I have just read a book by Pete Seeger titled, Where Have all the Flowers Gone - A Singer's Stories, Songs, Seeds, Robberies. This is a fantastic book that details all of the history of the songs sung by Seeger as well as the context in which he became known as a prolific performer and writer of folk music.
Typical to the tradition of folk songs he notes his adaptation of existing songs as well as the adaptation of his own. He writes:
I've rarely refused copyright permission for someone to change my songs. After all, I've changed so many other people's songs, what right have I to be picky about my own. [at pg 165]
With respect to the composition of The Long March, he states:
I find it easier to think of a refrain than put together the verses to proceed it. These few lines kept returning to me, though. Maybe some will be able to use them. [at pg 170]
He also talks of the tradition within folk music to reuse other people's work:
...[A]t the age of 20, I met Woody Guthrie, the most prolific song write of them all. He, too, used a standard technique of putting new words to old tunes. (see pg 85) One can make up a new song by changing around an old song. Who care's if its not completely original... So when I heard Woody sing Jimmie Rodger's yodeling blues "T for Texas" just having registered for the draft (October 1940) it inspired me to put together this "new" song.
The new song was called 'C for Conscription'. Indeed the index to the table of contents of this book is broken up into categories - Seeger lists 25 songs in which he has written a new tune to other's words and a further 23 songs where he has written new words to other's tunes.
He states: [T]hrough musical history borrowing has been a two way street. This is simply impossible in the litigious copyright environment of today.
For much of his career copyright was not automatic but had to be applied for. He writes, with respect to the origins of 'We Will Overcome', that he is only one of thousands of people whi have added verses to this now world famous song. [at pg 32] He furthermore states that he is unsure of the origins of the song which could back as far as a 1921 gospel song "We Will Understand it Better Bye and Bye". He introduced the song to the SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee in 1960 and its use in the context of the Civil Rights Movement meant that it became "the song".
With respect to the copyright on the song he states:
In the early '60's' our publisher said to us, "If you don't copyright this now, some Hollywood types will have a version out next year like "Come On Baby, We Shall Overcome Tonight" so Guy, Frank and I signed a "song writers contract" At that time we didn't know Lucille Simmon's name. Now we try to credit the African-American people... All royalties and income from the song go to a non-profit fund, which annually gives grants to further African-American music in the South. [at pg 32-34]
He notes that there are many versions of the lyrics and lists 15 of the most popular. [at pg 35]
Similarly with respect to the Woody Guthrie song "This Land is Your Land" he states:
Dozens of other verses have been written to the song within the last 10 years. Some of them simply change a few words to make the chorus apply to Canada or to England or to Australia... There have been anti-pollution verses. I always encourage anyone who loves any song not to be ashamed to try making up new verses for it. [at pg 144]
Finally, with respect to the role of musicians in society he writes (from 1974):
In most nations, most ages, the local or national establishment tried to warp almost any good ides to its own ends. Music, art, science, humor. Religion too... Our job now is to learn how to speak truth to power - without being thrown in jail too often. Don't say it can't be done. We can do it in a thousand ways. I've tried with banjos and boats... We just have to be aware that it is a struggle, all the way, to keep from being co-opted. [at pg 170]
He later adds:
Will there be a human race in another 200 years? Yest, it's a possibility. If so, it will be partly because songwriters of many kinds used whatever talents they were born with or developed. And use them to help their fellow humans get together.
This is an excellent book and worth a look for those interested in the use of music in the political context of the 1960s.
Further Reading
Peter Seeger, 'Where Have all the Flowers Gone - A Singer's Stories, Songs, Seeds, Robberies'. (I have the first edition which is undated and published by Sing Out) - the second edition was released in April 1997 and can be purchased from Amazon< http://www.amazon.com/Where-Have-All-Flowers-Gone/dp/1881322106 > at 28 July 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
Hendrix and The Star Spangled Banner
While there was no single song that summed up its central values, both the social and political dominations of youth protest shared a common belief that rock could articulate its concerns.[1]
Shelia Whiteley writes an interesting chapter in the text ‘Remembering Woodstock’ in which she considers the music played at Woodstock and its reception by the audience. She notes in particular the communication process that takes place in live concerts and the position of the audience in receiving the music. The combination of the civil rights movement and anti-Vietnam sentiments were paramount issues to be communicated through music by the artists at this event.
Whiteley focuses Jimi Hendrix’s rendition of ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ by discussing the civil rights and Vietnam war as the context in which he gave this performance. She writes:
Hendrix was certainly aware of the problems confronting black service-men in Vietnam. He, himself, had earlier been conscripted to the 101st Airborne Division... which had been assigned to Vietnam in 1965. By this time Hendrix had been honourably discharged following a training injury in the autumn of 1962, but he certainly knew the score as far as the position of black GIs were concerned: they represented 2 per cent of the officers and were assigned 28 per cent of the combat duties.[2]
Whiteley then goes on to consider the way in which Hendrix illustrated his lack of respect for the American authorities and the sense of injustice and cynicism he held for those in power:
So, what did the music mean, and did the crowd understand? While it is obviously impossible to say that those listening to Hendrix shared my interpretation, it is nevertheless suggested that the majority would have engaged with his performance, recognizing his style and possibly making some assumptions as to his personal philosophy and feelings, about the civil rights movement and those engaged in the Vietnam War. Clearly, the melody itself is still recognizable, but the sheer volume of noise, the distortion, the blue note bends and swerves, sustain and feedback aurally attack the original three-four metre, the neatly balanced phrases, the uplift of the melodic line and, as such, the connotations of heroism associated with ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ are undercut by a mood of devastation. I would also add that this was no spontaneous improvisation. Rather, it was a thought-through personal statement with all the trademarks of Hendrix’s performance style...[3]
____________________
[1] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 20
[2] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 25
[3] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 26
Shelia Whiteley writes an interesting chapter in the text ‘Remembering Woodstock’ in which she considers the music played at Woodstock and its reception by the audience. She notes in particular the communication process that takes place in live concerts and the position of the audience in receiving the music. The combination of the civil rights movement and anti-Vietnam sentiments were paramount issues to be communicated through music by the artists at this event.
Whiteley focuses Jimi Hendrix’s rendition of ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ by discussing the civil rights and Vietnam war as the context in which he gave this performance. She writes:
Hendrix was certainly aware of the problems confronting black service-men in Vietnam. He, himself, had earlier been conscripted to the 101st Airborne Division... which had been assigned to Vietnam in 1965. By this time Hendrix had been honourably discharged following a training injury in the autumn of 1962, but he certainly knew the score as far as the position of black GIs were concerned: they represented 2 per cent of the officers and were assigned 28 per cent of the combat duties.[2]
Whiteley then goes on to consider the way in which Hendrix illustrated his lack of respect for the American authorities and the sense of injustice and cynicism he held for those in power:
So, what did the music mean, and did the crowd understand? While it is obviously impossible to say that those listening to Hendrix shared my interpretation, it is nevertheless suggested that the majority would have engaged with his performance, recognizing his style and possibly making some assumptions as to his personal philosophy and feelings, about the civil rights movement and those engaged in the Vietnam War. Clearly, the melody itself is still recognizable, but the sheer volume of noise, the distortion, the blue note bends and swerves, sustain and feedback aurally attack the original three-four metre, the neatly balanced phrases, the uplift of the melodic line and, as such, the connotations of heroism associated with ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ are undercut by a mood of devastation. I would also add that this was no spontaneous improvisation. Rather, it was a thought-through personal statement with all the trademarks of Hendrix’s performance style...[3]
____________________
[1] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 20
[2] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 25
[3] Sheila Whiteley, ‘1,2,3 What are we fighting 4? Music, meaning and ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 26
Extracts: 'Remembering Woodstock’
Here are three more extracts of the text ‘Remembering Woodstock’. Each of these discuss the context in which the concert was held and the relationship between the music of that era and the social context in which it was written, recorded and performed:
In the original 1969 Woodstock, rock music rode on the back of the politics and not vice versa. The event was envisioned as participatory, non-commercial and counter-cultural, with music being the cultural prism for already existing social movements. Abbie Hoffman, notorious political activist of that period, saw it as epitomizing a part of an ongoing social revolution which was ‘not something fixed in ideology, nor is it something fashioned to a particular decade. It is a perpetual process embedded in the human spirit. Yet, of course, there were issues specific to the period: at that time, ‘the civil rights and anti-war movements engaged millions of people in the politics of direct action primarily on the strength of the issues themselves’ (Garofalo, 1992, p.16). In turn, the politics influenced the style and form of the music itself. Today’s world is very different. With the decline in trust and belief in the political power of social movements popular music has come to the fore. It fills the gap, often serving as the main vehicle to organize large masses of people raising social awareness.[1]
[D]espite its reliance on systems of mass production and mass communications, which tied it firmly in with the industrial logic of late capitalism, the rock music of the 1960s enjoyed a status as an authentic, artistic form of expression that set it apart, in the minds of those who performed and listened to it, from commercial chart music (see Willis, 1978; Frith, 1983). This in turn engendered a feeling among rock audiences that their bonding with rock performers was one of ’community’, and that the music produced by rock artists was the music of the counter-culture in that it communicated a message and cause endorsed by all of those with counter-cultural involvement – audiences and musicians alike... In every sense then, the notion of a counter-cultural community was a myth, maintained by the sheer belief of those involved that music could, in some way, represent their interests and, ultimately, change the world.[2]
[I]n the late 1960s it was possible to maintain the illusion that certain musical practices acted as a universalizing social force. The strength of this association mist not be underestimated. While popular music in the industrialized Weest in the 1930s and 1940s had been a leisure pursuit, and in the 1950s and early 2960s had become crucial to subcultural identification ... as the available stylists patters multiplied, the revulsions felt by affluent youth at US imperialism in South-east Asia coincided with an ever more radical approach to music-making and selling, such that we talk about a single counter-culture, indefinable by it ‘sound’.[3]
_____________________
[1] Gerry Bloustien, ‘Still picking children form the trees? Reimagining Woodstock in twenty-first-century Australia’ in Ed. Andy Bennett ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) Pg 128
[2] Andy Bennett, ‘Everybody’s happy, everybody’s free’: Representation and nostalgia in the Woodstock film’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 48 - 49
[3] Allan F. Moore, ‘The contradictory aesthetics of Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 76
In the original 1969 Woodstock, rock music rode on the back of the politics and not vice versa. The event was envisioned as participatory, non-commercial and counter-cultural, with music being the cultural prism for already existing social movements. Abbie Hoffman, notorious political activist of that period, saw it as epitomizing a part of an ongoing social revolution which was ‘not something fixed in ideology, nor is it something fashioned to a particular decade. It is a perpetual process embedded in the human spirit. Yet, of course, there were issues specific to the period: at that time, ‘the civil rights and anti-war movements engaged millions of people in the politics of direct action primarily on the strength of the issues themselves’ (Garofalo, 1992, p.16). In turn, the politics influenced the style and form of the music itself. Today’s world is very different. With the decline in trust and belief in the political power of social movements popular music has come to the fore. It fills the gap, often serving as the main vehicle to organize large masses of people raising social awareness.[1]
[D]espite its reliance on systems of mass production and mass communications, which tied it firmly in with the industrial logic of late capitalism, the rock music of the 1960s enjoyed a status as an authentic, artistic form of expression that set it apart, in the minds of those who performed and listened to it, from commercial chart music (see Willis, 1978; Frith, 1983). This in turn engendered a feeling among rock audiences that their bonding with rock performers was one of ’community’, and that the music produced by rock artists was the music of the counter-culture in that it communicated a message and cause endorsed by all of those with counter-cultural involvement – audiences and musicians alike... In every sense then, the notion of a counter-cultural community was a myth, maintained by the sheer belief of those involved that music could, in some way, represent their interests and, ultimately, change the world.[2]
[I]n the late 1960s it was possible to maintain the illusion that certain musical practices acted as a universalizing social force. The strength of this association mist not be underestimated. While popular music in the industrialized Weest in the 1930s and 1940s had been a leisure pursuit, and in the 1950s and early 2960s had become crucial to subcultural identification ... as the available stylists patters multiplied, the revulsions felt by affluent youth at US imperialism in South-east Asia coincided with an ever more radical approach to music-making and selling, such that we talk about a single counter-culture, indefinable by it ‘sound’.[3]
_____________________
[1] Gerry Bloustien, ‘Still picking children form the trees? Reimagining Woodstock in twenty-first-century Australia’ in Ed. Andy Bennett ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) Pg 128
[2] Andy Bennett, ‘Everybody’s happy, everybody’s free’: Representation and nostalgia in the Woodstock film’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 48 - 49
[3] Allan F. Moore, ‘The contradictory aesthetics of Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 76
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Music Law in the Digital Age
This looks like a book worth another look:
Music Law in the Digital Age
http://musiclawinthedigitalage.com/
Music Law in the Digital Age
http://musiclawinthedigitalage.com/
Woodstock: Country Joe McDonald
One performer that received much acclaim for his sets at Woodstock was Country Joe McDonald. In particular his acoustic set on the first day of the festival was seen to be a moment in time in which the Woodstock Nation was brought together. Reflecting on this through the film footage and noting the selective inclusion of material in that film, Andy Bennett states:
An illustrative example of such artistic licence on the part of the Woodstock production team is Country Joe McDonald’s rendition of ‘Fixin-to-Die’ , a powerful anti-Vietnam War song that assumed anthemic properties as a result of its inclusion in the film... In the now legendary film sequence of Country Joe’s Woodstock performance, subtitled lyrics are added to the bottom of the screen, urging cinema audiences to sing along with the satirical chorus lyric[1]:
And it’s one, two, three what are we fighting for,
Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn, the next stop is Vietnam
And it’s five, six, seven, open up the pearly gates,
Don’t ask me to wonder why, whoopee we’re all gonna die...
Country Joe McDonald also played an electric set at Woodstock that was not included in the film. Dave Allen suggests that this led to the determination of this artist’s subsequent reputation in a way that effected no other artist – Country Joe McDonald was characterised from then on as an acoustic political musician despite being diverse in instrument selection.[2] Indeed Country Joe and the Fish had been a psychedelic band and known as the main band from Berkeley.[3] Allen reflects on the influences on the band by stating:
“The songs of Country Joe and the Fish are more explicitly political than those of the Grateful Dead because of the influence that Woody Guthrie exerted on McDonalds career...he is clear about his role as a modern day troubadour... and his purpose in singing about war, army veterans, nursing, and other political, social and personal issues.”[4]
Dave Allen and Country Joe McDonald wrote the afterword to this text and in doing so examine McDonalds personal perspective on Woodstock:
I am an honourably discharged Vietnam veteran having served three years in the regular navy. I also grew up in Southern California with American Communist Party members as parents. Having had both these experiences in my background left me feeling victimized. I had no love for the leaders of the American military or the American Left – I was neither enamoured of or mystified by, either. Consequently, a life mission emerged from these experiences that I was never to abandon:
Dedicated to the cause of justice
A dream of peace
To try and help those who cannot defend themselves[5].
McDonald states:
The vast majority of the 50 million people making up the Vietnam generation did nothing but wait the war out. Ten million people – 9 million men and 1 million women – served in the Vietnam-era military, and several million were in the peace movement or the counter –culture, as it is sometimes called... At times I have resisted my connection to the Vietnam War. It has been consistently bad for business and I have been warned and cautioned by many of my peers for constantly bringing up the issues of the Vietnam War in my songs and in my chats to audiences. Over the years I have accepted this as my fate. Ever since I sag ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin-to-Die-Rag’ at Woodstock I cannot escape a connection with the Vietnam War. Whether or not I chose to make Vietnam a focus of my life, it seems to have chosen me. My efforts to help veterans and the country heal from the war have been both reviled and honoured, just like the war itself... In 1989 I appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show as part of the ‘celebration’ of the 20th Anniversary of the Woodstock festival. On air I said:
"My appearance at Woodstock essentially ruined my career and I have never recovered...”[6]
______________
[1] Andy Bennett, ‘Everybody’s happy, everybody’s free’: Representation and nostalgia in the Woodstock film’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 46
[2] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 112
[3] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 118-119
[4] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 120-121
[5] Country Joe McDonald and Dave Allen, ‘Afterword: Country Joe McDonald remembering Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 146
[6] Country Joe McDonald and Dave Allen, ‘Afterword: Country Joe McDonald remembering Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 152-153
An illustrative example of such artistic licence on the part of the Woodstock production team is Country Joe McDonald’s rendition of ‘Fixin-to-Die’ , a powerful anti-Vietnam War song that assumed anthemic properties as a result of its inclusion in the film... In the now legendary film sequence of Country Joe’s Woodstock performance, subtitled lyrics are added to the bottom of the screen, urging cinema audiences to sing along with the satirical chorus lyric[1]:
And it’s one, two, three what are we fighting for,
Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn, the next stop is Vietnam
And it’s five, six, seven, open up the pearly gates,
Don’t ask me to wonder why, whoopee we’re all gonna die...
Country Joe McDonald also played an electric set at Woodstock that was not included in the film. Dave Allen suggests that this led to the determination of this artist’s subsequent reputation in a way that effected no other artist – Country Joe McDonald was characterised from then on as an acoustic political musician despite being diverse in instrument selection.[2] Indeed Country Joe and the Fish had been a psychedelic band and known as the main band from Berkeley.[3] Allen reflects on the influences on the band by stating:
“The songs of Country Joe and the Fish are more explicitly political than those of the Grateful Dead because of the influence that Woody Guthrie exerted on McDonalds career...he is clear about his role as a modern day troubadour... and his purpose in singing about war, army veterans, nursing, and other political, social and personal issues.”[4]
Dave Allen and Country Joe McDonald wrote the afterword to this text and in doing so examine McDonalds personal perspective on Woodstock:
I am an honourably discharged Vietnam veteran having served three years in the regular navy. I also grew up in Southern California with American Communist Party members as parents. Having had both these experiences in my background left me feeling victimized. I had no love for the leaders of the American military or the American Left – I was neither enamoured of or mystified by, either. Consequently, a life mission emerged from these experiences that I was never to abandon:
Dedicated to the cause of justice
A dream of peace
To try and help those who cannot defend themselves[5].
McDonald states:
The vast majority of the 50 million people making up the Vietnam generation did nothing but wait the war out. Ten million people – 9 million men and 1 million women – served in the Vietnam-era military, and several million were in the peace movement or the counter –culture, as it is sometimes called... At times I have resisted my connection to the Vietnam War. It has been consistently bad for business and I have been warned and cautioned by many of my peers for constantly bringing up the issues of the Vietnam War in my songs and in my chats to audiences. Over the years I have accepted this as my fate. Ever since I sag ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin-to-Die-Rag’ at Woodstock I cannot escape a connection with the Vietnam War. Whether or not I chose to make Vietnam a focus of my life, it seems to have chosen me. My efforts to help veterans and the country heal from the war have been both reviled and honoured, just like the war itself... In 1989 I appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show as part of the ‘celebration’ of the 20th Anniversary of the Woodstock festival. On air I said:
"My appearance at Woodstock essentially ruined my career and I have never recovered...”[6]
______________
[1] Andy Bennett, ‘Everybody’s happy, everybody’s free’: Representation and nostalgia in the Woodstock film’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 46
[2] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 112
[3] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 118-119
[4] Dave Allen, ‘A public transition: acoustic and electric performances at the Woodstock festival’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 120-121
[5] Country Joe McDonald and Dave Allen, ‘Afterword: Country Joe McDonald remembering Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 146
[6] Country Joe McDonald and Dave Allen, ‘Afterword: Country Joe McDonald remembering Woodstock’ in Ed. Andy Bennett, ‘Remembering Woodstock’ (Ashgate 2004) 152-153
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
MySpace Music Beta
MySpace has launched MySpace Music in Australia in Beta form. I've had a good look around it this morning and it all seems to be functioning well - the streams are good and not resource intensive, some of my favourite bands, all independents, have music available and so far it looks good. The playlist making software took me a little to get used to - no real instructions - if you are setting up a new playlist, drag and drop from the search menu, its easy enough. The music news section really doesn't support the artists I like but of course they have pages that are easy enough to visit. If you are not already on MySpace sign up here: http://www.myspace.com/ and take a look - Australia is always behind the United States and other parts of the world so this is not new in other places.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Remembering Woodstock
I have just started to read the book Remembering Woodstock and would like to extract some of the comments and points made as I make my way through the text. This book has some important reflections on the socio-cultural context of the 1960s and the music that was released at that time and so is likely to form some of the basis of the second chapter of my thesis. The second chapter I am about to write considers the social and musical context of political music from the 1960s to today in Australia and the United States.
The introduction of this text, written by editor Andy Bennett notes that two very important issues were relevant to the United States in the 1960s – the Civil Rights movement particularly around the mid 1960s and the anti-Vietnam War movement of that decade.
Bennett notes that the passing of the Civil Rights Bill by Kennedy in 1964 did little to alleviate the socio-economic conditions of African Americans in the United States . The rise of the Black Power Movement and later the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) were two important developments of the 1960s in this country. The music reflected the sentiments of this issue with songs such as James Brown ‘Say it Loud’ and Aretha Franklin’s ‘Respect’ just two examples of songs relevant to this movement. [pg xvii] Hendrix was also an important musician in this regard and was of course one of the few African Americans invited to perform at Woodstock and in doing so gave a world renowned rendition of the Star Spangled Banner [pg xviii].
With respect to the Vietnam War, Bennett writes:
A particularly prominent liaison between rock music and protest centred around the Vietnam War. From the mid-1960s onwards a strong anti-Vietnam War movement put increasing pressure on the US government to end the war and withdraw from Vietnam. Anti-war demonstrations in the US... opposed the seemingly senseless nature of the Vietnam War. Which, it was argued, had ‘sunk into an apparently endless slough of mud and dead bodies’ (Snowman, 1968, p. 149). Similar concerns were expressed concerning what was deemed to the oppressive action of the US government and its over blocking of the self-determination of a small country in the interest of its own corporate concerns [pg xvi].
Bennett goes on to note that songs such as Country Joe MacDonald’s ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die-Rag’ were effective in detailing the central concerns of that movement [pg xvi]. Indeed he states that:
[T]he lyrical content of popular music ... took on increasingly radical dimensions as the 1960s progressed. Songwriters and lyricists saw it as their artistic responsibility to respond directly to current social and political issues, which, during the mid-1960s were becoming increasingly turbulent [pg xv].
The socio-cultural events and issues of this time were readily apparent to and indeed a driving force behind the Woodstock Festival held 15 August to 18 August 1969 with an audience of some 450,000 people and a further 1.5million unable to get in [pg xiv].
Further Reading
Ed. Andy Bennett, 'Remembering Woodstock' (Ashgate 2004) <http://www.amazon.com/Remembering-Woodstock-Ashgate-Popular-Music/dp/0754607143> at 11 July 2010
The introduction of this text, written by editor Andy Bennett notes that two very important issues were relevant to the United States in the 1960s – the Civil Rights movement particularly around the mid 1960s and the anti-Vietnam War movement of that decade.
Bennett notes that the passing of the Civil Rights Bill by Kennedy in 1964 did little to alleviate the socio-economic conditions of African Americans in the United States . The rise of the Black Power Movement and later the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) were two important developments of the 1960s in this country. The music reflected the sentiments of this issue with songs such as James Brown ‘Say it Loud’ and Aretha Franklin’s ‘Respect’ just two examples of songs relevant to this movement. [pg xvii] Hendrix was also an important musician in this regard and was of course one of the few African Americans invited to perform at Woodstock and in doing so gave a world renowned rendition of the Star Spangled Banner [pg xviii].
With respect to the Vietnam War, Bennett writes:
A particularly prominent liaison between rock music and protest centred around the Vietnam War. From the mid-1960s onwards a strong anti-Vietnam War movement put increasing pressure on the US government to end the war and withdraw from Vietnam. Anti-war demonstrations in the US... opposed the seemingly senseless nature of the Vietnam War. Which, it was argued, had ‘sunk into an apparently endless slough of mud and dead bodies’ (Snowman, 1968, p. 149). Similar concerns were expressed concerning what was deemed to the oppressive action of the US government and its over blocking of the self-determination of a small country in the interest of its own corporate concerns [pg xvi].
Bennett goes on to note that songs such as Country Joe MacDonald’s ‘I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-to-Die-Rag’ were effective in detailing the central concerns of that movement [pg xvi]. Indeed he states that:
[T]he lyrical content of popular music ... took on increasingly radical dimensions as the 1960s progressed. Songwriters and lyricists saw it as their artistic responsibility to respond directly to current social and political issues, which, during the mid-1960s were becoming increasingly turbulent [pg xv].
The socio-cultural events and issues of this time were readily apparent to and indeed a driving force behind the Woodstock Festival held 15 August to 18 August 1969 with an audience of some 450,000 people and a further 1.5million unable to get in [pg xiv].
Further Reading
Ed. Andy Bennett, 'Remembering Woodstock' (Ashgate 2004) <http://www.amazon.com/Remembering-Woodstock-Ashgate-Popular-Music/dp/0754607143> at 11 July 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
20th Anniversary celebrations at EFF
Check out this great animation about the 3 strikes rules from Nina Paley - its part of the 20th Anniversary celebrations at EFF:
https://w2.eff.org/ninapaley/
I am a proud member!
Sally
https://w2.eff.org/ninapaley/
I am a proud member!
Sally
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Four Great Women and a Manicure
I was watching The Simpsons tonight and caught this great reference to the Disney Corporation and copyright law - I cant actually see the link below in this region but those on the other side of the world may be more fortunate:
Season 20 / Episode 20: - Four Great Women and a Manicure
Lisa Simpson: I know another story about a great woman. It's called Snow White and the Seven
Lawyer: [interrupts Lisa] Excuse me, but the story you are about to tell is a copyright property of the Walt Disney Company.
Lisa Simpson: What? Snow White is a fairy tale that has been around for hundreds of years. Nobody owns the rights to it.
Lawyer: Does your story have any dwarves in it?
Lisa Simpson: Yes, but they are my own original creation. Their names are Crabby, Drunky, Hungry, Greedy, Lenny, Kerney, and Doc-tor Hibbert.
The Disney lawyer has very long evil finger nails! The scenes that follow are just as funny with an adaptation of the Snow White song available on hulu here. I purchased the episode from iTunes.
More Information
ShareTV.org, Lisa Simpson - The Simpsons Character Guide <http://sharetv.org/shows/the_simpsons/cast/lisa_simpson/quotes> at 6 July 2010
Wikipedia, Four Great Women and a Manicure (last updated 19 June 2010) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Women_and_a_Manicure> at 6 July 2010
Season 20 / Episode 20: - Four Great Women and a Manicure
Lisa Simpson: I know another story about a great woman. It's called Snow White and the Seven
Lawyer: [interrupts Lisa] Excuse me, but the story you are about to tell is a copyright property of the Walt Disney Company.
Lisa Simpson: What? Snow White is a fairy tale that has been around for hundreds of years. Nobody owns the rights to it.
Lawyer: Does your story have any dwarves in it?
Lisa Simpson: Yes, but they are my own original creation. Their names are Crabby, Drunky, Hungry, Greedy, Lenny, Kerney, and Doc-tor Hibbert.
The Disney lawyer has very long evil finger nails! The scenes that follow are just as funny with an adaptation of the Snow White song available on hulu here. I purchased the episode from iTunes.
More Information
ShareTV.org, Lisa Simpson - The Simpsons Character Guide <http://sharetv.org/shows/the_simpsons/cast/lisa_simpson/quotes> at 6 July 2010
Wikipedia, Four Great Women and a Manicure (last updated 19 June 2010) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Women_and_a_Manicure> at 6 July 2010
Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs Australia Pty Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 698 (6 July 2010)
UPDATED: In this decision Jacobson J was required to assess the copyright liability of the (respondents) composers of the song ‘Downunder’ for the sampling of the song ‘Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree’. Having held in February this year that a substantial part of the song was sampled, the court in this instance was required to assess the damages payable under the Trade Practices Act to the applicants.
Drawing from Ludlow Music Inc v Williams (No 2) [2002] EWHC 638 (Ch) (“Ludlow Music”) at [38] - [48] Jacobson held the relevant principles to be, at [29] – [34]:
First, the respondents being wrongdoers, damages should be liberally assessed but the object is to compensate the applicant, not to punish the respondents. Second, it is common practice in the music industry for the owner of the copyright in a work to grant a licence to a person who seeks to use part of the original work in a derivative work. In those instances the owner of the copyright will grant a licence in return for a share of the copyright (or a share of the income) in or from the derivative work. Third, when an infringer uses the copyright work without a licence, the measure of the damages it must pay will be the sum which it would have paid by way of royalty if, instead of acting “illegally”, it had acted legally. Fourth, where (as in the present case) there is no “normal” rate of royalty or licence fee, evidence may be adduced of practice in the industry including expert evidence of factors which may guide the court in the determination of the applicable rate. Evidence of that type will be general and hypothetical and it will be a matter for the court to determine the weight to be given to it. Fifth, where (as in the present case) some form of royalty or profit share is appropriate, the basis for the assessment is a transaction between a willing licensor and a willing licensee. The assessment has to be made upon all the relevant evidence which may include evidence of rates agreed in other similar or “comparable transactions”. Sixth, the process is one of judicial estimation. Mathematical precision is not attainable. It would appear that if the court is to err, it should do so on the side of generosity to an applicant.
Holding that there had been a continuing misrepresentation as to the copyright ownership of the song to APRA and AMCOS he cautioned against using other samples in songs and their respective royalty licence rates as guidelines in cases such as these at [179] – [181]:
The evidence of “comparable” samples is to be approached with caution. Each sample is different and the factors which informed the outcome of the negotiations in the various samples referred to in the evidence are not fully available. The process is quite different from that which underlies the well established principle applicable to the assessment of the value of land or items of property. There, the basis of the value is the price that a willing purchaser would pay to a willing but not anxious vendor and is determined upon the footing that there are articles of the same kind which are the subject of frequent sale and purchase: Spencer v Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418 at 431, 441. Nevertheless, insofar as the “comparables” adduced in evidence can be given weight as indicators of the outcome of the hypothetical bargain, they point to a low percentage figure.
Overall Jacobson held that the 2 bars of ‘Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree’ were a substantial part of that song, however in determining damages, the question was predominantly based on what qualitative contribution had been made by that song to 'Downunder’. ‘Downunder’ was not heavily reliant on the sample as part of its song with Jacobson referring to a range of other musical elements and qualities which gave the song its wider popularity. Here he held at [216] to [220]:
Although the quotation from Kookaburra in the 1981 recording is, in my view, sufficient to constitute an infringement of copyright, other factors are to be taken into account in assessing the percentage interest payable in a hypothetical licensing bargain. The most obvious factor is the difficulty in detecting the similarity between the flute riff and the bars from Kookaburra. A further strong indicator of a low percentage is to be found in a qualitative and quantitative consideration of Kookaburra’s contribution to Down Under, looked at a whole. The qualitative and quantitative comparison which I am required to undertake in this part of the case is different from that which was the subject of the February Reasons. There, the enquiry was limited to the bars of Kookaburra that are reproduced in the flute riff. Here, the comparison involves a weighing of the significance of the bars of Kookaburra to the overall musical qualities of Down Under. Whilst it is true that the commercial success of Down Under in 2002 may have given the copyright owner of Kookaburra an opportunity to capitalise upon its statutory monopoly, that is outweighed by the other factors to which I have referred. The process of determining the percentage figure to be paid is one of judicial estimation. Taking the most generous approach that is open to me having regard to the figures put to me by the parties, I estimate the figure at 5%...
Further Reading
Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs Australia Pty Limited [2010] FCA 29 (4 February 2010) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/29.html > at 6 July 2010
Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd v EMI Songs Australia Pty Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 698 (6 July 2010) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2010/698.html > at 6 July 2010)
Wikipedia, Kookaburra with Food (Image) (last updated 23 June 2010) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kookaburra> at 6 July 2010
(11.30am): According to ABC Youth Radio Station, Triple J, the copyright owners of the Australian band Men at Work's song 'Downunder' have been held liable for copyright infringement of the song 'Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree' and have been ordered to pay 5% of royalties backdated to 2002. As soon as the judgement has been published online I will write more about this decision and any obiter dictum with respect to sampling under Australian copyright law.
Further Reading
OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Recent Developments (6 August 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/08/recent-developments.html> at 6 July 2010
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Grids
All academics like a matrix - here's one from today:
| | Deliberate | Accidental |
| Political Use | | |
| Non Political Use | | |
| Political Music | | |
| - Narratives | | |
| - Anthems | | |
| Non Political Music | | |
| | | |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
