Cee-Lo Green Corrects The Weak, Faulty Lyrics of John Lennon's "Imagine"

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by PeterG, Feb 27, 2012.

  1. PeterG

    PeterG Hanyuflated

    9,090
    5,676
    113
    We've all been irked by Lennon's poor lyric-writing, no? Well Cee-Lo Green is a corrector of mistakes, bless his heart. His correction happened over a month ago when he sang the little ditty in New York's Times Square on New Year's Eve.

    Fans angry that Cee Lo changed 'Imagine' lyrics

    Here's the lyrics to the song, with Lennon's goof in red to Cee-Lo's improvement in green:

     
  2. Cachoo

    Cachoo Well-Known Member

    2,541
    290
    83
    Well there are two issues here: Changing the lyrics to one of the greatest songs we have in the rock songbook is --speaking religiously-- a grave sin.

    If whats-his-face had any grasp of history he would understand Lennon chose those words knowing what has been done in the name of religion.

    Idiot.
     
  3. triple_toe

    triple_toe Well-Known Member

    1,267
    335
    83
    He is such a tool.
     
  4. PeterG

    PeterG Hanyuflated

    9,090
    5,676
    113
    I can only imagine.

    :p
     
  5. Ozzisk8tr

    Ozzisk8tr Well-Known Member

    3,930
    1,494
    113
    WWYD?
     
  6. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    20,822
    2,372
    113
    Saying "all religion's true" is just idiotic, anyway. Think about it, some religions teach some very horrible things and they can't all be true, that is just not logical.
     
  7. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    17,078
    3,562
    113
    But it rhymes. ;)
     
  8. John 3 17

    John 3 17 Well-Known Member

    1,213
    150
    63
    As much as I dislike the original words (and tune), Cee-Lo's re-write was no improvement. Both suck.

    -Bridget
     
  9. tarotx

    tarotx Well-Known Member

    1,573
    141
    63
    I think Cee-lo was trying to make it mean imagine if people allowed everyone their own religion without judgement or prejudice. People change lyrics all the time. The song isn't a national anthem or sacrament. It's a pop song. Plus It doesn't change the lyric meaning dramatically imo. I don't see why such an issue would be be made.
     
  10. znachki

    znachki Active Member

    774
    75
    28
    If you're an atheist, I'd imagine the change would be offensive.
     
  11. Garden Kitty

    Garden Kitty Tranquillo

    25,271
    5,594
    113
    I blame Purrfect the cat! :lol:
     
  12. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    For reals. Now, if he'd corrected it to "and one religion's true" it would've made more sense. [But, alas, which religion is the true one? :drama:]
    Purrfect is obviously behind all Cee-Lo shenanigans and inappropriateness. Mrrrrrrrrrowwwwwwl!
     
  13. DarrellH

    DarrellH New Member

    4,763
    375
    0
    Imagine That!
     
  14. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    7,142
    618
    113
    My first paranoid impression was that he was pressured into changing the lyrics / was afraid of any backlash to Lennon's original line.

    But, I think he released a tweet since then saying that he just wanted to make the lyrics better :blah: Write your own song. Don't change a classic. WTF was he thinking?
     
  15. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    6,486
    524
    113
    Personally, I hate that song, so any crapping on it works for me.
     
    Cheylana and (deleted member) like this.
  16. taf2002

    taf2002 flower lady

    14,654
    3,372
    113
    If you're not an atheist, that line is offensive. I'm not crazy about the song but that line has always bothered me. A world with no religion? No matter how much misery has been done in the name of religion, I would not be willing to live in a world without my religion.

    It bothered me a lot when John said the Beatles were bigger than God too. No they weren't.
     
  17. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    10,836
    2,051
    113
    I'm not an atheist, and I don't find that line offensive -- however, I'm sure that others feel differently.
    Because of that misery (some of it in horrendous proportions), I can understand the feeling behind Lennon's lyric. Although a world without religion would not be a world without misery, just free from the misery inflicted in the name of religion. Human nature being what it is, there likely will always be some "reason" to inflict intentional misery upon others. :(
    The actual quote was that the Beatles had become "more popular than Jesus" which may well have been true for some in that time/place (1966/England). It didn't get much of a reaction until it was requoted in a U.S. teen magazine months later, after which it triggered protests -- and album burnings and banning of their music getting airplay in some places. Talk about over-reaction.
     
  18. Cheylana

    Cheylana Well-Known Member

    4,994
    984
    113
    Hey, there's no such thing as bad publicity! So...good on Cee-Lo! :D
     
  19. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    18,917
    2,870
    0
    And not getting the facts right.
     
  20. milanessa

    milanessa engaged to dupa

    18,917
    2,870
    0
    :respec: And not getting the facts right.
     
  21. MacMadame

    MacMadame Cat Lady-in-Training

    17,078
    3,562
    113
    I would love living in a world without religion!

    For one thing, surveys show that atheists are more moral that believers on average.
     
  22. allezfred

    allezfred Old and Immature Admin Staff Member

    44,087
    10,652
    113
    Well, none of us has any conclusive proof that God exists, so until then yes they were. :p
     
  23. Southpaw

    Southpaw Saint Smugpawski

    12,916
    3,831
    113
    Without religion there would be no "Crime and Punishment" or Mahalia Jackson or "Annie Hall" and that's just not a world I would want to live in. :drama:

    However, a world without that...that....Justin Bieber mangling ANY song on New Year's Eve is perfectly ok with me.
     
  24. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    10,822
    2,417
    113
    Would you be willing to live in a world without countries (borders, governments, etc.)? Or a world without possessions (private property)?

    The point of the song is to imagine an idealized world that is not based on anticipation of an afterlife (no heaven or hell) or on drawing lines between groups of people to set them against each other.

    Countries, religion, possessions are all about drawing lines.

    Imagine a world where land, relation to the divine however you experience it, resources and manufactured goods all exist but are available for personal use or sharing without drawing lines and fighting over them.

    Not a practical vision for a foreseeable future, but an ideal to make us question whether we really need to draw all those lines and put up all those barriers between us.

    One could argue that it's as much an anarchist or communist ideal as an atheist one.

    But it's really not atheist at all because it doesn't say imagine a world with no god.
     
    KatieC and (deleted member) like this.
  25. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    10,836
    2,051
    113
    No the Reverend Mr. Collins or Vicar of Dibley, either, I guess. :( That would take away some of life's laughter, wouldn't it. John Lennon obviously hadn't thought things completely through -- or wasn't much of an Austen fan. :shuffle:
     
  26. hydro

    hydro Well-Known Member

    4,653
    661
    113
    Love the original song and love the original lyric. And I love how much it pisses off religious folks clinging to their dogma.

    Cee-lo's cover is just that, a cover. It's his take on it. I don't really see the change as a big deal.
     
    Rob and (deleted member) like this.
  27. Southpaw

    Southpaw Saint Smugpawski

    12,916
    3,831
    113
    Without religion there would be no "The Feeling Begins" or "Ave Maria". :drama:
     
  28. skatingfan5

    skatingfan5 Well-Known Member

    10,836
    2,051
    113
    No, it doesn't, does it. From the wiki page I linked in my previous post:
    Though, I suppose for some this way of thinking would be "atheistic."
     
  29. cygnus

    cygnus Liberal Furry

    2,375
    870
    113
    Not to mention York Cathedral, the Church in the Rock, Notre Dame Cathedral, the Book of Kells, the Parthenon (temple to Athena), Hagia Sofia, most Renaissance art...........
     
  30. PeterG

    PeterG Hanyuflated

    9,090
    5,676
    113
    I saw a video on youtube recently that included statistics that stated that things would be worse off without atheists (which I assumed was an implication that things would be better without religion being so prevalent in our lives). Here is the link:

    Imagine If All Atheists Left America

    But I don't know how accurate the statistics are that this video cites... :shuffle:

    I think the Beatles were as likely to take the p*** out of themselves as much as they were anybody else. I'm guessing they felt the mania around their group was off-the-charts crazy. They probably just saw themselves as some pop group, nothing worthy of all the attention they were getting. So when John made this comment, I think he was being flippant and meant that the kind of attention they were receiving should be directed at something greater than four young pop stars.

    :40beers: