A very, very interesting thought I have for you today…
It’s on the true value of songwriting. Effectively, how many songs can you think of that are rubbish? True - you may not like them in their current studio incarnation, but have you ever thought what that song would be like if it were done… differently?
A golden example of this in my head is the famous (or notorious) track Umbrella. Formerly performed by Rihanna, we all know the hook ‘under my umbrella-ella-ella-eh-eh-eh’ blasting out of passing chav-piloted cars, inside greasy nightclubs and on the radio twenty-four-allthefuckingtime. I suppose most who read this article hate it thoroughly.
Yet, read on.
Now, I do not like Rihanna’s version all that much: the main problems I have with it are her voice and the pointless Jay-Z intro. I do like the drumloop and synths, having said that. And that was that: I didn’t like Umbrella. Then I heard Biffy Clyro’s acoustic version soon after, and was vastly impressed. The dumb hook ‘ella-ella’ intact, and yet it was truly great. Hmm… how bizarre. Over the months up to now, many other cover versions have popped up somewhere or other (including a sparse piano take by
This brings up some quite dodgy, reasonably philosophical questions. Number one: do I like the Manic’s version because to my ears, it captures the song better than Rihanna’s studio effort? Number two: do I like it more because I prefer the rock element they put into it over the Rn’B of the original? Number three: do I like it more, purely because I’m a fan of the Manic Street Preachers?
I don’t think I can really answer this one myself. If you would be so kind, let me know your own ideas. Comment on the post and discuss! Or else I will rain down upon you like Great Odin's raven.
No comments:
Post a Comment