"The Star-Spangled Banner": Overview

Happy Friday blog. I wasn’t exactly sure about what I wanted to discuss in this week’s post, similar to last week, but we only had one day of class this week which made the task even more difficult. I noticed that a few people talked about their article summaries but rather than repeat myself, I thought I’d speak on my reactions to the various covers of “The Star-Spangled Banner”, those of which we watched in class earlier in the semester. We heard the renditions of Whitney Houston, Slash and Jimi Hendrix.  

After listening to Whitney’s cover, I thought her voice sounded majestic and she projected it very well. Whitney sang in a variety of tones (low and high) and you could hear plenty of emotion in her voice as she sang. Her voice is both soothing and powerful.  

However, Slash’s performance was much different in the sense that there was no voice in his set. He strummed a guitar and brought a more rock and roll feel to the table instead of a soul vibe.  

Jimi Hendrix also stood out from the crowd, adding his own spin. It didn’t sound much like “The Star-Spangled Banner” we've come to know with Jimi’s flavor added to the pot. I initially believed that his rendition was to purposely make fun of the way some artists switch up famous songs so much that you can hardly recognize them, but I don’t think that was the intent. The attitude Jimi Hendrix brings to the stage is violent-like and represents the dangers of war.  

It seems that although multiple artists may be singing/performing the same song, the message comes across differently from person to person. Some people may recognize a style better than the next and how a song is performed brings out emotions that help determine its message and meaning. Without variety, everyone would sound the same and our opinions, more alike. The individuality of musicians today is part of what keeps us a healthy society.