SMALL BLUE WORLD - A REPLY TO THE CRITICS
The reaction to my song and video Small Blue World has mainly been very positive, both as a piece of music and as a poem. However there have been some who have vehemently criticised me about some or all of the content. It hasn't escaped my notice that nearly all these have done through private message on FB, or through my website contact email, some, closer to home have criticised me to my face! Others, and perhaps the ones that most hurt, are those I know and didn't post the video at all. To be fair they must have their reasons and its to all these points that I shall attempt to answer.!
To date out of over 650 positive messages and posts hugely outnumber the small number of negativeones, but those criticisms have have been consistent in the content and i feel that they deserve an answer. I have decided to put this open letter on site so that I can direct others to it. (I am sure there will be more)
The negative comments seem to be along the following lines.
1. A song will never change anything, you have to pull up your sleeves and make it happen.
2. The song generalised too much and too vague, 'What's the crap about catching submarines"
3. What would you do if your children were starving and you have to cut down a tree to sell it.
4. I bet you take medicines that were tested on animals.
5. The photos of animals smoking are out of date.. vivisection doesn't happen any more.
6. If it weren't for the weapons your country would be invaded, you would be killed by terrorists etc.
7. The song is political posturing
8. You're an old whining pom/brit pussy liberal who sings like a girl and looks like a piece of s**t.
1. A song will never change anything, you have to pull up your sleeves and make it happen.
Songs can make a difference far beyond that of just wanting to make you dance, screw, laugh or cry. Some have galvanized nations into rebellion, others, like our old folk songs, where a way of telling the stories of the working man and giving them the chance to vocalize their grievances..most during this period were illiterate and would not have been able to spread the word without songs. Songs DO NOT have to be true in every detail! But they should paint an image or inspire an emotion, and if that means using poetic license then so be it! Here's my example (I hope others share theirs).
There'll be blue birds over (The white cliffs of Dover)
There'll be blue birds over
The white cliffs of Dover,
Tomorrow, just you wait and see.
There'll be love and laughter
And peace ever after
Tomorrow, when the world is free.
The shepherd will tend his sheep,
The valley will bloom again
And Jimmy will go to sleep,
In his own little room again.
There'll be blue birds over
The white cliffs of Dover,
Tomorrow, just you wait and see.
Words - Nat Burton
Melody - Walter
KentPublished - 1941
This famous song became a sensational hit in 1942, as it reflected the feelings of all the both Allies towards the British people, and the spirit and hope that the British had themselves when faced with the imminent invasion by Hitler's Fascists. I wonder if Facebook had been around then if Nat Burton would have had people complaining about the accuracy of the song.
You see, there are NO Bluebirds in the UK, but Nat didn't know that because he lived 3000 miles away and had never been to Britain, he was in fact an American.
So.. did any of that change the message of the song?
Or diminish the impact of the emotions it aroused?Likewise my song is a poem and does use some imagery that may be just off centre...
2. The song generalised too much and too vague, 'What's the crap about catching submarines'
If I wanted to be boring here I could spew out some facts.. here's just the UK official figures of Submarine related Fishing Boat Accidents.
Ready?
Between 1980 and 1989 at least 17 fishing boats sank in the Irish Sea, with the loss of 37 lives.
Shocked?
I know I was because I did not know these facts when i wrote this song. I knew of one or two fatalities due to submarines but never imagined this many in JUST the Irish Sea. One American critic said, "Whats the crap about catching submarines all about, maybe its a British thing'. Sorry mate its not, just Google Sub+Fishing Boat
But I cant claim to be knowledgeable about this part of the song because I was just trying to be poetic, I knew that I was writing about military arms dealers later and thought that those words might conjure up an image of a dead sea bed, ruined by pollution where metal objects like massive turds floated around. That and the fact that I live one-mile away from one of the biggest Nuclear Submarine bases in the UK. I see them going in and out and..well that inspired me.
3. What would you do if your children were starving and you have to cut down a tree to sell it.
As a father I do understand this view. I would do anything, and I mean anything to feed my children. But it isn't one man cutting down a tree to sell the timber or make charcoal is it? Its bloody great big tree felling monsters that cut, strip and slice a tree as easy as you and I chop up Broccoli. BUT I know they are not to blame and I say it...its those who want to profit from it.
4. I bet you take medicines that were tested on animals.
Now this is where it gets really serious.
YesI do. But I never had any choice did I?
BUT more importantly did the animal testing actually help in any way? Everybody who has criticised me for this verse loves to bring up 'intelligent' people who go under names like, Professor this, Researcher that, Scientist him, CEO her, Founder me etc. so here's some of these super-brained individuals you love giving their opinions and findings; (sorry that they dont agree with you)
A. Researchers from Harvard and Boston Universities concluded that medical measures (drugs and vaccines) accounted for between 1 and 3.5% of the total decline in mortality rates since 1900. Scores of animals were killed in the quest to find cures for tuberculosis, scarlet fever, smallpox and diphtheria, among others, but was their unwilling contribution important to the decline of these diseases? Dr. Edward Kass of Harvard Medical School, asserts that the "primary credit for the virtual eradication of these diseases must go to improvements in public health, sanitation and the general improvement in the standard of living." These benefits have nothing to do with animal studies
B. As far back as February, 2004, an article in the British Medical Journal suggested that animal experimentation is an outdated paradigm producing inconsistent and species-specific results.
5. The photos of animals smoking are out of date.. vivisection doesn't happen any more.
A valid point made by some were.." Look how old the photos are..it doesn't happen any more like that" Well, you cant find recent photos easily (some brave activists and employees have smuggled out films and pictures - just Google for them), because the scientific industries know all about security.
There are probably no dogs being made to chain smoke anymore as either, (just as well because if you check the archives the Tobacco industry absolutely loved the findings.. um smoking didn't cause cancer!)
But that was in dogs.
Humans?
We all know the answer to that.(see previous BMJ about species specific results)
This then shows my weak-point - I am NOT A FILM MAKER. If I couldn't find up to date photos then maybe i should have chosen a different way to get the horrors across.
Now the truth is testing on animals for cosmetics is illegal in the UK.
Hooray!
But its still legal in the USA
Boo!and..and, just choose a country.
Its not hard to imagine that if our governments are capable of the 'Extraordinary rendition' of people to other countries so as to get over the illegality of torture within their own borders they would have no qualms of making sure that the testing of animals was also carried out elsewhere.
Nuff said.. and for you academics with a conscience click herehttp://www.learningwithoutkilling.info
6. If it weren't for the weapons your country would be invaded, you would be killed by terrorists etc.
OK. My father was mentioned in despatches, awarded and injured in the second-world war. He was a Commando 41 and 45. I am proud of him. I am proud of every fighting man who bears arms to fight an evil such as fascism. My grandfather was on the merchant seaman who constantly did the Atlantic crossing keeping this country supplied from our the Allies. I am proud of him. I hate war... but war is sometimes necessary, that just my opinion.
The wars we witness today are to do with um, what is it now...... oh I cant be bothered.
Really just click here;http://www.globalissues.org/article/74/the-arms-trade-is-big-business
On the other hand... what does it actually mean to be in a war, What's it like..its not like sitting on a sofa punching buttons on a console and playing Call Of Duty,
Its probably a bit more like this..http://sadaka.ie/About_Palestine/Gaza/IsraeliOnslaughtNov2012.html
7. The song is political
Really? I thought it was just me stating the bleeding obvious.
Here's a line from my song 'Shabby Road'
"you vote for a lifetime and what do you get?
a different coloured lie from a new rosette"
That's how much I trust the political parties.
8. You're an old whining pom/brit pussy liberal who sings like a girl and looks like a piece of s**t.
I really take offence to this. I am not old.
THAT'S THE LAST I WILL SAY ABOUT THIS SONG
OK.. if this has changed your opinion about the song, and you haven't done so already, please post and share it.
ps. I will not be profiting from any pain. All downloads from iTunes and cdBaby etc. will be donated to Greenpeace
