Hashing Mash Bashing
On the heels of your thoughtful and thought-provoking comments on playing originals vs. covers, an Ultimate-Guitar.com article profiles “Beatallica” - a band that mashes Beatles and Metallica songs into hybrid “creations.” The songs are mashed (”Blackened In The U.S.S.R.,” “A Garage Dayz Nite,” and “Helvester Of Skelter”); the band members’ names are mashed (Jaymz Lennfield, Grg Hammettson, Kliff McBurtney, and Ringo Larz); and the genre is mashed, skirting parody as much as serious effort (as the article notes, Beatallica “started out earlier this decade forming to perform their clever mash-ups during Milwaukee’s Spoof-Fest for April Fools Day”).
So, where does mashing rank on the scale of originality? Certainly not at the top, where unsung songs are conceived. Yet, how innovative is any song, borne of centuries of classics and classical? Does mashing rank alongside noted remakes and remodels, like Clapton’s tributes to early blues masters; compositions ingeniously adapted but duly footnoted? Should not merit be awarded for use of an innovative medium itself, here the fledging technique of electronic mashing?
And what weight in the balancing of innovation vs. imitation should be given to the issuance of a cease and desist letter by Sony/ATV Music Publishing, (copyright holder of The Beatles compositions), to the ISP that hosts Beatallica.org?
Sphere: Related Contentguitarblog @ July 12, 2007
It is very much a gimmick that is no doubt earning them a lot of money in the same way that cover bands such as By Jovi, Fred Zeppellin and Buffalo Soldier used to always pull in big crowds back in my home town of Birmingham, England. I think the mashup of metallica and the beatles is very clever as are other mashup artists like Hayseed Dixie but how many times can you listen to a joke song before it gets old?
As for the issue of copyright I’m sure it falls in a similar category to sampling and is probably a very complicated legal matter but I was once told that if you change 1 in every 8 notes of a melody it is not a breach of copyright, whether that is true or not I don’t know but if so I can’t see that these songs can be considered in breach can they?
It should be noted that Beatallica is not a mashup in the DJ Danger Mouse sense of the word, as the original recordings are not electronically mixed. Beatallica *performs* the songs, and is a mashup somewhat in the style of PDQ Bach, who since the 60’s has been creating works that use blatant plagiarism for comedic effect (such as combining Bach’s Air on a G String with “Brazil”). Whether you consider such Frankensteinean creations to be original can be debated, but it undeniably involves a degree of musical skill to pull off such a hybrid successfully.
To address Jon’s comment above, there is currently no “de minimis” doctrine (in American copyright law) regarding sampling. Even a microsecond can get you in trouble. Witness the recent Bridgeport case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeport_Music_Inc._v._Dimension_Films
Jon: I tend to agree. Nice gimmick but a one-trick pony in the end. Fun for a night, I suppose. I had heard that tale about changing every 8th note as well. I wonder if that is an old rule, or perhaps urban myth of sorts.
David: Thanks for the clarification and comments. I wonder if they will need to paint themselves as a “parody” band for the sake of their copyright battle, which might be an irksome position to take if they want to be considered serious musicians. It reminds me of a crime drama episode I once saw regarding a similar, albeit much more serious, dilemma. There, a planned parenthood protester had hit a pregnant woman with a sign, causing her to fall and the baby to miscarry. He was prosecuted for murder, the state claiming that the fetus was a person under the law. The defendant was left with the decision of accepting that classification of “fetus as human” (which was consistent with his personal beliefs and his anti-abortion stance), or arguing against his own beliefs that the fetus was not a human, which would result in his acquittal. Like I said, much more serious subject matter.
They don’t have to fight the copyright battle anymore– after a long series of negotiations that started with the cease-and-desist they got in 2005, they now have official permission from both the Beatles and Metallica publishers to do their thing. This is a pretty important development, considering that Sony/ATV (who control the bulk of the Beatles catalog) NEVER gives permission to mess with their golden goose. Note, for example, that Weird Al has no Beatles parodies on any of his records (though he has written at least one that I know of, “Pacman” to the tune of “Taxman”).
Good stuff, David. Thanks for the info.
Hi
I Saw Beatallica in the states last year and was very impressed,it made me smile..The way they blend both bands is very clever indeed.I am a life long James Hetfield “fan” and the singer in Beatallica sounds more like Het than Het!!.
Great topic.
TaTa4Now