Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Time and place.

(Cross-posted here.)

“Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing", written first as a poem by James Weldon Johnson, is known largely as the "Black National Anthem" and moves me like no other song.

Traditionally, I heard it in February, at my church's Black History Month celebrations. Every now and then on MLK Day, and sometimes even in the standard church program. (You weren't going to hear much of it at private school during the week.) Always, I associated it with celebration, honor and the best about us as a people. Sadly, it was used as a tool last week, and not for the benefit of the many.

Rene Marie, a jazz singer based in Bloomfield, Colorado, was invited to perform The Star-Spangled Banner before the Denver mayor's annual state of the city address. Here is what happened.

I admit that when I heard about this, my reflex was to support the sister in her expression of...well, whatever point she was trying to get across. But then I read this:

"I pulled a switcheroonie on them."

Huh? That sounds childish. At the very least, unprofessional. What else?

"I am an artist," she wrote. "If I wait until I am asked to express myself artistically, or if I must ask permission to do it, it would never get done. I knew that if I asked to do my version of the national anthem, the answer would be 'no.'"

Ya think?

But the point wasn't whether or not she sought permission. They did ask her to express her artistic gift - her voice, which is undeniable - to sing a song: The Star-Spangled Banner. If Marie was so dead-set on not singing it and replacing it instead with "Lift Ev'ry Voice", one might think she would have refused the invitation. Instead, she commanded the stage to sing her version of both songs.

While I certainly agree that the SSB is a violent and frankly inappropriate song to be our national anthem, Marie's attempt to marry the song with "Lift Ev'ry Voice" is wrong-headed at best. She insults the purity of Johnson's poem by braiding the melody from the SSB into a song of protest and of liberation from the very society that the SSB celebrates.

So the song that she sang was strange enough. But so are the reasons she remains unrepentant:

"As for offending others with my music, I cannot apologize for that. It goes with the risky territory of being an artist," she wrote.

I respect this sister's ability to express her gift, but that line is such self-aggrandizing crap. She was asked to perform a certain song, she agreed to, and then pulled a "switcheroonie" that, yes, has invited vitriol that she doesn't deserve, but has also garnered her more attention than any cause she may have been drawing attention to.

Oh, yes, that.

In the NPR interview, and in every article I've perused about the topic, she hasn't mentioned anything to justify this other than her being an artist, and flowery language that makes it sound as if her art simply cannot - CANNOT! - be contained within her.

I feel that. As a professional filmmaker who writes a blog in his spare time, I truly do. But, really now.

Let's say I'm asked to cut a film about, for the sake of argument, the patriotic aspects of the sport I principally cover. Instead (because, well, I feel like it), I produce a film that a) is 100% not what we agreed I would do and b) is about something that affects me deeply. That might be all well and good, but I haven't done my job. Marie may be an artist, but in that capacity, she was a professional.

Also, they asked her to sing the national anthem before a mayoral speech that most folks in Denver, let alone America, would've paid attention to. She picks that forum to share her art? Why not a concert? Why not on a radio station? A political rally, perhaps? There are so many more arenas that she could have done this in that would have had greater artistic and political impact. Why choose this time and place?

Well, because it's about her. I agree with Cheryl Contee of Jack & Jill:

I suppose I’d be more sympathetic if her decision to hijack Denver’s annual state of the city meeting was promoting awareness for a specific injustice happening in America or locally Colorado perhaps. Then perhaps it might be construed as a courageous act. As it is though, it seems deceptive — she wasn’t contracted to sing the black national anthem (which is a gorgeous inspirational song). They asked her to sing the National Anthem, the Star Spangled Banner, which all African-Americans recognize and sing as our nation’s official anthem.

Part of what I hate about gestures like this in today's America is that they seem so self-serving. I mean, when Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists 40 years ago, they did so to draw attention to a particular issue and at great risk to their professional futures. All Marie likely risked here was another chance to her (and likely, other African-American artists) to sing for the city ever again. And all she had to do was pimp out James Weldon Johnson's classic while pulling her "switcheroonie".

And for what? Attention to Black urban plight? Poor city schools? Racism in city politics? I'd love to know how Marie planned for weeks to do this and seemingly had little time to wonder why she was doing it.

Other than for the sake of art, that is. Other than for herself.


Comments (18)

I tried to find something positive to say about Ms. Marie, but unfortunately, I couldn't come up with a thing.

What she pulled was a publicity stunt for herself. Although there are reasonable things to protest, and music and lyrics to provide a fitting score, Ms. Marie chose neither the time nor place nor means of making any legit point.

Her little antics cheapen what is a beautiful song that deserves more mainstream exposure and play into the meme that certain folks are not proud of their country.

Good post! Recommended!

Narcissistic betrayal -- of the many by one, as a distortion of the actual fight being fought -- is color blind. I'm sorry for the pain this causes the many engaged in the real fight being fought.

avatar

Made me think of Obama's nomination speech at the stadium: the anniversary of MLK's I have a dream.

I suppose it's politically impossible but, you know, one of the things I love about the New Zealand anthem is it's always sung in Maori first -
Aotearoa.. And South Africa - the freedom song of the ANC which I LOVE has become part of the SA national anthem and is always sung before the English anthem.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Lift ev'ry voice could be sung at Denver?

I get emotional thinking about it. It would be magic.

Yes, that would be amazing - and the funny thing is that if Rene Marie hadn't pulled this stunt, she might very well be up for the job (seeing as she's local). But Obama himself came out and said she shouldn't have done it, and there's no way the campaign would want to be within a ten-meter cattle prod of this woman.

In my mind, this is still another mark on the wrong side of the civil liberties ledger for Sen. Obama.

avatar

Well I wasn't thinking of *her* singing it

I had envisaged a massed choir. Something simple - I love this version - not professional which makes it more touching somehow.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7PCFkY6LoTw

(We have a fabulous choir here called `The Choir of Hard Knocks` - a group of homeless and unemployed people that a professional tenor got together and worked with. They've become very popular and it's been marvellous for them - built self-esteem etc.)


Well, this artist probably blew it for any other African American singer in Colorado for a while. For herself for sure, but for others as well. Maybe not, though. Maybe it will just get all the lawyers busy writing addendi to contracts with a penalty clause for not delivering what was promised.

There is being an artist, and then there is being a professional artist.

Agreed. If she had a noble purpose in doing what she did, she failed to articulate it, and came off as self-aggrandizing. However, I do agree with one thing - sometimes an artists does take chances, and they pay for it. But if they take those chances, it helps if the artists themselves know why they did it and can make it clear. In this case, she just didn't do anything to make her statement meaningful. Pity.

Ms. Marie chose neither the time nor place nor means of making any legit point.

We heard this sort of thing a lot in the '60s.

Narcissistic betrayal -- of the many by one, as a distortion of the actual fight being fought -- is color blind.

We heard this sort of thing a lot in the '60s about MLK.

There is being an artist, and then there is being a professional artist.

We heard this sort of thing a lot in the '60s about performers like Dick Gregory.

Pardon the snark. Nothing personal. To be clear, I'm not accusing anyone of racism here, but I disagree. The woman, a well-respected jazz artist who suspended the most potentially lucrative years of her career to have and raise a family and whose come-back is inspirational for people of any race, was making a controversial political statement.

Start by putting limits on what is the "proper" time and place for free political speech. That leads quite naturally to "free-speech zones" where protesters are herded -- away from cameras and the target of their complaints. After that, people are ejected from rallies for wearing the wrong tee-shirt. Quite naturally, the next step is to beat up the folks who refuse to leave or take off the tee-shirts. That brings us to July, 2008.

What's the next step, folks?

No agreements? No disagreements? No umbrage? No "fuck you's?" No taking it personally?

I guess I'm losing my touch.

The woman, a well-respected jazz artist who suspended the most potentially lucrative years of her career to have and raise a family and whose come-back is inspirational for people of any race, was making a controversial political statement.

And what statement was that, exactly? I don't have a problem with her doing it, per se - I have a problem with the fact that she did it and can't articulate reasoning for her action that extends beyond her art. That's problematic for me, since society interprets such actions as much, more than just personal expression.

Obviously, her singing of the song in place of the SSB is per se a political statement.

The fact that she is not a skilled speaker or explainer is not difficult to fathom: She's a singer, not a politician.

And I'm not concerned in the least about how society reacts to her behavior, but I am concerned when liberals complain about someone's exercise of free political speech.

How is it a "free speech" issue when someone hires you to sing a particular song and you sing another one? Is it too much to expect to get what you pay for?

Even SHE doesn't claim it is a free speech issue, but you cover for her by making up the excuse that she is a singer not a politician, and therefore lacks the words to explain herself. If this gets to be the standard, how will anyone hire any performer for even a wedding?

MLK and Dick Gregory didn't get viewed by people who were expecting (and had paid for) a reading of Love Story and instead got their opinions and oratory. I think your examples are disengenuous.

How is it a "free speech" issue when someone hires you to sing a particular song and you sing another one? Is it too much to expect to get what you pay for?

I completely agree that whoever hired her has a perfect right to withhold payment or demand reimbursement. She did not deliver on her contract.

Even SHE doesn't claim it is a free speech issue

I disagree with her.

you cover for her

Now why would I do that? I have no dog in this fight except the First Amendment.

If this gets to be the standard, how will anyone hire any performer for even a wedding?

That doesn't concern me. But do you really see this becoming endemic? Je ne crois pas.

MLK and Dick Gregory didn't get viewed by people who were expecting (and had paid for) a reading of Love Story and instead got their opinions and oratory.

I'm sure that you are correct about this. So what?

I think your examples are disengenuous.

Opinions genuinely held cannot be disingenuous and I genuinely hold those opinions.

Why the rancor, Jan? I happen to be a Bill of Rights freak. You think this is not a Bill of Rights issue. Fine. I do. Despite appearances here at TPM, we can certainly disagree about an issue here and there and still like each other, can't we?

I'm pleased, though, that you chose to challenge me on this.

You consider my responses to be rancorous. I felt you were being unfair to the previous poster by going statement by statement upstream and saying, essentially, "You're just like those in the 60's who wanted to keep blacks in their places," you were doing the same as "When are you going to stop beating your wife."

The fact that you don't care if peoples' weddings are ruined by "artists" isn't really the point. I hope you don't get into a cab driven by an "artist" who wants to take you twenty miles out of your way so you can see what is really nice about City X, but if you do, maybe you will reflect a little bit on what a professional of any type should be accountable for. Yes. She may not get paid, but was probably already paid, and hotel and meals paid for as well.

I just disagree that this is a free speech issue. If my children's teacher decides it is more important to watch "art movies" than to learn grammar, I don't want that teacher hiding behind an "artist's switcheroonie," with you running out behind her with a poster claiming it is freedom of speech.

Anyway, I can see you are in an argumentative mood, and I have enough of that and don't feel like doing it here, so let's agree to disagree.

Rec'd, BTW. Well-written and -stated. But wrong, IMNSHO.

Thank you, and I'm always happy to agree to disagree. I'm just glad we can discuss it.

You're welcome, and I'm also glad we can discuss it -- so far.

Post a Comment

Inside Cafe



Cafe Features


October 6-10

Book Cover

October 13-17

Book Cover

October 20-24

Book Cover

November 17-21>

Book Cover

December 1-5

Book Cover





Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Claire Wilcox



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address