[78-L] covers

[David Lennick]

DAVID BURNHAM wrote:
> Michael Biel wrote:
> 
> It's not really a "cover" in the proper sense of the word as it was
> originally defined and still used at the time of that recording. 
> Although the word has been bastardized in recent years, it really only
> refers to alternate versions released at the time of the original hit
> version(s).  Something like this done 12 to 15 years after the song was
> a hit is really only another version, not a cover.  By your definition,
> anytime another conductor and orchestra records Beethoven's Fifth
> Symphony it is a cover.  
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Was it you or someone else who was taking us to task a few months ago for using the term "cover" at all?  Insisting that it was a racist term since it referred to white versions of black hits. 
> 
> I've asked several collectors and musicians since that discussion about the term and none of them had ever heard of it in that context.
> 
> But when it comes to the sensitivity of some folks, I was jumped on several months ago for referring to a common Canadian road hazard as "Black ice".  This person insisted that it's only called that because it's dangerous and that it's a racist term.  She said it should be called "clear ice".  If anyone has ever hit "black ice", they know how appropriate the term is.  I gained a point in the argument though by offering that "White-outs" aren't much fun either.
> 
> db

Balls.

Probably the same idiots who'll condemn Show Boat without ever having seen it 
and want to make sure you never do either. I feel a major rant coming on..

dl