- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 39,989
Also, "Born in the USA" (Springsteen) is a pretty serious anti-war song, though it is more than just anti-war. It's ironic that many warmongers play it as a "patriotic" song- they've probably never listened to the words.
It's ironic, but not surprising - or even "wrong." If Springsteen didn't want the song taken in that way, he probably shouldn't have used such a stirringly anthemic riff. His use of such was part of the point, of course - but it completely overwhelms the contrast provided by the lyrics. The simple fact is that the song wasn't popular because people thought it conveyed a pithy and insightful commentary on the many deleterious effects of the Vietnam War. It was popular because it invited people to stand up, shake their fists in the air and shout, "I wuz born in the USA!!" And even the lyrics - to the extent that they are noticed at all - inspire an under-doggish "against the odds" mood that dovetails perfectly with the standard vacuities of jingoistic "patriotism."
There were a lot of people who bitched about the Reagan campaign's use of the song in Reagan's second presidential bid - including Springsteen himself. But whoever it was in Reagan's camp who decided to use the song understood its appeal and why it was popular far, far better than all the people who bitched about how the "Reagan people" were too "stupid" to understand the song. On the contrary, they were not stupid at all. They understood how the mood of the song (if not every line of its lyrics) "fit" with the wider post-Vietnam zeitgeist of the '80s in general - and the Reagan campaign's "city on a hill" message in particular. While the disapproving sour-pusses were "technically" correct (with respect to how Springsteen had intended the song), they were utterly clueless (with respect to how the vast majority of the audience received the song).
I often think of "Born in the USA" as Exhibit A in the case against the twin notions that (1) "artists" are the final arbiters of the meaning of their creations, and (2) audiences are (or should be) passive receptacles for whatever "wisdom" or meaning artists imagine they are expressing through their works.