Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Fricken 1139 days ago
>Instead of aiming for the same target as other musicians—trying to out-sing or out-play them—Springsteen instead doubled down on the quality that made him unique: His ability to write song lyrics.

No, the ability to write song lyrics does not make Bruce Springsteen unique. He didn't exploit some weird angle that no other performer had considered. And it's worth noting his breakout hit, "Born in the USA" was popular because few people actually listened to the lyrics. It sounds like a patriotic song until you actually listen to what he says.

7 comments

Bruce Springsteen was famous from Born to Run well before Born in the USA. And I don't believe the meaning of the title track was ever misconstrued, it was simply aggressively misused. But our national anthem is also a guy asking if the country will survive, so maybe that's just how we like our patriotic songs.

If anything the lesson here is focus on what you're good at (songwriting), and outsource what you're bad at to people who are as good as you at what you're good at. The E Street Band has been filled with consistently amazing musicians. Springsteen as another Dylan would have never made it big.

And Australia had as a credible proposal for its national anthem a bush ballad about a sheep thief that committed suicide when the police caught up with him.

(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waltzing_Matilda#Official_use.)

Cornell University's fight-song is about failing out of school, or perhaps being expelled.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_My_Regards_to_Davy

I like to think that Waltzing Matilda is much more understood than Born In The USA. It’s a bit more in the Aussie culture to run with something like that. The Born In the USA American crowd on the other hand self-identifies is infallible and their homeland is their sacred cow. I’d eat my hat if the majority of people who like that song know more than 4 words from it.
I remember my 9th grade English teacher asking us what the song Born in the USA was about. We responded with mumbly, "rah rah, America, patriotism." This was just before Nevermind came out so we didn't know we were supposed to think everything was dumb. Anyway, she gave us all a copy of the lyrics and then had us listen to the song. We were blown away...and well prepared for Grunge.
> But our national anthem is also a guy asking if the country will survive, so maybe that's just how we like our patriotic songs.

Even the over the top “America the Beautiful” has the line “God mend thy every flaw”. The founders were very focused on the fallibility of those in power.

I was a teen in high school when Born in the USA came out. As I recall, it was described to me as a “Come Back” album from an artist whose previous work had “saved rock and roll”.
IIRC a Rolling Stone reviewer wrote circa 1975: I have seen the future of Rock and Roll; it's Bruce Springsteen.
> it was simply aggressively misused

And it wasn't the only one. I remember a short snippet of Fortunate Son was used to imply it was a patriotic song in a TV ad (Wrangler jeans I think?). The line being "Some folks were made to wave the flag, ooh the red, white, and blue"

The song, released in 1969, is quite clearly a criticism of the US's Vietnam policy. It's not likely to be mistaken for anything else (the way Born in the USA occasionally is), but still was aggressively misused.

> "Born in the USA" was popular because few people actually listened to the lyrics

I hear this repeated often, but is it even true? Couldn’t also be true that the song is popular because people can relate it to their negative feelings about “the system” and a weird sense of patriotism they feel regardless? It’s pretty common to have mixed feelings about one’s country.

Assuming the song is only popular because of ignorance seems far fetched.

>> "Born in the USA" was popular because few people actually listened to the lyrics

> I hear this repeated often, but is it even true?

I was a mid-western teenager when "Born in the USA" came out. My friends all knew the lyrics -- we hung out in the back of the bus, and shouted them out for 30 minutes on the ride to school. The lyrics spoke to our insecurity: fear of poverty, fear of being sent off in war, and the futility of it all. No one wanted to talk about the empty factories our bus drove past, or the parents that lost their jobs. Springsteen spoke to this, he captured our lived experience. The tune was fantastic. But it was the lyrics that clinched the deal.

That whole album was filled with singable songs: I'm on Fire, Glory Days, and especially My Hometown. The verses were especially catchy and clear as a bell, Springsteen pronounced the lyrics clearly so you hear, understand, and memorize them.

Whilst I can only speak anecdata, in my experience majority of people who "know" the song definitely only know the chorus, and have no idea about the song's history or lyrics. They'll sing along (loudly, I might add) during the chorus, but go hush during the verses.

This [1] is Bruce Springsteen performing the song very differently to how you might normally hear it. For me, this particular style seems to "fit" better with the subject matter.

[1] https://youtu.be/xBuZGiisGvs

As a brazilian kid that did not spoke english in the 80's (just like 99% of the folks down here), Born in the USA was a huge hit simply because it's catchy as hell, the melody is a pop rock masterpiece. I sung this song for over 10 years without having any idea what the lyrics meant other than the guy was born in the usa, and it was still a great song. Now that I'm fluent in english, to tell you the truth Springsteen is a very mediocre song writer, his lyrics are what a "very deep" preteen would write if he wanted to sound good to his middle school crush, the evil maaaannn, the government is baaaaaad, I got my motorcycle, I am a simple guy that work with my hands.... Man, finding out the lyrics for most of his songs was almost as bad as learning the lyrics for Midnight Oil songs after years of singing a lot to their hits.
I would buy-into the idea that quite a few people only know the song from the chorus ("born in the USA").

But the general public apparently has a short memory for complete song lyrics (or just enjoys a good catchy jingle.) In the past decade I've heard:

a. A song about raping and pillaging (Led Zepplin/Immigrant Song) used to sell Cadillac SUVs.

b. A song about a deadly disease (Gang of Four/Anthrax) used to sell Burritos and Tacos.

c. A song about random hook-ups in Texas (ACDC/Thunderstruck) used to sell... not sure what it was pitching... Apple commercials are sometimes vague.

d. A song about kidnapping pretty women (Johnny Guitar Watson/Gangster of Love) used to sell whatever the hell it is Axe is selling.

Though using the Ronettes "Be My Baby" to sell Cialis seems to be about right. All good rock songs are about sex, so using a song about hooking up to sell a product that makes it easy for old dudes to hook up seems spot on.

I think my point is a) Bruce Springsteen and Brian Eno had TONS of great songs before "Born in the USA" and various Talking Heads tunes and b) people don't listen to song lyrics when interacting with commercials. If they did, they sure as hell wouldn't eat at Taco Bell. (Though I have to admit, using "Anthrax" in a Taco Bell ad was inspired culture jamming. So... hats off to whichever random ad creative who snuck that in under the radar.)

Also... if you're analyzing ads based on song lyrics, I think you've missed the point. The advertisers aren't expecting people to listen to the lyrics, critically analyze them and then attempt to relate those concepts to the product being advertised.

Music in ads is (pretty much) exclusively there to establish an affective context. It's sort of like they're saying "hey. remember this song! remember when you were young and didn't have a mortgage and were dating that crazy blonde chic? this product will make you feel like that."

No it's not true. But people like to create strawmen in their head that they can feel superior to. "I'm better than all those dumb rubes!"
> "Born in the USA" was popular because few people actually listened to the lyrics. It sounds like a patriotic song until you actually listen to the lyrics.

That actually is a neat trick. Make a catchy tune that sounds like it says what dumb people like, but have a subtleties in the text, which dumb people won't notice, that turn the things around and let smart people like it for subversiveness.

Then you capture all of the audience. Provided that the tune is really catchy.

Every Breath You Take by The Police is another great example.

Song's about a stalker; gets played as a romantic wedding song :-)

I think these happen because many genuinely don't see the difference. The amount of times abusive relationships are shown as something desirable, in popular media, can also not be a coincidence.
If you’re into that, you should check out Third Eye Blind. Consistently cheery/fun sounding pop rock music with some of the most insanely grim lyrics you can find.
Thats what makes art, art. The ambiguity means that more and more people are able to take a realistic interpretation of your art and enjoy it
The words and meanings of songs have never been important so long as the tune was good. Yankee Doodle was essentially a dis track, but Americans liked the tune, so it was adopted as a patriotic song anyway. Stadiums of homophobes will happily stomp and clap to We Will Rock You.
> the ability to write song lyrics does not make Bruce Springsteen unique.

Springsteen is fact very good at writing lyrics.

Some of his lines draw beautiful character portraits, very economically:

> Got a wife and kids in Baltimore, Jack

> I went out for a ride and I never went back

Songwriting isn't a niche that an aspiring rockstar accidentally falls into. It's half the point of the whole enterprise.
I turns out that Mr. Springsteen authored quite a few critically received songs before "Born in the USA." Who knew?
> It sounds like a patriotic song until you actually listen to what he says.

Sounds like a great songwriter to me!