|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
Sweet 16,
As Tears Go By,
Maggie May
My Little Angel
Claire
I could go on as there are plenty more songs, but I think you get the idea. Your stance on this I think is way off the mark. I respect your right to hold strong views, but I totally disagree in THIS context
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
I really don't care what you think. I find the subject matter reprehensible, and your defense of it disgusting.
And yet you waste time and space reacting to comments. If you don't care what others think then why not just walk away. You cast rather nasty inferences and a wide net. Surely you must expect others to call you out on it? I was not defending anything, merely saying your reaction is a gross over-reaction as I am sure the writers intent was not what you are insinuating. Are you so arrogant that you cannot even contemplate for a moment, that your "opinion" may actually be wrong regarding this song? Defending the innocence of children is never a “waste” of my time. Apparently, I am in the minority. That's OK. And it's not my nature to 'walk away'. You speak of this “writer” in the third person, yet the song is posted under your forum name. Did you write this piece of art or not? If so, why try to distance yourself from it? Didn't you write: “The intent was to suggest that the person telling the tale is more troubled by the events than he realizes or admits ("I don't know why, I always sigh, each time I think of her name -- nothing was ever the same.")”? I have been called arrogant, but usually not to my face. I rather doubt that you would choose to do so; but then, I'm not a 15 year old child, either. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
errmm...I didn't write the song 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
I have been called arrogant, but usually not to my face. I rather doubt that you would choose to do so; but then, I'm not a 15 year old child, either. I would certainly repeat every comment I have made face to face. No problem. Bear in mind I am only criticising your comments and reaction on this one, NOT you personally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
errmm...I didn't write the song I am quite aware of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
errmm...I didn't write the song errmm............I wasn't speaking to you. But thanks for playing. But you used my post in your quote, thereby inferring I had written it. So that was a mistake? In which case your apology is accepted......oh wait you didn't apologise  My bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
errmm...I didn't write the song errmm............I wasn't speaking to you. But thanks for playing. But you used my post in your quote, thereby inferring I had written it. So that was a mistake? In which case your apology is accepted......oh wait you didn't apologise My bad. You are quite right. I apologize for confusing you with the other person. I do not, however, apologize for my opinion. I need another drink.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
Okay cool, no probs...Easy enough to do on an emotive subject as this is.
And I expected no apology for your views. They are valid for you and I respect that 100%
Peace to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665 |
The author is clearly not advocating or glamourizing the abuse of a minor, right? I didn't read the lyric as either "advocating" or "glamourizing" the abuse of a minor. One of us has a serious reading comprehension problem. Well, that's quite possible. I think we can agree the lyric talks about pedophilia without clearly condemning it. But I don't agree that it "advocates" (recommends or supports) pedophilia. As for "glamorize" (make glamorous or desirable), how does the narrator feel about being in the relationship? The only time the narrator speaks about their own feelings are: I don’t know why
I always sigh
each time I think of her name
nothing was ever the sameOne could take the word "sigh" to mean "Gosh, I really loved that 32 year old rapist!"Or it could mean "Boy, I should be over these feelings of attachment by now - darned Stockholm Syndrome!" It doesn't seem to be a word that overly "glamorizes" the relationship. It seems to be just another ordinary choice in a song filled with trite and lazy "rhymes" (boy/boy and good/good).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“It doesn't seem to be a word that overly "glamorizes" the relationship. It seems to be just another ordinary choice in a song filled with trite and lazy "rhymes" (boy/boy and good/good).”
David -
You really are an expert on critiquing the songs of others. You say that this one is “filled with trite and lazy "rhymes".
On what basis do you claim any expertise in songwriting? On what basis do you presume to critique anyone's songwriting?
I have yet to hear any of your wonderful, well-crafted songs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665 |
You really are an expert on critiquing the songs of others. Am I? I never made that claim. You say that this one is “filled with trite and lazy "rhymes". Yes. Sorry,Gilley. I quoted "rhymes" because he rhymed "boy" with "boy" and "good" with "good." As for "trite", I'll defer to Pat Pattison on that one. On what basis do you claim any expertise in songwriting? I never claimed any expertise in songwriting. On what basis do you presume to critique anyone's songwriting? My comments were explaining why I didn't think this song promote or glamorize pedophilia. Specifically, I was speaking to the choice of the word "sigh", which is the only place where the narrator of the song voices any emotional response. I have yet to hear any of your wonderful, well-crafted songs. I'm not sure how that invalidates my ability to parse a song. Why the ad hominem attack?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,139 |
“I'm not sure how that invalidates my ability to parse a song.”
What gives you the 'ability' to “parse” a song at all? That's precisely the point. You critique people's songs, never having written one yourself (or at least posted one), and everyone is supposed to take your criticism seriously. On what grounds?
Why the ad hominem attack?
A better question would be -
“Why would someone who has never written a song in his life comment on anyone's writing?”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,888
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,888 |
Oh Gilley,
what have you done to the forum?
Why didn't you let that boy grow two years older
and you would have created a wonderful song.
A forum mishap.
Guenter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665 |
What gives you the 'ability' to “parse” a song at all? Ah, you got me there. This "language" thing, using "communication" to encode the transmitting of information from the sender to the receiver is just beyond me. The last couple of posts prove that decisively. From now on, I'll leave critiquing to songwriters, endowed as they are with mystical powers to understand meter, rhyme and complex stuff beyond the ken of ordinary listeners. How any of this has any bearing on Gilley's song is beyond me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11
Newbie
|
|
OP
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 11 |
I could probably change 15 to 16 (and perhaps get rid of the curseword in the final verse). But, looking at the comments here, would that make a difference? I was thinking about how I decided to write this song, and the choices musically and otherwise, and I suspect that in the back of my mind was that 1971 film, Summer of '42. A boy, who is also 15, has his first sexual experience with an older women. She's closer to the boy's age, being in her 20s, but she is still an adult female who sexually initiates a 15-year-old. I might also have been affected, without thinking about it, by Michel Legrand's hauntingly beautiful score and the song at the heart of it, "The Summer Knows." I suspect I was going for the same sad, wistful feeling in the intro.
What I find interesting, though, is that Summer of '42 seems to get away with it. I wondered if the film had provoked any moral indignation at the time, so I went back and read some reviews that came out when the film was first released (NY Times, Roger Ebert, etc.) To my surprise, I couldn't find any that mentioned "pedophilia" or objected to the film's theme, or the actions of the Jennifer O'Neill character, on that basis. Are we living in different time with different sensibilities? Or was the movie just so sweet and drenched in nostalgia that few could condemn the plotline? Frankly, I don't think the movie would have worked if the boy had been 17. I think there is something about being about 15, in that stage between childhood and adulthood, that is necessary for this kind of story. But what do I know. Still, I wonder how people would have responded to Summer of '42 if it had been released in 2013, instead of 1971.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987 |
There was a more recent case in Washington State where a female teacher "initiated" a young boy and, if I recall, is still in prison. Her name is Mary Kay Leturnou and the boy was only 13.
Last edited by Don Gaynor; 07/15/13 02:12 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,665 |
Changing the age won't "fix" the problem, because the core issue is that the relationship is morally wrong. The legal distinction between children and adults is predicated on the idea that children lack the intellectual and moral capacity to understand the consequences of their actions. The adult in a relationship has the upper hand in every regard over the teenager, and that's why we give children and teenagers legal protection. There was once a sort of double-standard in play, where sex with an adult male was considered predatory rape, while sex with a adult female was a sort of "coming of age" incident. There was also the idea that it was less harmful, in that boys wouldn't become pregnant. The political and legal landscape has changed a lot since then. And in the past few years there's been a lot of high profile cases were older women have been charged with rape of teenagers. Here's a recent case of an adult teacher having sex with her student. The only reason she's not in jail is because she married the student (with the mother's blessing)! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,640
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,640 |
I don't recall the female in this song being in a 'position of authority', which would change things.
Both 90db and Don (and DCUNY) have mentioned this. 11 - 13 yrs old is is different than 15 -16, under many circumstances. Especially when a teacher or mentor is involved.
Like Gilley, I think the age choice is significant in the reactions.
If he's 16 it is no legal issue in most states (provided no authority figure is involved). Being shy of that the 'pedophile' question comes up. That's why I posted the link of the Pedophile definition .. generally accepted to be a few years younger than 15.
I'm not condoning any of it, just questioning the reactions, and trying to clarify the accusations. I honestly don't think the original post was meant to promote pedophilia. But then again I don't know the original poster at all.
FWIW in the Letorneau case, the boy was 12 ..
Last edited by rharv; 07/15/13 07:23 PM.
Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,074
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,074 |
My take on this is that the wrong issue is being discussed. <my two cents> It isn't a question of whether the song has offended some people, because it clearly has. But there are two distinct groups and their opinions about what is OK are different. Therefore we can never get consensus based on a discussion of whether or not the subject is OK. Its really a question of censorship on the forum, and which group gets to decide what's not allowed. We've had this discussion several times , and it always ends up that we decide censorship is not what we want In the past we've had blow-ups when people posted songs with faith-based content. It is another situation in which two groups having opposing and irreconcileable opinions fight for control of the forum. When one group tells the other group they can't post faith-based songs because they don't like them, we quickly protest that they don't have the right to censor our posts based on their beliefs. And in a group with multiple points of view, there needs to be liberty to accommodate all of them, except where it violates other forum rules. In this case, forum rule #2 says:
2. There will be no profanity or foul language. Any disruptive language will be removed and you may receive sanctions.
therefore it is reasonable to request a change in the posted lyrics containing the offending language. But there's no rule about the songs content any more than there is a rule about posting faith based stuff. In both cases, allowing posts from the opposing group doesn't mean you agree with that sentiment. It just means that the forum doesn't have thought-police on duty. Personally, I didn't like the song either. But I don't want to set a precedent that starts an ideology war of both groups trying to set limits on the other. The most peaceable response when you don't like a post or a song, is to skip over it. That applies to all of us. (note to self: "yes, you too") If censorship DOES come into play, it should come from PGMusic, not from forum members. We're just guests in their house abiding by THEIR rules. </my two cents>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Showcase
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792
Journeyman
|
|
Journeyman
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 792 |
+1
Great post Pat.
Dennis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Video: Next-Level AI Music Editing with ACE Studio and Band-in-a-Box®
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 German for Windows is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 für Windows Deutsch ist verfügbar!
Wir waren fleißig und haben über 50 neue Funktionen und eine erstaunliche Sammlung neuer Inhalte hinzugefügt, darunter 222 RealTracks, neue RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, "Songs with Vocals" Artist Performance Sets, abspielbare RealTracks Set 3, abspielbare RealDrums Set 2, zwei neue Sets von "RealDrums Stems", XPro Styles PAK 6, Xtra Styles PAK 17 und mehr!
Paket | Was ist Neu
Update Your PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 Today!
The Newest RealBand 2024 Update is Here!
The newest RealBand 2024 Build 5 update is now available!
Download and install this to your RealBand 2024 for updated print options, streamlined loading and saving of .SGU & MGU (BB) files, and to add a number of program adjustments that address user-reported bugs and concerns.
This free update is available to all RealBand 2024 users. To learn more about this update and download it, head to www.pgmusic.com/support.realband.htm#20245
The Band-in-a-Box® Flash Drive Backup Option
Today (April 5) is National Flash Drive Day!
Did you know... not only can you download your Band-in-a-Box® Pro, MegaPAK, or PlusPAK purchase - you can also choose to add a flash drive backup copy with the installation files for only $15? It even comes with a Band-in-a-Box® keychain!
For the larger Band-in-a-Box® packages (UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition), the hard drive backup copy is available for only $25. This will include a preinstalled and ready to use program, along with your installation files.
Backup copies are offered during the checkout process on our website.
Already purchased your e-delivery version, and now you wish you had a backup copy? It's not too late! If your purchase was for the current version of Band-in-a-Box®, you can still reach out to our team directly to place your backup copy order!
Note: the Band-in-a-Box® keychain is only included with flash drive backup copies, and cannot be purchased separately.
Handy flash drive tip: Always try plugging in a USB device the wrong way first? If your flash drive (or other USB plug) doesn't have a symbol to indicate which way is up, look for the side with a seam on the metal connector (it only has a line across one side) - that's the side that either faces down or to the left, depending on your port placement.
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows® Today!
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows for free with build 1111!
With this update, there's more control when saving images from the Print Preview window, we've added defaults to the MultiPicker for sorting and font size, updated printing options, updated RealTracks and other content, and addressed user-reported issues with the StylePicker, MIDI Soloists, key signature changes, and more!
Learn more about this free update for Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/support_windowsupdates.htm#1111
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 Review: 4.75 out of 5 Stars!
If you're looking for a in-depth review of the newest Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows version, you'll definitely find it with Sound-Guy's latest review, Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows Review: Incredible new capabilities to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs.
A few excerpts:
"The Tracks view is possibly the single most powerful addition in 2024 and opens up a new way to edit and generate accompaniments. Combined with the new MultiPicker Library Window, it makes BIAB nearly perfect as an 'intelligent' composer/arranger program."
"MIDI SuperTracks partial generation showing six variations – each time the section is generated it can be instantly auditioned, re-generated or backed out to a previous generation – and you can do this with any track type. This is MAJOR! This takes musical experimentation and honing an arrangement to a new level, and faster than ever."
"Band in a Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is huge, with hundreds of functions, more than any one person is likely to ever use. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. BIAB can do some things that no DAW does, and this year BIAB has more DAW-like functions than ever."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums66
Topics81,660
Posts735,516
Members38,528
| |
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean