 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-10-22 22:16
Hi Everyone,
I attend many HS athletic events each year with grandchildren as active team members. But last night, I had an experience that I would like to get feedback on, please.
The setting is a HS gymnasium for the district semi-finals in volleyball. All rose for the National Anthem and what followed was a recorded solo version sung IMHO in a very distracting manner.
The female vocalist in a very slow pop/country way proceeded to render the anthem. There were lots of vocal embellishments and gymnastics culminating with the highest note which is on the 5th (for the word "free") being changed to the tonic above.
As a military veteran and as a musician, I found this performance disrespectful to the anthem and in very poor taste. By my training and experience, the National Anthem should briskly move along at about 110 beats per minute and not be a vehicle for the self-grandisement of the performer.
Am I way off base here (I would appreciate comments from those in other countries, please).
HRL
PS HS bands for football pre-game activities seem to do just fine.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2008-10-22 23:20
Ah...one of my pet peeves.
The Star Spangled Banner, or any national anthem is a song about the nation. It is not the singer’s song. It is not a time to be creative.
Aside from the amazing, unique, one time performances by a Jimi Hendrix, or a Whitney Houston, most other attempts at being creative are simply overused, trite up and down vocal runs in a poor attempt to make the song "their own"
The problem is that the national anthem is a song which most people like to sing along with. It is always about the song - not the artist performing it. Vocal gymnastics are distracting and in some cases almost vulgar. How can you expect the audience to sing with you, when you've added two unexpected scales at the end of each phrase?
Note to singers: If you are asked to sing the national anthem, try singing it as written. It doesn't need to be embellished. The melody has served us well for almost 200 years. We do not care, or need to hear your "take" on how it should go. Sing it as it is supposed to be sung, and sing it well.
You wouldn't be hiding behind all the runs because you can't find or hold out the correct notes?
Or is that the real reason?
...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2008-10-22 23:33
GBK wrote:
> Aside from the amazing, unique, one time performances by a Jimi
> Hendrix
Especially as it was used as a protest song rather than as a patriotic song. Even appreciated by those "that were over there" during the time.
Mark C., (barely) Vietnam Vet
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jkelly32562
Date: 2008-10-22 23:37
So are you saying that any attempt to sing the Anthem in four part harmony should only be done so as it is in the piano score?
I disagree, while the Anthem should always be performed in taste, I believe the artist should be able to add his or her own flare, as with any other music he or she performs.
Rosanne Barr sang the Anthem as written, and it was awful, would you say only people with "talent" should be able to sing the Anthem?
Rosanne's video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrFW2aYHVR8
I would rather hear Marvin Gaye sing the Anthem any day over Roseanne.
Marvin's video:
<www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRvVzaQ6i8A>
While I do know that this song should be the most respected song in our country, I don't feel it should take away from any artistic interpretations.
On the other hand I do detest those pesky bands that add all of that trumpet filigree, If they can't play the Navy version, they shouldn't play at all.
but not that anyone cares what I think.
Jonathan Kelly
jkelly32562@troy.edu
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-10-23 01:30
JKelly,
I don't believe I said or implied anything about four part harmony at all; a fine choir doing this is really nice. And I did like the way Marvin Gaye sang BTW.
I think adding some "flare" must be approached very cautiously and done tastefully. I once heard a solo tuba do The Anthem and it was spell-binding and quite moving (not a grace note or ornament was added).
HRL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hank Lehrer
Date: 2008-10-23 02:03
I may have been a tad too fast at 110 but the 96 that the Marine and service bands use seems a bit slow to me. I've always conducted it a bit more briskly.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetist04
Date: 2008-10-23 02:53
I'm so glad someone else feels this way.
My two biggest pet peeves with the American anthem are:
1) when they noodle with the notes (including moving from the G to the C on land of the "free"
2) when they sing "banner yet wave" d-e-f-e-d-c-c---b---- as 6 eighths and a quarter. that's not how it's written. It's d (quarter) f-e-d-c (eighths) c-b (quarters). My, this gets my goat and most people sing it the wrong way.
Four part harmony is one thing, taking the anthem and blatantly disrespecting it, which I firmly believe Rosanne did (not to disrespect it in the "how do you like that, America?" kind of way but in the "I don't care what you think" kind of attitude). Of all the games, races, matches, and concerts I've been to (LOTS) I couldn't tell you the name of a single anthem singer. You're right, it's not about the singer, it's about the song.
As for trumpet flares, the official anthem that the army band had about 25 years ago (don't quote me on that all you army band alums -- I have no idea exactly when but it was a while ago -- I have a copy of the score) a version that had trumpets doing a fanfare call during the "And the rockets red glare..." part. On the word "glare" the trumpets played a triplet G-C-E-G (up an arpeggio) with the first clarinets and flutes doing the same thing with a trill on the G. They did this again on the word "air" after "the bombs bursting in air."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2008-10-23 05:16
It might be a little strange that I even post on this subject, not being American, but on the other hand maybe I'm more objective (of course, many Americans probably don't think this should be objective). Also, I don't generally play any pop music, and don't listen to very much of it too, and consider that actually I mostly play modern improvised or written music and modern jazz or free jazz. That said....
I know Whitney Houston's version and I think her voice and singing is very good, and the arrangement is reasonable. But this version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GzlGMxJO7U by Beyonce, her voice isn't as good as Whitney Houston's (also a bit mechanical and harsh), but I think the arrangement is really great in most parts. It's very easy for me to fogive the 'overdone' parts. Changing the note for 'free' to the tonic is done by many singers I think (actually moving to the tonic, as opposed to changing the note). For this arrangement, the 'whole thing' IMO was worth it because of the great arrangement.
Of course I don't think this should change how someone feels about it at all. But as a musician but not a military veteran, I wouldn't be offended in any way if something like this was done with our local national anthem.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2008-10-23 11:40
Hank, although you're a bit younger than I am we come from the era that respected our flag and our national anthem....and our President. Lots of things have changed since Harry Truman left office and many younger people today don't feel as we do. A performance of our national anthem much like the one you describe was the reason I left the venue where it was performed. I feel the same as you do on your posted subject but we are the real minority today.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2008-10-23 12:00
....but of course Jimi didn't vocalize it.
The problem is that it is a very difficult piece to sing accurately since the music and lrics didn't originate simultaneously. ( One doesn't expect drinking songs to sound musical.) Sorry to disagree but imo Roseanne didn't sing it "as written" because she didn't have the capability to do so. Ah, if only Kate Smith were still with us!
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2008-10-23 13:04
Does the US have anything that might be considered an 'unofficial' national anthem?
In the UK we have several to choose from, that can be regularly trotted out and mangled at sporting events. Things like 'Land of Hope and Glory', 'Jerusalem', and 'I Vow to Thee my Country'. And then there's 'Rule Britannia', which is infamously and professionally mangled every year, usually by a well-known opera singer, in a popular ceremony at the Albert Hall in London. (It deserves it, btw - have you ever seen the words?)
So in the UK we have the opposite problem: it takes great skill to play our anthem as anything other than a dirge - so it doesn't usually get an airing unless you /really/ mean it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2008-10-23 13:29
Well, we did, Bassie. God Bless America was, for years, an unofficial anthem as was America The Beautiful both of which were much easier for vocalists. The music to our National Anthem was a UK drinking song, so they say.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2008-10-23 14:06
Interesting, thanks. Though I've never heard the drinking song of which you speak.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NorbertTheParrot
Date: 2008-10-23 14:38
Bassie -
I was not aware it was permissible to play the UK national anthem (G*d save the Queen/King) as anything but a dirge. It is a dirge. I do have some vague recollection of being told that, long ago, it was performed much faster than is customary today. I guess at least that got it out of the way quickly.
Also, it is a little misleading to say "In the UK .... Jerusalem". Jerusalem refers specifically to England. Nobody from Scotland, Wales or Ireland is likely to regard it as their national anthem.
Jerusalem makes me cry. G*d save the Queen/King just makes me want to puke.
It might be worth saying, for the benefit of our American readers, that British people tend to be much more blase than Americans about their anthems and flags. Wikipedia tells us "Title 36 of the United States Code outlines the role of Patriotic Societies and Observances". This has no equivalent in our legal systems. Whereas flag-burning has sometimes been illegal in the USA, there has never been such an offence in the UK, though you might be arrested under the catch-all offence of causing a breach of the peace. There have been some proposals to make flag-burning illegal, but the intention seems to have been to protect ALL flags, not just our own.
None of this means that the British are less patriotic than the Americans, merely that they have different ideas as to what symbols are important to them.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bassie
Date: 2008-10-23 15:40
> Jerusalem refers specifically to England.
Apologies, my bad...
> [The British National Anthem] is a dirge.
Some renditions are more dirge-like than others, in my opinion. With a proper drum roll and some good crash cymbals you're in with a chance. :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-23 16:22
Bassie wrote:
<<Does the US have anything that might be considered an 'unofficial' national anthem?>>
Yes...In fact, the tune (but not the words) to "God Save the Queen" happens to be one of them! The American version is usually known as either "My County Tis of Thee" or simply "America." It's a very nice tune--Muzio Clementi apparently made a symphony out of it, even.
Of course, when it comes to over-the-top patriotic songs, it's hard to beat the Texas State Song, "Texas, Our Texas," which makes Texas out to be some great imperial power (I'm not kidding). Of course, it was co-written by a man who emigrated to Texas from Liverpool, England so maybe that explains why it sounds more like it was written about the British Empire than about the State of Texas.
You know, times really have changed, though, when it comes to patriotic songs. Some of this is not so good (like others have noted), but some of the changes are good. In the 1940s, Igor Stravinsky, in a gesture of patriotism toward his new home, wrote a gorgeous (and very conservative, by Stravinsky's standards) arrangement of the Star Spangled Banner, which was banned in Boston because of its use of modern harmony. I don't think you'd see that kind of reaction today, which is a good thing!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-23 16:55
NorbertTheParrot wrote:
<<None of this means that the British are less patriotic than the Americans, merely that they have different ideas as to what symbols are important to them.>>
I wonder if that may have something to do with Britain's (or all of Europe's, really) experience in World War II (well, and WWI, too). Europe got to see firsthand what kind of bad things can happen when nationalism gets out of control, so I wonder if that might account for some of the difference in attitude between the UK and US. I've been told that the Germans are rather wary of nationalism for that reason. I just wonder if that sort of attitude is shared among the European "Allied Power" countries as well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Neal Raskin
Date: 2008-10-23 17:12
Isn't there a law here in the US. that any "renditions" or "embellishments" on the National Anthem are illegal?
I dislike any embellishments on the star spangled banner, especially by pop vocalists at sporting events... My opinion of pop singers who ruin the anthem goes way down when they do this.
Just my thoughts,
Neal Raskin
www.youtube.com/nmraskin
www.musicedforall.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NorbertTheParrot
Date: 2008-10-23 17:21
mrn, this is all surmise, but I think the reason may be to do with history dating back long before WWII.
The USA is a country of immigration. It needed symbols to represent the unity of its constituent peoples, who had come from European countries that had often been at war with one another. It said to its people: "This is your country now. This is its anthem, this is its flag, they belong to you all, respect them."
Most European countries, on the other hand, are united by common language, history and religion. They don't have the same need for artificial symbols like anthems and flags. Some European countries do have laws against flag burning, but I don't get the impression that many European people venerate their country's flag in the way Americans do.
I'm not a historian nor a sociologist, and this may be all complete nonsense!
I get the impression that the flags you see most often in Europe are not the flags of countries but those of minority groups. The Spanish don't need the Spanish flag. But go to the Basque country, and you will see Basque flags everywhere. (The Basque flag, oddly enough, is quite a modern creation, and is modelled on the Union Flag.)
As for the attitude of the Germans to flags, flag burning (of any flag) is illegal. Displaying Nazi flags is also illegal. Whether it is illegal to burn a Nazi flag I have no idea.
We are straying a long way from clarinets.....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JJAlbrecht
Date: 2008-10-23 19:40
Neal: "Isn't there a law here in the US. that any "renditions" or "embellishments" on the National Anthem are illegal? "
It seems to me that that would be an excellent case to try for censorship and a blatant example of quashing freedom of speech, as guaranteed by Amendment I.
Even given that, I have to agree with the original post. I really have no desire to hear singers (usually female) yodeling their way through The Star Spangled Banner. It just screams to me of self-aggrandizement and disrespect for the piece, the country and music in general. This also includes Whitney Houston, who seems to have been one of the founders of this style of "singing." She may have an excellent voice and great talent, but the way she uses/abuses it is rather distasteful, especially in this case. As for Roseanne Barr, her "performance" and the word "music" do not even belong in the same universe.
Hank, you aren't the only one. Many of us under the age of 50 (even if not for much longer!) feel as you do.
Jeff (Edit for typos)
“Everyone discovers their own way of destroying themselves, and some people choose the clarinet.” Kalman Opperman, 1919-2010
"A drummer is a musician's best friend."
Post Edited (2008-10-23 19:43)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Shi-Ku Chishiki
Date: 2008-10-23 20:42
Now if you really want to hear how our National Anthem should be sung, listen to this.
I "guarantee" if it doesn't send chills up and down your body.. and you don't agree the rendition was done just beautifully, then y'all just gott'a be dead!
The Cactus Cuties..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85mcbKzK0N0
Shi-Ku Chishiki ShiKu.Chishiki@Gmail.com
It's not the clarinet that makes the player, but the player that makes the clarinet!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: mrn
Date: 2008-10-23 20:51
JJAlbrecht wrote:
> Neal: "Isn't there a law here in the US. that any "renditions"
> or "embellishments" on the National Anthem are illegal? "
>
> It seems to me that that would be an excellent case to try for
> censorship and a blatant example of quashing freedom of speech,
> as guaranteed by Amendment I.
I don't think there is any federal law on the subject, but there apparently have been some state laws and there was attempt made in the 1970s to standardize the performance of the piece, but it never became law. Standardization the "official national anthem" is a completely different animal from banning new versions of the song. The U.S. Code section dealing with the national anthem basically just gives the title of the song. See 36 U.S.C. 301 for the text of the law.
See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33967-2004Aug25.html for an interesting discussion of this.
It would seem that any such law banning any kind of embellishment would likely be found to be unconstitutional, which is as it should be in a country that holds freedom of speech as an unalienable right. Nonetheless, people need to use common sense and good taste and voluntarily perform the anthem with the degree of honor, respect, and decorum it deserves. (I'm under 50, too, by the way).
Post Edited (2008-10-23 20:57)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetist04
Date: 2008-10-24 02:19
Faith Hill's version is incredible. The one she did for the Super Bowl a few years ago. She does use some embellishments but, her voice easily makes up for it!
I mean, if you really want to hear some beautiful versions of this, check out the Dixie Chicks (a phenomenal, incredible version), Beyonce, and obviously Whitney Houston.
In that vein, if the NFL usually gets right, it's the anthem at the Super Bowl. Cher's is beautiful too in that deep alto voice she has.
BTW, I'm 22.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Michael E. Shultz
Date: 2008-10-24 21:43
Jim Nabors was the favorite of someone writing to a newspaper magazine supplement. However, I cannot find a recording or youtube video of Jim singing the Star Spangled Banner, so I am unable to offer my opinion of his performance.
My favorite performance is by Joan Jett. This is available on the Unfinished Business CD. She sings it straight, and up to tempo.
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read."
Groucho Marx
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
