I desecrated a national treasure over the weekend, and I enjoyed every second of it.
That treasure was “The Star-Spangled Banner.” I recorded my attempt at it and failed spectacularly because I can’t sing at all (ask anyone who was at the halftime show for the men’s basketball game against Southeastern Louisiana; they’ll tell you how bad I am.). There was something refreshing about doing something I knew I couldn’t do well and doing it with gusto anyway.
What about those who do have talent? Beyoncé Knowles at the inauguration and Alicia Keys at the Super Bowl come to mind first. Tastes in music aside, no one can question that they have legitimate vocal skill when it comes to music. Can they be fairly accused of disrespecting the anthem?
Beyoncé caused a national stir when it was discovered that her singing was lip-synced. I was surprised to find so many people held the notion that not performing the anthem live was disrespectful. I thought it was the opposite; she didn’t want to do disservice to a song we hold dear and therefore made plans to preserve the best possible performance.
Keys’ version provoked a more common argument about the anthem, one that asserts there is a “right” and “wrong” way to sing it.
On a technical argument, based on the actual notes of the song, I concede there is a correct way to sing the song. That way is also incredibly hard to sing perfectly, let alone in front of a demanding audience who will harp on a mistake the instant it happens.
To compensate for the difficulty, we usually see personal flairs attached, whether by holding notes for a different amount of time, emphasizing different lines or shifting notes mid-word when traditionally there isn’t one. People view this as an affront to the song’s honor and integrity.
So what?
Covers of songs are released all the time that keep the words but change genres. My favorite example of this is the “Punk Goes” series, in which punk bands perform songs in their own style. The United States is a country that values personal freedom, individuality and hard work. The last of those is required to even be considered for the honor and the opportunity to sing such a glorious song, while the first two are rights of the performer that we also recognize. Because of their talent, we allow the singers to impart their own style into the song, barring major alterations.
It’s just silly to me. Only one kind of patriotic display can be shown, and anything that doesn’t match someone’s interpretation is offensive?
If you do a quick Google Images search of “the most patriotic thing ever,” what comes up first is a collage featuring the World Trade Center, a bald eagle on a dog wearing a flag, the space shuttle Challenger explosion and a picture of the crew, Captain America, Hulk Hogan and Dale Earnhardt, all set in front of a flowing American flag. There are things I would both add to and remove from that collection, but I’m not going to get up in arms about someone’s personal view of this awesome country. We have enough issues in the country to worry about; types of patriotic displays should not be one of them.
If the national anthem sounds amazing even if it isn’t what you expected, applaud the work. Those who get riled up over it show they care more about the pronunciation of the words over what those very words mean.
Logan Ladnyk is a journalism junior at UF. His column runs on Fridays. You can contact him via opinions@alligator.org.
