Going back down the musical path today, with a top ten list of cover songs that are better than the original version. This list reflects my opinions, with a brief attempt at justification for each. I based my list on some combination of quality of the song as a whole, quality of the cover, and disparity between the original and the cover (that is, how much better the cover is than the original). First, a few honorable mentions:
"Drive" by Deftones (originally by The Cars)
"Knockin' on Heaven's Door" by Guns N' Roses (originally by Bob Dylan)
"Whiskey in the Jar" by Metallica (originally by Thin Lizzy)
"Head Like A Hole" by AFI (originally by Nine Inch Nails)
"New York Groove" by Ace Frehley (originally by Hello)
10.
“Heroes”
Originally By: David Bowie
Improved Upon By: The Wallflowers
Most songs would sound better with Jakob Dylan singing them anyway, but it’s the whole package here. When you can give a song a unique sound even when compared to Bowie, you’ve really accomplished something.
9.
“Across the Universe”
Originally By: The Beatles
Improved Upon By: Fiona Apple
I can’t actually justify this one, I just think it sounds better with a female vocalist, particularly Apple’s. Her voice seems to wander its way across the universe in question with a wonderful sort of ease.
8.
“Psycho Killer”
Originally By: Talking Heads
Improved Upon By: Velvet Revolver
The Talking Heads were certainly influential due to an unconventional sound, but few of their songs were as good as their potential. Velvet Revolver filled that potential gap and then some. Not to mention, Scott Weiland might actually be a psycho killer.
7.
“Higher Ground”
Originally By: Stevie Wonder
Improved Upon By: Red Hot Chili Peppers
This one is actually close, and I certainly have no qualms with Wonder’s original. The Chili Peppers maintain the funk, but give the song a relentless aggression that it had previously lacked.
6.
“All Along the Watchtower”
Originally By: Bob Dylan
Improved Upon By: Jimi Hendrix
Such an obvious choice, but also so prominent that I couldn’t leave it off such a list. I’m hardly critical of Dylan, but his rendition simply struck me as lackluster, while Hendrix quite simply blew it out of the water.
5.
“Easy”
Originally By: Commodores
Improved Upon By: Faith No More
Of two Faith No More-performed covers (the other being “War Pigs”), this is the more widely-heard, but its unexpectedness gives it the edge. Such a far cry from their usual sound, this is another that shouldn’t have worked, but against all odds emerged as the better rendition.
4.
“Ring of Fire”
Originally By: Johnny Cash
Improved Upon By: Social Distortion
Shouldn’t a song called “Ring of Fire” be a little harder-hitting than your average country tune? Social D stepped up to the plate to fill in what was missing from this one. The original is rightly famous, but the lesser-known cover is far, far better.
3.
“The Boys of Summer”
Originally By: Don Henley
Improved Upon By: The Ataris
Not a thing wrong with the original here, but the Ataris give it some much needed energy and turn it into the kind of song you blast at full volume while driving with the windows down.
2.
“Turn the Page”
Originally By: Bob Seger
Improved Upon By: Metallica
“Whiskey in the Jar” was also in heavy consideration, but Metallica’s version of “Turn the Page” is the more emotionally powerful, a far cry from Seger’s laid-back offering of a song that really demands a heartfelt performance.
1.
“Hurt”
Originally By: Nine Inch Nails
Improved Upon By: Johnny Cash
Cash hit such a nerve with this cover that Trent Reznor proclaimed that “this song ain’t mine anymore.” Enough said.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 23, 2011
Holy Shit
You know what kinds of stories I've been seeing a lot of as I stumble my way across the bleak wasteland that is the internet over the last couple days? No, of course you don't, stop pretending like you can read my mind or access the web yourself! Oh, wait, you can do that last one, I suppose...
At some point in the last week or so, you've probably heard the name Harold Camping. Sound familiar? It should. He's that guy that said the world was going to end this past Saturday and Jesus was going to come back and take him and 199,999,999 other people off to paradise while the rest of us were boned (except for anybody in New Jersey at the time, for whom there would have been no discernible change). So, um...well, that didn't happen so much, which predictably resulted in lots of not-so-subtly-tongue-in-cheek news articles making observations about how the world had failed to end. What inexplicably happened alongside these pieces, however, was the cropping up of a lot of sympathy for all of those (literally) poor folks who emptied their bank accounts and sold their possessions to promote awareness of the coming rapture or to throw one last great big hedonistic party/orgy (one of those things being somewhat less pious than the other). Just one question here, if I may: what the fucking fuck?!
Is this for real? Are we really expected to feel sorry for these people? If you know me, you know that I suffer fools not at all, and these people are fools. Of course, many people are suckered in by religion in some form every single day, but not nearly so visibly or with such devastating consequences. So, some people in the media would have us feel sympathetic for these impossibly naive folks? They will get none from this dude. However, they may receive from me an offer to purchase a bridge in Brooklyn, or perhaps to monetarily assist me in freeing an imprisoned Nigerian prince.
At some point in the last week or so, you've probably heard the name Harold Camping. Sound familiar? It should. He's that guy that said the world was going to end this past Saturday and Jesus was going to come back and take him and 199,999,999 other people off to paradise while the rest of us were boned (except for anybody in New Jersey at the time, for whom there would have been no discernible change). So, um...well, that didn't happen so much, which predictably resulted in lots of not-so-subtly-tongue-in-cheek news articles making observations about how the world had failed to end. What inexplicably happened alongside these pieces, however, was the cropping up of a lot of sympathy for all of those (literally) poor folks who emptied their bank accounts and sold their possessions to promote awareness of the coming rapture or to throw one last great big hedonistic party/orgy (one of those things being somewhat less pious than the other). Just one question here, if I may: what the fucking fuck?!
Is this for real? Are we really expected to feel sorry for these people? If you know me, you know that I suffer fools not at all, and these people are fools. Of course, many people are suckered in by religion in some form every single day, but not nearly so visibly or with such devastating consequences. So, some people in the media would have us feel sympathetic for these impossibly naive folks? They will get none from this dude. However, they may receive from me an offer to purchase a bridge in Brooklyn, or perhaps to monetarily assist me in freeing an imprisoned Nigerian prince.
Monday, May 16, 2011
Make the Best of It
First, at least glance at this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/15/stephen-hawking-interview-there-is-no-heaven
In an interview with the UK Guardian, renowned physicist Stephen Hawking discusses his belief that heaven or an afterlife is nothing more than a "fairy story" for people who fear death. Well, who am I to argue with the smartest guy on the planet? Certainly, Dr. Hawking is not the first person to say that there is no God or anything related to that, but this is a dude who is so off-the-charts brilliant that when he posits something, you would do well to listen and consider.
This is a subject which I often discuss, and could have written about at any time, but this presented me an opportunity to emphasize a particular point. Dr. Hawking says that he does not fear death, but that he is in no hurry to die, either, adding that we as humans should seek the greatest value of our action. I've suggested this myself on a number of occasions, though I say it in a different context. Let me explain.
Where Dr. Hawking has increasingly become an outspoken atheist, I find myself to be more in the agnostic camp. When it comes to God, my thinking is that I don't know and can't know whether there is a God or, if there is, what his/her/its nature is. Frankly, I have not seen any convincing evidence either for or against, and that is what I overwhelmingly base my beliefs on. If I have a good reason to believe something, then I am likely to believe it. However, my agnosticism has little bearing on the way I live my life from day to day. My behavior is much more influenced by my philosophical leanings. I am an existentialist of sorts, and more specifically, an absurdist and discordian.
In the absence of any concrete evidence in favor of or against the existence of a God, my personal feeling is that life and the universe is devoid of any inherent meaning (which, if true, would seem to preclude the existence of God, but again, I don't know). However, true to the absurdist way of thinking, it is my belief that a person can give meaning to his or her life through her actions; or, as Dr. Hawking put it, one should seek the greatest value of your action. In short, do something worthwhile! It doesn't really matter what someone else says you should do in order for your life to be important or meaningful, it matters what is important to you. For me, it isn't important that I try to force myself to believe in something that strikes me as imaginary, a man-made fable meant to frighten people into complacency and submission. What is important to me is my ability to draw my own conclusions based on observation and reason. I see no sense in grasping at straws when it simply isn't necessary. There are perfectly good facts presented to us on a daily basis; we need only not ignore them. And where there are no facts, there is no need to fear the dark. There is no monster waiting to grab you there. Just deal with the fact that you can't know everything, just like everybody else. Not everything has to have a pretty picture painted over it. You're here, that's all, just make the best of it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/15/stephen-hawking-interview-there-is-no-heaven
In an interview with the UK Guardian, renowned physicist Stephen Hawking discusses his belief that heaven or an afterlife is nothing more than a "fairy story" for people who fear death. Well, who am I to argue with the smartest guy on the planet? Certainly, Dr. Hawking is not the first person to say that there is no God or anything related to that, but this is a dude who is so off-the-charts brilliant that when he posits something, you would do well to listen and consider.
This is a subject which I often discuss, and could have written about at any time, but this presented me an opportunity to emphasize a particular point. Dr. Hawking says that he does not fear death, but that he is in no hurry to die, either, adding that we as humans should seek the greatest value of our action. I've suggested this myself on a number of occasions, though I say it in a different context. Let me explain.
Where Dr. Hawking has increasingly become an outspoken atheist, I find myself to be more in the agnostic camp. When it comes to God, my thinking is that I don't know and can't know whether there is a God or, if there is, what his/her/its nature is. Frankly, I have not seen any convincing evidence either for or against, and that is what I overwhelmingly base my beliefs on. If I have a good reason to believe something, then I am likely to believe it. However, my agnosticism has little bearing on the way I live my life from day to day. My behavior is much more influenced by my philosophical leanings. I am an existentialist of sorts, and more specifically, an absurdist and discordian.
In the absence of any concrete evidence in favor of or against the existence of a God, my personal feeling is that life and the universe is devoid of any inherent meaning (which, if true, would seem to preclude the existence of God, but again, I don't know). However, true to the absurdist way of thinking, it is my belief that a person can give meaning to his or her life through her actions; or, as Dr. Hawking put it, one should seek the greatest value of your action. In short, do something worthwhile! It doesn't really matter what someone else says you should do in order for your life to be important or meaningful, it matters what is important to you. For me, it isn't important that I try to force myself to believe in something that strikes me as imaginary, a man-made fable meant to frighten people into complacency and submission. What is important to me is my ability to draw my own conclusions based on observation and reason. I see no sense in grasping at straws when it simply isn't necessary. There are perfectly good facts presented to us on a daily basis; we need only not ignore them. And where there are no facts, there is no need to fear the dark. There is no monster waiting to grab you there. Just deal with the fact that you can't know everything, just like everybody else. Not everything has to have a pretty picture painted over it. You're here, that's all, just make the best of it.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Reasonable Doubt
The big news today (well, last night, but I can't always get to this immediately) is that the U.S. military special forces finally tracked down and killed Osama bin Laden. This is great news and justice has been done and all is right with the world and U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Oh, wait, that's not what I meant to say about it at all. Everyone else seems pretty thrilled about all this; for my part, I'm skeptical, at least. I mean, it's not like the U.S. government has ever lied to its people or anything (insert massive sarcasm there). I'm not saying that's the case here, but my general assumption is that the government does much more lying than truth-telling, so...maybe this was just something President Obama and his guys drew up to fill in a slow news day and bump up his numbers in the polls. Maybe. That's not particularly an indictment of the president or anything. That wouldn't be drastically different from measures taken by any politician to improve their appearance to the public. That's all politics is now, just a game. Then again, maybe it's legit. Maybe we really did get him, maybe the whole thing went down just as the major news sources are reporting (except for Fox News, which congratulated George W. Bush...I'm pretty sure he didn't have anything to do with whatever happened over there). I guess nobody would ever know the difference, since the whole thing was all "top secret" and happened halfway around the world and they're saying the guy has already been buried at sea. And they say there are pictures which they might release, because it's not like convincing photos can be faked or anything. Really, am I wrong to be so dubious of anything my government tells me?
Let's just suppose, for the sake of argument, that all the news reports are accurate, at least on the major details. Even at that, I'm having a hard time really caring all that much about this. It's interesting that it happened now, after all this time, but on the whole...who really still cares? Does this actually change anything? Nah, not really. And I wouldn't be that excited if it did. I know that this isn't a popular thing to say, even now, but didn't we kind of have it coming? I don't mean that I condone the 9/11 attacks; far from it. What I am saying is, we really should have seen it coming. You know, the whole giving a bunch of weapons to this guy back in the 1980s. And then we act all surprised when he goes after us? Come on man, he was a terrorist back then too! Yeah, that doesn't make him a good guy, and yeah, he deserved probably a lot worse than what his fate ultimately was, but it makes it hard to look at the United States as a wholly undeserving victim, and it makes it hard for me to look at this as a win of any kind.
Oh, wait, that's not what I meant to say about it at all. Everyone else seems pretty thrilled about all this; for my part, I'm skeptical, at least. I mean, it's not like the U.S. government has ever lied to its people or anything (insert massive sarcasm there). I'm not saying that's the case here, but my general assumption is that the government does much more lying than truth-telling, so...maybe this was just something President Obama and his guys drew up to fill in a slow news day and bump up his numbers in the polls. Maybe. That's not particularly an indictment of the president or anything. That wouldn't be drastically different from measures taken by any politician to improve their appearance to the public. That's all politics is now, just a game. Then again, maybe it's legit. Maybe we really did get him, maybe the whole thing went down just as the major news sources are reporting (except for Fox News, which congratulated George W. Bush...I'm pretty sure he didn't have anything to do with whatever happened over there). I guess nobody would ever know the difference, since the whole thing was all "top secret" and happened halfway around the world and they're saying the guy has already been buried at sea. And they say there are pictures which they might release, because it's not like convincing photos can be faked or anything. Really, am I wrong to be so dubious of anything my government tells me?
Let's just suppose, for the sake of argument, that all the news reports are accurate, at least on the major details. Even at that, I'm having a hard time really caring all that much about this. It's interesting that it happened now, after all this time, but on the whole...who really still cares? Does this actually change anything? Nah, not really. And I wouldn't be that excited if it did. I know that this isn't a popular thing to say, even now, but didn't we kind of have it coming? I don't mean that I condone the 9/11 attacks; far from it. What I am saying is, we really should have seen it coming. You know, the whole giving a bunch of weapons to this guy back in the 1980s. And then we act all surprised when he goes after us? Come on man, he was a terrorist back then too! Yeah, that doesn't make him a good guy, and yeah, he deserved probably a lot worse than what his fate ultimately was, but it makes it hard to look at the United States as a wholly undeserving victim, and it makes it hard for me to look at this as a win of any kind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)