Jane Dark Sugarhigh blog on Beyonce's "Irreplaceable" restoring "melodic range to pop"

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
"Sometime in the Nineties — say, after "Waterfalls" and well before "No Scrubs," to use the TLC calendar — mersh R&B narrowed its melodic range. It didn't necessarily use fewer notes (though this was often the case), but chose notes from within a narrower scope in any given song. Largely gone were the transcendent/ludicrous ascents and resolves, the struggle/release/euphorias of "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" or "Man in the Mirror"; the duotone themes of "No, No, No, No" and "Say My Name" carried the day.
This condensation was meant to convey coiled sensuality, tense menace, moral seriousness. In part it borrowed these sensibilities from hip-hop, the center of authority in popular culture. One might argue that the structures of tune in American pop float between forms where affect is largely conveyed by speech, and where it's indexed to variations of melody keyed to the Western scale: upper limit country, lower limit rap, as Louis Zukofsky surely meant to say.
In the event, R&B was successful enough in expressing its revised set of feelings that it had a dialectical effect on the entire Billboard Hot 100. On the one hand, a new genre arose immediately for the express purpose of rescuing melodic range: this got named teenpop, and its genius took up the explicit project of extending the melodic scope of the Top 40 through complex modulations, moments after R&B narrowed its own scope. But on the other hand, the new significations of R&B, every time someone in an adjacent genre was feeling, well, dippy, they could emulate the move to refashion themselves as mature, controlled, serious.
And so, for example, when Mariah Carey of the famous range, of "Dreamlover" and "Fantasy" and "Emotions," needed to indicate she was no longer Glitter-y and/or crazy, she stopped down to the minimal palette of "Shake It Off" and etc. And when Britney, who had become synonymous with teenpop, needed to "grow up," she just repeated history: the passage from "Oops..." to "Slave" tells the story of modern R&B again, offset by a few years, with the naked significatory intent that had always been her stock in trade. The genius of "Toxic" lies exactly in how much it manages to do within the late phase's restrictions, between the low ceiling and high floor.
Shifts, of course, never happen all at once: uneven development, three-steps-forward and two-steps-back, little gestures here and there, these turn out to have been key junctures in a story that the market is trying to tell. And this is the story that "Irreplaceable" begins to narrate. It's a good song, not a great one; nobody thinks its within seven rungs of "Crazy in Love" on the ladder of the Ideal Pop Song. That song had decent range as well, but it also had other things on its mind, and returned relentlessly to the three-note theme. "Irreplaceable" seems to have as its main purpose the restoration of melodic range to pop. That it found traction with an audience that had proved itself indifferent to the far-narrower B singles that preceded it is the most telling fact — not in the least in that it demonstrates how Beyonce had better dance to the tune of the times, having lost the imperious capacity to make the times dance to her own tune."

http://sugarhigh.abstractdynamics.org/

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:01 (seventeen years ago) link

Hmmmm, I think other r'n'b singers have used a wider melodic range on occasion than the norm of recent years but I do not know the sales charts well enough to make the argument. Mary J. Blige may not always hit the notes but she has always gone beyond the recent r'n'b/pop norm.

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:08 (seventeen years ago) link

For what it's worth, I count Britney's performance as the least impressive/convincing part of "Toxic."

A Radio Picture (Factory Sample Not For Sale), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:19 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm also curious about how conversant with music theory Joshua is; i.e., is he even right about his basic assumption here? (I don't know that he is or isn't, by the way. Just sayin'.)

A Radio Picture (Factory Sample Not For Sale), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:21 (seventeen years ago) link

'irreplaceable' is miles better than 'crazy in love' which is only like...the sixth best beyoncé song, or something

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 07:57 (seventeen years ago) link

Miles better? I'll stick with Joshua/Jane Dark on at least this point that "Crazy in Love" is superior.

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 12:56 (seventeen years ago) link

>"On the one hand, a new genre arose immediately for the express purpose of rescuing melodic range: this got named teenpop, and its genius took up the explicit project of extending the melodic scope of the Top 40 through complex modulations, moments after R&B narrowed its own scope."

Frank Kogan to thread. He can probably convey numerous reasons why teenpop arose (again).

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 12:58 (seventeen years ago) link

"Irreplaceable is a pop-RnB song written by American singer-songwriter Beyonce, Amund Bjorklund, Espen Lind, Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen and Ne-Yo for Knowles sophomore studio album B'Day [2006]. Produced by Norwegian production team Stargate and Beyonce, the song was released as the album's third single and second single internationally in October 2006." http://www.mininova.org/tor/494949

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 13:13 (seventeen years ago) link

as usual I have no idea wtf "Jane" is talking about, a little theory really would be nice to back up this assertion but as is I have to assume he/she is basing this on the fact that "Irreplaceable" has fluttery acoustic guitars and Beyonce's other singles have brittle Swizz Beatz tracks with two-finger keyboard riffs.

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:30 (seventeen years ago) link

I usually turn off her slow ones before the halfway mark, but hasn't Beyonce made big Whitney Houston ballads before?

m1cc1o (m1cc1o), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:36 (seventeen years ago) link

oh, definitely. "Dangerously In Love 2" and the new one from Dreamgirls, "Listen," just to name a couple that were singles. i'm not sure if that's what he's talking about, though. or is it?

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:39 (seventeen years ago) link

I think he is, that r&b singles aren't as "melodic" now because of hip-hop, but that Beyonce (who helped usher that in with DC) is now backpedalling. I was under impression that "Irreplaceable" was just the first time that I liked her increased "melodic range" ballads, rather than her first (or even her first hit ballad).

m1cc1o (m1cc1o), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Does he mention "Crazy" with the same regard? (Personally I enjoy Dark Clover's movie reviews a lot more than his music ones).

m1cc1o (m1cc1o), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 14:45 (seventeen years ago) link

The above excerpt I posted from Josh/Jane comes from near the bottom of his December 31st posting on his blog (that Carl Wilson raved about on his Zoilus blog btw). Then he goes on to talk about Jo-jo.

Here's him talking about "Crazy in Love": >"And this is the story that "Irreplaceable" begins to narrate. It's a good song, not a great one; nobody thinks its within seven rungs of "Crazy in Love" on the ladder of the Ideal Pop Song. That song had decent range as well, but it also had other things on its mind, and returned relentlessly to the three-note theme. "Irreplaceable" seems to have as its main purpose the restoration of melodic range to pop. That it found traction with an audience that had proved itself indifferent to the far-narrower B singles that preceded it is the most telling fact — not in the least in that it demonstrates how Beyonce had better dance to the tune of the times, having lost the imperious capacity to make the times dance to her own tune."

Uh, Josh/Jane maybe the earlier singles from the latest album were not as good as "Crazy in Love," as opposed to being out of "tune with the times." In his theory, is he giving Beyonce all the credit for restoring "melodic range to pop" with "Irreplaceable" ? He does not even mention the other songwriters--Amund Bjorklund, Espen Lind, Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen and Ne-Yo ...

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:12 (seventeen years ago) link

When I first listened to the album in August "Irreplaceable" was the immediate standout, not least because Beyoncé finally sunk her teeth into a ballad that (a) she was fully comfortable singing; (b) a ballad of above-average inteligence.

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:16 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't understand this argument at all. Selective listening.

deej (deej), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:21 (seventeen years ago) link

or possibly just not listening

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:23 (seventeen years ago) link

"b) a ballad of above-average inteligence. "

Only recently did I really pay close attention to all the lyrics (after hearing Beyonce talk about how the song was an empowerment anthem). The lyrics have now been appropriated for all kinds of uses--I heard a sports talk show host going "To the left, to the left" in an "Irreplaceable" style melody as a way of describing his feeling watching a missed NFL field goal not go in between the vertical cross bars

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:29 (seventeen years ago) link

"Beyonce finally sunk her teeth into a ballad that (a) she was fully comfortable singing;"

Alfred, she hasn't just dumped anybody in her own life, why do you think that this is the first ballad that she is fully comfortable singing? I think she's sung ballads convincingly before, as have other r'n'b singers (and gotten them on the radio) despite Josh/Jane's contention that "Irreplaceable" is the first one to restore a melodic range to r'n'b/pop hits.

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:34 (seventeen years ago) link

how about that boise state
bringing back melodicism to statue of liberty plays

deej (deej), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Only recently did I really pay close attention to all the lyrics (after hearing Beyonce talk about how the song was an empowerment anthem).

Except it's really downcast for an empowerment anthem, isn't it? She sounds like she's trying to half-convince herself that she can pack up all his shit in boxes.

On second thought I don't like the way "above-average intelligence" sounds. I'll just say that it's cool Beyonce can flesh out doubt and pain like the Diana Ross she wants to be.

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:36 (seventeen years ago) link

I think she's sung ballads convincingly before, as have other r'n'b singers (and gotten them on the radio) despite Josh/Jane's contention that "Irreplaceable" is the first one to restore a melodic range to r'n'b/pop hits.

Well, most of Beyonce's ballads have sucked, to my ears. There's any number of ballads by Blige, Ne-Yo, and Carey I've liked in the last couple of years, so I don't buy the Jane/Josh argument either.

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:38 (seventeen years ago) link

Alfred, Musically as opposed to lyrically why would she be more comfortable with the arrangements of this song versus any prior ballad-like pop songs she has sung? Or do you think this is that much better arranged and written by she and the other 5 credited with composing the song with her?

In the interview she suggested she was singing this for other women.

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:39 (seventeen years ago) link

Damn fine post/article. I'm not saying that I buy the argument in its entirety, but it's intellectually engaging, knowledgeable and well-written (i.e., fun to read). More important, he/she's putting forward a personal, incisive view of something that far to many people discuss solely in terms of received platitudes. Jane/Josh is actually listening, thinking and making unexpected connections.

And that isn't enough, of course. It isn't enough just to think about stuff in a complex and original manner. If the post was completely off-base, all the above criticisms would make sense. But it isn't completely off-base. It makes a great deal of sense on a number of levels.

The desire of many R&B artists over the past decade-plus to present a tougher, more serious public image seemingly has resulted in sleek, minimal, rap-inflected and melodically restrained performances. And teenpop really did step up into the resulting void to offer unrestrained melodic pop with all of its unserious/unsexy baggage. That's the central point (the Beyonce tune just being an intellectual hook), and it's completely valid.

But the most interesting thing about the article is the way it centers the locus of authority in the discourse. I mean, it's a truism that hip-hop is "the center of authority in popular culture." Sure, but I like the way Jane asserts that teenpop is (by implication) the center of non-authority and goes on to explore the consequences.

Hip-hop, a profoundly masculine expression, assumes cultural authority, but must dispense with anything that might symbolically feminize it: melody, (most) sentimentality, love, compassion, weakness, etc. Teenpop, on the other hand, accepts its own lack of (masculine) authority, and this frees it to express/explore a much wider musical and emotional scope. R&B is caught in the middle, stretched between the repressive authority of hip-hop and the naive freedom of teenpop.

Come on, that's a really fucking cool idea, and at least half convincing.

adam beales (pye poudre), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:48 (seventeen years ago) link

The discussion of teenpop solely in the context of r'n'b, leaves out any discussion of how teenpop could also be seen reacting to the rock and country out at the time (although Jane/Josh elsewhere asserts that the members of the Wreckers went from making teenpop to country)...

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 15:57 (seventeen years ago) link

That's a good point, Corny, but it really just expands on what Jane said -- doesn't subvert it at all. Like hip-hop, rock and country assume authority from their ostensible authenticity - their "reallness." While pop country has become more willing to take risks over the past decade or two, rock was certainly compressing its range (at least emotionally) in pursuit of vaguely punk authority when teenpop came of age.

The Beyonce tune may not be the only successful, mature, melodically wide-ranging and powerfully sung R&B tune to chart in recent years while still maintaing a measure of adult authority, but it's one of only a few to do so. And worth noting as such.

P.S. I like the article's underlying implication that pop history can be looked at as a back-and-forth pendulum swing between serious, adult authority and childish, naive expression. Pop forms arise young and foolish, then attempt seriousness as they age, only to be reinvented again and again in bright cartoonish colors, 'cuz the essentially juvenile appeal of pop will not be denied. After the exploratory excesses of the late 60s and 70s, rock becomes childish in the 80s. So, grunge comes along with a more self-important (but, really, no less juvenile) vision of rock authority, and out go the hair bands. Punk becomes the new rock Bible, and bands are expected to be angry, dark, brooding, introverted. But kids figure out that punk can be fun, too, so tons of mallpunk bands spring up, holding on the new version of rock authority, but subverting it in favor of a less serious approach. And so on.

adam beales (pye poudre), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 16:45 (seventeen years ago) link

That it found traction with an audience that had proved itself indifferent to the far-narrower B singles that preceded it is the most telling fact — not in the least in that it demonstrates how Beyonce had better dance to the tune of the times, having lost the imperious capacity to make the times dance to her own tune.

There's a strong idea and argument here, but the writing is a goddam prepositional trainwreck.

Roy Kasten (Roy Kasten), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 16:54 (seventeen years ago) link

That is an interesting tension, I think people are resisting to the idea that this tension isn't ongoing.

deej (deej), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 16:54 (seventeen years ago) link

yes; also that 'irreplaceable' specifically signifies any sort of pendulum swing, esp given how melody-averse the rest of b'day is!

if anything it's mainstream hip-hop which has been embracing melody more and more with its increasingly massive riffs (eg 'what you know'), catchy choruses (chamillionaire, fiddy &c &c), opulent arrangements (kanye) et al.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:16 (seventeen years ago) link

also i'm not convinced that teenpop and r&b have so much overlap that the former felt the need to fill the gap the latter left - if anything stuff like hilary duff, ashlee simpson, lindsay lohan is filling the gap britney and xtina left when they grew up (and went r&b-ish), taking their cues from avril lavigne.

paris hilton is the only one who ties the two together! that one slightly rocky cassie album track which sounds like h duff notwithstanding.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:19 (seventeen years ago) link

"...if anything, it's mainstream hip-hop which has been embracing melody more and more with its increasingly massive riffs, catchy choruses, opulent arrangements..."

Good point, Lex. OTM, of course. But that's really just the other side of the same coin.

adam beales (pye poudre), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:36 (seventeen years ago) link

This whole thread is bonkers. Those who forget Gier Hongro are doomed to repeat him.

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 17:38 (seventeen years ago) link

I was wondering when someone was going to say that.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Just for the record, I'd say the issue in question here is probably less about "melody" and more about chord structure -- on one side, the way dance and hip-hop need to use tense, static structures, and on the other, the way pop ballads/country/teenpop are full of big chord changes, key changes, chromatic developments, etc. That's pretty obviously linked to the vocal melodies, too, but it's worth being wary of just calling it "melody" -- there's a difference in there important enough that pointing it out isn't just pedantry.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:06 (seventeen years ago) link

yeah it just seems sort of arbitrary to pick this song, which isn't even as big as a song like "We Belong Together"

deej (deej), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:08 (seventeen years ago) link

We Belong Together affirming what Nabisco's saying too i think

deej (deej), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:19 (seventeen years ago) link

Nabisco OTM, and Deej, too.

It is arbitrary to pick this tune as thee single song that's gonna save R&B from itself, or whatever. We Belong Together is just as good a candidate, sure.

I just think that Jane's larger arguments are interesting and compelling completely independent of this particular song.

adam beales (pye poudre), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:29 (seventeen years ago) link

I want actual stats and charts. I've worked out that Cherish's "Do It To It" uses a range of an octave, and only two chords, and that "Irreplaceable" has a range of about an octave and a half, and five chords, but I'd like to see more.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 18:33 (seventeen years ago) link

You'd need a more flexible formula than that, though, J! I mean, you could have a narrow range and few chords, but if those chords are all like major-minor changes and the vocals are hitting them at weird harmonies, then ... well, it'd be interesting to see someone try to come up with a workable Geir Hongro Memorial Melodic/Harmonic Activity Index.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:21 (seventeen years ago) link

Actually, I suppose most combinations of few chords / narrow range / lots of Hongroid activity are going to come from exactly the kinds of guitar and synth acts G.H. likes, where there's the drive to write songs in those "melodic" terms and yet keep them simple and punchy and unshowy and all.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:24 (seventeen years ago) link

"Hongroid."

adam beales (pye poudre), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:26 (seventeen years ago) link

"crazy in love" = basically three chords = punk, obv

(unless i'm forgetting a bridge)

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Nabisco is basically OTM about the difference being in big chord changes rather than solely melodic. Also I'd be wary of suggesting that 'melodic range' solely = difference between the highest and lowest note. A song can have a range of four octaves and still only use relatively few notes (not that this is in any way proportional to the quality of the song obv).

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:40 (seventeen years ago) link

I think what I'm getting at is a sense of melodic... fluidity? Its what separates the melody of She Loves You from that of Get Back (to use the most rockist example possible).

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:43 (seventeen years ago) link

Haha isn't that basically Geir's touchstone division -- likes pop Beatles, hates all blues-based Beatles songs? I always thought of that as like the beautiful mind-boggling core of his dogmatism, the fact that there was a specific black-and-white line (ha) where he could love the Beatles' writing, but as soon as a 12-bar blues progression came into it, it was awful. (I seem to remember people asking him about Beatles songs that were kind of on the border, and he had them all neatly separated to one side or another.)

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:48 (seventeen years ago) link

She Loves You from that of Get Back

who are these by?

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 19:58 (seventeen years ago) link

on one side, the way dance and hip-hop need to use tense, static structures, and on the other, the way pop ballads/country/teenpop are full of big chord changes, key changes, chromatic developments, etc

surely this is also about performance as much as actual melody - if yr aesthetic is to emphasise the big chord changes and so on you'll sing them with a lot more gusto than if you want to play it ice-cold. i suspect a lot of melody gets hidden beneath how various r&b ice queens choose to play it. people who know about music theory beyond grade 5 feel free to correct me.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:00 (seventeen years ago) link

That might be true in a few cases, Lex -- especially with r&b, which has the potential to go in either direction -- but by and large you just don't write those sorts of changes into most sorts of hip-hop, dance music, etc. They just don't fit with what the music does. That's true of (say) a steady James Brown vamp, where anything more than periodic blues-type changes (I-IV-V, right?) would kind of ruin the groove; it's true of (for instance) techno, where adding flowing pop chord changes instantly changes what you're doing into Euro-pop; it's true of hip-hop, where no matter what you sample, you want to be able to reduce it to a few chords in a steady loop. And that's because part of what makes all those genres compelling is the way they have a predictable groove -- as soon as you hear it, you know what the groove is, and the expectation is that it will repeat, and that you can sink into it that way.

The cool thing about r&b right now -- and the reason why a lot of it has been really interesting over the past decade or so -- is that it's poised right between those two things. It's borrowed that repeating-groove aspect back from hip-hop, as well as hip-hop's advancement into synthetic and electronic sounds. But the connection to singing ballads and gospel keeps the other foot in the singing-songs-with-chord-changes turf. It has the opportunity to do whatever it wants, really, and so it's not surprising that some of the big smashes of the past years have been expensive combinations of those camps -- Timbaland/Timberlake "Cry Me a River"/"My Love" stuff is suspended just about exactly halfway between chord-changing ballad and static hip-hop (or really it's kinda fully both, not a difference-splitting but a way of having both entirely).

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:19 (seventeen years ago) link

(Haha for evidence of that first paragraph, just imagine "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" with everything as it's supposed to be except they're playing it in that C / Am / F / G doo-wop pattern, one chord per bar. The funk vanishes. It turns into an okay Stax/Motown backing track, but the funk definitely vanishes.)

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:24 (seventeen years ago) link

Haha Nabisco I was deliberately trying to avoid breaking it down into black and white (which was why I didn't pick Come Together), but I couldn't think of a non-bluesy Beatles song that quite fit.

Okay, a song like She Loves You is fluid melodically in the way that something like Losing My Religion isn't.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:36 (seventeen years ago) link

Haha you're cutting it close on that one, Matt! Plus someone might complain about using the word "fluid" in that comparison, because "She Loves You" is tightly regimented into blocks, whereas "Losing My Religion" flows through its melodies in a much more liquid way. But yeah, "She Loves You" makes a show of the vocal harmonies and guitar fills and chord changes in a way that, from today's standpoint, sounds as antique and stylized as Tin Pan Alley or music-hall, whereas "Losing My Religion"'s chord changes are spread far apart and meant to be anticipated and crash hard. (Actually I'm suddenly thinking you could draw odd connections between like "Losing My Religion" and "Cry Me a River" in these terms, apart from the singing.)

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 20:56 (seventeen years ago) link

'fluid' is subjective but 'losing my religion' would be quite a good example of it i think! something to do with the ease with which one melodic passage will go into another? i've never heard this 'she loves you'.

if we're talking fluidity, i don't think 'irreplaceable' is at all fluid - it seems awkward, gulpy, which of course is entirely fitting thematically - it's this which undercuts the "female empowerment" of the lyrics. 'we belong together' is totally fluid though.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:04 (seventeen years ago) link

i've never heard this 'she loves you'.

Jesus Christ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CGL4Wjg_0k

Mr. Que (Party with me Punker), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:07 (seventeen years ago) link

oh god that song is vile!! i couldn't get all the way through it, ugh mccartney's face is so smackable, watching it bob up and down like that made my fingers itch. aaargh HATE HATE HATE. i hope i never hear that again!

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Hahaha I love this imaginary rock Lex lives under that somehow filters out commonplace musical information but still allows him to know the freezing point of water or who Margaret Thatcher is.

nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:19 (seventeen years ago) link

Someone had to explain that a radiator is full of water not so long ago, so don't get carried away with that theory.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:39 (seventeen years ago) link

It's a good song, not a great one; nobody thinks its within seven rungs of "Crazy in Love" on the ladder of the Ideal Pop Song.

wtf, "Crazy in Love" was mediocre and "Irrepaceable" is FANTASTIC. I don't think there's some great mystery at work here, it just has a really good melody.

Goodtime Slim, Uncle Doobie, and the Great Frisco Freakout (bernard snowy), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 21:50 (seventeen years ago) link

Andrew, no one is denying the melody of "Irreplaceable," some of us are just denying the significance Josh/Jane has given it in the context of popular music today...And yes, some of us, maybe for rhythm reasons more than melody, or for the vocals, do like "Crazy in Love," better.

cornyrocker (DC Steve), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 22:56 (seventeen years ago) link

I think the implied significance is just a rhetorical flourish. I'm sure Joshua would admit if pressed that "Irreplaceable" is one among many.

It would have made more sense actually had he drawn attention to Ne-Yo's involvement - having also penned "So Sick" and "Unfaithful" he's the posterboy for Respectable Ballads in the 06, so he works as a figurehead for one end of the dialectic in a way that Beyonce doesn't really.

Perhaps where Joshua's article falls short is that by setting up this process as a pendulum swing he's simplyfing the dialectic. To some extent Beyonce's problem to date has been finding ways to make ballads which don't abandon the qualities which her uptempo singles formerly possessed in spades. "Irreplaceable" actually works because it's less "full of big chord changes, key changes, chromatic developments" than most of her previous ballads, so it retains some of the tension and tautness of, say, "Say My Name" or "Baby Boy". I'd have to listen to it again but I was under the impression that "Irreplaceable" doesn't even have a big key change, although the middle-eight packs an equivalent punch.

This is not to say that it isn't notable that the biggest single from Beyonce's new album is a ballad-of-sorts - but I think one reason it's big is that it's a ballad that people who have only liked Beyonce's uptempo work can click with.

Tim F (Tim F), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 23:21 (seventeen years ago) link

(xpost)

Well, right, that's what I'm saying: it doesn't have any great significance, it's just a really good song. Those do tend to come along every once in a while, and sometimes the temptation to read too much into them is overwhelming. Hell, I've been known in moments of argumentativeness to claim that it will singlehandedly save the album format.


RANDOM SIDENOTE: I know an inexplicably large number of women who completely hate this song and, by extension, any man who enjoys it. I've heard multiple suggestions that guys "only like it because of the video" (haven't seen it yet, but judging by tone of the song, I wouldn't exactly expect a Pussycat Dolls-style skank-o-rama -- am I way off base here?); one woman I work with actually said she "lost respect for [me]", and I got the feeling she was only half joking. Beyonce for Mariah of the oughties?

Goodtime Slim, Uncle Doobie, and the Great Frisco Freakout (bernard snowy), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 23:22 (seventeen years ago) link

one month passes...
So Beyonce sung "Listen" on the Grammys instead but....

02/02/07
http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2007/02/02/beyonce_still_irreplaceable_on_top_of_th

"Beyonce Knowles' Irreplaceable has notched up a ninth week at the top of the US singles chart.

The hit, which first hit number one in early December, has kept Fall Out Boy's This Ain't A Scene, It's An Arms Race at number two and Nelly Furtado's Say It Right at number three for a second successive week.

The highest debut on the new Billboard chart belongs to Brit Lily Allen, whose Smile enters the countdown at number 83."

curmudgeon (DC Steve), Monday, 12 February 2007 22:27 (seventeen years ago) link

"Irreplaceable" is a mind-bogglingly stupid, confused song that seems to conflate being able to buy someone a car with being able to keep them from cheating on you. Also, if this is an "empowerment song", why is she so hell-bent on picking up another meaningless boytoy whom she can disdain into cheating on her? Finally, exactly what is the point of telling someone "don't think you are irreplaceable" as you're kicking them out? Isn't it kind of obvious at that point that you think they're replaceable?

Basically all this song has shown me is that Beyonce sometimes says some stupid shit when she gets mad; "Ring The Alarm" is a much more coherent take in terms of narrative sense as well as being much more successful in making me identify with the protagonist. Also, the transition into the chorus of "Irreplaceable" is a big pile of unimaginative shit.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 04:08 (seventeen years ago) link

i cant even remember if i ever liked this I hate it so much now

deej (deej), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 06:00 (seventeen years ago) link

It's got the chord changes of Closing Time

Not For Use as Infant Nog (A-Ron Hubbard), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 06:20 (seventeen years ago) link

these are good points. (esp. dan's about the chorus, and i would add that the climax of the chorus -- the actual "irreplaceable" moment -- barely arrives at all. there's no resolution or anything, the melody seems to just dissipate like milk in water.)

still, in spite of or because of all that, a 100 percent pop classic. (which "ring the alarm" is not quite, despite being a better song.)

tipsy mothra (tipsy mothra), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 07:17 (seventeen years ago) link

Dan you are so wrong about this that little babies die every time your fingers hit the buttons on your keyboard.

Tim F (Tim F), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 10:19 (seventeen years ago) link

"Irreplaceable" is a mind-bogglingly stupid, confused song that seems to conflate being able to buy someone a car with being able to keep them from cheating on you.

this isn't what she says at all. she mentions the car because it's an insult-to-injury thing, like he's slept with another girl in HER BED.

Also, if this is an "empowerment song", why is she so hell-bent on picking up another meaningless boytoy whom she can disdain into cheating on her?

well it's not a straight-up empowerment song, is it? it's an expression of all the confusion/pride/conflict one feels when a relationship ends, and this totally includes meaningless casual sex as revenge on yr ex.

Finally, exactly what is the point of telling someone "don't think you are irreplaceable" as you're kicking them out? Isn't it kind of obvious at that point that you think they're replaceable?

well, no, not at all, not if you’ve been left no other option than to kick them out after you discovered that they were being unfaithful! beyonce is underlining, to him, that she’s not simply doing this to save her pride, but she really will get over him just like that. (of course, she’s lying to herself, which is what makes the song so effective.)

Basically all this song has shown me is that Beyonce sometimes says some stupid shit when she gets mad; "Ring The Alarm" is a much more coherent take in terms of narrative sense as well as being much more successful in making me identify with the protagonist.

this is true, and it’s exactly why ‘irreplaceable’ is the more emotionally affecting song (though ‘ring the alarm’ is fabulous’ as well). incoherent stupid shit when you’ve just been emotionally shattered? EXACTLY.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 10:34 (seventeen years ago) link

It's weird, I always assumed that everyone believed that in 'irreplaceable' Beyonce was lying to herself and to him, building up this image of herself as the breadwinner who could kick out her boytoy for any infraction and replace him any minute, and then the moment the song was over and his back turned she'd collapse. And then the video was so literal, and in interviews Beyonce herself seems to be taking the song straight, all this chat about how it's 'empowering'... I suppose it's kind of empowering that she's staking a claim for the kind of braggadocio identity some guys adopt in hip-hop, big pimping, economically and emotionally in control, never pussywhipped, and so on. But since it isn't all that convincing (& why is this - because it doesn't seem emotionally true? because women are demonstrably fools for wuv? because her delivery suggests otherwise?), how 'empowering' can it be?

'telling me / i ain't going to find another man like you'
man clearly does not think he's irreplacaeble! presumably he thinks she'll come crawling back, but she's never going to do that, she's too strong, she never needed him anyway, he was just some man, etc etc etc.

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 12:57 (seventeen years ago) link

I will admit that the rhetoric surrounding "Irreplaceable" irritates me more than the actual song itself (except for that fucking awful pre-chorus). Cis is totally OTM here; every time Beyonce opens her mouth to talk about this song, I think she gets dumber.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:04 (seventeen years ago) link

do you really think beyoncé's going to say outright in interviews "the song is a lie to myself"? that is not the sort of thing i've ever heard any pop star admit to, it would be...too revealing. i'm not sure it matters what beyoncé says about it.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:08 (seventeen years ago) link

(& why is this - because it doesn't seem emotionally true? because women are demonstrably fools for wuv? because her delivery suggests otherwise?)

keep trying to formulate response along the lines of - the fact that it's a ballad in the first place creates this fundamental disjoint between the words and the music, the independent-woman braggadocio fronting which comes out of beyoncé's mouth (inc the inevitable focus on the economics of it all) at complete odds with not just her overtly emotional delivery but also with the sappy acoustic guitar and predictable ballad chord changes. it hasn't come out right though.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:12 (seventeen years ago) link

I suppose it's kind of empowering that she's staking a claim for the kind of braggadocio identity some guys adopt in hip-hop, big pimping, economically and emotionally in control, never pussywhipped, and so on. But since it isn't all that convincing (& why is this

also: she has built up very effectively, that exact image many, many times before! it's virtually her default persona. so we know what beyoncé sounds like when she's being empowering, we know she's very good at it, and we know that this is not it.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:18 (seventeen years ago) link

She could say 'the song is about throwing your man out, telling yourself you'll get through it, cos you will eventually', though? 'myself' doesn't really come into it, I've not seen anything that suggests it's autobiographical.

It really makes me wonder, though: I think Beyonce puts in a really great performance on the song, she knows how to sing it - and then she goes around acting like she can't see any of the subtlety, and I start to think 'maybe she has to believe in its literal truth to sing it as well as she does...' so that, I don't know, every performance is at the emotional point before you realise you're lying to yourself, or something.

yes to recognisable signifiers of ballad form affecting perception etc.

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:21 (seventeen years ago) link

is the disjoint not between the idea of the strong woman casually tossing aside man who has done her wrong, with replacement ready, as though he were a nothing... and the idea that cheating on her is this crime that must be punishable by immediate cessation? ie, if he was that unimportant in first place, surely anything he might do is of no great consequence to B in the first place.

unless the song is about pride rather than enpowerment. perhaps you might say they are the same thing. but i'm not sure about that.

Subtractive Synthesis (Subtractive Synthesis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:24 (seventeen years ago) link

the song is definitely about pride.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:24 (seventeen years ago) link

Anyway if she's talking about/selling this as an 'empowerment anthem', does she want to undermine that by talking about how its a lie underneath?

Subtractive Synthesis (Subtractive Synthesis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Pride for B
Empowerment for....women (who's she selling the 'idea' to). B doesn't need empowerment (in her mind), but pride is all

?

Subtractive Synthesis (Subtractive Synthesis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:26 (seventeen years ago) link

'maybe she has to believe in its literal truth to sing it as well as she does...'

or maybe she is STILL lying to herself, and still in denial!

or: sometimes, even after you've admitted to yourself that you're lying to yourself, and have come to terms with that...you're still not going to give the other party the pleasure of seeing it, so you carry on with your public face at all times.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:26 (seventeen years ago) link

Anyway if she's talking about/selling this as an 'empowerment anthem', does she want to undermine that by talking about how its a lie underneath?

precisely! especially as it's the kind of song where you hope by repeating its words to yourself enough times, you will eventually believe them. any public concession to their untruth would SHATTER YR FRAGILE EMOTIONAL WORLD, etc.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:28 (seventeen years ago) link

pride more than empowerment, that's a good way of putting it. esp with the double-edgedness of pride.

it's virtually her default persona
but you can't mesh it with the buckwild crazy needy mad-eyes persona (cf deja vu etc), or the service-your-man one (cf cater 2 u, naughty girl, etc).


lex you sound like you're implying it's based in real life, watch it. :(

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:37 (seventeen years ago) link

and where is the rule that her persona in interviews and her persona in songs have to be the same?

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:37 (seventeen years ago) link

it is possible to take the 'new criticism' thing too far.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:42 (seventeen years ago) link

i mean basically what we are all saying was neatly summed up by Dan:

every time Beyonce opens her mouth to talk about this song, I think she gets dumber

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:42 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost I don't even know what a new criticism is. ^_^

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:43 (seventeen years ago) link

it was written in character after dreamgirls wasn't it? (which i still haven't seen, must rectify.) i do think that whether based on real life or not, it's not the kind of song which should have the curtain pulled back on it like that.

but you can't mesh it with the buckwild crazy needy mad-eyes persona (cf deja vu etc), or the service-your-man one (cf cater 2 u, naughty girl, etc).

indeed, though for whatever reason submissive/needy solo beyoncé hasn't stuck as a persona in the way that shark-eyed businesswoman DC beyoncé did. i guess until now she's backed it up with some pretty no-nonsense beats.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:43 (seventeen years ago) link

i mean basically what we are all saying was neatly summed up by Dan:

every time Beyonce opens her mouth to talk about this song, I think she gets dumber

no, dan's completely wrong, we have established exactly why it would be a bad idea for beyoncé (or any pop star doing a similar song) to openly talk about how it's a lie! it doesn't matter what she says in interviews, anyway.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:44 (seventeen years ago) link

maybe we just like shark-eyed businesswoman more than submissive&needy, and so pay more attention to it?

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:45 (seventeen years ago) link

ha, indeed

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:50 (seventeen years ago) link

it does matter what she says in interviews: it makes me think she's being dumb, whether intentionally (to sell her 'empowerment' angle on the song) or not. By thinking about it at all we're pulling the curtain back, why would it be any different if Beyonce were more eager to appear smrt in interviews?

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:51 (seventeen years ago) link

the problem with beyonce is, that is exactly how nuanced her stuff gets. you're either parody of old-style dependent woman or fucking nightmare materialist headcase.

xpost

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:52 (seventeen years ago) link

i tend to pay no attention to what any popstar says in interviews though! i mean, when i talked to pusha t he didn't know what a choir was, which is arguably dumber than beyoncé not bothering to go into the complexities of 'irreplaceable's narrative.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 13:55 (seventeen years ago) link

Now that I'm a little embarrassed by my ridiculous claims upthread, I'm closer to what Xgau said in his most recent Consumer Guide: something about how in this song "hook subsumes meaning."

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:08 (seventeen years ago) link

doesn't the fact that someone other than Beyonce wrote the lyrics kinda mean that it's entirely possible that she doesn't totally understand the song herself and it doesn't really matter what she thinks about it?

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:09 (seventeen years ago) link

surely what she thinks about it matters to her performance of the song?

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:10 (seventeen years ago) link

well, given that she's a robot, I don't think it matters how she feels, just that she gets the words right.

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:12 (seventeen years ago) link

I said back in December that I like Beyoncé best "when her insistent blare is out-flared by the beats, when her personality is subsumed in the sonic atmosphere, when her vocals work as texture (consonants and vowels) rather than content (words, ideas, emotions)."

What she says in interviews is irrelevant.

sw00ds (sw00ds), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:13 (seventeen years ago) link

More Jane Dark fun.

I'd love Dan's take.

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:14 (seventeen years ago) link

don't fancy sw00ds' idea much. content is nice.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:27 (seventeen years ago) link

not saying it's true of everyone, or even of most. and there's content in sounds--moods, emotions, etc.

sw00ds (sw00ds), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:30 (seventeen years ago) link

i love Dark's Dreamgirls thing. honestly, the way every critic (even those who otherwise disparage the movie) has been describing jennifer hudson's "showstopping" performance has more or less convinced me that i would very likely hate that part.

sw00ds (sw00ds), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:33 (seventeen years ago) link

The Cocker-Jagger comparison is interesting, and I really like this: "That Aretha happens to be transcendently magnificent within that style is a fact about her, not about the style."

sw00ds (sw00ds), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:36 (seventeen years ago) link

sounds to me like a way of getting round the meanings of the words -- entirely understandable, this being beyonce, but still.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:38 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't know if it's "getting round the meanings" or just not relying on a coherent narrative to supply the meaning. I love words, and I have a long list of favourite lyricists, but I mostly hear the words the same way I hear guitar parts and drum beats--as riffs. Good lyrics for me are usually just phrases I turn over in my head a number of times, though sure, some do add up to a narrative I can kind of follow.

sw00ds (sw00ds), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 14:51 (seventeen years ago) link

"That Aretha happens to be transcendently magnificent within that style is a fact about her, not about the style."

This remark should be posted atop every rock critic's computer. It's probably the most compelling statement regarding a critic's obligation to delineate why an artist is or isn't worth his/her time.

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 15:42 (seventeen years ago) link

'transcendently magnificent' is pretty gross.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 15:49 (seventeen years ago) link

Dream Girls was terrible, that blog entry was OTM.

steve schneeberg (steve go1dberg), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 15:56 (seventeen years ago) link

My take on that Jane Dark post:

What complete and utter horseshit. Has this idiot NEVER heard other people's renditions of "And I Am Telling You" (including the one they all rip off, Jennifer Holliday's) and seen the glaring interpretive contrast between what every random screamer does (YELL YELL YELL YELL YELL MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE) and what Jennifer Hudson does (tender start, build in emotion, out of control bridge leading to a massively impressive phrase that shows breath control that Beyonce has never once exhibited in any of her singing)? This is completely setting aside differences in timbre; Jennifer Hudson has a darker, richer, rounder sound than Beyonce does. Also, Jennifer doesn't belt "Love You I Do" and she doesn't belt the verses of "Move"; that is saved for the coda. That nonsense was written by someone who is too busy jizzing over Beyonce's weave to give anyone else a fair shake (Anika Noni Rose could easily have outsung both of them had her big number not been cut from the movie, BTW, so this is not just the same argument from the "RAH RAH JENNIFER" perspective).

no, dan's completely wrong, we have established exactly why it would be a bad idea for beyoncé (or any pop star doing a similar song) to openly talk about how it's a lie!

Petulantly stamping your foot and shouting "I DECREE THIS, THEREFORE IT IS TRUE" is not a universally-accepted way of establishing a point, Lex.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:00 (seventeen years ago) link

neither is shouting "i can't hear you from way up here on my high horse" as you might have realised had you read my many other posts on this subject in this thread

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:06 (seventeen years ago) link

Lex, you do realize that there are different opinions from yours, I hope.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:13 (seventeen years ago) link

Your "many other posts" have the credibility of a teenage girl lip-synching to "Me + U" in a mirror. You've never once written anything that gives me the impression you know the slightest thing about music; fashion, image and public relations are way more your bag.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:14 (seventeen years ago) link

Having never read a word in print about this song I thought it was screamingly obvious that the song is about someone trying to convince themself about something that isn't true. I'm not sure Beyonce herself actually understands this, but hey.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:16 (seventeen years ago) link

You've never once written anything that gives me the impression you know the slightest thing about music; fashion, image and public relations are way more your bag.

you must not know 'bout me

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:18 (seventeen years ago) link

fwiw i would trust a lip-syncing teenage girl far more when it comes to talking about this song than pompous perry

Lex, you do realize that there are different opinions from yours, I hope.

different opinions != ad hominem attacks. ilx is a fucking hive of incivility these days.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:27 (seventeen years ago) link

A wretched hive of scum and villainy!

steve schneeberg (steve go1dberg), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:34 (seventeen years ago) link

lol "these days"

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:50 (seventeen years ago) link

ho rap is a hive of incivility these days.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:51 (seventeen years ago) link

PS: The fact that you're a published and celebrated music writer says more about the state of music journalism than it does about your musical knowledge.

Pompous Perry (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 16:52 (seventeen years ago) link

why do you even hang around ilx if its working knowledge of music theory is so inferior to yours? if that's the kind of thing you want to discuss you'll only raise your blood pressure. which would explain a lot. unless of course you like being able to shout down all argument with your superior technical knowledge of one aspect of the game. i guess this is why you don't post on the tennis threads any more (ps you forgot tennis in that list of things i know about).

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 17:06 (seventeen years ago) link

GENTLEMEN YOU CAN'T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM!

ihttp://datacore.sciflicks.com/dr_strangelove/images/dr_strangelove_large_06.jpg

Alfred Soto (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 17:22 (seventeen years ago) link

PS: The fact that you're a published and celebrated music writer says more about the state of music journalism than it does about your musical knowledge.

"celebrated"

Dom Passantino (DomPassantino), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 17:28 (seventeen years ago) link

"Irreplaceable is a pop-RnB song written by American singer-songwriter Beyonce, Amund Bjorklund, Espen Lind, Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen and Ne-Yo"

Not to interrupt or anything, but does anyone know which of the credited writers penned the lyrics, or was it a team effort of some sort? (and you can explain whether you think it matters)

curmudgeon (DC Steve), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 18:17 (seventeen years ago) link

there was a big to-do on a lot of R&B blogs and gossip sites a few weeks ago about Beyonce always introducing the song by talking about how she wrote it for all the women out there etc etc and Ne-Yo said in interviews that he wrote all the words and her contribution to the songwriting was entirely melody/arrangement stuff.

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 18:24 (seventeen years ago) link

Lex, every time you talk about music, you do so from the context of image. As far as I know, you don't talk about it from the context of tennis, which is why I didn't mention it. If you DO actually use your tennis knowledge when you talk about music, I apologize.

I would say "feel free to continue reading whatever motives you want into what threads I decide to follow" but I have the sneaking suspicion that you're going to do that anyway.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 19:35 (seventeen years ago) link

Lex, every time you talk about music, you do so from the context of image.

this is complete bollocks though and either you know it, or you have read about four things i've written ever and thus have no licence to be talking shit about how i write.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 19:48 (seventeen years ago) link

Put up or shut up.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 19:57 (seventeen years ago) link

dan i don't care enough for your opinion to do your legwork for you. my writing is all over the place, go find it yourself. don't expect me to read it out for you either.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:03 (seventeen years ago) link

Have you ever read your dilute, tepid music "journalism" over the internet to some dude you don't actually know?

YOU WILL.

And the company that will bring it to you is AT&T.

elmo albatross (allocryptic), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:13 (seventeen years ago) link

Meep.

I'd like to point out that Beyonce and crew lifted the whole falling melodic hook from Joan Osborne's "Poison Apples" song. Or not.

Either way, meep.

Jubalique die Zitronen (juicefriend), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Really the only downside about this whole situation is being on the same side as Dom.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:38 (seventeen years ago) link

roffle

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 20:45 (seventeen years ago) link

lex's klaxons review was all about image

this is cutty (mcutt), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 21:03 (seventeen years ago) link

this thread could use some plan b

coz larry (bundgee), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 21:13 (seventeen years ago) link

I think we're being a bit quick to delineate so clearly and obviously between truth and lies in "Irreplaceable". I would put "Irreplaceable" in the category of 'faith' more readily than either: it makes me think of people talking about how they're gonna be saved by Jesus etc as the house is burning down around them. It's not exactly a lie but I'm not expecting to see it happen any time soon, and even though they believe it part of them is still concerned about how awfully hot it's starting to get.

Lex's writing about rock is indeed often more focused on an idea of rock rather than the music itself. But Lex's writing about rock is the minority of his writing. Check him on R&B, hip hop, dance music etc.

Tim F (Tim F), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 22:12 (seventeen years ago) link

check him like a hockey playa

bliss (blass), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 22:17 (seventeen years ago) link

is the 'call out other ilx posters for having sand in their vagina' thread on the sandbox or ile-proper? cos

You've never once written anything that gives me the impression you know the slightest thing about music; fashion, image and public relations are way more your bag.

is not so much pompous as remarkably catty?

I don't really understand what the fuck happened there - this seems a really weird thread to be all 'oh lex you know nothing about music, only about the externals' on, especially, Dan, when your recent posts have been about the interviews and rhetoric surrounding 'Irreplaceable' and your annoyance with its straightforward narrative. idk maybe that's just me but that seems a bit further from the music than Lex saying 'perhaps one reason why cis can't believe beyonce in this song is because it's full of weepy ballad signifiers, not empowering anthem ones'. I'll grant that he's not identifying anything as specific as a clunky pre-chorus, but he is dealing with the music, and in a thread where both you and I have been talking about being blindsided by image!

cis boom bah (cis), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 23:32 (seventeen years ago) link

do we really want to delineate between "music" and "image" all that quickly?

max (maxreax), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 23:49 (seventeen years ago) link

not that there isn't a difference, but i don't know that it's so easily distinguished--ESPECIALLY w/r/t to a world-famous pop star and a song ostensibly about her relationship with her world-famous boyfriend--and i dont know that super-formalist readings of it (or really of any pop song) are going to be all that helpful or interesting.

max (maxreax), Tuesday, 13 February 2007 23:53 (seventeen years ago) link

narcisissm_of_small_differences.jpg

Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 00:35 (seventeen years ago) link

Max is correct.

I don't know if "Irreplaceable" would be nearly so interesting if it was sung by a singer of whom we didn't already have a fairly detailed "image". It's precisely because it doesn't seem to accord with Beyonce's prior character that it's so startling (this sense of startlement has unfortunately begun to fade due to the song's ubiquity).

I'm not sure that Beyonce is more memorable for being shark eyes (god I hate that term though!) than for her submissive songs/ballads/etc. It's more the case that her ballads have never been as conflicted as they are here. As I think I've said before, Beyonce is usually very literal, esp. in her ballads and love songs. "Irreplaceable" is the first time she's introduced dramatic irony into that setting.

The song in her back-catalogue it's actually most like is "Survivor", which when you think about it has the exact same message and vulnerabilities - Beyonce espousing "you don't/can't affect me, I'm better than that" while the force of her performance convinces you otherwise.

It's actually Kelly who sings it (as if this matters: the Survivor era DC is swallowed up by Beyonce personality-wise), but the middle eight in "Survivor" is most on-point here: Kelly lists all the things she's too classy or morally superior to do, but it's clear that just by making the list she has thought about it, been mighty tempted, perhaps even wrote out a long diss on the internet which she deleted only after their mouse button had hovered over "submit" for a good five minutes.

I loved Beyonce singing "Listen" in Dreamgirls (a mostly patchy film, although I liked Jennifer Hudson too). Not sure how I feel about it as a single - hasn't been released here properly yet.

Tim F (Tim F), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 01:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Cis, Lex annoys the shit out of me and I let that get the better of me because work sucked ass today. I apologize for that. I still don't buy anything he's saying about the song.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 03:22 (seventeen years ago) link

you had a bad day

http://blog.streaming.jp/user/christomoko/blog/image/39.jpg

friday on the porch (lfam), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 04:43 (seventeen years ago) link

Now you've made it worse.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 05:19 (seventeen years ago) link

It's actually Kelly who sings it (as if this matters: the Survivor era DC is swallowed up by Beyonce personality-wise), but the middle eight in "Survivor" is most on-point here: Kelly lists all the things she's too classy or morally superior to do, but it's clear that just by making the list she has thought about it, been mighty tempted, perhaps even wrote out a long diss on the internet which she deleted only after their mouse button had hovered over "submit" for a good five minutes.

yeah this is completely on point, though again i think the music is key - the lyrics hint at kelly's inner conflict but the momentum of the beats and the massive, propulsive strings leaves us in no doubt that she's convinced herself she's "better than that", and ultimately reinforces the DC image as the strong, business-like survivors they say they are. i'm not sure what the same kind of treatment would do to 'irreplaceable' - though there's a cod-reggae remix which gives it a far lighter, breezier and less conflicted feel.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 09:21 (seventeen years ago) link

"It's actually Kelly who sings it (as if this matters: the Survivor era DC is swallowed up by Beyonce personality-wise), but the middle eight in "Survivor" is most on-point here: Kelly lists all the things she's too classy or morally superior to do, but it's clear that just by making the list she has thought about it, been mighty tempted, perhaps even wrote out a long diss on the internet which she deleted only after their mouse button had hovered over "submit" for a good five minutes."
yeah this is completely on point, though again i think the music is key - the lyrics hint at kelly's inner conflict but the momentum of the beats and the massive, propulsive strings leaves us in no doubt that she's convinced herself she's "better than that", and ultimately reinforces the DC image as the strong, business-like survivors they say they are. i'm not sure what the same kind of treatment would do to 'irreplaceable' - though there's a cod-reggae remix which gives it a far lighter, breezier and less conflicted feel.

-- lexpretend (lexusjee...), February 14th, 2007.

erm, no; the lyrics do not "hint at kelly's inner conflict"; tim is possibly right that "it's clear that just by making the list she has thought about it, been mighty tempted", but it's only clear from the delivery, not from the actual lyrics themselves. the lyrics are lock-step with the production.

likewise if 'irreplaceable' has an (entirely unremarkable in the context of this kind of song) inner conflict between the words and the feelings behind them, whether we think beyonce lands it or not is a) likely to be inflected by how beyonce talks about it herself, like it or not and b) will depend on how we hear her delivery.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:24 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't really care how Beyonce talks about the song, (or when artists talk about their works in general,) but her delivery on "Irreplacable" is fantastic. I definitely agree with the assured lyrics/emotive performance dichotomy.

The Reverend (Rodney J. Greene), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:43 (seventeen years ago) link

mind you, while the delivery/lyrics split is a standard nuff trope, in this case and partly because of beyonce's "persona" (read: character, read: who beyonce is) you have to wonder how appealing this iron-clad thing is, and how cloying she can be in her other mode. pushing it into full-blown schizophrenia is probably her best bet.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:48 (seventeen years ago) link

I dunno about that. If you push it to "full-blown schizophrenia", you get "Ring the Alarm", which annoys the hell out of me.

The Reverend (Rodney J. Greene), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 10:58 (seventeen years ago) link

good thread

resumo impetus (blueski), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 11:02 (seventeen years ago) link

is 'ring the alarm' so much schizo as just straight-ahead demented? i loved it.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 11:06 (seventeen years ago) link

At first I didn't like "ring the alarm" but I got caught recently by the quiet part towards the end "how can you look at me...". That's what makes all the craziness around work, for me. And although I never found her hot or anything, she's pretty cute in the video at that precise moment.

AleXTC (AleXTC), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 11:37 (seventeen years ago) link

not that there isn't a difference, but i don't know that it's so easily distinguished--ESPECIALLY w/r/t to a world-famous pop star and a song ostensibly about her relationship with her world-famous boyfriend

Um, I don't think that anyone really believes on any level that this song is about kicking Jay-Z to the curb.

Also I can't see why it's important that it's Beyonce-the-star singing it, my love for it is due to B's performance irrespective of anything around it - and also that it's a great song - all this different levels of emotion that Lex is peeling off the music in Survivor are present here in the lyrics - along with one that I'm surprised no-one has mentioned, the regret that she thought he was irreplacable for a while, but it turns out that he's another in a long line of scumbags, and here's the next along in a minute.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 11:58 (seventeen years ago) link

i kindof totally understand the melodic range theory thing.

these days, and not only in pop music, it seems like because jumping up and down scales has been such a big thing in the past, sticking to a few notes in an intriguing way is even more, like, captivating.

sorry it's early, and this has probably been said. meow.

Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 14:55 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm not sure that Beyonce is more memorable for being shark eyes (god I hate that term though!) than for her submissive songs/ballads/etc. It's more the case that her ballads have never been as conflicted as they are here. As I think I've said before, Beyonce is usually very literal, esp. in her ballads and love songs. "Irreplaceable" is the first time she's introduced dramatic irony into that setting.

wtf is "shark eyes"

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:10 (seventeen years ago) link

lol beyonce would flip if she knew this thread was happening. i think maybe we're giving her a little too much credit

homegirl prolly wasn't thinkin of any dramatic irony, she was just bustin out a few good hooks

Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:20 (seventeen years ago) link

Beyonce has given much better performances in the past ("Say My Name", "Bills, Bills, Bills", "Bootylicious", "Lose My Breath", "Dangerously In Love", "Emotion", "So Good", "Crazy In Love"). The construction of the entire song is a shambles; it doesn't go anywhere musically or lyrically and the place it sits in is low-rent rip-off of TLC's "Unpretty".

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:21 (seventeen years ago) link

whaaaat! i LOVE this song dude. okay, BUT

i have to say that i did hear "rip off" the first time i heard it cuz that part in the middle reminds me of this christina aguilera song off the first album where she's like "a love for al lseaons a love for all time"

ANYWAY, what i think, about this song is that yes it's DIFFERENT from like say my name, bills bills bills - i think because it's way more cut and pastey

but i LIKE cut and pastey, i find it deft and clver, so i say goo girl.

Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:24 (seventeen years ago) link

"goo girl" google image search TOTALLY nsfw

elmo albatross (allocryptic), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:35 (seventeen years ago) link

Great minds think alike.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:36 (seventeen years ago) link

=P

Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:37 (seventeen years ago) link

is that the goo girl emoticon?

elmo albatross (allocryptic), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:47 (seventeen years ago) link

YEs duh!

Surmounter (Awn, R), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 15:53 (seventeen years ago) link

Um, I don't think that anyone really believes on any level that this song is about kicking Jay-Z to the curb.

beyonce girl u own this song i know jay z was embarresed when he heard this wit his big lip self u need to have this on radio its to good to have to search for it and u sho right u can have a nuther him in a minute u go girl tell yo man cuz sum people just be like oh its ok he wont do it again but u told him he must not know bout u lol

max (maxreax), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 17:47 (seventeen years ago) link

Beyonce in Sports Illustrated (and others at the R n roll hall of fame) Beyonce in Bikini Is Swimsuit Cover Girl for music theme issue! Hah.
By Associated Press
3 hours ago

NEW YORK - Beyonce has hit another high note, claiming the coveted cover shot of this year's Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue in a yellow-and-pink bikini.

"The Dreamgirl As You've Never Seen Her," a cover headline teases. There's also a photo spread inside the magazine.

The 25-year-old singer-actress ("Dreamgirls") posed on a Florida beach in the bikini designed by House of Dereon, the fashion label she started with her mother, Tina Knowles.

The 2007 swimsuit edition continues with a music theme inside, featuring scantily clad models posing with Kanye West, Aerosmith, Kenny Chesney, Gnarls Barkley and Panic! At the Disco.

A five-page spread featuring Russian Anne Vyalitsyna was shot at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland in September.

"Once the decision was made to have a music hook, one of the first settings to come up was the Rock Hall, because it's such an iconic place," said Sports Illustrated spokesman Rick McCabe. "It was a natural fit."

Vyalitsyna posed with Jon Bon Jovi's motorcycle and other Rock Hall items.

The magazine portrayed the museum with respect, said Todd Mesek, Rock Hall spokesman.

"We felt it would've been an omission if we weren't included," he said.

___

curmudgeon (DC Steve), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 17:49 (seventeen years ago) link

Beyonce has given much better performances in the past ("Say My Name", "Bills, Bills, Bills", "Bootylicious", "Lose My Breath", "Dangerously In Love", "Emotion", "So Good", "Crazy In Love"). The construction of the entire song is a shambles; it doesn't go anywhere musically or lyrically and the place it sits in is low-rent rip-off of TLC's "Unpretty".

Well, I like "Irreplacable" more than most of those songs, including "Unpretty", and don't necessarily agree that she gives better performances on all of them, so taste is a bugger, etc.

And how is "Irreplacable" a ripoff of "Unpretty" other than that both are R&B songs built around an acoustic guitar?

The Reverend (Rodney J. Greene), Wednesday, 14 February 2007 22:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Both are mid-tempo "empowerment anthems" based on an acoustic guitar riff based very heavily on the circle of fifths sung by African-American women more known for their trendsetting/trendchasing (delete as applicable to the relative stage in each act's career) hip-hop/r&b work.

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Thursday, 15 February 2007 01:48 (seventeen years ago) link

Fair enough, but that doesn't really answer my question. I didn't ask how they are similiar, (and half of that is based on circumstance, rather than anything within the songs. the circle-of-fifths thing may be a good point, but my knowledge of music theory is rather rudimentary) I asked how one is a ripoff of the other. I don't see any reason to assume that Beyonce was consciously or even subconsciously setting out to make a song that sounds like "Unpretty".

The Reverend shines like a lighthouse (Rodney J. Greene), Thursday, 15 February 2007 05:17 (seventeen years ago) link

not that there isn't a difference, but i don't know that it's so easily distinguished--ESPECIALLY w/r/t to a world-famous pop star and a song ostensibly about her relationship with her world-famous boyfriend--and i dont know that super-formalist readings of it (or really of any pop song) are going to be all that helpful or interesting.

-- max (mreadn...), February 13th, 2007.

WTF? When did singing a song that's not actually about one's own life become something only decipherable by "super formalist" readings??? Did Johnny Cash actually kill a man?

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 05:26 (seventeen years ago) link

I mean in what sense is Irreplaceable "ostensibly" about Jay-Z???

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 05:27 (seventeen years ago) link

"Both are mid-tempo "empowerment anthems" based on an acoustic guitar riff based very heavily on the circle of fifths sung by African-American women more known for their trendsetting/trendchasing (delete as applicable to the relative stage in each act's career) hip-hop/r&b work."

Dan, as long as Sugababes' "Ugly" it's hard for me to take this accusation seriously.

Tim F (Tim F), Thursday, 15 February 2007 06:03 (seventeen years ago) link

As long as Sugababes' "Ugly" exists, even.

Tim F (Tim F), Thursday, 15 February 2007 06:03 (seventeen years ago) link

hurting--maybe i misspoke? i meant that a formalist reading (by which i guess i really mean a new critical reading i.e. w/out extratextual information such as uh i dont know biographical context) is lacking b/c it takes the song to be objectively given, extant in a vacuum, separate from the mechanisms by which its produced and consumed. now i dont have a window into beyonces life but i thought (and i could be wrong but i couldve sworn i read this all over the place) that the song has been generally taken by the public (if not the critics who tend to be suspicious that a pop star might bring "real" life into what is thought of as a genre abt "image" and "surface") as being specifically referential to her relationship w/ jay-z. and EVEN if that reading of the PRODUCTION of the song itself is wrong (and i dont think its strictly true since apparently ne-yo wrote the lyrics but i dont think you can deny that giving a recently-jilted girl a song like that to sing wont bring her own attitude, exp., etc to it), the mechanisms of CONSUMPTION of the song are such that a huge number of ppl take it to be abt her and jay. (id maybe even argue that one meaning the song itself produces involves her relationship to jigga)

max (maxreax), Thursday, 15 February 2007 07:20 (seventeen years ago) link

"recently-jilted"? Did I miss something?

The Reverend shines like a lighthouse (Rodney J. Greene), Thursday, 15 February 2007 07:37 (seventeen years ago) link

i dont know; i should probably actually start reading hip hop weekly if im going to talk a big game abt biographical references.

max (maxreax), Thursday, 15 February 2007 07:49 (seventeen years ago) link

the mechanisms of CONSUMPTION of the song are such that a huge number of ppl take it to be abt her and jay

surely 'ring the alarm' rather than 'irreplaceable' though? the rihanna/teairra mari rumours, and so on. i basically agree that this tabloidy method of consumption is a worthwhile angle though.

lexpretend (lexpretend), Thursday, 15 February 2007 08:06 (seventeen years ago) link

Ok hang on, did they actually break up?

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 14:39 (seventeen years ago) link

i think they've tried to suggest it wasn't that kind of exclusive relationship anyway.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Thursday, 15 February 2007 14:40 (seventeen years ago) link

Well anyway, I know what a formalist reading is. I don't think one has to exactly "close read" this song to see that it's probably not literally about Jay-Z. But if you want to believe Beyonce is channelling her emotions about him into the song or something, fine. I just heard a Willie Nelson interview where he talked about writing this super pitiful heartbreak song (whose name I forget) and the whole inspiration for it was that his wife was sleeping on his arm and he had to get a cigarette, strike a match and light the cig all with his other hand.

----

If I bought it nigga please don't touch
And keep talking that mess, that's fine
But could you walk and talk at the same time
And It's my mine name that is on that Jag
So remove your bags let me call you a cab

Standing in the front yard telling me
How I'm such a fool - Talking about
How I'll never ever find a man like you
You got me twisted

You must not know about me
You must not know about me
I could have another you in a minute
matter fact he'll be here in a minute - baby

You must not know about me
You must not know about me
I can have another you by tomorrow
So don't you ever for a second get to thinking you're irreplaceable

So go ahead and get gone
And call up on that chick and see if she is home
Oops, I bet ya thought that I didn't know
What did you think I was putting you out for?
Cause you was untrue
Rolling her around in the car that I bought you
Baby you dropped them keys hurry up before your taxi leaves
Standing in the front yard telling me
How I am such a fool - Talking about
How I'll never ever find a man like you
You got me twisted

You must not know about me
You must not know about me
I could have another you in a minute
matter fact he'll be here in a minute - baby

You must not know about me
You must not know about me
I will have another you by tomorrow
So don't you ever for a second get to thinking you're irreplaceable

So since I’m not your everything
How about I'll be nothing
Nothing at all to you
Baby I wont shead a tear for you
I won't lose a wink of sleep
Cause the truth of the matter is
Replacing you is so easy

To the left
To the left
To the left
To the left
To the left
To the left
Everything you own in the box to the left

To the left
To the left

Don't you ever for a second get to thinking you're irreplaceable

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 14:46 (seventeen years ago) link

If I bought it nigga please don't touch

I thought the album version was the same as the single edit but apparently not!

the part where I think most analysis of Beynoce's relationship songs being about Jay falls apart is when she seems to be singing from the perspective of a relationship where either she (in "Ring The Alarm") or he (in "Irreplaceable") is financially dependent on the other, that one would be broke if the other dumped them, which obviously isn't the case. but then maybe she's just trying to frame the songs in such a way that people who aren't extravagantly rich can identify with them (as opposed to, say, "Upgrade U," where I've never even heard of half the brands they're babbling on about).

Al (Alex In Baltimore), Thursday, 15 February 2007 14:58 (seventeen years ago) link

I thought the album version was the same as the single edit but apparently not!

no swearing on my copy of the album!

i think beyoncé's return, again and again, to the theme of economics is essential to both the persona she builds up of herself as popstar, and to enable her songs to ring true to 'normal' life. she's consistently used financial security/superiority to represent more than just what it is; and, far from rendering her heartless and cold, the way she constantly returns to it kind of proves that she's more in touch with the sometimes-unpleasant details of how real-life relationships (both within & without her income bracket) function than any number of singers who prefer to sing about the more romantic, rose-coloured picture. what's that statistic again, half of all relationships end because of financial disagreements/incompatibility?

lexpretend (lexpretend), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:10 (seventeen years ago) link

Even with a song like "Crazy In Love" it's a bad idea to go too far with biographical assumptions. I mean it's not like Jay-Z and Beyonce are just sitting on the couch spooning one day and then a light-bulb goes on and they rush into the studio to let their feelings pour forth.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:15 (seventeen years ago) link

Though they and their handlers might like it if the buying public sees it that way.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:16 (seventeen years ago) link

the way she constantly returns to it kind of proves that she's more in touch with the sometimes-unpleasant details of how real-life relationships (both within & without her income bracket) function

she doesn't offer any comment on how unpleasantly materialistic life can get, just affirms it; and by affirming it by talking about ridiculous fucking bullshit brands, sports cars, and war diamonds yay, she really isn't on the side of the poor lex.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:43 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah, well that's all about playing to the aspirational audience.

Shadowcat (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:52 (seventeen years ago) link

well for sure, but i'm not going to use the end-product of that calculation as a stick to beat the allegedly "romantic, rose-coloured picture" provided by other artists. it is what it is.

temporary enrique (temporary enrique), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:55 (seventeen years ago) link

In last month's GQ Beyonce says that as someone born into the middle classes, she's "more intelligent" than people from "the hood", and this makes it easy for her to cope with success.

She then didn't add a "Why you frontin' wigga?" style html mark-up box.

White Collar Boxer (DomPassantino), Thursday, 15 February 2007 15:58 (seventeen years ago) link

no, hurting, yr right--i don't want to take it (a bio. reading) too far, but i don't think it's a wrong-headed movement; especially not if a huge number of fans are hearing the song that way--but i can already see the danger of this angle, namely, that i sort of assumed that this was the song that everyone thot was abt hov but apparently none of you did, so either i hallucinated that reaction, or its v. specific to the ppl i interact w/.

max (maxreax), Thursday, 15 February 2007 16:58 (seventeen years ago) link

Way late but anyway:

Fair enough, but that doesn't really answer my question. I didn't ask how they are similiar, (and half of that is based on circumstance, rather than anything within the songs. the circle-of-fifths thing may be a good point, but my knowledge of music theory is rather rudimentary) I asked how one is a ripoff of the other. I don't see any reason to assume that Beyonce was consciously or even subconsciously setting out to make a song that sounds like "Unpretty".

I did not use the word "ripoff" to imply intent on the part of Beyonce. I used the word "ripoff" to imply similarity, chronology and how I view the relative quality of both (I am not a fan of "Unpretty" but I would rather listen to that any day over "Irreplaceable", despite Beyonce being a much better singer than anyone in TLC).

Jesus Dan (dan perry), Thursday, 15 February 2007 22:13 (seventeen years ago) link

aw c'mon her ridiculous bullshit dazzles any cultural theory etc etc...

da mystery of sandboxin' (fandango), Thursday, 15 February 2007 23:09 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.