|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 18, 2012 7:39:37 GMT -5
If you don't know this song, play it here!
Then rate the song by voting in the poll, but ALSO PLEASE WRITE YOUR THOUGHTS HERE, AND TELL US WHICH NUMBER YOU CHOSE AND WHAT YOU ACTUALLY THINK OF THE SONG!
Thanks!
"Give Ireland Back To The Irish" -- Paul McCartney, Single (1972)
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 18, 2012 7:41:48 GMT -5
2.5 (3 for this Poll) -- I like it when Paul grows a pair of balls. This is a very rare example of that. (Even though Paul doesn't dare place songs like IRISH or BIG BOYS BICKERING on his albums too).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2012 8:02:49 GMT -5
here are the lyrics..
Give Ireland back to the Irish Don't make them have to take it away Give Ireland back to the Irish Make Ireland Irish today
Great Britian you are tremendous And nobody knows like me But really what are you doin' In the land across the sea
Tell me how would you like it If on your way to work You were stopped by irish soliders Would you lie down do nothing Would you give in, or go berserk
Give Ireland back to the Irish Don't make them have to take it away Give Ireland back to the Irish Make Ireland Irish today
Great Britian and all the people Say that all people must be free Meanwhile back in ireland There's a man who looks like me
And he dreams of god and country And he's feeling really bad And he's sitting in a prison Should he lie down do nothing Should give in or go mad
Give Ireland back to the Irish Don't make them have to take it away Give Ireland back to the Irish Make Ireland Irish today
Give Ireland back to the Irish Don't make them have to take it away Give Ireland back to the Irish Make Ireland Irish today.
Is this specifically about Northern Ireland
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2012 8:03:30 GMT -5
I give it a 3.
I like to hear Macca making a statement
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on May 18, 2012 8:18:44 GMT -5
Good song but I wish Paul had not accepted his knighthood, it's simultaneously ironic and hypocritical that he did so. How was Sir Paul honoured by the English Establishment even after writing this song ?
Therefore from the 4.0 I was going to give it, I can only give it a 1.0
1.0
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on May 18, 2012 8:46:41 GMT -5
My thoughts are fairly similar to JoeK and I was thinking 2.5 as well so I'll vote it as a 2 to balance it off!
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 18, 2012 9:19:55 GMT -5
3 + This song was given such an unfair rap by the critics in 1972 and subsequent years. It works on all levels, as an anthem, as a rock song and as well performed pure entertainment. If you can relate to the lyrics regarding Northern Ireland this can translate into a real gem. You don't really have to be sympathetic to this cause particularly. It can be a metaphor for any form of repression.
Small correction on the lyrics:
But really what are we doin' In the land across the sea.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 18, 2012 9:34:36 GMT -5
Good song but I wish Paul had not accepted his knighthood, it's simultaneously ironic and hypocritical that he did so. How was Sir Paul honoured by the English Establishment even after writing this song ? Therefore from the 4.0 I was going to give it, I can only give it a 1.0 1.0 Good point. I'll say 1.5 also in protest of Paul accepting the Knighthood by the Queen while pretending in this song to support Irish independence. I suspect that while Paul did not like people preaching practises, 1972 was a very political year in music(just look at John Lennon) and Paul wanted to appear relevant. Pity as I like this song but the knighthood thing is bogus. Same with Mick Jagger and the rest of them. A real Rock and Roller would tell the palace to piss off! I have never liked the sound of Sir Paul McCartney.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 18, 2012 9:57:00 GMT -5
3 + This song was given such an unfair rap by the critics in 1972 and subsequent years. It works on all levels, as an anthem, as a rock song and as well performed pure entertainment. If you can relate to the lyrics regarding Northern Ireland this can translate into a real gem. You don't really have to be sympathetic to this cause particularly. It can be a metaphor for any form of repression. Of course, had John written and performed this song exactly the same, you'd probably go on a tirade. Why can't you relate to WOMAN IS THE N-- song as "relating to any form of repression"? Or is it only Paul's controversial preaching that you stand by? ;D
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on May 18, 2012 10:57:09 GMT -5
1
I'll go on a tirade. I don't like McCartney wagging his finger at me any more than I like Lennon doing it. Musically this is tolerable, lyrically it is as objectionable as any other political rant telling me what to think and do.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 18, 2012 13:40:46 GMT -5
3 + This song was given such an unfair rap by the critics in 1972 and subsequent years. It works on all levels, as an anthem, as a rock song and as well performed pure entertainment. If you can relate to the lyrics regarding Northern Ireland this can translate into a real gem. You don't really have to be sympathetic to this cause particularly. It can be a metaphor for any form of repression. Of course, had John written and performed this song exactly the same, you'd probably go on a tirade. Why can't you relate to WOMAN IS THE N-- song as "relating to any form of repression"? Or is it only Paul's controversial preaching that you stand by? ;D Go back and read my final posts about Woman... I agreed to the broader interpretation you suggested.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 18, 2012 13:51:37 GMT -5
Good song but I wish Paul had not accepted his knighthood, it's simultaneously ironic and hypocritical that he did so. How was Sir Paul honoured by the English Establishment even after writing this song ? Therefore from the 4.0 I was going to give it, I can only give it a 1.0 1.0 Good point. I'll say 1.5 also in protest of Paul accepting the Knighthood by the Queen while pretending in this song to support Irish independence. I suspect that while Paul did not like people preaching practises, 1972 was a very political year in music(just look at John Lennon) and Paul wanted to appear relevant. Pity as I like this song but the knighthood thing is bogus. Same with Mick Jagger and the rest of them. A real Rock and Roller would tell the palace to piss off! I have never liked the sound of Sir Paul McCartney. Ease up John, we're not rating the concept of monarchy. We are rating a song. The sentiments were not phony either. Paul is by blood an Irishman as was John. The UK is not 18th century France before the revolution with absolute monarchy rule. They are enlightened to the benefits of equality, citizenship and inalienable rights including property rights. The queen mum and the whole royal family are harmless. They have recently been at their most popular, enjoying a 75% approval rating. So if the people who live there approve, why are you concerned? Remember both Louis XVI and Robespierre died at the sharp end of a guillotine.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on May 18, 2012 13:53:29 GMT -5
1 I'll go on a tirade. I don't like McCartney wagging his finger at me any more than I like Lennon doing it. Musically this is tolerable, lyrically it is as objectionable as any other political rant telling me what to think and do. Many songs, if they have some wisdom to impart, could be put in the category of preachy. Its when someone makes a career out of it that it becomes objectionable.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 18, 2012 14:46:34 GMT -5
Many songs, if they have some wisdom to impart, could be put in the category of preachy. Its when someone makes a career out of it that it becomes objectionable. Nice way of letting Paul emerge scott free. When you refer to "making a career out of it", is there anyone you have in mind there?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on May 18, 2012 14:48:27 GMT -5
Ease up John, we're not rating the concept of monarchy. We are rating a song. You mean like you eased up in the WOMAN IS THE N-- thread?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 18, 2012 16:53:43 GMT -5
Good point. I'll say 1.5 also in protest of Paul accepting the Knighthood by the Queen while pretending in this song to support Irish independence. I suspect that while Paul did not like people preaching practises, 1972 was a very political year in music(just look at John Lennon) and Paul wanted to appear relevant. Pity as I like this song but the knighthood thing is bogus. Same with Mick Jagger and the rest of them. A real Rock and Roller would tell the palace to piss off! I have never liked the sound of Sir Paul McCartney. Ease up John, we're not rating the concept of monarchy. We are rating a song. The sentiments were not phony either. Paul is by blood an Irishman as was John. The UK is not 18th century France before the revolution with absolute monarchy rule. They are enlightened to the benefits of equality, citizenship and inalienable rights including property rights. The queen mum and the whole royal family is harmless. They have recently been at their most popular, enjoying a 75% approval rating. So if the people who live there approve, why are you concerned? Remember both Louis XVI and Robespierre died at the sharp end of a guillotine. Since Paul is a Knight, are you now sorry that we won the American Revolutionary War? I join ursamajor in protesting Paul's acceptance of the knighthood and I call upon Paul to renounce it.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on May 18, 2012 17:12:53 GMT -5
Ease up John, we're not rating the concept of monarchy. We are rating a song. The sentiments were not phony either. Paul is by blood an Irishman as was John. The UK is not 18th century France before the revolution with absolute monarchy rule. They are enlightened to the benefits of equality, citizenship and inalienable rights including property rights. The queen mum and the whole royal family is harmless. They have recently been at their most popular, enjoying a 75% approval rating. So if the people who live there approve, why are you concerned? Remember both Louis XVI and Robespierre died at the sharp end of a guillotine. Since Paul is a Knight, are you now sorry that we won the American Revolutionary War? I join ursamajor in protesting Paul's acceptance of the knighthood and I call upon Paul to renounce it. Paul accepting the knighthood makes this song less heartfelt. Paul grew some political balls when he wrote this and then handed them back when the knighthood came on offer. The BBC ban was a blessing in some ways, Paul was never going to make it as a political commentator.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on May 18, 2012 20:06:01 GMT -5
Paul is by blood an Irishman as was John. No he isn't. He is an Englishman, of Irish ancestry. And like so many of Irish ancestry (like a good many US citizens whose forbears come from the ould country), he has this romanticised view of Ireland which qualifies him to make judgemental pronouncements on it out of soft-headed sentiment. Did McCartney or Lennon have homes in Ireland? No. Did they ever even go there? I don't bloody think so. Apart from the odd concert, the nearest McCartney ever got to Ireland is when the IRA blew up the bandstand in Regent's Park. I really hate this record for its sentimental and potentially dangerous political naivete (see also Luck of the Irish, Sunday Bloody Sunday).
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on May 18, 2012 23:12:47 GMT -5
2. I don't have a problem with Paul writing a political, or protest, song. He obviously had some strong feelings about the Troubles in Northern Ireland at that time and put pen to paper. What's wrong with that? He's a song writer and he wrote a song expressing his point of view. That's good, isn't it? How often is Paul criticised for predominantly writing about trivialities?
I just wish he had written a better song. There is nothing memorable about this tune, IMO. It's simply not very good. If you asked a person in the street to name a Beatles related protest song, they might offer John's Give Peace A Chance. If you asked them to suggest any song about the Irish conflict, they might offer U2s Sunday Bloody Sunday. No one is likely to bring up Give Ireland Back To The Irish except Beatles nuts like us. Everyone else has either forgotten the song, or has never heard of it in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 19, 2012 1:30:47 GMT -5
2. I don't have a problem with Paul writing a political, or protest, song. He obviously had some strong feelings about the Troubles in Northern Ireland at that time and put pen to paper. What's wrong with that? He's a song writer and he wrote a song expressing his point of view. That's good, isn't it? How often is Paul criticised for predominantly writing about trivialities? I just wish he had written a better song. There is nothing memorable about this tune, IMO. It's simply not very good. If you asked a person in the street to name a Beatles related protest song, they might offer John's Give Peace A Chance. If you asked them to suggest any song about the Irish conflict, they might offer U2s Sunday Bloody Sunday. No one is likely to bring up Give Ireland Back To The Irish except Beatles nuts like us. Eveyone else has either forgotten the song, or has never heard of it in the first place. Interesting thoughts, KC. GIBTTI is the most polite protest song ever, that's for sure! "Great Britain, you are tremendous, and nobody knows like me." Paul is trying to win the establishment over while Bob Dylan was going to stand over some General's grave until he was sure the war hawk was dead! ;D Lennon speaks of "bastards" and "genocide." I prefer my protest songs angry.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 23, 2012 20:18:02 GMT -5
I kind of waver on this one. I generally think it awkward and messy but it has it's moments. It has a hard rock kind of edge to it but then it has the countryish slide guitar riffs.
The song Rock Show has the same sort of slide guitar and overall sloppy sound. But Rock Show pulls it off. This song falls short. I can only give it a 2.0.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on May 23, 2012 20:34:26 GMT -5
I kind of waver on this one. I generally think it awkward and messy but it has it's moments. It has a hard rock kind of edge to it but then it has the countryish slide guitar riffs. The song Rock Show has the same sort of slide guitar and overall sloppy sound. But Rock Show pulls it off. This song falls short. I can only give it a 2.0. I didn't think to debate the politics of a 40 year old song. And a friendly protest song is just as effective as an angry one. It draws attention to the issue. If I remember correctly, at the time, there was some pretty serious beatdowns going on. A voice of reason, makes sense. He stated his opinion on the subject. There's no "Or else" sentiment. He did not renounce his citizenship.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on May 25, 2012 15:48:56 GMT -5
1.
Just a silly political song. And whats wrong with that? Well, just about everything. Talk about banal. I just thank God he didn't end it with "and here I go AGAIN!" Thanks God he nipped this genre in the bud.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on May 25, 2012 15:54:13 GMT -5
This was Paul trying to play John (as he did a couple of times) and doing it badly. 1.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on May 25, 2012 15:56:13 GMT -5
3 + This song was given such an unfair rap by the critics in 1972 and subsequent years. It works on all levels, as an anthem, as a rock song and as well performed pure entertainment. If you can relate to the lyrics regarding Northern Ireland this can translate into a real gem. You don't really have to be sympathetic to this cause particularly. It can be a metaphor for any form of repression. Of course, had John written and performed this song exactly the same, you'd probably go on a tirade. Why can't you relate to WOMAN IS THE N-- song as "relating to any form of repression"? Or is it only Paul's controversial preaching that you stand by? ;D If you have to compare "Woman Is the ... " and "Give Ireland ...", Lennon comes way out on top. They both have a bit of hokey in them, but Lennon's is much stronger. "Give Ireland ..." is just bad.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on May 25, 2012 20:25:09 GMT -5
Of course, had John written and performed this song exactly the same, you'd probably go on a tirade. Why can't you relate to WOMAN IS THE N-- song as "relating to any form of repression"? Or is it only Paul's controversial preaching that you stand by? ;D If you have to compare "Woman Is the ... " and "Give Ireland ...", Lennon comes way out on top. They both have a bit of hokey in them, but Lennon's is much stronger. "Give Ireland ..." is just bad. I can't get over the N-word in WITNOTW and I know the meaning was women are still treated like slaves etc .. but I think it's extremely demeaning, ok in conversation but not on record, IMO.
|
|