Johm Lennon wrote 'no religion' in Imagine

[malaise]

That's what he fugging meant.

Leave his classic alone ReTHUGS amd other morons - that is all.

[spanone]

1. Cee Lo Green Outrages John Lennon Fans By Changing Lyrics to 'Imagine'

Cee Lo Green upset John Lennon fans on Saturday night by performing a soulful version of the songwriter's classic "Imagine" with the lyrics changed from "nothing to kill or die for / and no religion too" to "nothing to kill or die for / and all religion's true." According to some fans, Green changed the meaning of the song by switching out the line. "The whole point of that lyric is that religion causes harm," tweeted someone with the handle @geekysteven. "If 'all religion's true' it would be a pretty bleak place."

Green, who sang the song on NBC's New Year's Eve broadcast from Times Square, responded to criticism about the alteration by tweeting "Yo I meant no disrespect by changing the lyric guys! I was trying to say a world were u could believe what u wanted that's all." He responded directly to other angry Lennon fans on Twitter, but has since deleted all of the tweets.

You can watch Cee Lo Green's performance of "Imagine" in the clip below. Advance to the 3:55 mark for the beginning of the song.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/cee-lo-green-outrages-john-lennon-fans-by-changing-lyrics-to-imagine-20120102#ixzz1iLbtIhIK

[undeterred]

10. Thanks for explaining this mysterious OP.

[getdown]

15. ignoramus

[barbtries]

22. thank you.

glad i don't have to hear it. imagine is a great song just as it is.

[malaise]

29. Thanks for posting the link

Sometimes I assume people read what's going on

[spanone]

41. hehehe

me too

[HuckleB]

128. Not everyone pays attention to New Year's shenanigans.

Heck, the last five days I was in a wonderful place with no cell phone access, no Internet access and where we kept the TV off.

It's really all right if you explain something as soap opera oriented as this. Many people are spending time reading other things.

[malaise]

167. Cool

Happy New Year!!

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Hey "Cee-Lo"

Fuck You.

[glinda]

96. Just dropped him from my FB like list. Uggggh*

[bigwillq]

156. Why did you "like" him in the first place?!?!?

Could never stand him.

[glinda]

162. Work he did with Mighty Mouse. Soulful. Bluesy voice. Liked it. Did

not know anything about his behavior. Still don't totally but am turned off by a couple of things now. One being the tv show thing also.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. Rememeber when that asshat from Limp Bizkit shat all over "Wish You Were Here"?

Children, they're classics for a REASON. Either leave them alone or don't do em at all.

[Motown_Johnny]

2. I don't think he is a moron

but he showed some poor judgement.


He should have just sung a different song

[getdown]

17. he showed no judgement. that's a moron. you don't just change lyrics like that. moron

[malaise]

24. He showed judgment alright

He imposed his views on the man's classic.
We didn't watch it live but saw a clip and it sure pissed us off.

[getdown]

54. well put

ty

[AngryOldDem]

106. Exactly right.

If it's **your** song and **you** redo the lyrics, that's one thing -- think Elton John's "Candle In The Wind". But to take someone else's work and deliberately put an entirely new spin on it that the lyricist never intended, that is something else altogether. Doing so when it's obviously not parody makes it that much worse.

I don't know why this so difficult for some people to understand.

Just have a recording (or video) of Lennon doing the song himself, and be done with it.

[Politicalboi]

3. I heard it on NYE

I couldn't believe it. If that part of the song offends you, then don't do it. They should have showed a video of Lennon singing it instead with updated video.

[Solly Mack]

4. Changing the words changes the meaning...and that ruins the song. That said...

Can you imagine religious extremists heads exploding at the thought of "all religion's true"?


LMAO

[jberryhill]

6. That's why I'm surprised at the reaction...

...any performance of a song is an interpretation.

There is no difference between all religion being true and no religion being true.

[whatchamacallit]

11. So to you

an indictment of religion is the same as an endorsement of all religions? Interesting.

[jberryhill]

12. They are all mutually contradictory

One cannot "endorse all religions" because they all pretty much condemn one another.

You don't seem to get the point.

[whatchamacallit]

18. Well you can, but it would be nonsensical, as Ce Lo's version is

John Lennon's version makes sense. Therin lies the difference you don't seem to get.

[boppers]

56. I try to be an omnitheist.

All belief systems are true, including atheism.

Sure, it doesn't make much sense, but belief systems don't make sense, as a rule.

[whatchamacallit]

60. I respect your belief(s)

I would like people to respect Lennon's too, by respecting his work.

[piratefish08]

77. atheism is the complete lack of a belief in the supernatural. not a belief system.

[boppers]

84. Atheists tend to believe in gravity, mass, logic, reason, etc.

They also tend to believe that reality somehow exists, and that they are an active part of it.

Contrast with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism , which believes that nothing exists or is real... a belief, which I accept as also true.

Claiming that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural makes no more sense than Christians rejecting the supernatural.... they are both just claiming that their particular understanding is somehow "real", and not "magical", like those other people.

[Warren DeMontague]

151. I think you may be confusing Atheism with Objectivism

Atheism is just what the definition of the word is- lack of belief in a God or Gods. Some Atheists are hard-core rationalist/materialists (including but by no means limited to the Objectivists), others have differing interpretations on what constitutes "reality"

many Buddhists are also Atheists, for starts- not believing in an external Deity, and that reality flows outward from the self rather than the self existing in a larger independent reality;

it's also worth noting that the solipsist is, by definition, also an atheist, unless the solipsist believes that the self IS "God".

[boppers]

171. I said "tend to believe".

It's more or less an intellectual protest vote, "I don't believe, I believe in things you don't have to believe in".

Sure, it's a recursive logic error, but it's funny.

[McCamy Taylor]

66. Agree. If I "imagine" that all religion's true, the world becomes a freaky place.

Flying spaghetti monsters would not even begin to describe it.

[boppers]

85. That's kind of the beauty of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnitheism

I got there (in my personal development) from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discordianism

A brief glance:
--
Greater Poop: Is Eris true?
Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.
GP: Even false things?
M2: Even false things are true.
GP: How can that be?
M2: I don't know man, I didn't do it.
--

[johnaries]

73. Uh, no. Only a very few "exclude" other religions.

You should do your homework.

[jberryhill]

75. And....

...the ones which don't are not the ones which are the problem.

[Solly Mack]

13. My head wouldn't be exploding either way. (all or no)

Lennon sang about no religion, period. Meaning, no religion existing (ever) to cause division between people or to use as an excuse for war and hate. The change in lyric changes that meaning. So, yeah, I can see why that would bother people.

[boppers]

86. You kind of editorialized.

"no religion existing (ever) to cause division between people or to use as an excuse for war and hate"

That wasn't the lyric, either.

Lennon was actively promoting a decentralized religion of love, compassion, and coming together, at the time.

Based on the other lyrics, I would guess he was trying to say "no religions that cause division, war, and hate", but that's my own editorializing.

[Solly Mack]

87. I'll stick with mine and I'm sure you'll stick with yours.

We certainly can't ask John.

[boppers]

92. Well, he was already asked, fortunately:

"If you can imagine a world at peace, with no denominations of religion—not without religion, but without this 'my God is bigger than your God' thing—then it can be true." ... Harry, Bill. The John Lennon Encyclopedia. Virgin; 2000b. ISBN 0-7535-0404-9. Pages 282-283.

[Solly Mack]

95. There is also an interview from the 80's where he says something along the lines of....

PLAYBOY: On a new album, you close with "Hard Times Are Over (For a While)." Why?

LENNON: It's not a new message: "Give Peace a Chance" -- we're not being unreasonable, just saying, "Give it a chance." With "Imagine," we're saying, "Can you imagine a world without countries or religions?" It's the same message over and over. And it's positive.


http://www.john-lennon.com/playboyinterviewwithjohnlennonandyokoono.htm
http://www.beatlesinterviews.org/dbjypb.int3.html

Again, he's not around to ask.

[Scootaloo]

23. Actually there's a huge difference

If all religions are true, then we live on the back of a giant turtle, people sometimes turn into pillars of salt, gods rape women while disguised as swans, and lightning is caused by a four-armed blue man shooting arrows at demons. You can have good luck by leaving food under the skull of your grandpa, getting naked and dancing widdershins makes plants grow, and you've certainly done everything before. Humanity is the result of mud and spare ribs being possessed by the souls of dead aliens, and the world is only six thousand years old - well, this world, there have been six or seven before this one where everyone died. Everything you do is predetermined by a god somewhere, who you can face in single combat and kill - you might need to use mistletoe for this. And when you die, you will walk under a lake guarded by swans, where you'll sleep forever. Unless you were unable to walk a tightrope, in which case you are devoured by a critter that's equal parts crocodile, hippopotamus, and baboon. You can avoid this by being wealthy and being buried with all your sacrificed entourage. Assuming of course, you have either accepted or rejected Jesus Christ as your personal savior.. which is it? Well, they're still working that one out in the middle east, give 'em about three more centuries and we might have an answer for you.

If none of them are true, then reality functions just like we currently experience it.

Sooooo...

[jberryhill]

27. Tell me more about that dancing naked part

For any set of mutually contradictory propositions to be true, then it must be the case that none of them is.

[glinda]

97. Than all "religions true" is a Hieronymous Bosch painting then?

[Scootaloo]

102. Yeah, that sounds about right

[deucemagnet]

166. I propose we stop the DUzies

and declare you champion for life.

[yardwork]

52. Big difference. Not the same at all.

I heard him sing it on NYE and I noticed that he'd changed the line. I understand what he was saying, but it definitely changes the meaning.

[justiceischeap]

104. There's a difference between "interpreting a song" and changing the lyrics

IMO, interpreting a song is changing the arrangement, the way it is sung, not the words. That's kinda like plagiarizing a book and then claiming after being caught that you were just interpreting the original author's work.

When Lennon wrote, "Imagine there's no religion" that wasn't open for interpretation, he meant, imagine there's no religion because he saw, as many do, that religion causes problems. He doesn't mean that one shouldn't have faith but religion as an institution has ruined many people.

[loyalsister]

122. Well said

As an atheist, I see them all as equally ridiculous- therefore all have the same magical lack of validity and pose no threat to me.
Respecting the personal feelings attached to the justifications for magical thinking seems to me to be a uniting principle.

[whatchamacallit]

8. Ha, yeah I thought that too

might be even more "subversive".

[Solly Mack]

14. LOL Could very well be

lolol

Love it!

[malaise]

25. For real - LOL

Happy New Year!!

[Enrique]

5. he should have skipped the "no possessions" line

given his fur coat and humungous gold watch.

[JackRiddler]

81. Lennon made it clear that was the toughest one.

No religion, it isn't hard to do, but no possessions? "I wonder if you can?" By implication, hard for him, too.

[whatchamacallit]

7. If you're gonna do that pick another fucking song!

No coopting, no sanitizing!

[Dreamer Tatum]

143. That's how I feel about Wang Dang Sweet Poontang nt

[PeaceNikki]

9. John Fugelsang changed up some CeeLo lyrics:

See you changin' the lyrics to a song I love & I'm like, forget you -
I guess singing 'Imagine no possessions' in a full fur coat w/bling wasn't enough, & I'm like, forget you-
Cee Lo thinks it's artistic, to make John's song theistic... ain't that some ish?-
That's not a song you can molest, I still wish you the best, & I'm like...gonna go rewrite some Gnarls Barkley tunes.

[Union Scribe]

16. I figured DU would get around to this.

But what's that line about sacred cows and hamburger? Maybe only certain cows.

[Logical]

72. Your issue is what. Spit it out.

[Charlemagne]

19. response from the guy

"Yo I meant no disrespect by changing the lyric guys! I was trying to say a world were u could believe what u wanted that's all." He responded directly to other angry Lennon fans on Twitter, but has since deleted all of the tweets."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/cee-lo-green-outrages-john-lennon-fans-by-changing-lyrics-to-imagine-20120102#ixzz1iLiSdnUS


Lennon was trying to 'imagine' a world were there arent divisions among people. If all religions were true...well...I dont think that would work. If you feel you need to change the lyrics, pick another song.

[malaise]

46. or write your own

They all know this is one of the great songs of all time. They'd love to co-opt it.

[Synicus Maximus]

20. So a second rate singer changes the words to a song that he will sing once and noone will remember

next month. Why get upset?

[whatchamacallit]

45. I remember the Clear Channel memorandum

Last edited Mon Jan 2, 2012, 09:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Though some of the choices were baffling, I was not surprised to find Imagine on the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Clear_Channel_memorandum

While there's nothing sacrosanct about any song really, Imagine is important in that it presents a bold challenge and counter vision to a self destructive world. Obscuring that message to make it suitable for mass consumption, betrays the essence of the song. Still no biggie to most, but that's what bothered me about it.

[boppers]

59. Never seen that list, the entry for RAtM made me laugh:

Rage Against the Machine - All songs by Rage Against the Machine

(The only artist on the list to be totally blacked out.)

[whatchamacallit]

61. Lol, I know!

I guess it's a testament to the power, or perceived power, of song.

[suffragette]

101. Hadn't seen that list before but it made me remember the Oct 2001 Groundworks concert

in Seattle after seeing "End of the World as we know it" on that list.

The media in Seattle had been questioning whether REM would play "End of the World" or not.

They did and it was like a collective exhale went through the arena.
Then Eddie Vedder joined them and they played "People have the Power."

Found a video here:

&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL7B8577CE60B95AB6

[McCamy Taylor]

67. I'll bet the Christians said that when the Romans decided to rewrite the words of Jesus to prop up

their failing empire. And look where that got us?

I hate it when the establishment co-opts the freedom movement to sell us crap we do not need or want.

[barbtries]

21. what did they do?

[hughee99]

26. Oh my go... eh, sorry, don't give a shit.

Lennon's song is HIS song, other version are something else. Don't care if it's Cee-Lo Green or Weird Al, it just doesn't matter.

[malaise]

28. Sure and that ReTHUG ahole Cain

can change the lyrics to promote pizza.

Fugg them all
I liked it better when ReTHUGS hated the song.

[grntuscarora]

38. Some people are

hearing the song for the first time, like my young kids. Regardless of my pointing out that it's not the original, it will be the one they remember. Screwing with the lyrics ticks me off, and, yeh it matters, imo.

[hughee99]

43. When your children grow up, they will either recognize Lennon's version as a classic,

or they won't, in which case the lyrics probably won't mean much to them anyway.

[grntuscarora]

51. I submit:

The one heard first IS the "classic" for a young listener. All other renditions, (including the original) are going to be the "variations".

But I admit, I adore that Lennon song. Hate lesser artists messin' with it

[fishwax]

90. I doubt that a one-off New Year's Eve performance will become the classic for many, even youngsters

It isn't as though people are likely to hear that version repeatedly in the years to come--if it were released as a single or something, that might be different (though even then I'd be skeptical ).

[Goblinmonger]

79. Though it's like the Demi Moore film version of Scarlet Letter

if you are going to bastardize something, why even call it the original. Just create your own. Green changed the meaning of the song by 180 degrees. Why say you are singing the Lennon song? Just write your own to say what you want.

[boppers]

88. I don't think he changed the whole *song* 180 degrees....

On religion, where there is much argument, two ideas are being discussed:
1. No religion, no argument.
2. Any religion, no argument.

Both song lyrics want a world of peace.

[AngryOldDem]

30. That was simply outrageous.

I just heard about this on the news. Thankfully, I missed this Saturday night.

I hate it when singers don't get the songs right, or intentionally mess up the lyrics so that the song means NOTHING what the songwriter intended. How dare Cee-Lo take it upon himself to edit John Lennon. I think it's disrespectful to do that, no matter whose song it is -- a poor arrangement is one thing; dicking with the lyrics is something else altogether.

I think "Imagine" is a powerful song to hear at midnight on New Year's -- much more so than that tired cliche "Auld Lang Syne," (which will never go away) or the canned Frank Sinatra "New York, New York."

From now on they should play a recording of Lennon singing "Imagine" (and I thought they did just that in years past) and leave the amateurs to their own devices. Let them fuck up their own songs.

[Dreamer Tatum]

99. I find it ironic to the nth degree that people who decry fundamentalism

are fundamentalists when it comes to Lennon's lyrics. See what you think of this:

Imagine there's no inconsistency
It's easy if you try
No self righteousness below us
Above us only reason
Imagine all the people being consistent in their beliefs

Imagine there's no hypocrisy
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to piss and moan for
And no indignation too
Imagine all the people letting others do what they want to do

You, you may say
I'm Dreamer Tatum, and I'm the only one
I hope some day you'll join me
And stop being such a whiner

Imagine no possession of John Lennon's lyrics
I wonder if you can
No need to defend what requires no defense
A brotherhood of minding your own business
Imagine all the people sharing all the lyrics

You, you may say
I'm Dreamer Tatum, and I'm the only one
I hope some day you'll join me
And you'll stop getting all pissed off about nothing




There. Sue me.

[AngryOldDem]

103. Sorry that I have an opinion on this.

Given the place where the song was sung, and the circumstances, I just think any tinkering with the lyrics was out of line.

What Cee-Lo did was 360 degrees opposite of the intent "Imagine," and the reason why it's performed at New Year's. He added absolutely nothing of value to the song, and should have performed it the way it was written.

And If I want a Weird Al Yankovich song parody (or yours), I'll ask for them -- thanks.

[Dreamer Tatum]

108. Imagine no kids...on my lawn...nt

[Dr. Strange]

137. 360 degrees opposite?

This thread...it kills me.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Like all non-believers, Lennon was supposed to keep his trap good and shut

certainly, bigoted statements like "I don't believe in God" are hurtful to the delicate sensibilities of the picked on, persecuted religious majority.

[Union Scribe]

117. Lol, why are you so mad? nt

[Warren DeMontague]

120. I don't like to see no-talent assclowns crap all over great songs.

For one.

[fishwax]

32. meh

I didn't catch the performance, but if I had my response would have been "that's a stupid change." And then I probably never would have thought of it again, because it doesn't seem worth the energy.

Great song, though, in its original form.

[boppers]

34. Oh the irony.

What, are the original lyrics sacred or something?

[MilesColtrane]

49. There is some music that is sacred to me.

I don't know that Imagine crosses that threshold, but it was, and remains, a powerfully moving work of art.

Some people get upset when they see something pure defaced in the name of commercial pressure.

I can understand that completely.

[AngryAmish]

109. Imagine is pure? What horseshit.

John Lennon had a carefully cultivated commercial image. It appears you bought into it. The Beatles and the Lennon Estate have kept the firehose of money going for going on fifty years and they want it to go on in perpetuity.

[MilesColtrane]

112. Yeah, that's the thing about art, your mileage may vary.

What you think is a cheezy sop to the hippie generation, I think is a beautiful song.

I'm no fan of Yoko, but do you really believe it is her John Lennon Legacy Machine that has made this song so well-loved forty years on?

[AngryAmish]

113. There are huge multinational corporations pushing this shit

They have an asset - Lennon's songs. Is it easier to make another Lennon or just keep pushing the same bullshit forever? I see ClearChannel stations with huge billboards with JL's picture on them. I see television, magazine and billboards ads for iTunes with the same.

There is no crime in being a mark. But please be a smart mark. Realize that you are being manipulated and recognize that there are other things out there besides the same old same old.

I saw "All in the Family" when I was a kid. The theme song began "Boy the way Glenn Miller played," At the time Glenn Miller would have been a newer artist than the Beatles than today.

[MilesColtrane]

115. "Realize that you are being manipulated"

The only manipulation possible in this case would be from my sense of nostalgia.

I first heard Imagine the year it came out, when my sixth-grade teacher played it for the whole class.

And, yes, I liked it then, as well as now.

[Hugabear]

116. So if I like John Lennon's "Imagine" song, then I'm a corporate mark?

What bullshit. Not all of us are rushing out to buy Lennon memorabilia, or Lennon boxed CD sets.

Maybe sometimes people just like a song for what it is, a song?

[Bluenorthwest]

35. That idiot with the fur coat, what a tool that creep is. The first I heard of him was his

intolerant and ignorant hate speech toward gay people. Now this. Fuck him. Just fuck him.

[Greybnk48]

37. i find this VERY disturbing.

I hope Yoko sues his ass off.

[malaise]

48. Ding ding we have a winner

[Dreamer Tatum]

142. Oh fuck that shit. The song was used in a Cisco commercial.

If it's so holy and sacrosanct, why was it used to sell networking equipment?

Give me a break.

[limpyhobbler]

39. He's clearly not a fan of it, so why was he singing it it the first place?

dumb

[Burgman]

40. What it was about.

[glinda]

98. My that is a nice photo.

[boxman15]

42. As a fan of his since his Goodie Mob days, Cee-Lo was dumb for doing this

Lennon was one of the greatest songwriters of all-time. Don't mess with his work or message. It's outrageous. Especially since Cee-Lo has been very subpar over the past year or so.

[Trekologer]

44. If you don't like the song's lyrics, write your own damn song.

Don't try to change someone else's.

[boppers]

89. Not a big fan of folk music, then?

Rewriting music is how it's worked since... well... ever.

The absurd idea of "owning" a song is a fairly new concept.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

47. Least he didn't change John's name....

[whatchamacallit]

50. Heh, no shit.

[getdown]

55. haha!

[Hyphen]

53. Next he'll change

"brush my teeth with a bottle of jack" to "Brush my teeth twice a day and say no to drugs and alcohol".

[Lint Head]

57. Thanks for this I added my own comments.

[Warren DeMontague]

58. ***

[Burgman]

76. A nice cover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=0IeZJNC4osA

[thucythucy]

64. But didn't Lennon also write "the goddess really smiled

upon our love, dear Yoko?" ("Dear Yoko" on Double Fantasy). And also, "God bless our love" ("Grow Old with Me" on Milk and Honey)? And (and this might not be an exact quote--it's been a while since I've heard these), "Before you go to sleep/say a little prayer..." ("Beautiful Boy" on Double Fantasy)?

Personally, I'm an agnostic, so I don't have a dog (that's "god" spelled backwards) in this fight.

But Lennon wasn't quite so easy to pin down.

That said, don't change the f-kin' lyrics. They're perfect as is. Write your own damn song, if you have to.

"Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV
and you think you're so clever and classless and free
but you're still fuckin' peasants as far as I can see
A Working Class Hero is something to be..."

[spanone]

70. god is not religion

[thucythucy]

74. I agree.

And I'm pretty sure Lennon would have as well.

This whole thread has got me wondering if anyone has ever written as kick-ass an indictment of hypocrisy as "Give Me Some Truth."

Best wishes and happy new year!

[boppers]

93. A response from John:

"If you can imagine a world at peace, with no denominations of religion—not without religion, but without this 'my God is bigger than your God' thing—then it can be true."
Harry, Bill. The John Lennon Encyclopedia. Virgin; 2000b. ISBN 0-7535-0404-9. pp382-383

He's already "rewriting" his own lyrics. It wasn't a world without religion he imagined, it was a world without people being assholes about religion.

[Union Scribe]

119. Well that's going to ruin the song

for some people in this thread. Lol.

[McCamy Taylor]

65. One can have faith without organized religion.

Some of the most spiritual people (like St. Francis and Jesus) were at odds with their organized religion.

Tom Paine, Thomas Jefferson and other Founders envisioned a world where people did not have an official, state sanctioned church telling them what they ought to think. This would allow them to follow their own conscience.

[McCamy Taylor]

68. Remember the movie "Breaking Glass"? They made the singer change "Kick Big Brother in the Ass" to

"Hit Big Brother in the Nose." Still true twenty years later. Capitalism tries to co-opt rebellion and use it to sell overpriced gym shoes.

[whatchamacallit]

71. Yep.

[Dawson Leery]

69. Cee Lo Green is another religious fundamentalist who will twist and lie to

make everything conform to his world view. Shameless.

[JI7]

80. well, not sure he is a fundie, just anti atheist maybe, he said all religions are true, not

one specific religion is true.

i knwo a few people like him who think everyone should have some faith in some higher being regardless of what that is.

[Dreamer Tatum]

82. hahaha nt

[johnaries]

78. Considering John's TOLERANT nature,

whether or not he would have approved of the change I think he would have defended the performer's right to adapt it.

John wanted us to Imagine Tolerance and Understanding, not Intolerance and Anger.

[boppers]

91. I tend to think John would have adopted it for his own version.

It was a near-unthinkable idea ("what, it's *all* true?&quot 40 years ago, but as we've learned more about the flimsy nature of "truth", we're slowly learning (as a species) that anybody who thinks they know about any "truth" is not seeing the whole picture.

[Dreamer Tatum]

83. Oh brother. Get over it, Lennon fundies. nt

[Union Scribe]

118. Heh.

[ButterflyBlood]

94. Don't give a fuck really. More bothered by Slayer's cover of Minor Threat's "Guilty of Being White"

Where the last line was changed to "guilty of being right" which pissed of Ian MacKaye greatly and to which he basically disowned any connection with them. Then there's also the fact that anyone covering the song is taking it out of context considering it was about being a white student at a predominately black DC high school being bullied over things in the past he had nothing to do with, not a right wing whiny rant about "oppression of the white man".

[Liquorice]

100. I thought I misheard Cee Lo when he sang that. It is ridiculous to change

the lyrics. Every other year they play the original John Lennon version right at midlnight on New Year's Eve. I don't think they should have had Cee Lo or anyone else doing their rendition, and NOBODY should be changing the damn lyrics.

[T S Justly]

105. Yoko's been doing some odd things with John's work.

Could this be done without Mother's permission?

[MilesColtrane]

114. Artists don't have to seek permission to perform a published song.

In this case, ABC/Disney just has to pay the Lennon estate performance royalties. (indirectly through a licensing agreement with a performing arts organization)

However, an artist must get the publisher's permission to record a song.

[sofa king]

107. WKRP in Cincinnatti would agree.

http://paulharrisonline.blogspot.com/2006/12/wkrp-imagine.htm

Note also Richard Paul, who had a long and hopefully lucrative career as the only human being to actually benefit from the existence of Jerry Falwell.

[99Forever]

110. This is simple for me.

I have only one person I have ever considered a hero. That person was John Lennon.

As far as I'm concerned, anything that has this assclown's name associated with it in any way, will not be included in my life. Ever.

[phleshdef]

111. Oh geez, You are all being "war on christmas" O'Reilly crazy over this.

The dude swapped the lyric to be more inclusive.

The spirit of the lyric was that people wouldn't have religion to fight over. I think the same meaning is there either way.

Aside from that, Imagine is a terribly dull song, any stoned high schooler in a mushy mood could have written it. And the melody is obnoxious. Its not a musical masterpiece. Its a mediocre song at best.

[malaise]

121. Thankfully that's your opinion

[joeybee12]

124. You must be CeLo Green's agent...

To spout crap like that about a no-talent twot hacking a classic song.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

127. It's just a song.

[joeybee12]

129. Then take a knife to the Mona Lisa and cut out part of it...

It's just a painting...an artist creates something to be a certain way...no talent twits like Green should simply join Celebrity Rehab.

[phleshdef]

132. Theres only one Mona Lisa. John Lennon's recording of the song still exists, undamaged and you can..

...still listen to it anytime you please.

The hyperemotional nonsense over this is cracking me up.

[Dreamer Tatum]

133. So Mona Lisa = Imagine? Hahahahhhhhha

[Nuclear Unicorn]

135. If the idea of shedding dogmatic assertions in the name of peace is so important

then why all the acrimony?

Serious question. All the vile condemnations over a mere song are violating the very ideals the song supposedly imagines. While everybody hyperventilates over half of 1 line they forgot the lines that come after it.

Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

Way to honor the legacy, peeps.

[Dreamer Tatum]

138. It's an irony sandwich: in defending no religion whatsoever, people deify Lennon.

Ridiculous.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

144. It's irony when one can claim the innocence of not being aware

Sadly, I don't think that defense applies. It seems more people are motivated by an intense, exceedingly emotional reaction, to the various religions held by roughly 95% of the world's population. Supposedly religion is bad because it causes excessive emotional reactions.

[phleshdef]

130. I can't even name one song by him. I'm a rock music only kind of person.

[99Forever]

126. Some things cross the line and are unacceptable.

You just did. Welcome to my Ignore List, population one.

[phleshdef]

131. Grow up.

[Dreamer Tatum]

134. Can you add me, too? Because it's just a fucking song.

And a terrible one at that.

[99Forever]

136. No problem.

Consider it done.

[Warren DeMontague]

145. "and a terrible one at that"

yeah, whatever. Love to see what's on your ipod, Jack.

[Dreamer Tatum]

146. Not shitty music, for openers. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

149. yeah, right.

I'm thinking Pat Boone. Maybe his "heavy metal" album. And The Nuge.



Am I warm?

[Dreamer Tatum]

150. My ipod could be a carbon copy of yours

And you'd still ridicule. Music: another way to measure dick size.

[Warren DeMontague]

152. I doubt it. But it's nice to know I have a 160GB dick.

I don't really give a shit if people think my music sucks, or not- nothing is more subjective IMHO than artistic appreciation.

Still, if you're so insistent that "Imagine" is "a shitty song", I have to be curious as to what- to your mind- constitutes a classic, great one.

[Dreamer Tatum]

153. Anything I say will be seized upon, even if it's your favorite, too.

Sorry, not exactly an idiot over here.

[Warren DeMontague]

154. try me.

seriously. I'm really not that duplicitous.

[Dreamer Tatum]

155. Said the scorpion to the frog. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

157. I'm a Deadhead, so I'm used to hearing hipsters make fun of my music.

honestly, you get to be my age, you stop caring.

but, whatever.

[Dreamer Tatum]

158. New Mastersounds. The Perceptions. Johnny Hammond. Boogaloo Joe Jones.

Speedometer. And of that ilk.

[Warren DeMontague]

160. Never heard of 'em, but that means nothing, being that I am out of touch

anything like P-Funk? I like P-Funk.

[Dreamer Tatum]

161. Less electric than P-Funk. Even old P-Funk. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

164. fair 'nuff. I'll check em out

thanks for the heads up. I'm always looking for new music.

[AzDar]

123. How could ALL religion be true, anyway?

[Warren DeMontague]

147. It's the sort of new-agey gibberish that many believers like to float, but that

completely falls apart under any sort of logical scrutiny- come to think of it, sort of like a LOT of religious assertions.

You know, "it doesn't matter what you believe- ONLY that you believe!!!"

Oh, really? Because that sort of makes concepts like "belief" as well as "rationally attempting to understand the universe" sort of meaningless...

Kind of how 12 Steppers are supposed to believe in "God", but "God" can be a doorknob, or a tree, or the Universe... ("he" still likes the Lord's Prayer, of course, but that doesnt mean he's not a doorknob)

[treestar]

170. It could all be a different cultural expression for the same thing

[Nuclear Unicorn]

125. It's just a song. A pretty song with nice thoughts, but just a song.

This need to treat it's lyrics as sacrosanct seems to be missing the very point the song speaks of which the would-be defenders insist should not be changed -- we should shed our dogmatic assertions if they cause people to take hostile attitudes.

The irony is pretty ironic.

[MilesColtrane]

140. My opinion doesn't spring from dogma.

No authority laid down the law to me about changing a song. In fact, interpreting the work of others and putting one's own mark is essential to the type of music that I have studied.

My objection is that the change adds nothing.

The thing is, if you are going to mess with something so well conceived, you'd better have new material that at least approaches the level of craftsmanship of the original composer.

Changing a part of a lyric of a standard that specifically means something, to one that is logically absurd, is incredibly stupid.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

141. In college

my clique of friends included a male Hindu, a female Muslim, me a female atheist and the man I adoringly refer to as my gay boyfriend. I married a man from a fundamentalist Christian family and they welcomed my gay boyfriend with literally opened arms as a member of my wedding party.

I think that is what Mr. Green was imagining and I don't see a problem with that. I think my Hindu and Muslim friends would be just as put-off about the assertion of imagining no religion as some in this thread are put-off by notions of accommodating other people and the faith's they choose for themselves.

And who cares if the change adds nothing? As I've noted before, it's just a song.

[AtomicKitten]

139. Bad Cee Lo Green

He apologized: http://music-mix.ew.com/2012/01/03/cee-lo-john-lennon-imagine-apology/

[hfojvt]

165. How DARE you change those lyrics??!!??

It was written 'Leroy Brown' for a reason!!

[Throd]

148. "Imagine there's no outrage, over trivial things..."

[hfojvt]

163. that's pretty hard to do

In one series of Peanuts cartoons, Snoopy was doing impressions and Charlie Brown and others were getting upset. Schroeder could not see the big deal and was telling Charlie Brown to lighten up and let the dog have his fun. Then Charlie Brown said, look who he is doing now - Beethoven. At which point Schroeder yelled "It's an outrage!!!"

Everybody has their own standard of 'trivial'.

[hfojvt]

159. it staggers the imagination

that all these people who wish there was "nothing to kill or die for" are seemingly ready to kill somebody for changing a few words in the song "Imagine".

And many seem to be people without religion.

Go figure.

[whatchamacallit]

168. You ever create an original work?

Song, Poem, Speech, Book?... I hope when I'm gone people will respect my work, and perform it to echo my intent and sentiment.

[easttexaslefty]

169. I love John Lennon but this is just silly

Its altered art and it's all good.