cynical_genx_man t1_jddr9n5 wrote on March 23, 2023 at 5:45 PM

Reply to comment by Opus-the-Penguin in Best version of hallelujah? by JoeLawson10

Because Cale was the first to sort of re-jigger the original lyrics and everything subsequently - including Buckley - is just a duplicate.

Opus-the-Penguin t1_jddshhk wrote on March 23, 2023 at 5:52 PM

Yeah, but it's not. That's my point. Cale's making fine music but, for me, there's no connection to the words. He might as well be singing in a foreign language. He's Joan Sutherland and Buckley is Maria Callas.

Or to switch metaphors, Leonard Cohen's version is Moses--harsh and full of implied glory. Cale's is John the Baptist, preparing the way. But when the perfect comes, the partial must pass away.

cynical_genx_man t1_jddttnz wrote on March 23, 2023 at 6:01 PM

Well, here is where the subjectivity about music comes in, because when I hear them, Cale's version is understated which actually makes the lyrics more impactful, while when I hear Buckley it's almost as if he's trying too hard to give emotional resonance.

However, again, the fact is Cale's reworking of the lyrics was so profound that altering the song that it was a tectonic event. Buckley just sang it differently.

I don't think either of us is wrong, just different interpretations and reactions.

Opus-the-Penguin t1_jddtzb7 wrote on March 23, 2023 at 6:02 PM

Fair enough.

cynical_genx_man t1_jdeo08s wrote on March 23, 2023 at 9:12 PM

As I think about it, it seems that my lack of enthusiasm for the Buckley version stems from the fact that to me the song is one from the POV of a middle-aged man who is looking back on his life and his relationships (both physical and spiritual) and trying to unpack the memories good and bad.

With that in mind, a singer still in their 20's - no matter how much soul or passion they bring - miss the mark because one cannot mimic the sort of experience, approach, and attitude that comes with age. It's the same reason that having someone like, say, Bono or Paul McCartney try and cover a song of youthful angst and rebellion comes off as lacking the necessary life-perspective behind it. Sure, they can recall what it was like to be 20, but the feelings and internal reality of a 20 year old are different than the memories of it and an old guy whinging about the difficulties a young person faces can often feel forced or silly. So for this song while a young singer might be able to imagine themselves as an older version of themselves wandering the dusty rooms of their life, it's at best a good approximation.

And, as a middle-aged dude myself, I can sense that inauthenticity (for lack of a better word), while that genuine truth is clear when the song is sung by someone of the right age.

Even worse is using this song as some sort of celebratory anthem. It's not. It may not be full doom and gloom, but there is a melancholy to the lyrics *and* music that sort of renders any use of this as an upbeat joyful song of triumph to be a misapplication.

Anyway, I'm sure that now this comment will be downvoted simply because my opinion doesn't match that of others who are unaware that subjective opinions and interpretations of art is not a matter of right or wrong.

Opus-the-Penguin t1_jderszf wrote on March 23, 2023 at 9:36 PM

Yeah, I hate the way people use downvotes as a way of disagreeing. I like hearing opinions that don't match mine and I think you've expressed yours thoughtfully.

For what it's worth, I was close to 40 when I heard Jeff Buckley's version (and it was the first I'd heard, so I admit I "imprinted" on it like a duckling). And I'd had some major life curves that aged me beyond those years. But what I heard seemed authentic and relatable and not at all like a cheeky kid claiming he'd experienced the full gamut of life's vicissitudes.

cynical_genx_man t1_jdkcszm wrote on March 25, 2023 at 12:43 AM

As you said before, fair enough.

Say hi to Bill, Steve, and the rest of the gang in Bloom County for me!