Virginia Foxx,

In a recent issue of Rolling Stone magazine, your name appeared on their “Threat Assessment” scale. The magazine said that you called “hate killing of Matthew Shepard a ‘hoax.’” As Rolling Stone is a liberal tilted magazine (they had President Obama on the cover three times in two months before the election), I’ve learned to take their political commentary with a grain of salt.

In the political world, what people say is often misinterpreted and taken out of context, so I’ve learned to not get to up in arms when I hear that a politician misspoke. Even if a politician says something wrong, it’s ok, we’re all human. I don’t expect my politicians to never make mistakes, but I do expect them to take responsibility for what they say.

I found the quote that Rolling Stone magazine was referring to. It’s a statement you made April 29th in discussion of a hate crime legislation.

“ . . . hate crimes bill called the ‘Matthew Shepard Bill,’ is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery it wasn’t because he was ‘gay.’ The bill was named for him, the hate crimes bill was named for him, but it’s really a hoax”

After hearing this, I still wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. This clearly was a mistake, you probably misspoke, you feel awful, and I’m sure that you made an immediate effort to retract and apologize for your statement.

Well, that day you did make a statement:

“It has come to my attention that some people have been led to believe that I think the terrible crimes that led to Matthew Shepard’s death in 1998 were a hoax,” she said. “The term “hoax” was a poor choice of words used in the discussion of the hate crimes bill. Mr. Shepard’s death was nothing less than a tragedy and those responsible for his death certainly deserved the punishment they received.

The larger context of my remarks is important. I was referring to a 2004 ABC 20/20 report on Mr. Shepard’s death. The 20/20 report questioned the motivation of those responsible for Mr. Shepard’s death. Referencing this media account may have been a mistake, but if so it was a mistake based on what I believed were reliable accounts.”

A couple days later, you made another statement in a news interview:

“In the heat of trying to handle the rule on the floor, anybody can use a bad choice of words. Saying that the event was a hoax was a poor choice of words,” Foxx said. “I’ve apologized for that. I never meant in any way to harm the family or offend the family or anybody else for that matter.”

I teach elementary school and one thing I tell my students is that it’s not the mistakes that we make that define our character, it’s what we do when we make mistakes that defines who we are. Your “apology” for the statement you made about Matthew Shepard shows very little of your character and is more disappointing then your original statement.

Yes, the term “hoax” was a poor choice of words and maybe referencing a 20/20 news report was a mistake. I do believe that you never meant to harm or offend anybody. I don’t believe that was your intention but I agree with Matthew Shepard’s mother who was there when you made your statement that your “apology” doesn’t change anything.

“Hoax” was not a poor choice of words; it was the wrong choice of words. A poor choice of words is calling is calling someone who is “mentally retarded” an “idiot.” The basic meaning measuring mental capacity of both words is the same however the cultural context and use of the words is vastly different. Calling something that factually happened a “hoax” is calling “banana” a “race car.” They are two completely different things. Saying that you made a “poor choice of words,” tells us that your intent, to discredit his tragedy hasn’t changed, you just wish you didn’t use the word “hoax.”

You cite a 2004, 20/20 news report that questioned the motivation for Matthew Shepard’s death as a source. Here’s the story that you were referring to. The article interviews Matthew’s killers on their motivation. One of them makes a statement that he was only trying to get rob Matthew. The article also calls into questions why the two killers so brutally beat Matthew and hung him out on a fencepost to die if all they wanted was money.

Are you seriously going to believe the words of a convicted killer as facts? Even when the killer’s explanation for his actions is as poor as the one given in this report? This is the kind of thing I expect out of my 5th graders when they are doing research not my public servants.

It’s not 20/20’s fault that you misinterpret a news report correctly. You may not have known the facts of this case but you should have known better.

Maybe, the reason you made the original statement or don’t seem more apologetic now is because you don’t know what Shepard’s death means to people. I’m sure by now the facts have been made clear to you but there is another piece which is just as important.

I heard about the Matthew Shepard tragedy when it happened but what made it mean something to me was the song “American Triangle” by Elton John. He wrote “American Triangle” in memory of Shepard and it was featured in the television move The Matthew Shepard Story.

Elton John has spent much of his career examining the American experience, like “Mona Lisa’s and Mad Hatters,” one of my favorite songs of all time. Elton doesn’t explicitly tell the story of Shepard’s tragedy but focuses on the emotions around this tragedy. We feel the promise in the beginning of the first verse “young boy just starting out,” and the spit and anger at the end of this verse, “God hates f--- where we come from.”

Elton is right, “Western skies” don't make it right, and “Home of the brave” doesn’t make any sense. Even if the killers were motivated only by a simple robbery, the death of Matthew still would be a tragedy. What this song understands is that it’s a tragedy for the killers as much as it is for Matthew: “Three lives drift on different winds, two lives ruined, one life spent.”

At his older age, Elton Johns tenor has deepened into a dark and expressive voice colored by a life surrounded by the peaks and valleys of life. In his voice you understand that what Matthew Shepard represents is bigger than legislation, it’s about who we are as a people, not just the homosexual community, but all of us.

I can accept that people believe that homosexuality is a choice and a sin. We as country must respect people’s opinion, but we should never accept hate in the hearts of our citizens directed at anyone. Hate crime laws are not about special treatment for certain groups of people, it’s about saying as country that we will not accept hate and prejudice in our society.

Rep. Foxx, I hope that you will reconsider what you said. I hope that you will make steps to be more cautious in the future and I hope that you understand why your words have offended so many of us.

Thank you for choosing to serve your constituents and our country. I do not doubt your intentions and I believe that you acted and will continue to act in the best interests of our country. I am disappointed by this incident only because I believe so strongly in the great things that you and our government do every day to make America a better place.

Sincerely,
Kingsley Tang

Love Child by the Supremes

I took a sociology class my freshmen year at Northwestern University. One of the books I read for this class was Sidewalk by Mitchell Duneier. This book documented the life of homeless people in New York City and explained how they handled different aspects in their life like how they made money found food. One aspect that I never thought about was their romantic life. I just assumed that homeless people didn’t have boyfriends or husbands. I didn’t really think that someone who get their food from a trash could have a sex life, but they do.

Duneier discuss where homeless people find places to be romantic, make love and how these relationships in many way are not that different than the relationships of those of us who are fortunate enough to live comfortably. However, like most things for people who are in poverty, romance and sex is more challenging and in some ways is not as enjoyable.

Everything from fancy dinners, sexy underwear and romantic vacations all contribute to people’s enjoyment of each other. One of the less apparent advantages but important ones is birth control. Whether it’s condoms or pills, these things all cost money. If those things fail, people of means have much more resources and options when it comes to abortions and putting children up for adoption. The lack of options of people in poverty and the fear of an unwanted baby drives the narrator in “Love Child.”

I always found “Love Child” to be one of the most intriguing songs that the Supremes recorded. The Supremes set the standard for what it meant to be a girl group. Motown built up the Supremes with an image of high-class elegance singing some of the best crated pop songs in music history. Most of the songs are relatively light in their subject matter, contemplating idealized romantic love through a variety of situations.

After two failed singles, Berry Gordy the owner of Motown records got a group of songwriters called The Clan to work on a new hit single for the Supremes. What they created was not a song about romantic love but a song about a woman trying to explain to her boyfriend why she doesn’t want to have sex with him. Can you imagine pitching this song idea to a pop radio station? The subject doesn’t sound like something that most people would want to listen to but “Love Child” holds as the Supremes best selling single, outselling all of their other 45 releases. It was so successful it knocked off The Beatles’ enormous hit “He Jude” off the number one spot on the pop charts.

Diana Ross, the lead singer of the Supremes takes on the roll of a woman who was born a “love child.” This is another term for a child born to unwed parents. Her mother was poor and Diana’s character grew up in a tenement slum. She describe is the first verse how she never knew her father and that she carries the guilt from her mother about the fact that she has no name. In the second verse Diana, describe starting school in a second hand dress. There is pain in not having the things that her friends had but what is even more painful is the guilt that she carries.

This first hand experience as a “love child” motivates Diana’s character to try to convince her boyfriend to hold off making love because the possibility of creating a “love child” that they will both end up hating this child. Diana’s character asserts that if she has a illegitimate child that it will carry the same shame and guilt that she carries.

There are attitudes in our society about children born out of wedlock, but I wonder if the level of shame and guilt that Diana’s character experiences comes more from her mother than society. Diana’s character herself feels ashamed of her own existence and this is one of the most shocking things about this song. She talks about a “love child” as being “never meant to be” and if there is any doubt that she is referring to herself, she sings in the end of the first chorus “take a look at me.”

“Love Child” ends with a declaration of love. In an earlier section she explains to her boyfriend that she wants to please him and that she needs him which is followed by talking about a the love child they may create. So when Diana starts signing “I’ll always love you,” my initial thought was that she was singing to her boyfriend. In declaring that she loves him, maybe she is attempting to assuage his advances by expressing a level of commitment that would make up for not making love. The more I listen to this song, the more I think that she’s probably not singing to him, but to herself and to her child.

As Diana sings “I will always love you” it sounds more like a desperate cry than a declaration of romantic love. After telling herself and her future child how much she thinks they are both mistakes, she realizes how wrong she is and tries to convince them otherwise. Was she being so negative as a reflection of how she truly feels or in an effort to convince her boyfriend not to force her to have sex? Either way by the end of the song, with the back-up singers reminding us that the being a “love child” is on her mind, she sings about love, apologizing to herself and her future child.

Diana Ross stretches her dramatic abilities as a singer in “Love Child.” In earlier songs written for the Supremes, Diana’s thin, gentle and conversational voice worked in those songs. She doesn’t have a large range, or a great degree of variety in her tone but “Love Child” she approaches a level of rawness, expressing an internal struggle as she pushes her voice creating a level of intensity that drives the song as much as background instruments.

The Andantes, Motown’s session singers sang on this record instead of the Mary Wilson and Cindy Birdsong, the other two members of the Supremes. The Andantes begin the song singing on “oo” while softly rising. Then right before Diana enters they sing a high tense “ah” that comes across like a woman screaming. This happens a couple times during the song expressing the turmoil in the main character’s mind and makes it clear to the listener that there is a level of pain to be dealt with in this song.

Sometimes I wonder, what is the point of a song like “Love Child.” It’s not especially happy and it doesn’t put me in a great mood to listen to it. I’m sure some people who feel like Diana Ross’ character can relate to it, but I don’t really relate to most of this song. Is this song suppose to make me feel bad about poor people motivating me to go help them? I don’t think so, and that’s one reason why I like this song. It’s not preachy but instead it’s an interesting examination of a human conflict. These kinds of stories come from all different place, sometimes it’s from Green Bow, Alabama with a guy names Forrest and other times it comes from a tenement slum. What great stories do is help us know another person for a moment and in that experience we feel things that we don’t normally do, and get perspective on our lives.

It’s important that we are aware of the struggles of others, not so that we can feel guilty all of the time and spend our lives doing charity work. We all should work to help others but people’s choices about charity are their own prerogative. However, it is essential that we are aware of struggles like the one in “Love Child” because it is through understanding each struggle that we realize that there is no individual experience but only a shared humanity that binds us, challenges us and brings us closer to each other and ourselves.

The Times They Are A Changin’ by Bob Dylan

"The Times They Are A Changin’" lyrics

In 1964, a 23-year-old singer from Duluth Minnesota released his third studio album and called out to the world that change was here. Bob Dylan was able to encapsulate the feelings of urgency, unrest and frustration of a generation not with anger but with honesty.

“The Time They Are A Chagin’” from the album of the same name became an anthem for a generation. It pulled together the folk music movement of the 1960s with the Civil Rights movement. There is a long history of American folk music speaking about the struggles of people and artists like Joan Baez along with Dylan brought that tradition to the forefront of music in the 1960s, reminding America not only of the tradition of American folk music but the power of the genre to impact society.

Critics credit Dylan with many things. In a recent issue of Rolling Stone, Bob Dylan ranked number seven in their list of the 100 greatest singers. While, I don’t necessarily agree with this ranking, his influence on music is undeniable. In Rolling Stone’s list different artist wrote about why the singers were ranked as they were. Bono explained that without Dylan, we would not have singers who sung with a cracked voice including Kurt Cobain, Eddie Veder and Bruce Springsteen.

While the influence of Dylan’s singing is debatable, the voice of Dylan at 23-years-old is truly remarkable. Sam Cooke explained that because of Dylan, singing is “no longer going to be about how pretty the voice is. It’s going to be about believing that the voice is telling the truth.”

Artists create their work within limitations. Paintings have frames and films can’t reach out and physically touch the audience. Great artist acknowledge their limitations and work around and within them, which is the central to what it means to be creative. Dylan does not have an expansive range in his voice, nor does sing with a fantastic tone. However, the songs that Dylan writes that he sings don’t require either of those things.

The melody in “The Time They Are A Chagin’” is made up of a five notes in amajor scale. Most of the melody features repeated notes, with slight rises and drops. The rhythm is close the way most people would speak the lyrics. In some ways, this seems like easy way out and if you think of it compared to more expansive and dynamic melodies, “The Time They Are A Chagin’” seems silly and almost stupidly simple. However if you look at this melody in the tradition of great folk songs like “This Land is Your Land” the artistic choices Dylan makes become clear. Simple melodies are easier for people to sing. Rhythms that match the way people speak are easier to understand and a singer with a voice that sounds like a person you may actually see on the street as opposed to an opera start makes the song not only sound for relevant, but also more accessible.

He starts in the first verse calling out to the whole population talking about how change is an inevitable part of nature. Dylan says that change may not have a good effect on you (“drenched to the bone”) but it is coming and it needs to be recognized. This may seem like a pessimistic view of the future but he speaking more to people who by not acknowledging the coming change are setting themselves up for hardship.

In the second verse, Dylan is more specific calling out to people who write. He explains that their predictions may not necessarily be true. Dylan invalidates their jobs saying that they can no longer predict the future. These writings are out of touch because on a fundamental basis the world has changed beyond what these writers can understand.

Dylan gets political in the third verse and tells politicians how a war is coming. If they don’t change and start moving, they will get run over. Dylan talks about how change necessitates action. This may not seem like a big deal to call out politicians but in a time when it was rare for pop music to even acknowledging that politicians existed, criticizing them was a shocking and unheard of. That doesn’t mean that people weren’t thinking it, Dylan just helped people admit to themselves the truth of the situation.

I’ll always remember when I first listened to this song and heard the opening of the fourth verse, “Come mothers and fathers throughout the land and don't criticize what you can't understand.” At first my jaw dropped, and then I celebrated in my mind thinking ”PREACH ON BROTHER!!!” As a teenager I felt I was misunderstood. I know that it’s human nature to criticize what you don’t understand but that doesn’t mean you should. At school, no one got how into music I was and people constantly seemed to criticize the choices I made in my life.

Dylan was right on that we shouldn’t criticize what we don’t understand. Wait a second, not “don’t understands” but “can’t understand.” No one can truly understand what you are feeling and no parent can completely understand what his or her child is going through. That doesn’t mean you can’t help make situations better but it does mean that we have to acknowledge the uniqueness of people’s feelings and situations which raises the level of relationships from a authoritative parental figure to a mentor who can truly help a child improve his or her life.

The last verse talks about what the result of all this change will bring. Slow will be fast, present will be past, and first will be last. The world will flip over and things that you assume to be true will be false. It is scary to think how correct Dylan. The changes in the past forty years are astounding and the world changed dramatically not only the way we view others but the way we view ourselves.

The power in protest music isn’t to change people’s minds. Do you think that a tyrannical parent is going to listen to “The Time They Are A Chagin’” and decide to give their child independence? Chances are, especially in the 1960s you couldn’t even get the parent to even listen to the song let alone be convinced by its message. What protest music does is validate people’s feeling and help them find others who feel the same way. In the 1960s, Dylan said what many were feeling but weren’t saying either because didn’t know how to articulate their feelings or because they were afraid to speak out.

Is “The Time They Are A Chagin’” still relevant today? Yes, because their will always be people who resist change. In America the change has been moving in the direction of a moral idea that lines up with the way that I view the world and one day it may move away from the way. At that time, should I just accept change? No, change is something that is inevitable but that doesn’t mean we are powerless. It is important to not only recognize change but to be vigilant by helping change move things into a better direction. We all are constantly changing and our society reflects those changes in a positive way if we work for it and in negative ways if we do nothing. Thomas Jefferson said it best when reflecting on government:

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."