|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 14, 2009 5:57:08 GMT -5
Again, this was not some coffee shop or someone's living room where one might feel comfortable discussing these lyrics or the record label. This was Famous Barr, a chain department store. Put yourself in the guy's shoes. This is just not a song that a white person can throw out in the public square and expect blacks to sit down and listen to rationalizations about its meaning. And I hear guttural cRap songs everywhere I go with profanity in them. I don't think those should be played just anywhere and everywhere. Bottom line is, this man incorrectly called a white kid "racist". He was wrong. He was also wrong about the song. As far as I am concerned, always branding white people as "Racists" is just as insulting. And it in itself is prejudging an entire race.
|
|
|
Post by johnpaulharstar on Apr 14, 2009 11:53:13 GMT -5
My take on WITNOTW is that it isn't really a very good song musically-kind of plodding. I never understood people objecting to the lyrics or finding them racist. I can understand Lennon/Ono's feelings.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 14, 2009 14:05:44 GMT -5
My take on WITNOTW is that it isn't really a very good song musically-kind of plodding. I never understood people objecting to the lyrics or finding them racist. I can understand Lennon/Ono's feelings. It was written for the time it was. I don't think, given the political correctness atmosphere today, he would have written it now. But then John was never predictable.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 14, 2009 14:10:26 GMT -5
Not to nitpick, Steve, but why isn't this in the Lennon folder? It isn't?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 14, 2009 14:36:37 GMT -5
My take on WITNOTW is that it isn't really a very good song musically-kind of plodding. I never understood people objecting to the lyrics or finding them racist. I can understand Lennon/Ono's feelings. It was written for the time it was. I don't think, given the political correctness atmosphere today, he would have written it now. But then John was never predictable. I agree, Steve, and that's what I was trying to say above. I completely understand the point that John and Yoko were making but they could have made it without using the n-word. In fact, John and Yoko make their point when John sings, "Woman is the slave to the slaves." That line could be the title to the song and if so, that song might be getting played today. Instead, "Woman Is the Nigger Of the World" is relegated to the music collections of mostly white Beatles/Lennon fans. It is not being broadcast. The n-word conjures up such hatred among people of African descent that no matter how sincere or earnest that word is used by non-black intellectuals or artists(like John and Yoko) and who are even deploring its hateful meaning, well, there is going to be trouble and misunderstanding. I just think that John and Yoko were trying to be too cutting edge and now they have a song that cannot get out its message of women's oppression because it is too controversial over the deliberate choice of one word. John once said that he wanted to sell peace to the mainstream public like one would sell soap. Well, he didn't take his own advice here because one dosn't sell soap with gasoline and a match.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 14, 2009 16:38:48 GMT -5
I agree, Steve, and that's what I was trying to say above. I completely understand the point that John and Yoko were making but they could have made it without using the n-word. In fact, John and Yoko make their point when John sings, "Woman is the slave to the slaves." That line could be the title to the song and if so, that song might be getting played today. Instead, "Woman Is the Nigger Of the World" is relegated to the music collections of mostly white Beatles/Lennon fans. It is not being broadcast. The n-word conjures up such hatred among people of African descent that no matter how sincere or earnest that word is used by non-black intellectuals or artists(like John and Yoko) and who are even deploring its hateful meaning, well, there is going to be trouble and misunderstanding. I just think that John and Yoko were trying to be too cutting edge and now they have a song that cannot get out its message of women's oppression because it is too controversial over the deliberate choice of one word. John once said that he wanted to sell peace to the mainstream public like one would sell soap. Well, he didn't take his own advice here because one dosn't sell soap with gasoline and a match. It definitely would have been more played, but I like that the song packs a whallop by using a controversial phrase like it does. I do think it was intended to turn heads, shock people, and be cutting edge. The line "woman is the slave to the slaves" is a good one and makes the point, true --but that's just an addition to the main chorus of the song (I use the word "addition" because I don't know proper musical language). John and Yoko claimed that - at least at the time - the black community knew the score, and that the harshest reaction was really from "the honkey whites". Yoko tried to add that it was because "black people know they're not niggers". By the way, don't forget that the song title itself came from a quote of Yoko's.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 14, 2009 21:13:36 GMT -5
By the way, don't forget that the song title itself came from a quote of Yoko's. True and I have been careful to always credit both for the song.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Apr 15, 2009 6:16:30 GMT -5
I never liked this song when I was younger so much younger than today but now I think it has a cutting edge vibe musically. I also think the melody is great but it does get lost in the muddiness. The Live in NYC version is better and shows its greater potential.
|
|
|
Post by jimc on Apr 15, 2009 7:57:36 GMT -5
It was written for the time it was. I don't think, given the political correctness atmosphere today, he would have written it now. But then John was never predictable. I agree, Steve, and that's what I was trying to say above. I completely understand the point that John and Yoko were making but they could have made it without using the n-word. In fact, John and Yoko make their point when John sings, "Woman is the slave to the slaves." That line could be the title to the song and if so, that song might be getting played today. Instead, "Woman Is the Nigger Of the World" is relegated to the music collections of mostly white Beatles/Lennon fans. It is not being broadcast. The n-word conjures up such hatred among people of African descent that no matter how sincere or earnest that word is used by non-black intellectuals or artists(like John and Yoko) and who are even deploring its hateful meaning, well, there is going to be trouble and misunderstanding. I just think that John and Yoko were trying to be too cutting edge and now they have a song that cannot get out its message of women's oppression because it is too controversial over the deliberate choice of one word. John once said that he wanted to sell peace to the mainstream public like one would sell soap. Well, he didn't take his own advice here because one dosn't sell soap with gasoline and a match.
|
|
|
Post by jimc on Apr 15, 2009 8:02:50 GMT -5
It was written for the time it was. I don't think, given the political correctness atmosphere today, he would have written it now. But then John was never predictable. I agree, Steve, and that's what I was trying to say above. I completely understand the point that John and Yoko were making but they could have made it without using the n-word. In fact, John and Yoko make their point when John sings, "Woman is the slave to the slaves." That line could be the title to the song and if so, that song might be getting played today. Instead, "Woman Is the Nigger Of the World" is relegated to the music collections of mostly white Beatles/Lennon fans. It is not being broadcast. The n-word conjures up such hatred among people of African descent that no matter how sincere or earnest that word is used by non-black intellectuals or artists(like John and Yoko) and who are even deploring its hateful meaning, well, there is going to be trouble and misunderstanding. I just think that John and Yoko were trying to be too cutting edge and now they have a song that cannot get out its message of women's oppression because it is too controversial over the deliberate choice of one word. John once said that he wanted to sell peace to the mainstream public like one would sell soap. Well, he didn't take his own advice here because one dosn't sell soap with gasoline and a match. I've always been indifferent about this song, but this thread has made me think: I don't particularly like this song. Like most of STINYC, it "swings" wildly and misses.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 15, 2009 8:16:06 GMT -5
I definitely have always preferred the studio version as opposed to ANY of the more soft and saccharine "live" versions, including the Dick Cavett Show. There's something very intense in the recorded version. It's not too slick either, which I think adds to the vibe.
|
|
|
Post by ChokingSmoker on Apr 19, 2009 14:48:03 GMT -5
I deleted a post by chokingsmoker for the racial jokes. I will not allow that. This thread is touchy enough as it is. Let's keep it on topic. Thanks. I have no problem if you delete posts. Yes, this whole thread is very touchy and I was making my point in my own controversial manner. Making a joke or stating a joke if it pertains to the subject matter is way within reason to me. When one starts to censor in his own point of view, that is big trouble. My folder was not full of complaints, nor did I see any sort of criticism than your own. I've defended you in the past for what I thought was right, and not in an effort to brown nose. In this case I think you overstepped your bounds and stifled me without just cause. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Apr 19, 2009 22:10:54 GMT -5
. . . My folder was not full of complaints, nor did I see any sort of criticism than your own . . . Just for the record, I thought it was inappropriate, and I feel your explanation for the legitimate use of "nigger" in your joke was not convincing. Your joke, as offensive as it was, would have been just as understood if you had used "black person or African-American" instead. "Nigger" did not make the joke. What it did do was inform us about you. In John's song, the use of the word "nigger" was crucial to the sentiment of the song. He was not calling African-Americans "niggers". You were. As I mentioned before, context is everything. John was not being racist in his use of "nigger". Of course, you have the right to use it as you did, but others have the right to question the use. I think, though, you may have a point about it's removal, though. Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so. By removing it, Steve let you off the hook. Too bad.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 20, 2009 12:13:20 GMT -5
Just for the record, I thought it was inappropriate, and I feel your explanation for the legitimate use of "nigger" in your joke was not convincing. What it did do was inform us about you. He was not calling African-Americans "niggers". You were. I think, though, you may have a point about it's removal, though. Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so. By removing it, Steve let you off the hook. Too bad. Oh, knock off your high-horse crap. You carry on as though using such a negative word is even worse than a person committing murder itself, for crying out loud. I hope not everyone these days is so terrified of you PC Thugs. I'm certainly not afraid of you. You tried another time to paint me as the "R" Word just because I referred to a black person as "black" (even though I equally refer to white people as "white"). You tried to say even that was offensive.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Apr 20, 2009 15:53:41 GMT -5
Just for the record, I thought it was inappropriate, and I feel your explanation for the legitimate use of "nigger" in your joke was not convincing. What it did do was inform us about you. He was not calling African-Americans "niggers". You were. I think, though, you may have a point about it's removal, though. Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so. By removing it, Steve let you off the hook. Too bad. Oh, knock off your high-horse crap. You carry on as though using such a negative word is even worse than a person committing murder itself, for crying out loud. I hope not everyone these days is so terrified of you PC Thugs. I'm certainly not afraid of you. You tried another time to paint me as the "R" Word just because I referred to a black person as "black" (even though I equally refer to white people as "white"). You tried to say even that was offensive. Uh, so you think that someone who has a problem with the "N' word is a "PC Thug"? You may not be a racist, but you really are nuts!
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Apr 20, 2009 15:57:44 GMT -5
Just for the record, I thought it was inappropriate, and I feel your explanation for the legitimate use of "nigger" in your joke was not convincing. What it did do was inform us about you. He was not calling African-Americans "niggers". You were. I think, though, you may have a point about it's removal, though. Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so. By removing it, Steve let you off the hook. Too bad. Oh, knock off your high-horse crap. You carry on as though using such a negative word is even worse than a person committing murder itself, for crying out loud. I hope not everyone these days is so terrified of you PC Thugs. I'm certainly not afraid of you. You tried another time to paint me as the "R" Word just because I referred to a black person as "black" (even though I equally refer to white people as "white"). You tried to say even that was offensive. to you too. Nothing in sayne's post indicates that he equates the use of the N word with committing murder. You're overreacting once again. Signed, PC Thug
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 20, 2009 16:40:34 GMT -5
to you too. Nothing in sayne's post indicates that he equates the use of the N word with committing murder. You're overreacting once again. Signed, PC Thug Don't forget to realize that my purpose in posting it in the first place was to show how sayne was overreacting.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 20, 2009 16:49:08 GMT -5
Uh, so you think that someone who has a problem with the "N' word is a "PC Thug"? You may not be a racist, but you really are nuts! Yes, when someone goes off as far as sayne did about someone else using the word "nigger" (I refuse to call it the "N Word" when I am merely quoting it from someone else's remarks), saying things like "what it did do was inform us about you", and "Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so" ... or even something like "Steve let you off the hook. Too bad." ----- this kind of stuff really is of a "thug" mentality. It sounds like he'd love to tar and feather someone for such a "heinous crime", or forever brand him as some type of murderer or child molester would be. Why not just brand a red not letter "R" on a guy's forehead? It's an ugly and negative word, but it's a word. "Sticks and Stones.." etc... And I see calling people "Nuts" is still acceptable at this point in time... no need for the "N Word" there...
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Apr 20, 2009 18:20:17 GMT -5
He was not calling African-Americans "niggers". Am I out of line in pointing out that all black people have a right to object to being referred to as niggers, not just African-Americans? I'm sure there's a kind of unconscious nationalism / prejudice in there somewhere, maybe a reverse one or something. Truth to tell, I find it all a bit confusing. I watched British war movie The Dam Busters over the weekend and noted that Richard Todd's dog, a black labrador, was called Nigger. My grandparents' generation used the word freely as a nickname for anyone with a dark complexion, meaning no harm, and probably causing little as they had little contact with anyone black. But from the 50s into the 60s it started becoming clear that the pejorative air the word had in the deep South was, to some extent, matched by its use in the UK. Lennon's feminist point was well made, and cannily crafted to be as "in your face" as possible for maximum reaction. I don't care for the song very much but I admire both the sentiment andthe balls required to express it in that way.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Apr 20, 2009 18:21:24 GMT -5
to you too. Nothing in sayne's post indicates that he equates the use of the N word with committing murder. You're overreacting once again. Signed, PC Thug Don't forget to realize that my purpose in posting it in the first place was to show how sayne was overreacting. OK, we disagree on who was overreacting and who wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Apr 20, 2009 18:23:35 GMT -5
Uh, so you think that someone who has a problem with the "N' word is a "PC Thug"? You may not be a racist, but you really are nuts! Yes, when someone goes off as far as sayne did about someone else using the word "nigger" (I refuse to call it the "N Word" when I am merely quoting it from someone else's remarks), saying things like "what it did do was inform us about you", and "Perhaps it would have been better to keep it in so that everyone on this board would forever know that you have no problem using the word "nigger" in the context you used it. Keeping it there would give all of us opportunities to wave your post in your nose whenever it was appropriate to do so" ... or even something like "Steve let you off the hook. Too bad." ----- this kind of stuff really is of a "thug" mentality. It sounds like he'd love to tar and feather someone for such a "heinous crime", or forever brand him as some type of murderer or child molester would be. Why not just brand a red not letter "R" on a guy's forehead? It's an ugly and negative word, but it's a word. "Sticks and Stones.." etc... And I see calling people "Nuts" is still acceptable at this point in time... no need for the "N Word" there... Would you prefer "mentally ill" over "nuts?"
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 20, 2009 18:28:25 GMT -5
Would you prefer "mentally ill" over "nuts?" I think "mentally challenged" is the term you politically correct lunatics prefer to use these days. Not that I can see where any of those terms apply to me just tellin' it like it is.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 20, 2009 18:59:24 GMT -5
Let's keep this thread about the song and not the word. I don't want a discussion about the n-word. I will delete any messages along those lines.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 20, 2009 19:02:30 GMT -5
I deleted a post by chokingsmoker for the racial jokes. I will not allow that. This thread is touchy enough as it is. Let's keep it on topic. Thanks. I have no problem if you delete posts. Yes, this whole thread is very touchy and I was making my point in my own controversial manner. Making a joke or stating a joke if it pertains to the subject matter is way within reason to me. When one starts to censor in his own point of view, that is big trouble. My folder was not full of complaints, nor did I see any sort of criticism than your own. I've defended you in the past for what I thought was right, and not in an effort to brown nose. In this case I think you overstepped your bounds and stifled me without just cause. Just my opinion. Your post was about the word and used racial terms in what I thought was offensive. As moderator, that's my call. I will not allow racial jokes. Period.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 20, 2009 19:05:34 GMT -5
I am closely watching this thread. I reserve the right to shut it down. FYI.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Apr 20, 2009 20:56:28 GMT -5
Would you prefer "mentally ill" over "nuts?" Not that I can see where any of those terms apply to me just tellin' it like it is. As am I
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Apr 20, 2009 22:04:41 GMT -5
Would you prefer "mentally ill" over "nuts?" I think "mentally challenged" is the term you politically correct lunatics prefer to use these days. Not that I can see where any of those terms apply to me just tellin' it like it is. I'm a thug, not a lunatic. Get yer terms correct.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 20, 2009 22:22:15 GMT -5
As to the song, Philip Norman called John and Yoko's use of the n-word in this song, "an extreme metaphor." The context in which Norman writes that leads me to believe that he finds the use of that word as a metaphor unfortunate as I strongly do no matter how sincere John and Yoko.
More surprising is Norman's claim that until John and Yoko befriended Michael X, John Lennon was more likely than any of us here to be a racist pointing to, among other anecdotes, a character in one of his books which would never see the light of day today because of gross racial stereotyping.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Apr 20, 2009 22:32:02 GMT -5
I am closely watching this thread. I reserve the right to shut it down. FYI. I hope you exercise that right Steve. This thread has more than run its course. Most of the recent comments have nothing to do with the song; which isn't worth the time that has been devoted to it. Let it be.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Apr 21, 2009 5:09:50 GMT -5
As to the song, Philip Norman called John and Yoko's use of the n-word in this song, "an extreme metaphor." The context in which Norman writes that leads me to believe that he finds the use of that word as a metaphor unfortunate as I strongly do no matter how sincere John and Yoko. And why should Philip Norman's opinion carry any more weight than anyone else's? You'd have to then be prepared to let Norman have the final say on everything, not just this particular song. And you needn't be afraid to use the word when talking about this song; it's in the title itself, and in the lyrics.
|
|