SoulAlive said:

^^If that was the case,bands like Jamiroquai would be getting sued,left and right.Many of their songs have an Old School feel/influence.But that's not the same thing as copyright infringement.

[Edited 8/18/13 14:28pm]

Slightly off topic, but I always liked this scene from Summer of Sam.

BlaqueKnight said:

I was done with the Grammys after the Janet Jackson fiasco. When they gave Paul Simon the award for Graceland over her and nobody even knew that album,

I wouldn't call more than 5 million buyers "nobody". I followed the charts at that time and listened to Top 40 radio and Graceland was pretty popular. I recall there was some concert that was shown on MTV I think and the You Can Call Me Al video was shown a lot. Here's a chart from December 1987, and it had sold 2 million at this point. The next 3 lists are the most popular albums and male performers of 1987 and most popular R&B album acts (USA). Janet's album is only on the R&B list and not the overall Top 25 albums of the year. Control was mostly 1986 anyway, but carried over to 87, which is why she's #2 on the popular females list. Paul's album also came out in 86, but later in the year.

[Edited 8/18/13 14:55pm]

lrn36 said:

Slightly off topic, but I always liked this scene from Summer of Sam.

Me too. The music sequences stood out. Let's just say I've never listened to Everybody Dance the same way ever again.

Zannaloaf said:

This "hit" can't seem to catch a break!

http://www.buzzfeed.com/r...-is-rapey

Everyone Thinks Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” Is “Rapey”

“‘I know you want it’ was the exact thing the man trying to rape me yelled.”posted on June 20, 2013 at 1:32pm EDT

Ryan BroderickBuzzFeed Staff

Share

1K

Tweet

174

Email

Pin it

React

Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” is the No. 1 song in the country. But the mega popular song is the center of intense criticism.

Both for its lyrics and “Dirty Version” music video, embedded above. Blogger Feminist In LA called the song disgusting:

Basically, the majority of the song (creepily named “Blurred Lines”) has the R&B singer murmurring “I know you want it” over and over into a girl’s ear. Call me a cynic, but that phrase does not exactly encompass the notion of consent in sexual activity.

The uncut video has nude women in almost every shot. But the song’s lyrics are what are most troubling for many.

And blogger Liz Terry called the song’s lyrics dangerous.

I believe that songs and videos like Robin Thicke’s, although possibly well-intentioned and meant to be light-hearted, are fuelling a culture of sexual exploitation and violence which exists more openly than ever in our society.

The video is being called an intense example of rape culture, with Thicke telling women “I know you want it” over and over again.

VICE UK’s Bertie Brandes called it sexism under the guise of “liberating good girls.”

What’s worse is that Thicke and his gang of likely lads probably think they’re doing something really great for women’s rights because their song is all about emancipating a “good girl” from the patriarchal constraints of a domineering partner: “Okay, now he was close, tried to domesticate you / Just let me liberate you / That man is not your maker.” So cute, right? So fucking Jimmy Dean. So thanks, Robin! Evidently your song topping the charts all over the planet will free the world’s women from the kind of violent or abusive relationships which, hold on, sorry, I got distracted by the, why are they… What are you doing with that… Why isn’t she wearing… oh. *dial tone*

Critics are saying that Thicke’s “degrading” song and video illustrate a frightening hatred towards women.

The Daily Beast’s Tricia Romano is, also, uncomfortable about the song’s main hook.

The nudity might be fine if the song was called, “Let’s All Have Some Fun,” but it’s called “Blurred Lines,” and the subject itself is enough to make some female music fans uncomfortable. The song is about how a girl really wants crazy wild sex but doesn’t say it—positing that age-old problem where men think no means yes into a catchy, hummable song.

Thicke, himself, addressed the “rapey” undertones of the song, not denying that it was degrading to women.

He even goes so far as to say it was done on purpose:

“We tried to do everything that was taboo. Bestiality, drug injections, and everything that is completely derogatory towards women. Because all three of us are happily married with children, we were like, “We’re the perfect guys to make fun of this.”

People say, “Hey, do you think this is degrading to women?” I’m like, “Of course it is. What a pleasure it is to degrade a woman. I’ve never gotten to do that before. I’ve always respected women.” So we just wanted to turn it over on its head and make people go, “Women and their bodies are beautiful. Men are always gonna want to follow them around.”“

While Thicke and contributors Pharrell and T.I. might see it as funny and self-parody, many don’t.

Becca Knowlton@berkuhhh Follow

@robinthicke 'I know you want it' was the exact thing the man trying to rape me yelled. Thanks for making it mainstream and 'hot'.....

11:55 PM - 19 Jun 13

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

1-800-THECAKE@Let_Go_July_23 Follow

@robinthicke "blurred lines" and how "she knows she wants it." Let's get something straight: There are no "blurred lines." RAPE IS RAPE. And

5:30 PM - 18 Jun 13

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

Listeners have been tweeting at Thicke, outraged over the song and worried about the fact it’s now No. 1 in the country.

MickyDolenz said:

BlaqueKnight said:

I was done with the Grammys after the Janet Jackson fiasco. When they gave Paul Simon the award for Graceland over her and nobody even knew that album,

I wouldn't call more than 5 million buyers "nobody". I followed the charts at that time and listened to Top 40 radio and Graceland was pretty popular. I recall there was some concert that was shown on MTV I think and the You Can Call Me Al video was shown a lot. Here's a chart from December 1987, and it had sold 2 million at this point. The next 3 lists are the most popular albums and male performers of 1987 and most popular R&B album acts (USA). Janet's album is only on the R&B list and not the overall Top 25 albums of the year. Control was mostly 1986 anyway, but carried over to 87, which is why she's #2 on the popular females list. Paul's album also came out in 86, but later in the year.

It was a well established FACT that labels were buying copies of records back then as well. Go read Stiffed: A True Story of MCA, the Music Business, and the Mafia. MCA wasn't the only one pulling that crap, they just got caught. In the 80s, the awards were almost always given for the previous year's artists because they are given AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.

Paul was popular among to 50+ year old white males who comprised most of the voting Grammy members back then. Its no secret. Who are they voting for? The guy they grew up on MJ's little sister? Come on. Add payola and all of the other shady shit going on with labels back then...nevermind. We can just pretend that the general target audience of 14-28 year olds gave a fuck about some dude from their parents' generation of music over one of the most popular icons of the moment. Riiiight...because that's believable.

We know who votes on the Grammys. Its a peer, in crowd, popularity contest among 50-something year old white males (or at least it was in the 80s). Charts are a terrible measure of popularity because they can be faked. Any label with a big budget for promotion can sway charts by buying their own stock of an artist. Grammys are and have been fixed for a long time. The Grammys are hypocritical because they pretend to be more than they are.

YOu actually tried to make a case for Paul Simon's Graceland; which was obscure at best. Nobody was playing that album on the radio. Call Me Al got some minor press but that's about it. It didn't fit the format of pop radio.

Nevermind.

Fuck Robin Thicke. Fuck Pharrell. They know what they did.

CocoRock said:

This "hit" can't seem to catch a break!

http://www.buzzfeed.com/r...-is-rapey

Everyone Thinks Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” Is “Rapey”

“‘I know you want it’ was the exact thing the man trying to rape me yelled.”posted on June 20, 2013 at 1:32pm EDT

Ryan BroderickBuzzFeed Staff

Share

1K

Tweet

174

Email

Pin it

React

Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” is the No. 1 song in the country. But the mega popular song is the center of intense criticism.

Both for its lyrics and “Dirty Version” music video, embedded above. Blogger Feminist In LA called the song disgusting:

Basically, the majority of the song (creepily named “Blurred Lines”) has the R&B singer murmurring “I know you want it” over and over into a girl’s ear. Call me a cynic, but that phrase does not exactly encompass the notion of consent in sexual activity.

The uncut video has nude women in almost every shot. But the song’s lyrics are what are most troubling for many.

And blogger Liz Terry called the song’s lyrics dangerous.

Listeners have been tweeting at Thicke, outraged over the song and worried about the fact it’s now No. 1 in the country.

what's striking

where was all the fuss by commercial critics when this record shot up the charts........

it aint like the sound of record changed once it reached #1.......

[Edited 8/18/13 18:40pm]

BlaqueKnight said:

MickyDolenz said:

I wouldn't call more than 5 million buyers "nobody". I followed the charts at that time and listened to Top 40 radio and Graceland was pretty popular. I recall there was some concert that was shown on MTV I think and the You Can Call Me Al video was shown a lot. Here's a chart from December 1987, and it had sold 2 million at this point. The next 3 lists are the most popular albums and male performers of 1987 and most popular R&B album acts (USA). Janet's album is only on the R&B list and not the overall Top 25 albums of the year. Control was mostly 1986 anyway, but carried over to 87, which is why she's #2 on the popular females list. Paul's album also came out in 86, but later in the year.

It was a well established FACT that labels were buying copies of records back then as well. Go read Stiffed: A True Story of MCA, the Music Business, and the Mafia. MCA wasn't the only one pulling that crap, they just got caught. In the 80s, the awards were almost always given for the previous year's artists because they are given AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.

Paul was popular among to 50+ year old white males who comprised most of the voting Grammy members back then. Its no secret. Who are they voting for? The guy they grew up on MJ's little sister? Come on. Add payola and all of the other shady shit going on with labels back then...nevermind. We can just pretend that the general target audience of 14-28 year olds gave a fuck about some dude from their parents' generation of music over one of the most popular icons of the moment. Riiiight...because that's believable.

We know who votes on the Grammys. Its a peer, in crowd, popularity contest among 50-something year old white males (or at least it was in the 80s). Charts are a terrible measure of popularity because they can be faked. Any label with a big budget for promotion can sway charts by buying their own stock of an artist. Grammys are and have been fixed for a long time. The Grammys are hypocritical because they pretend to be more than they are.

YOu actually tried to make a case for Paul Simon's Graceland; which was obscure at best. Nobody was playing that album on the radio. Call Me Al got some minor press but that's about it. It didn't fit the format of pop radio.

I don't care about the Grammys, only that you said that Graceland was not popular. It doesn't matter if it sold mainly to boomers instead of teenagers. Older people are an audience too. That's ageism to say that only the music of young people should count or win awards. R&B music isn't the only music that exists. Payola has always been around, so what does that have to do with Graceland not being popular? Janet didn't get on the radio without it. Labels have always spiked the charts as well. Payola is the main way songs get on the radio. Even Dick Clark was taken to court for it in the late 1950's or early 1960's.

.

Call Me Al was played a lot on the local radio stations, but none of the other singles were. Singles are not always an indicator of popularity anyway. Hard rock groups like AC/DC and Metallica sold lots of albums with little or no radio airplay or hit singles. Some acts are more popular with albums like Pink Floyd.

.

This anniversary box set of Graceland was released last year in 2012. A label would not go to this trouble with an obscure album, as it expects it to sell.

Special Graceland 25th Anniversary Collector's Edition Box Set– a 2 CD/2 DVD set which including the remastered original album, the "Under African Skies" documentary film extended interviews, the original 1987 "African Concert" from Zimbabwe, three original music videos and the iconic "Saturday Night Live" performance of "Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes." The box set also features the audio narrative "The Story of 'Graceland'" as told by Paul Simon, replicas of an original Graceland poster and a handwritten lyrics pad, plus a deluxe 80-page book featuring new and archival photos and interviews with Paul Simon. The box set also includes a special short audio documentary of Simon discussing the making of the record.

The official Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition CD/DVD – an exclusive two disc set featuring the remastered original album with five bonus tracks and audio documentary, and "Under African Skies" film with bonus features, three original music videos and "Saturday Night Live" performance of "Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes."

"Under African Skies" Blu-ray Disc – the feature documentary in state-of-the-art 5.1 sound with bonus extended interviews.

Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition Vinyl – This audiophile edition is remastered on 180-gram 12" vinyl and includes an art-quality collectible Graceland poster and a download card with the full album plus three bonus tracks. It will be available beginning Saturday, April 21 at independent retailers worldwide participating in Record Store Day.

An ultra-deluxe Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition Box Set package - The ultimate Graceland set includes the boxed set, the 180-gram 12" vinyl and a signed and numbered autographed commemorative poster--will be available direct-to-consumers during a limited time exclusive offer on the official Paul Simon website (www.paulsimon.com).

that woman's feet are ugly as hell

Wow... I never interpreted that song to be about vague consent. More about meeting a stranger who you are attracted to but can't read.

MickyDolenz said:

BlaqueKnight said:

It was a well established FACT that labels were buying copies of records back then as well. Go read Stiffed: A True Story of MCA, the Music Business, and the Mafia. MCA wasn't the only one pulling that crap, they just got caught. In the 80s, the awards were almost always given for the previous year's artists because they are given AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.

Paul was popular among to 50+ year old white males who comprised most of the voting Grammy members back then. Its no secret. Who are they voting for? The guy they grew up on MJ's little sister? Come on. Add payola and all of the other shady shit going on with labels back then...nevermind. We can just pretend that the general target audience of 14-28 year olds gave a fuck about some dude from their parents' generation of music over one of the most popular icons of the moment. Riiiight...because that's believable.

We know who votes on the Grammys. Its a peer, in crowd, popularity contest among 50-something year old white males (or at least it was in the 80s). Charts are a terrible measure of popularity because they can be faked. Any label with a big budget for promotion can sway charts by buying their own stock of an artist. Grammys are and have been fixed for a long time. The Grammys are hypocritical because they pretend to be more than they are.

YOu actually tried to make a case for Paul Simon's Graceland; which was obscure at best. Nobody was playing that album on the radio. Call Me Al got some minor press but that's about it. It didn't fit the format of pop radio.

I don't care about the Grammys, only that you said that Graceland was not popular. It doesn't matter if it sold mainly to boomers instead of teenagers. Older people are an audience too. That's ageism to say that only the music of young people should count or win awards. R&B music isn't the only music that exists. Payola has always been around, so what does that have to do with Graceland not being popular? Janet didn't get on the radio without it. Labels have always spiked the charts as well. Payola is the main way songs get on the radio. Even Dick Clark was taken to court for it in the late 1950's or early 1960's.

.

Call Me Al was played a lot on the local radio stations, but none of the other singles were. Singles are not always an indicator of popularity anyway. Hard rock groups like AC/DC and Metallica sold lots of albums with little or no radio airplay or hit singles. Some acts are more popular with albums like Pink Floyd.

.

This anniversary box set of Graceland was released last year in 2012. A label would not go to this trouble with an obscure album, as it expects it to sell.

Special Graceland 25th Anniversary Collector's Edition Box Set– a 2 CD/2 DVD set which including the remastered original album, the "Under African Skies" documentary film extended interviews, the original 1987 "African Concert" from Zimbabwe, three original music videos and the iconic "Saturday Night Live" performance of "Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes." The box set also features the audio narrative "The Story of 'Graceland'" as told by Paul Simon, replicas of an original Graceland poster and a handwritten lyrics pad, plus a deluxe 80-page book featuring new and archival photos and interviews with Paul Simon. The box set also includes a special short audio documentary of Simon discussing the making of the record.

The official Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition CD/DVD – an exclusive two disc set featuring the remastered original album with five bonus tracks and audio documentary, and "Under African Skies" film with bonus features, three original music videos and "Saturday Night Live" performance of "Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes."

"Under African Skies" Blu-ray Disc – the feature documentary in state-of-the-art 5.1 sound with bonus extended interviews.

Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition Vinyl – This audiophile edition is remastered on 180-gram 12" vinyl and includes an art-quality collectible Graceland poster and a download card with the full album plus three bonus tracks. It will be available beginning Saturday, April 21 at independent retailers worldwide participating in Record Store Day.

An ultra-deluxe Graceland 25th Anniversary Edition Box Set package - The ultimate Graceland set includes the boxed set, the 180-gram 12" vinyl and a signed and numbered autographed commemorative poster--will be available direct-to-consumers during a limited time exclusive offer on the official Paul Simon website (www.paulsimon.com).

Graceland is a masterpiece. It's better than anything Miss Jackson has ever released.

Blurred Lines doesn't do much for me. It's ok, but it's clear that he stole from Marvin Gaye.

[Edited 8/19/13 10:00am]

BlaqueKnight said:

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

I have followed his work closely. I attended a conference he gave last month. He is very articulate! He likes to think outside the box. I was very impressed with him! Especially with his work he did on the soundtrack to Despicable Me 2(I almost bought it ) I also attended a special screening of that movie that he was at. He spoke briefly there. He is no dummy!

[img:$uid]http://s24.postimg.org/mnj2lwv4l/o7u8v.jpg[/img:$uid][/url]

Who asked U? My message was for SoulAlive. NOT YOU!

Empress said:

Graceland is a masterpiece. It's better than anything Miss Jackson has ever released.

Blurred Lines doesn't do much for me. It's ok, but it's clear that he stole from Marvin Gaye.

[Edited 8/19/13 10:00am]

Graceland is also one of the records that helped to popularize so-called "world music" in the USA. After it came out I saw Ladysmith Black Mambazo (who sang on Paul's album) on Saturday Night Live and they appeared in Michael Jackson's Moonwalker videotape. On Jimmy Fallon's show today, they do skits on the group.

MickyDolenz said:

Empress said:

Graceland is a masterpiece. It's better than anything Miss Jackson has ever released.

Blurred Lines doesn't do much for me. It's ok, but it's clear that he stole from Marvin Gaye.

[Edited 8/19/13 10:00am]

Graceland is also one of the records that helped to popularize so-called "world music" in the USA. After it came out I saw Ladysmith Black Mambazo (who sang on Paul's album) on Saturday Night Live and they appeared in Michael Jackson's Moonwalker videotape. On Jimmy Fallon's show today, they do skits on the group.

I saw Ladysmith Black Mambazo several years ago and thoroughly enjoyed them.

Graceland definitely contributed to world music becoming more popular. I still listen to Graceland on a regular basis and I love it was much now as I did when it was first released. The musicianship is incredible and Paul Simon is such an amazing songwriter too.

nd33 said:

Zannaloaf said:

"Written by the singer and produced by Art Stewart" - so why is the Gaye family going after them. He didn't write it or produce it. Shouldn't the Stewart family be pursuing a lawsuit?

Although obviously that means that Marvin was the writer, you still bring up a good point, which is that for all we know, the recognisable elements of Blurred Lines could have all been brought on board by the producer. The things that link the two songs are not the chords and melody, but the drum/cowbell pattern, combined with the tempo, choice of instruments and the reggae feel keyboard. It's very common for the producer to guide these sort of elements. I'm speculating here, but it would be great to hear some comments by the producer who possibly deserves as much credit as Gaye for the sound of the original recording.

arr, never post before coffee. I read right over that part. But yeah - the sound is ususally sculpted by producers. The melodies have nothing to do with each other. So my point styandfs...just edited to reflect the sound.

MickyDolenz said:

Zannaloaf said:

"Written by the singer and produced by Art Stewart" - so why is the Gaye family going after them. He didn't write it or produce it. Shouldn't the Stewart family be pursuing a lawsuit?

Marvin wrote it, I have the record. The producer is not really relevant.

.

Did Marvin even own his songs? Motown often owned the songs/publishing of their writers. Then Marvin had things taken by the IRS. If Motown owns them, Marvin's family has nothing to do with it. It was Motown that turned down filmakers from using his songs, not the family or estate like in Jimi Hendrix's case. That's why the proposed Marvin movie was going to focus on the CBS years.

producer isn't relevant? you clearly don't know what a good producer does. Especially back in the day.

BlaqueKnight said:

This MF done lost his damn mind; him and fake ass Pharrell.

I just knew you had to tell it like you see it.

BlaqueKnight said:

I don't see how anyone with ears could deny that Blurred Lines is an interpolation of a piece of Got To Give It Up.

If this were a Prince song, the org would be full of hate for Robin. The org has gone nuts over less. Because it is a dead black R&B singer that some people on here are unfamiliar with, there is a lot of indifference about it because there is less attachment to the original artist and the source material.
The fact is, they tried to cleverly copy GTGIU, and everybody was cool with it until Marvin's family decided to say something. Now its denial, denial, denial.

Suing the original artist over something you KNOW you stole? That's just downright disgusting. No R&B head in their right mind should support these fools ever again. Robin and Pharrell should have their careers severed at the head and T.I.'s ass should be put on notice just for good measure .

T.I. 'll be like "What did I do? and folks 'll say "You was with 'em!"

Its up to people that support a genre of music to preserve its integrity.

Maybe a few years down the line, someone will do the same thing to "Lost Without You" like Kevin Hart did jokingly and Robin will feel the same sting.

[Edited 8/18/13 7:51am]

Very true.

Zannaloaf said:

MickyDolenz said:

Marvin wrote it, I have the record. The producer is not really relevant.

.

Did Marvin even own his songs? Motown often owned the songs/publishing of their writers. Then Marvin had things taken by the IRS. If Motown owns them, Marvin's family has nothing to do with it. It was Motown that turned down filmakers from using his songs, not the family or estate like in Jimi Hendrix's case. That's why the proposed Marvin movie was going to focus on the CBS years.

producer isn't relevant? you clearly don't know what a good producer does. Especially back in the day.

I mean the producer isn't relevant in a songwriting lawsuit, unless the producer is the songwriter.

Empress said:

I saw Ladysmith Black Mambazo several years ago and thoroughly enjoyed them.

Graceland definitely contributed to world music becoming more popular. I still listen to Graceland on a regular basis and I love it was much now as I did when it was first released. The musicianship is incredible and Paul Simon is such an amazing songwriter too.

I like Oumou Sangare.

theAudience said:

Jazz musician Nicholas Peyton lays it out...

Thicke and Co., Got To Give It Up To Marvin
Posted on August 16, 2013

Wow, another case of a White dude stealing Black music. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised. This is where sample culture goes wrong and morphs into entitlement culture. I don’t know how the “composers” of Blurred Lines are even suing Gaye’s estate and insisting they didn’t do an exact rip of Marvin’s tune. I’m down with writing a piece that is influenced by another cat’s style, changing certain key elements and ultimately making it your own, but this is just wrong.

And their whole defense that the song is in tribute to an era or genre, not a specific song, is wack. First off, Gaye’s Got To Give It Up doesn’t really sound like anything else from that era. It contains a certain musical artifact that is uniquely its own—which is why it’s such an iconic sound. The song is an era within itself. Not even Marvin created anything exactly like it again. It’s elements are a cultural interpolation of blues, funk, good disco, cha-cha-cha and other Caribbean elements.

Let’s break it down in specific musical terms:

1.) The sparse square wave sounding bass line is almost identical in its function to both songs. The motif is that the bass line drops beat 1 of each bar or every other bar, leaves some space, then ad libs a little bit. This is a recurring theme throughout. Blurred Lines does exactly that, except they change a couple of the chords. Maybe that’s what they mean by “Blurred Lines.”

2.) The use of the cowbell is also a central part of both songs. The only difference in the songs—and in general—is whereas Gaye’s piece is more fluid and less pattern-based, Thicke’s interpretation is rhythmically static and doesn’t really go anywhere.

3.) They didn’t even try to change the keyboard. The upbeat chord stabs that give the song a slight Reggae feel (or should I say, ReGaye) is central to the character of the tune.

4.) They even codified that background chatter atmosphere Gaye frequently employed in his songs during this period of his work. How you gon’ turn organic party sounds into a cliché?

5.) The drums are the same: 4-on-the-floor with a snare backbeat on 2 and 4 with the occasional accent on a half-closed sock cymbal.

In short, they dumbed down the hipness of the original and turned Gaye’s classic opus into a fake, Macarena-esque, line dance, limbo party type club anthem.

How low can you go?

This is symptomatic of the lack of respect younger cats have for The Masters. The nerve of this even having to be an argument is ridiculous.

The funny part to me is that Gaye had to foresight to call it Got To Give It Up, almost like he knew 35-some-odd-years ago that some young punks would try to steal his shit.

Dudes: Give it up to the master—and most importantly—give up them royalties to Gaye’s estate.

ARTISTS: (if I can even call you that) Please write some original material. I’m tired of turning on the radio and thinking I’m about to hear Marvin Gaye’s Got To Give It Up, The Commodores’ Night Shift, or Mtume’s Juicy Fruit, and hearing your thievin’ behinds.

It’s tantamount to getting your tastebuds ready for some Kool-Aid and opening the fridge to find out somebody’s selfish ass done almost drank it all and ain’t left but a swallow!

http://nicholaspayton.wor...to-marvin/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

He's not done yet.
"It ain't over!"

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Thicke’s Got To Give It Up (Pt. 2)
Posted on August 17, 2013

Since Gaye’s Got To Give It Up is in two parts, I thought it would be fitting to make my post in two parts.

I knew that a lot of folks would be pissed off at the first line of my previous piece being, “Wow, another case of a White dude stealing Black music.” And that would color the way some folks would read and interpret the rest of the piece, but, when I think about what’s so fucked up about it, the White part is it.

Let me explain why . . .

To this point, Robin Thicke has built his celebrity around Black music, and the core of his fan base is Black people—Black women in particular. I recall seeing an interview of Thicke on TV One years ago where he said explicitly that Marvin Gaye was his favorite vocalist. That really resonated with me, as anyone who knows me, knows that Marvin is my fave, as well. And after Miles Davis, he is my favorite musician, period.

It is incredulous to me that someone who owes a tremendous debt of gratitude for his success to the Black community, and who has a Black wife, and biracial kids, could be as callous to sue Marvin Gaye’s estate as a preemptive strike against his blatant theft of Gaye’s material. All respect due to Funkadelic, but I hear no resemblance to their song Sexy Mama, as some suggest.

The “White Man stealing Black music” is cliché, really, but we never should become so desensitized to wrongdoings that we simply let it pass by unacknowledged. To those who say Pharrell was complicit in the plagiarist act, I say, yes, but it’s ultimately Thicke’s record and the onus is on him to do what is right. Besides, Black men have typically sold out their brothers and ancestors for a piece of silver. Just this year alone, Russell Simmons publicly disrespected Harriet Tubman, and Lil’ Wayne, Emmett Till. Two iconic, Black ancestors exploited and used for laughs and shock value. But that’s where we are with it today; everything’s a meme, and no one is above being a target.

And the whole argument that Pharrell’s participation makes it less racially offensive, is very similar to when Whites pull out the “Well, Zimmerman’s not White,” card or the “Well, the Black community doesn’t get as upset about Black-on-Black crime as they have the Trayvon Martin case?”

Racism is not about an individual act; it’s a collective system that hands out rewards and privileges to Robin Thicke that Marvin Gaye never got to enjoy.

“Pharrell and I were in the studio and I told him that one of my favorite songs of all time was Marvin Gaye’s ‘Got to Give It Up.’ I was like, ‘Damn, we should make something like that, something with that groove.’ Then he started playing a little something and we literally wrote the song in about a half hour and recorded it.”

— Robin Thicke

So, Mr. Thicke, how do you go from knowing you “composed” a song something like Marvin’s, to suing his estate to protect your ass? See the problem is that he knows—legally—he didn’t steal any copyrightable elements. Since groove, chord progressions, rhythms, blues and vibe are not legally copyrightable, he technically didn’t steal the song. In other words, of all the things that are indicative of Black music, the most important elements are not able to be copyrighted. Another example of African ideals being seen as invalid through the Western/European lens.

Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. George Zimmerman was found not guilty of murder, but that doesn’t mean his act wasn’t morally wrong. The problem with the American justice system is that any act is both legal and illegal. What side of the law you might find yourself all depends on who you are, who you know, and how much money you have.

Robin Thicke is the George Zimmerman of copyright infringement. By suing the Gaye estate, he evoked the musical equivalent of Stand Your Ground.

I think what needs to happen here is a rewriting of copyright law. But then again, even when someone directly samples your recorded work—as in the case of flautist James Newton vs. the Beastie Boys—you still might come up short. Because Newton is a Black man who played music imbued with the Black aesthetic, the judge ruled that the 3 notes, albeit important in Mr. Newton’s composition, were not enough to constitute a song. Not only did James Newton lose his case, but I think the Beastie Boys wound up suing him. Sound familiar?

This all plays into the narrative that when you’re Black in America, there is not value to your life or your creations. Not only do your possessions not belong to you, but you don’t belong to you. You don’t own anything. You are a slave.

“We tried to do everything that was taboo. Bestiality, drug injections, and everything that is completely derogatory towards women. Because all three of us are happily married with children, we were like, ‘We’re the perfect guys to make fun of this.’ People say, ‘Hey, do you think this is degrading to women?’ I’m like, ‘Of course it is. What a pleasure it is to degrade a woman. I’ve never gotten to do that before. I’ve always respected women.’ ”

— Robin Thicke

I also think it’s interesting that he openly admitted to degrading women in the video and had this summer’s biggest hit, whereas Rick Ross lost endorsements and became the whipping boy of feminists for glorifying rape culture by talking about putting a molly in a girl’s drink unbeknownst to her and having his way, as a result. It’s cute when a White matinee idol does it, but let a big Black guy do it, and everybody’s in a tizzy.

What’s also quite revealing here is that the song, in which Mr. Thicke committed a cultural crime against Marvin Gaye, has been his entrée and acceptance into the Pop world. He went from being a fairly popular Urban artist to a mainstream sensation, overnight. He may take this as encouragement to continue in this fashion. Why not? His shenanigans have done nothing but made him an even bigger star.

As a White man, I know Thicke is not personally responsible for what his ancestors did, nor should he necessarily feel guilty by virtue of being labeled “White,” but when he turns around and steals from a Black artist whom he purports to admire, he’s no better than his White predecessors. He’s following in the footsteps of all the other White cats who stole Black music and their money.

Don’t just pay tribute; pay royalties.

— Nicholas Payton

In business, the way you show respect is through financial support.

So, I know many of you are tired of hearing it, but many of us are tired of it happening. So, to you White folks, who get upset every time a Black person calls out racism—just pause—and imagine how we must feel.

On the heels of Marvin’s song, Thicke has broken the record for the highest radio listeners ever recorded—ever—and reached No. 1 in 102 countries. He’s got the greatest radio ratings-ever, and not only does he refuse to give a portion to the Gaye estate, but he sues. Wow.

He’s missing a golden opportunity to pay back an artist he’s indebted to. Instead, he’s decided to just rip him off.

I ain’t mad, nor am I surprised, but I am disappointed. Thicke should know better. And unless he apologizes, and pays a percentage to the family, Blacks should stop financing his career.

#BAM

— Nicholas Payton aka The Savior of Archaic Pop

http://nicholaspayton.wordpress.com/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


Music for adventurous listeners

tA

Tribal Records

It's a lot to read. But I agree with everything Nicholas Payton said.

BlaqueKnight said:

Scorp said:

what's crazy about it......

critics will say the actual original version that becomes part of lexicon is outdated

but when a guy hijacks it,, the hijacker is praised for bringing the song "up to date".......

but taking it back to 1990

when Milli Vanilli won those two Grammy Awards, in particular for best new artists

it totally discredited the Grammy Award Academy for good and there were signs flying all around that the recording industry would soon tank....

they sold over 10 million copies of "Girl You Know It's True"......

which not only featured tons of samples, but they weren't even singing the songs.....

I was done with the Grammys after the Janet Jackson fiasco. When they gave Paul Simon the award for Graceland over her and nobody even knew that album, I looked into how the Grammys work and it was then that I understood that Grammys are bullshit.

By the time the Milli Vanilli scandal hit, I was already done. I just watch for the performances.

Robin is about to dig himself in a hole he can't get out of. 119 made a good point about how poorly he's handling the press around his success.

I knew the Grammy Awards were total bullshit when U2's The Joshua Tree won album of the year instead of Michael's Bad OR Prince's Sign 'O' The Times.

TonyVanDam said:

It's a lot to read. But I agree with everything Nicholas Payton said.

I understand.
But remember R.I.F. so you got the benefit of what he had to say.

I guess it's lucky most won't because then it'll just be the usual verbal melee here over Part 2 (the Black/White thing).


Music for adventurous listeners

tA

Tribal Records

theAudience said:

TonyVanDam said:

It's a lot to read. But I agree with everything Nicholas Payton said.

I understand.
But remember R.I.F. so you got the benefit of what he had to say.

I agree with virtually every word of his musical analysis. I think he nails exactly why the songs are linked by so many (most importantly his first point, that the bass lines — while different — perform the same function in the songs). We both concluded that they didn't legally steal anything from the song. He just thinks they should pay the Gaye estate anyway. It's a nice sentiment, to be sure. I wouldn't have filed the suit (to avoid bad press), but I also wouldn't have voluntarily paid money for it either. I'm not sure there are many people out there who would.

He also appears to advocate changing copyright law so that things like vibe and chord progressions would be included. I shudder to think of the ligitation nightmare that would be!

AlexdeParis said:

He also appears to advocate changing copyright law so that things like vibe and chord progressions would be included. I shudder to think of the ligitation nightmare that would be!

Don't really think he's advocating, just simply pointing out that those musical elements fall outside of the copyright laws.

But as you say, if they were, Katy bar the door!


Music for adventurous listeners

tA

Tribal Records

Not crazy about the song, but it's frivolous to say that they copied GTGIU or Sexy Ways. Journey would've had a stronger case suing Prince for Faithfully's influence in Purple Rain LOL.

There would be no suit if the song wasn't so successful in the chart. It's money, end of story.

Thicke may have opened a can of worms that he will regret with this lawsuit.

I'm sure a LOT of interested parties are paying close attention 2 the outcome of this case.

I wonder if a settlement is in the works 2 make it go away?

BlaqueKnight said:

Scorp said:

what's crazy about it......

critics will say the actual original version that becomes part of lexicon is outdated

but when a guy hijacks it,, the hijacker is praised for bringing the song "up to date".......

but taking it back to 1990

when Milli Vanilli won those two Grammy Awards, in particular for best new artists

it totally discredited the Grammy Award Academy for good and there were signs flying all around that the recording industry would soon tank....

they sold over 10 million copies of "Girl You Know It's True"......

which not only featured tons of samples, but they weren't even singing the songs.....

I was done with the Grammys after the Janet Jackson fiasco. When they gave Paul Simon the award for Graceland over her and nobody even knew that album, I looked into how the Grammys work and it was then that I understood that Grammys are bullshit.

By the time the Milli Vanilli scandal hit, I was already done. I just watch for the performances.

Robin is about to dig himself in a hole he can't get out of. 119 made a good point about how poorly he's handling the press around his success.

Nicely said and good points.