Soulful National Anthem?

Mixed feelings. While I am all for artistic interpretation, I guess my stance is that if she wants to sing the song at a school funtion, do it the way they ask. If not, don't do it. I mean if someone decided to gangsta rap the Anthem, should we be required to let them?

Meh.

Its no worse than some overblown celebrity screwing up the words or putting their own dopey twist on it.

Not long ago, I may have been annoyed at this, but if I'm going to demand that other people 'lighten the hell up' I suppose I ought to do the same- I mean in the end, what exactly does it matter?

oldpbnoob wrote: girls-national-anthem-rendition-stirs-flap   .

Which rocked.

Frankly, I think we could do much better with our national anthem, but I'm quite sir that Francis Scott Key is way to dead to care how people sing it.

But it is also a 200 year old song. If everyone sang it the same way it would be boring. The whole point of getting someone with skillz to sing it is so they can add their twist to it.

Everyone singing it the same is so large crowds can all be in tune.

Besides, the damn thing only became official in the 1930's. So really? Is it THAT important if it is still done with respect and honour?

evillepaintball wrote: My personal beliefs: The National Anthem exists to honor our country.  Any attempt to add artistic interpretation to the national anthem is an attempt to honor one's self rather than to honor the country.  The national anthem should be performed in accordance with the original musical score.  Any other performance is a selfish attempt to gain recognition for one's personal abilities rather than for our country.  I disagree with any attempt to modify the Nation Anthem from its original form.    That being said, I read about 5 sentences from that story.  The people saying that this is about race are retarded.  It has nothing to do with race, in my eyes, and everything to do with respecting our country's song.

Edited by Tolgak - 30 January 2011 at 8:46am

Tolgak makes a good point -- he wrote it to the tune of a popular drinking song.

evillepaintball wrote: Is it that important that our national anthem be sung with respect and honor?  Yeah, i think it is.

I see this. I really do.

But I'm of the mind that merely SINGING it is respectful of it and the country. They're not permanently changing it- they're merely exercising the freedoms that are so lauded by the song in the first place.

Setting conditions on freedom of speech or expression at such a low level as "Don't sing the sing differently" seems to go against the grain of the message that the song is trying to get across in the first place.

If the "Official" version was changed, then I can see taking a little bit of offense. It'd be like the push to amend the pledge. If someone doesn't want to say "Under God" when saying the pledge for personal reasons, fine. If the official pledge was amended to remove the line from it, Not so fine.
Its the same thing as singing the song in a different manner. The message is the song and its lyrics. Not the manner in which it's sung.

It was added in the '50s, right?  Since of course Communists wouldn't say.

I think I'm going be counter conservative for a change...I thing that adding a personal twist to the anthem makes it a think of personal pride, which is sadly neglected by modern society.

Edited by stratoaxe - 30 January 2011 at 1:06pm