WEBVTT - David Byrne 0:00:08.200 --> 0:00:17.759 Pushkin. A while back, David Byrne published a list of 0:00:17.800 --> 0:00:21.560 protest songs on his website. Billie Holliday's Strange Fruit was 0:00:21.600 --> 0:00:24.120 on there, so was Bob Marley's Get Up, Stand Up, 0:00:24.400 --> 0:00:29.200 and also more unusual choices like Merle Haggard's Oki from Muskoki, which, 0:00:29.320 --> 0:00:32.120 if you've ever heard it is a song not protesting 0:00:32.280 --> 0:00:36.360 for change, but against change. It's the song protesting protest songs. 0:00:36.600 --> 0:00:39.560 Needless to say, we loved all this a broken record, 0:00:39.880 --> 0:00:42.400 and we love David Byrne, going all the way back 0:00:42.440 --> 0:00:45.080 to his days of the Talking Heads and his brilliant 0:00:45.080 --> 0:00:49.000 book How Music Works, and a million other genius things 0:00:49.000 --> 0:00:51.960 he's done over the years. So Rick Rubin and I 0:00:52.040 --> 0:00:54.480 asked David to sit with us in New York. Rick 0:00:54.560 --> 0:00:57.319 skyped in from Hawaii and the three of us had 0:00:57.360 --> 0:01:01.360 a chat about David's list, the earliest test songs he remembers, 0:01:01.800 --> 0:01:03.920 and what it takes to write a song of protest. 0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:09.600 Here we are Rick Rubin me in conversation with David Byrne. 0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:18.319 I'm Malcolm Goldwell. This is broken Record. I have a question, 0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:22.080 a very naive question. Have you guys ever worked together? No, 0:01:22.640 --> 0:01:24.320 I don't think as far as I know, we've never 0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:26.679 even met. No, we've never really, we have never met. 0:01:27.000 --> 0:01:31.600 Oh wow, I've been a fan from a distance and likewise, 0:01:31.959 --> 0:01:35.440 but we've never met. So this is historic. This is 0:01:35.480 --> 0:01:37.560 kind of historic. I mean in the smallest in a 0:01:37.680 --> 0:01:43.600 small age, in the smallest age. I mean, it's not 0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:46.360 Neil Armstrong on the moon, but you know it's like, so, 0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:51.120 does that mean qualifies for your other podcast? Yeah, I'm 0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:55.800 going to revisit this incident. Yes, say what really happened? Well, 0:01:55.840 --> 0:01:59.800 welcome David, Thank you for coming on. Thank you, broken record. 0:02:00.600 --> 0:02:03.640 You had said that you wanted to talk about protest songs, 0:02:04.040 --> 0:02:07.200 and you've made this list which many of us have 0:02:07.280 --> 0:02:11.960 been scrutinizing. And can you start by defining what you 0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:15.120 mean by a protest song? Ah? Yes, okay, this is 0:02:15.200 --> 0:02:18.080 kind of where I started. Not too many years ago, 0:02:18.600 --> 0:02:22.160 there was a spate of articles in the press saying 0:02:22.560 --> 0:02:25.920 everybody's kind of up in arms about the political situation, 0:02:26.120 --> 0:02:31.080 social situation, polarization, etc. Etc. Where are all the protest songs? 0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:35.040 What happened was everybody just sitting back and going, Wow, 0:02:35.080 --> 0:02:37.519 we're just going to wait till this blows over. And 0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:39.400 I did a little bit of looking, and I thought, 0:02:39.960 --> 0:02:43.720 they haven't gone anywhere. They're still here. People are writing, 0:02:44.040 --> 0:02:47.359 and what's more, some of them are big pop hits 0:02:47.800 --> 0:02:51.080 by big pop artists. So not only have they not 0:02:51.200 --> 0:02:55.239 gone away, they've become part of the mainstream. And I thought, well, 0:02:55.560 --> 0:02:59.400 I'll make a little list to prove my point. What 0:02:59.440 --> 0:03:01.840 do you mean by they've become part of the mainstream. 0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:03.520 I mean they're now made in such a way that 0:03:03.560 --> 0:03:08.359 they blend in with other music. Absolutely, if you didn't 0:03:08.360 --> 0:03:12.240 listen to the words, you might think it was a 0:03:12.280 --> 0:03:15.280 love song or a big pop hit. The sound of 0:03:15.280 --> 0:03:17.560 some of the songs, not all. The sound of some 0:03:17.600 --> 0:03:20.720 of the recent songs that I put on here sounds 0:03:21.040 --> 0:03:23.800 just like any top twenty, top ten hit that you 0:03:23.880 --> 0:03:26.600 might hear. And then you listen closer to the lyrics 0:03:26.600 --> 0:03:30.720 and you realize, oh, this is about something else. Do 0:03:30.760 --> 0:03:33.840 you think that's a positive development or does it? Yes? 0:03:34.040 --> 0:03:36.280 I think it's very positive in a certain sense. It 0:03:36.320 --> 0:03:40.520 shows that these ideas are being discussed and put out 0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:43.480 and for kind of a general audience, a general public. 0:03:43.520 --> 0:03:47.240 It's not necessarily a public that is a little rebellious 0:03:47.240 --> 0:03:52.520 demographic or college students who have time to protest. It's 0:03:52.960 --> 0:03:56.520 kind of the general adolescent and young pop music listeners. 0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:59.720 And I thought, well, no, how about that. There's even 0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:03.480 some that are I would say, to my ears, they 0:04:03.560 --> 0:04:07.520 sound like straight up Nashville country, not the country that 0:04:07.600 --> 0:04:10.880 I know you and I might listen to, which is older, 0:04:11.240 --> 0:04:13.720 but kind of contemporary country music, which sounds more like 0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:16.720 rock music these days. And I thought you might not 0:04:16.760 --> 0:04:21.040 have expected to hear those sentiments being expressed coming out 0:04:21.040 --> 0:04:24.760 of Nashville. What's a good example of what you're talking 0:04:24.760 --> 0:04:28.440 about in that from your list? Hands Dirty by a 0:04:28.520 --> 0:04:33.960 group called Delta Rey. It's kind of a bluesy country 0:04:34.000 --> 0:04:36.640 song and it's about it's sung by a woman, and 0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:41.040 it's about equal opportunity and empowerment. And what do you 0:04:41.080 --> 0:04:43.920 mean I'm not suited for the job. I'm totally suited 0:04:43.960 --> 0:04:46.760 for this job. I can do this job. Or what 0:04:46.800 --> 0:04:48.159 are you saying? You're not going to listen to what 0:04:48.200 --> 0:04:50.440 I have to say? You're not? Why is that you're 0:04:50.440 --> 0:04:53.200 not looking at That's what a lot of the lyrics are. 0:04:53.440 --> 0:04:58.760 There's a lot of anger in it, but it's really catchy. Now, 0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:02.159 the obvious response to that is that what a protest 0:05:02.200 --> 0:05:06.520 song is is constructed like an everyday pop song, You're 0:05:06.520 --> 0:05:08.800 going to miss it. Like I think of how hard 0:05:08.839 --> 0:05:12.080 it is for I think musicians, and I would love 0:05:12.160 --> 0:05:14.440 Rick to respond to this, but I think musicians as 0:05:14.440 --> 0:05:18.760 a rule overestimate the extent to which people understand the 0:05:18.800 --> 0:05:22.960 subtlety is in their lyrics. Absolutely. I mean, I think 0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:25.920 that one that I mentioned, I think it's pretty hard 0:05:25.960 --> 0:05:28.240 to miss that one if you listen to it at all. 0:05:28.240 --> 0:05:31.800 It's pretty it's pretty direct. But I absolutely agree. I mean, 0:05:32.120 --> 0:05:37.279 plenty of politicians have born in the USA not knowing 0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:41.800 what it's about that it's meant ironically in a certain way. 0:05:41.839 --> 0:05:44.080 So the rah rah I was born in the USA 0:05:44.400 --> 0:05:48.640 is kind of meant in an ironic way, which adds 0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:53.320 another layer of confusion to the understanding of it. I think, yeah, 0:05:53.440 --> 0:05:55.320 irony is a really hard thing to do in a 0:05:55.440 --> 0:05:59.120 pop song like that. Shouldn't an ironic protest song be 0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:01.599 ruled out of the list to protest songs? Can we 0:06:01.640 --> 0:06:03.600 say that if you are resorting to irony, you're not 0:06:03.640 --> 0:06:06.520 actually protesting? Well it could be, It could be, but 0:06:07.560 --> 0:06:09.240 I would just say it's really hard to pull it 0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:12.159 off so that it actually people. As you said, people 0:06:12.240 --> 0:06:15.599 really have to understand the lyrics. Yeah, they really have 0:06:15.680 --> 0:06:18.240 to be listening to the lyrics, say of that Springsteen song. 0:06:18.560 --> 0:06:22.680 It's also a subversive trick in that it allows the 0:06:22.760 --> 0:06:28.640 song to go places that the more direct protest song 0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:31.480 couldn't go. But the very fact I was thinking about this, 0:06:31.520 --> 0:06:34.359 you know, the I notice on your list is Randy 0:06:34.440 --> 0:06:39.080 Newman's Rednecks, which is it's funny because in my revision's history, 0:06:39.120 --> 0:06:41.560 I have a whole thing on that song. This is 0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:44.320 that one song, yes, which I'm so obsessed with. But 0:06:44.360 --> 0:06:46.159 at one point I interviewed Ready Nowone about it and 0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:49.080 he said, now, there is a song that is ironic 0:06:49.120 --> 0:06:51.600 and just the way you're talking about Rick. But he 0:06:51.680 --> 0:06:54.320 stopped playing it live because he'd play it in the 0:06:54.360 --> 0:06:58.080 South and the rednecks would all start shouting for him 0:06:58.080 --> 0:07:00.480 to play Rednecks, which is a song which is critical 0:07:00.520 --> 0:07:05.280 of rednecks, which and that criticism, that ironic criticism, ironically 0:07:05.560 --> 0:07:08.000 escape the redneck. At a certain point, you have to say, 0:07:08.000 --> 0:07:10.600 it's like, isn't it feudile to do a protest song 0:07:10.640 --> 0:07:15.160 that the subjects of the protest consider to be a celebration. 0:07:16.320 --> 0:07:19.360 I think it happens pretty often. Actually, there's an example 0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:22.240 I could think of from punk rock. Black Flag had 0:07:22.240 --> 0:07:26.000 a song called TV Party, which was a sarcastic song 0:07:26.040 --> 0:07:28.200 about people who just sit around and watch TV all 0:07:28.280 --> 0:07:30.640 day instead of going out and changing the world like 0:07:30.800 --> 0:07:35.520 Black Flag were doing. Yet it became an Eventually, even 0:07:35.520 --> 0:07:37.880 when Black Flag would play it, the people in the 0:07:37.920 --> 0:07:41.880 audience would cheer, not at the sarcasm of it, but 0:07:41.960 --> 0:07:44.000 the idea of we just want to have a TV party, 0:07:44.080 --> 0:07:50.280 Like it completely reversed. It was amazing to watch. Was 0:07:50.320 --> 0:07:53.280 it amazing to watch? You're depressing to watch? I found 0:07:53.280 --> 0:07:58.640 it entertaining. I'm going to ask you guys about some 0:07:58.760 --> 0:08:01.520 other songs that I put in. I put in some 0:08:01.640 --> 0:08:04.760 songs that were well, some will be familiar, like Oki 0:08:04.800 --> 0:08:08.280 from Muskoki put in some others like that. And there's 0:08:08.360 --> 0:08:14.000 one called Rednecks, White Sox and Blue Ribbon Beer, which 0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:17.920 is again kind of a there that one is celebrating 0:08:18.560 --> 0:08:22.520 for a redneck thing. So in Okay from Muskok, who's 0:08:22.560 --> 0:08:24.560 doing the same thing in another way, And I thought, 0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:28.640 these are songs that are protesting from the other side, 0:08:29.400 --> 0:08:32.120 not the side of Bob Billin or all that. And 0:08:32.160 --> 0:08:37.040 they're saying, wait a minute. Our way of life has 0:08:37.040 --> 0:08:41.160 a value. Our way of life. We have things that 0:08:41.200 --> 0:08:45.440 we believe in. We don't want it totally turned upside down. 0:08:46.360 --> 0:08:49.000 I was reminded when I was looking at those songs. 0:08:49.040 --> 0:08:52.400 There's a famous essay by a black historian called the 0:08:52.480 --> 0:08:56.080 whole Country is Southern, or the whole U the whole 0:08:56.120 --> 0:08:58.360 country is now Southern, which is or something like that, 0:08:58.400 --> 0:09:01.760 which is a famous statement made by George Wallace. George 0:09:01.800 --> 0:09:05.120 Wallace in the early seventies, when he runs for president, 0:09:05.320 --> 0:09:08.199 he starts to get people from around the country sending 0:09:08.320 --> 0:09:12.120 him letters saying that they agree with him. And what 0:09:12.200 --> 0:09:14.840 he meant by that was the whole US is Southern 0:09:14.880 --> 0:09:18.200 now is that the argument of the Southerner was that 0:09:18.760 --> 0:09:22.079 we ought to think about racial politics in personal terms 0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:26.679 and not structural terms, and that once America bought that 0:09:26.800 --> 0:09:29.199 line that this is all just about people getting along, 0:09:29.280 --> 0:09:33.360 not about reforming institutions and laws, they would win. The 0:09:33.400 --> 0:09:37.959 white Southern protest song is very often that kind of song. 0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:43.000 It's a song that personalizes structural injustice. And I consider 0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:46.760 those kind of personal protest songs to be illegitimate protest songs. 0:09:47.240 --> 0:09:50.800 I think I have a Marxist position that a protested 0:09:50.840 --> 0:09:55.679 to be a protest song has to protest unjust institutions, 0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:58.880 and if all you're doing is saying people are not 0:09:59.000 --> 0:10:02.240 nice to each other, like, I don't think that Sunday 0:10:02.240 --> 0:10:05.000 Bloody sunday's a protest. I know you like you too, 0:10:05.640 --> 0:10:07.720 that's a why can't we all get a long song? 0:10:08.000 --> 0:10:10.679 I don't. It's not a protest song. Okay, Okay, it's 0:10:10.679 --> 0:10:13.520 the point. That's a good point. Okay. So I'll pick 0:10:13.559 --> 0:10:16.720 another country, one which was coming from another point of view, 0:10:16.760 --> 0:10:19.400 an older country. Don't call on the pill. You would say, 0:10:19.400 --> 0:10:22.280 this is not protesting an institution. Well, the pill is 0:10:22.320 --> 0:10:25.600 an institutional. That's an institutional for us. Yeah, it's a 0:10:26.320 --> 0:10:28.920 So she's saying, you're saying you can't be telling me 0:10:28.960 --> 0:10:31.720 what to do anymore because now I've got the pill. Yeah. 0:10:31.840 --> 0:10:37.200 I wonder do we think that the purpose of a 0:10:37.240 --> 0:10:41.160 protest song is to change somebody's mind who has a 0:10:41.160 --> 0:10:43.920 different opinion, or is the purpose of a protest song 0:10:44.400 --> 0:10:49.120 to rally the like minded people around something they already believe. 0:10:50.400 --> 0:10:53.480 I think the second one is what whether it's that's 0:10:53.480 --> 0:10:55.960 what the intention is or not. I think that's what 0:10:55.960 --> 0:10:58.880 it ends up doing it ends up creating a community 0:10:59.480 --> 0:11:03.520 by saying and people go, yes, I believe that, and 0:11:03.559 --> 0:11:06.040 look there's somebody else that believes that, and they wrote 0:11:06.040 --> 0:11:09.600 a song about it. So there's two of us now. Yeah, 0:11:09.640 --> 0:11:13.240 so it helps the tribe feel more like a tribe. Yeah, 0:11:13.240 --> 0:11:16.959 that's what I think. Would that makes that sounds right 0:11:17.280 --> 0:11:21.880 in a roundabout way, that causes larger change. Once the 0:11:21.960 --> 0:11:28.480 tribe recognizes itself, then that then things can happen after that. Yeah. 0:11:28.520 --> 0:11:33.240 You know, there's a phenomenon in social science where the 0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:37.440 biggest obstacle to people to social change is that the 0:11:37.480 --> 0:11:41.000 people who are might be motivated to change radically underestimate 0:11:41.080 --> 0:11:42.800 the kinds of the number of people who feel like 0:11:42.840 --> 0:11:47.000 they do. So. For example, if you ask college students 0:11:47.360 --> 0:11:52.400 how many college students binge drink? There in many cases 0:11:52.600 --> 0:11:55.080 historically their estimates were way higher than the actual number. 0:11:55.120 --> 0:11:57.280 They thought it was the norm to binge drink and 0:11:57.360 --> 0:11:59.760 felt weird and left out if they didn't, and then 0:11:59.800 --> 0:12:02.679 they were informed, actually, you have weel majority of college 0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:06.400 students do not binge drink, and kids like, oh, I'm 0:12:06.400 --> 0:12:08.679 part of the majority. So a protest song can have 0:12:08.720 --> 0:12:10.920 that function. This is what you're saying, I guess is 0:12:10.920 --> 0:12:15.319 that it can alert people to a position and let 0:12:15.360 --> 0:12:18.440 them know they're not alone in I was thinking of 0:12:18.640 --> 0:12:21.520 do you remember a song? And I forgotten new sang it? 0:12:21.559 --> 0:12:24.440 A British new wave song from the eighties called sing 0:12:24.440 --> 0:12:28.240 if You're Glad to Be Gay? Oh? Who did that song? Oh? 0:12:28.360 --> 0:12:33.880 What's his name? Robertson, Tom roberts I'm Robertson. Do you 0:12:33.920 --> 0:12:37.720 remember this song? Rick? I don't sing if You're Glad 0:12:37.760 --> 0:12:41.080 to be gay? Sing if You're happy? That way, I've 0:12:41.080 --> 0:12:44.400 now rendered it completely and a nine. And the point 0:12:44.440 --> 0:12:48.360 of that song was that for it made it okay. 0:12:48.840 --> 0:12:51.840 I mean my interpretation of it was it at a 0:12:51.880 --> 0:12:56.880 time when it was difficult for people to celebrate their sexuality, 0:12:57.679 --> 0:13:01.640 he sort of legitimized it. He was talking about his homosexuality, 0:13:01.960 --> 0:13:05.200 his sexuality, not in a defensive way or an angry way, 0:13:05.200 --> 0:13:07.080 but in a celebratory way. That was why that song 0:13:07.160 --> 0:13:09.640 was such a radical I don't know if I'm getting 0:13:09.640 --> 0:13:11.720 it wrong. No, no, no, I agree, I totally agree. 0:13:12.000 --> 0:13:14.080 I think it was also had to do it the 0:13:14.120 --> 0:13:17.120 way he'd looked and thinks he didn't fit any of 0:13:17.120 --> 0:13:20.480 the stereotype gay stereotypes. Yeah, he looked like just another 0:13:20.600 --> 0:13:23.360 punk rocker or new wave rocker or whatever. But there 0:13:23.400 --> 0:13:26.120 that had that function that you're talking about of It 0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:29.280 was a rallying point for people who might otherwise be 0:13:30.080 --> 0:13:35.040 isolated or disaffected from their from their cause. But I'm 0:13:35.080 --> 0:13:37.120 still not satisfied that we have an answer as to 0:13:37.200 --> 0:13:40.640 why this question of who is the audience for a protest? 0:13:40.720 --> 0:13:43.360 So does this suggest that it when enough protests and 0:13:43.400 --> 0:13:47.559 gets an audience, it's in spite of its protests, not 0:13:48.120 --> 0:13:52.079 because of it, Like we just are we just drawn 0:13:52.120 --> 0:13:55.240 to what's going on because it's a beautiful song sung 0:13:55.280 --> 0:13:59.000 by you know, an extraordinary saying. I think if it's 0:13:59.120 --> 0:14:03.640 not a beautiful song, regardless of the content, we probably 0:14:03.679 --> 0:14:07.760 wouldn't be drawn to it. It has to function successfully 0:14:07.800 --> 0:14:13.079 as a song first before the message. The message is additional, 0:14:13.720 --> 0:14:16.679 but the message is rarely going to carry the weight 0:14:17.480 --> 0:14:21.040 of the work of the song. But when you're producing 0:14:21.360 --> 0:14:24.800 a song, if someone came to you with a I 0:14:24.800 --> 0:14:27.600 mean it could well happen. Someone you're working with comes 0:14:27.600 --> 0:14:30.640 to you has written an angry song about Donald Trump 0:14:31.520 --> 0:14:35.520 or some you know, would the lyrical content and the 0:14:35.560 --> 0:14:38.560 message change the way you would produce that song the 0:14:38.600 --> 0:14:42.720 way you help them craft its final thing. It's very unlikely. 0:14:43.200 --> 0:14:47.040 It's very unlikely that the content would would dictate. Do 0:14:47.080 --> 0:14:49.400 you ever have an experienced David of working on a 0:14:49.440 --> 0:14:53.200 song where you've musically changed it based on the lyric. 0:14:55.160 --> 0:14:57.960 I had a song that's not very well known, but 0:14:58.120 --> 0:15:00.840 it was one of those ironic ones where I wrote 0:15:00.840 --> 0:15:03.920 what to me seemed like a republican anthem, and I 0:15:03.960 --> 0:15:06.520 thought I was being very ironic, and I tried it 0:15:06.960 --> 0:15:11.560 as like a fascist rally style and worked with the 0:15:11.560 --> 0:15:14.400 guys from Devo, and then I tried in another style 0:15:14.400 --> 0:15:18.480 where it was more like this beautiful brass arrangement. Both 0:15:18.520 --> 0:15:20.920 of them completely ironic, and both of them, I think, 0:15:21.240 --> 0:15:23.080 in their own way, failed in that way. Wait what 0:15:23.160 --> 0:15:27.040 was the song? It's called Empire, but wait what album 0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:29.280 is it on? I was Grown Backwards is the name 0:15:29.280 --> 0:15:32.200 of the album. But it's fun. But I think in 0:15:32.240 --> 0:15:35.960 that sense, I tried to adjust the music to fit 0:15:36.120 --> 0:15:38.840 what I was saying, and I think it just made 0:15:38.840 --> 0:15:41.560 it more ironic than ever. We can't prevail on you 0:15:41.680 --> 0:15:44.000 to sing like two lines of it. Come on, give 0:15:44.080 --> 0:15:50.520 us a little flavor of it. National elections, it was 0:15:50.560 --> 0:15:59.040 something on ha with stirring emotions. As I've filled this 0:15:59.200 --> 0:16:08.440 guy in Democratic Fee for National Defense. So there you go. 0:16:08.920 --> 0:16:13.400 I like those two last two lunes. I like, we'll 0:16:13.400 --> 0:16:16.000 be back with more on protest music with our guest 0:16:16.120 --> 0:16:25.120 David Byrne after this break, We're back with more. David Byrne. 0:16:25.360 --> 0:16:27.440 I think I have an example of a protest song. 0:16:27.440 --> 0:16:32.600 It sounds like a protesting ready Okay, Peter Gabriel Bico, 0:16:33.440 --> 0:16:37.600 m h. It's a lament. The chorus is a searing 0:16:37.880 --> 0:16:41.280 personal lament. There's nothing pretty it is. It is a 0:16:41.280 --> 0:16:45.240 beautiful song. There is no way to listen to that 0:16:45.280 --> 0:16:49.320 song without understanding that it's a protesting Yes, but that 0:16:49.440 --> 0:16:51.000 but the very fact that I can think of only 0:16:51.080 --> 0:16:54.160 one is I think maybe proof of this point. Can 0:16:54.160 --> 0:16:57.440 you can you think of any others that are maybe 0:16:57.480 --> 0:17:03.840 Mississippi goddamn? Oh mm hmm. That that that really reeks 0:17:03.840 --> 0:17:08.760 of protest? Yes, yes, yeah. She announces the name of 0:17:08.800 --> 0:17:12.600 the song before she sings it, and you just go, okay, 0:17:12.640 --> 0:17:15.639 here we go. Yeah, I know what you're in for. 0:17:15.960 --> 0:17:18.280 We were talking before and someone I've forgotten new my 0:17:18.359 --> 0:17:22.640 apologies said, there's a Charlie minga song about Governor Farbus 0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:26.720 of Arkansas. Oh yeah, yeah, which he just you just 0:17:26.720 --> 0:17:29.159 sort of I have heard it fables of Faubus or 0:17:29.240 --> 0:17:32.200 fables of Fabus, that's right. Yeah, that would also hit 0:17:32.280 --> 0:17:35.280 into the category of one with there's no ambiguity. You 0:17:35.320 --> 0:17:37.600 know this video that is going around done by this 0:17:37.720 --> 0:17:41.879 sweet Masons of Once in a Lifetime putting Donald Trump, 0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:43.960 have you heard? Oh? Yes, I seen? Do you know 0:17:44.000 --> 0:17:47.919 this right? No? So someone will you tell David tell 0:17:48.000 --> 0:17:50.400 us what you might have sent it to me? Someone 0:17:50.440 --> 0:17:53.440 sent it to me. It's a they've done that CG 0:17:53.720 --> 0:17:57.200 trick where they can put Donald Trump's face on top 0:17:57.240 --> 0:17:59.399 of mine and kind of I think, just run the 0:17:59.480 --> 0:18:04.040 video all the way through, but instead it's a Donald 0:18:04.080 --> 0:18:08.879 Trumps instead of me, And I thought this is actually 0:18:08.880 --> 0:18:11.040 pretty funny. People were saying, you got to tell him 0:18:11.040 --> 0:18:13.760 to take this down. You take this down. More than that, 0:18:14.560 --> 0:18:18.680 it's that they go through Donald Trump's speeches and take 0:18:18.680 --> 0:18:21.719 out all the words where he appears to be saying it. 0:18:21.880 --> 0:18:23.560 Yeah he So they have once in a you know, 0:18:23.680 --> 0:18:26.120 once in a lifetime, they have Donald Trump. They found 0:18:26.119 --> 0:18:27.959 a once, they found an inn, they found an ad 0:18:28.000 --> 0:18:31.359 and they found a lifetime. So he's actually singing a song. 0:18:32.920 --> 0:18:37.119 It's like, it's kind of fantastic. Yeah, it's very clever 0:18:37.240 --> 0:18:39.680 as he bounces up and down in that. Yeah. I 0:18:39.680 --> 0:18:43.639 don't know what what particular protest song category that belongs to, 0:18:43.760 --> 0:18:46.880 but we're deep into c g I irony at this point. 0:18:47.320 --> 0:18:50.080 I have a question. I think to myself, now, if 0:18:50.080 --> 0:18:52.159 I were to write a song that dealt with an 0:18:52.200 --> 0:18:55.399 issue or of some sort like that, that I would 0:18:55.800 --> 0:18:59.400 put it in someone's mouth, as some of these songwriters 0:18:59.400 --> 0:19:02.080 and singers do. I would try and tell a story 0:19:02.119 --> 0:19:07.199 through a character and have them personify an injustice or 0:19:07.560 --> 0:19:11.280 whatever it had happened. Rather than me yelling and saying 0:19:11.880 --> 0:19:14.879 this is unjust, this is unfair, this is wrong whatever 0:19:15.040 --> 0:19:19.120 like that, you just tell the story and then let 0:19:19.160 --> 0:19:23.119 the audience make the conclusion, which again could be so 0:19:23.320 --> 0:19:25.639 what is that about? But you would hope that it 0:19:25.640 --> 0:19:28.200 would be more moving because it it has a narrative 0:19:28.240 --> 0:19:31.480 to it, and some of these people do that. Sever 0:19:31.560 --> 0:19:35.080 Earl's Billy Austin. Yes, that's really great at that. But 0:19:35.119 --> 0:19:37.679 this is an interesting question, which is that there is 0:19:37.760 --> 0:19:43.520 so little third person narration in popular music, which is 0:19:43.520 --> 0:19:47.520 weird only when you consider that in fiction, that's basically 0:19:47.600 --> 0:19:51.560 all there is. Some exceptions, the overwhelming. You would think 0:19:51.560 --> 0:19:54.240 there would be a thousand songs of filled with characters 0:19:54.280 --> 0:19:56.719 saying things, but there's very few. Ranny Newman does it 0:19:57.280 --> 0:19:58.840 in country. They do it from time to time, but 0:19:58.880 --> 0:20:03.040 there's very little of this way of storytelling, which I've 0:20:03.040 --> 0:20:07.760 never understood. Why is it? Is it hard? It's just different. 0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:10.800 I think most musicians think of it as expressing their 0:20:10.880 --> 0:20:14.760 true selves, and I think the jump to that using 0:20:14.960 --> 0:20:18.520 a fictional character to present your true self is a 0:20:18.640 --> 0:20:21.280 step that a lot of musicians don't take. Bruce Springsteen 0:20:21.400 --> 0:20:24.480 probably comes to mind as someone who really does it well. 0:20:24.520 --> 0:20:27.840 He often portrays a character in his songs. But it's 0:20:27.840 --> 0:20:30.720 true that I think for a lot of songwriters and 0:20:31.040 --> 0:20:36.879 singers it's deemed to be inauthentic if you're not singing 0:20:36.920 --> 0:20:41.680 about yourself. Yeah, I mean, but that's ridiculous. Well okay, 0:20:42.240 --> 0:20:45.040 but no, this is an interesting question. I understand on 0:20:45.040 --> 0:20:47.680 an emotional level why they would, but that's not what 0:20:47.840 --> 0:20:51.800 fiction writers think. Yes, and it gets even more complicated 0:20:51.880 --> 0:20:55.600 because a lot of pop songs are written in the 0:20:55.760 --> 0:20:58.000 first person, where it's I did this and under that 0:20:58.160 --> 0:21:00.960 and they're not the person that's singing it didn't. It's 0:21:01.000 --> 0:21:05.719 written by a professional writer or somebody. You have no 0:21:05.760 --> 0:21:10.199 idea who they are, and so there's a feeling that 0:21:10.280 --> 0:21:12.639 if the singer does it really well, it feels like 0:21:12.840 --> 0:21:17.399 it's their story that they're telling, but it's not. Is 0:21:17.440 --> 0:21:20.640 this why covers are as appealing as they are, because 0:21:20.680 --> 0:21:23.760 you have a prior relationship with the song that they're singing, 0:21:24.600 --> 0:21:27.840 often with the person who wrote the song singing at first. 0:21:28.400 --> 0:21:31.080 It's clear then that the person covering the song is 0:21:31.119 --> 0:21:33.560 in character. Is that a fair statements to why we 0:21:33.720 --> 0:21:36.600 like covers as much as we do. That's a good idea, 0:21:37.200 --> 0:21:41.320 I'm not sure, because when you hear someone sing a 0:21:41.359 --> 0:21:44.879 song that you're familiar with, you think of the song 0:21:45.000 --> 0:21:49.040 as the content, but you don't necessarily think of it 0:21:49.080 --> 0:21:53.800 as the person spilling their guts. If it's an already 0:21:53.800 --> 0:21:56.800 familiar song, it's more like, this is the way I 0:21:56.880 --> 0:22:00.560 would do this song if I wrote it. It's more 0:22:00.600 --> 0:22:06.760 like a demonstration of a musical angle or a direction, 0:22:07.760 --> 0:22:10.760 then necessarily making it sound like the person who wrote it. 0:22:10.800 --> 0:22:15.280 There are there are occasions where cover songs hit the 0:22:15.359 --> 0:22:17.879 mark so well. The first one that comes to mind 0:22:18.000 --> 0:22:22.680 is nothing compares to you the Shade version. I can't imagine. 0:22:22.960 --> 0:22:25.520 I know Prince wrote the song, but when I think 0:22:25.560 --> 0:22:28.119 of that song, I think of its as Shanade's song. 0:22:29.600 --> 0:22:31.480 A lot of people would say that about the song Hurt, 0:22:31.600 --> 0:22:35.440 the Johnny Cash version. They would just say, he just 0:22:35.760 --> 0:22:39.240 took it. Now he owns that song, So you would think, yeah, 0:22:39.240 --> 0:22:41.760 when it's really well done, the fact that it's from 0:22:41.800 --> 0:22:46.600 somebody else else just dissolves, and you're identifying with something 0:22:46.600 --> 0:22:49.760 that somebody else wrote. You know what this reminds me 0:22:49.840 --> 0:22:53.800 of when Iced Tea got in so much trouble for 0:22:54.080 --> 0:22:58.439 cop Killer, his response was that was a character. And 0:22:58.800 --> 0:23:02.400 I think in interview he mentioned psycho Killer your song 0:23:02.720 --> 0:23:05.960 and said the inspiration for cop Killer was psycho Killer. 0:23:06.480 --> 0:23:09.640 It was just my it was a version. And what 0:23:09.680 --> 0:23:12.720 was fascinating to me was no one could accept the 0:23:12.760 --> 0:23:15.200 fact that he was writing in character, whereas with you, 0:23:16.080 --> 0:23:18.960 it was clear that you weren't writing as a psycho killer. 0:23:19.080 --> 0:23:21.640 You were talking about a psycho you know. But with him, 0:23:21.840 --> 0:23:23.960 I wonder whether that was one of the forms in 0:23:24.000 --> 0:23:27.200 which that One of the things we deny the group 0:23:27.280 --> 0:23:30.480 that we are excluding is we deny them the full 0:23:30.520 --> 0:23:33.680 reign of their imagination. As we say, you can only 0:23:33.720 --> 0:23:37.040 be literal in your music, whereas for people who are 0:23:37.200 --> 0:23:39.440 on our side of the fence, we will allow them 0:23:39.800 --> 0:23:44.000 much greater license. Also, if you listen to so much 0:23:44.080 --> 0:23:48.760 early hip hop, it's packed with fantasy imagery. Very little 0:23:48.960 --> 0:23:53.240 little of it is face and value of people speaking 0:23:53.320 --> 0:23:58.280 about their lives. It's usually more paints a picture of 0:23:58.320 --> 0:24:01.800 this opulent lifestyle than more often than not, those artists 0:24:01.960 --> 0:24:06.359 were not living but desired, And it wasn't probably until 0:24:07.119 --> 0:24:12.000 maybe NWA was the first time that the lyrics were 0:24:12.080 --> 0:24:16.800 like gangsters talking about gang related things. That was the 0:24:16.800 --> 0:24:19.280