Not quite Alexander Hamilton, but...
February 15, 2010 8:47 PM Subscribe
This post was deleted for the following reason: poster's request -- cortex
That's much better than it has any right to be. Oh, and if anyone quit halfway through, stay at least until the end of the fiddle solo.
posted by Kattullus at 9:10 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by Kattullus at 9:10 PM on February 15, 2010
Nope, stayed to near end and completely not worth it. ACHTUNG
posted by Meatbomb at 9:26 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by Meatbomb at 9:26 PM on February 15, 2010
The best part is definitely the silhouetted singer. Genius.
posted by Corduroy at 9:30 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by Corduroy at 9:30 PM on February 15, 2010
Good song, great video. Very simplistic and biased summary of late 18th century imperial politics.
Some of those intolerable acts? Toleration for Catholics in Quebec, and a promise to aborigal peopleto restrict settlement.
(Yeah, I'm Canadian. How could you tell :)
posted by jb at 9:38 PM on February 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
Some of those intolerable acts? Toleration for Catholics in Quebec, and a promise to aborigal peopleto restrict settlement.
(Yeah, I'm Canadian. How could you tell :)
posted by jb at 9:38 PM on February 15, 2010 [4 favorites]
Yeah... I watched the whole thing. Lame. Neither funny, nor insightful. Plus, I kinda thought it would be rap/hip-hop. Had I realized it was going to be some lame crooning, I would never have clicked.
Also, what's up with people quoting the Declaration of Independence in songs? It's powerful prose and all, but it doesn't rhyme, and it has terrible scansion.
posted by Netzapper at 10:01 PM on February 15, 2010
Also, what's up with people quoting the Declaration of Independence in songs? It's powerful prose and all, but it doesn't rhyme, and it has terrible scansion.
posted by Netzapper at 10:01 PM on February 15, 2010
Fantastic! I'm with Kattullus on this, it's much better than it has any right to be.
posted by Lizc at 10:06 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by Lizc at 10:06 PM on February 15, 2010
I'm clearly missing something here. This is a Usanian thing, right?
posted by quarsan at 10:15 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by quarsan at 10:15 PM on February 15, 2010
This may just be because I'm an utter history nerd, but I laughed through the whole thing. I thought that was awesome in a biased and historically kind of inaccurate way.
posted by pecknpah at 10:22 PM on February 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by pecknpah at 10:22 PM on February 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
Pompous froppery
I think you might have meant to say "frippery" or "foppery." (Oh please say it's the latter, I loves me a dandy fop.)
Froppery would be something different.
Though after that search i am not entirely sure what.
posted by louche mustachio at 10:31 PM on February 15, 2010
Fuck yeah! We showed those British assholes that we're number one! This is the greatest nation in the world 'cause I was done born here, we got cheese in a can and gas is as cheap as milk! If we hadn't beat those losers back to England, we'd have socialist healthcare, a woman on our money and green peas on our goddamn pizza!
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:05 PM on February 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:05 PM on February 15, 2010 [2 favorites]
Four score and seven riffs ago, our rockers brought forth, upon your ears, a new sound, conceived in the depths of Satan's bosom, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created to rock.
posted by secret about box at 11:16 PM on February 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
posted by secret about box at 11:16 PM on February 15, 2010 [5 favorites]
(can uh i get ben franklin to sign my guitar?)
posted by secret about box at 11:21 PM on February 15, 2010
posted by secret about box at 11:21 PM on February 15, 2010
I enjoyed that waaaay too much. And yes, I too did enjoy an especially thrilling jolt of excitement by the frippery of fiddle-playing.
Also, the wig popping off the wig head at precisely the right moment was a really nice touch.
posted by humannaire at 11:25 PM on February 15, 2010
Also, the wig popping off the wig head at precisely the right moment was a really nice touch.
posted by humannaire at 11:25 PM on February 15, 2010
I've got a historian friend who states that the only reason the American Revolution worked is because the Brits were having a bit of bother in India, and India was a much more valuable part of the empire. You didn't so much win, as have us decide that a distant valueless religious-nutjob country wasn't really worth the bother.
Also, and while we're on the subject of tea parties, I'd like to thank America once again for buying the UK its socialised healthcare system. You may not want your own, but you bought us ours. Thanks. We use it loads, and it's great.
chin chin.
posted by seanyboy at 12:20 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Also, and while we're on the subject of tea parties, I'd like to thank America once again for buying the UK its socialised healthcare system. You may not want your own, but you bought us ours. Thanks. We use it loads, and it's great.
chin chin.
posted by seanyboy at 12:20 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
em>You didn't so much win, as have us decide that a distant valueless religious-nutjob country wasn't really worth the bother.<>
And, as America is discovering right now (and has discovered in the past), it's pretty hard to sustain an occupation across an ocean. Particularly when the French are in the mix, stirring things up. And the people you are fighting are religiose insurgents.
This was pretty funny, though!...
posted by lucien_reeve at 12:44 AM on February 16, 2010
And, as America is discovering right now (and has discovered in the past), it's pretty hard to sustain an occupation across an ocean. Particularly when the French are in the mix, stirring things up. And the people you are fighting are religiose insurgents.
This was pretty funny, though!...
posted by lucien_reeve at 12:44 AM on February 16, 2010
I stopped watching when the one dude licked his lips.
posted by keli at 12:45 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by keli at 12:45 AM on February 16, 2010
For those unhip folks like me, here is a link that should've been included in the original FPP of the original Timbaland video, of which this is a parody (homage? ripoff?)
posted by zardoz at 1:09 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by zardoz at 1:09 AM on February 16, 2010
Ha! As Zardoz acutely points out, this is indeed a cheesy rip off.
posted by Arnolfini at 1:36 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by Arnolfini at 1:36 AM on February 16, 2010
I was confused by the lines "We've colonized America, we won't stand for tyranny." I was thinking...who is tyrannizing the British here? Oh, it turns out to be from the US point of view.
That aside, this appears to be one of those happy instances where the parody (tribute?) outshines the original.
posted by telstar at 3:28 AM on February 16, 2010
That aside, this appears to be one of those happy instances where the parody (tribute?) outshines the original.
posted by telstar at 3:28 AM on February 16, 2010
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over my FREE HEALTHCARE.
posted by unSane at 4:56 AM on February 16, 2010 [7 favorites]
posted by unSane at 4:56 AM on February 16, 2010 [7 favorites]
This is a tea party rap.
I'm so sorry.
posted by mccarty.tim at 5:13 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm so sorry.
posted by mccarty.tim at 5:13 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I am out of the pop culture loop so I heard this before hearing the timbaland song. I thought it was good at capturing a certain modern music gestalt. I was wrong though since cribs so heavily from the original song. It's basically the orignal song with like four or five sentences of new material or which a couple are from the declaration of independence. My point is that for the few minutes that I liked this video I did so in ignorance and I would like to rescind any enjoyment this video brought me.
posted by I Foody at 5:17 AM on February 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by I Foody at 5:17 AM on February 16, 2010 [2 favorites]
> I've got a historian friend who states that the only reason the American Revolution worked is because the Brits were having a bit of bother in India, and India was a much more valuable part of the empire.
Some historian. Or perhaps he's a historian of medieval Tibet and can't be expected to know anything about British colonial history.
Anyway, an enjoyable video!
posted by languagehat at 5:27 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Some historian. Or perhaps he's a historian of medieval Tibet and can't be expected to know anything about British colonial history.
Anyway, an enjoyable video!
posted by languagehat at 5:27 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
I liked it.
OTOH Ralph hates music videos, so he hated it. One of his few flaws.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:55 AM on February 16, 2010
OTOH Ralph hates music videos, so he hated it. One of his few flaws.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:55 AM on February 16, 2010
Well, it's not a rap but this is the original teaparty video.
posted by fuse theorem at 6:27 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by fuse theorem at 6:27 AM on February 16, 2010
Somehow I doubt George III smoked or ate table grapes. Kinda took me out of the story there...
posted by elwoodwiles at 9:32 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by elwoodwiles at 9:32 AM on February 16, 2010
It's wrong to say that the British gave up the US to save other colonies -- they did lose the war. What I was objecting to was the very biased way of presenting the "intolerable acts" which the colonists objected to -- the objections were over taxes (and then removal of taxes), though of course the colonists had a lower tax burden than Brits in Britain. And they were also very much over the decision to lock off the Ohio valley from settlers (so that the native people could live there) and the toleration for Catholicism in Quebec (the Quebec Act, 1763)
In terms of losing the war: my understanding -- and I've only written one 70 page research paper on a topic related to the American Revolution/War with the Colonies -- is that it was not yet India which was so valuable, but that once the French were involved, the tide turned on the Continent in favour of the rebels, and there was a new threat to the MUCH more valuable Carribbean colonies like Jamaica from the French Navy which also distracted the British from the continient. The British really were out-maneauvered on the Continent after the French came in -- things were looking very dicy for the Americans before that (though I can't remember what happened first -- the significant victory by Benedict Arnold at that S-place, or the French coming in -- but both helped shift things). Had the British succeeded in capturing West Point on the Hudson in 1780 (what Benedict Arnold was planning to help them with before he was betrayed by the incompetence of John Andre), they might have had more of a chance.
Part of the loss was real incompetence and stupid decisions on the British side -- after capturing Philidephia one year -- 1776 or 1777? (Sorry, it's been 8 years and it's not my specialty, so the exact dates have gone) -- they sat down for a winter of parties instead of going out to finish the job of defeating the Continental Army, thus allowing Washington et al to regroup. It also probably did not help that the British homefront was divided on the war -- though maybe not as divided as the colonists.
But over all, it is very unlikely that the Americans would have succeeded without the massive amounts of help -- in trained officers, units and equiptment, as well as a big distraction -- from the French. They just didn't have enough money or enough people. The British were suddenly fighting a war on two...no, three fronts -- on the Continent, in the Carribbean, and back in Europe (because the French could invade Britain directly from across the Channel).
posted by jb at 9:36 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
In terms of losing the war: my understanding -- and I've only written one 70 page research paper on a topic related to the American Revolution/War with the Colonies -- is that it was not yet India which was so valuable, but that once the French were involved, the tide turned on the Continent in favour of the rebels, and there was a new threat to the MUCH more valuable Carribbean colonies like Jamaica from the French Navy which also distracted the British from the continient. The British really were out-maneauvered on the Continent after the French came in -- things were looking very dicy for the Americans before that (though I can't remember what happened first -- the significant victory by Benedict Arnold at that S-place, or the French coming in -- but both helped shift things). Had the British succeeded in capturing West Point on the Hudson in 1780 (what Benedict Arnold was planning to help them with before he was betrayed by the incompetence of John Andre), they might have had more of a chance.
Part of the loss was real incompetence and stupid decisions on the British side -- after capturing Philidephia one year -- 1776 or 1777? (Sorry, it's been 8 years and it's not my specialty, so the exact dates have gone) -- they sat down for a winter of parties instead of going out to finish the job of defeating the Continental Army, thus allowing Washington et al to regroup. It also probably did not help that the British homefront was divided on the war -- though maybe not as divided as the colonists.
But over all, it is very unlikely that the Americans would have succeeded without the massive amounts of help -- in trained officers, units and equiptment, as well as a big distraction -- from the French. They just didn't have enough money or enough people. The British were suddenly fighting a war on two...no, three fronts -- on the Continent, in the Carribbean, and back in Europe (because the French could invade Britain directly from across the Channel).
posted by jb at 9:36 AM on February 16, 2010 [1 favorite]
Oh, I think it might have been 1778 that they had Philidelphia. Someone who has access to wikipedia can probably clear this up. They had a mock jousting tournement, and John Andre had all the girls when he looked their way.
posted by jb at 9:37 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by jb at 9:37 AM on February 16, 2010
This Heat does a quite sinister version of the DOI in their song Independence.
posted by swift at 9:38 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by swift at 9:38 AM on February 16, 2010
sorry -- "had all the girls tittering" -- it was the 18th century.
posted by jb at 9:38 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by jb at 9:38 AM on February 16, 2010
Oh, and if anyone quit halfway through, stay at least until the end of the fiddle solo.
He plays the violin
He tucks it right under his chin
And he bows, oh he bows!
posted by Rarebit Fiend at 9:53 AM on February 16, 2010
He plays the violin
He tucks it right under his chin
And he bows, oh he bows!
posted by Rarebit Fiend at 9:53 AM on February 16, 2010
The wording of the FPP, and the wording of the song (specifically about colonization and such things) definitely had me all tingly that it was going to be a British perspective song that was just going to flip on us half-way through and make the viewer realize that in a certain way, the colonists were Brits who took British support until a lot of them felt like they really didn't want/need the support anymore and decided to schism. Or something along those lines.
posted by redsparkler at 10:57 AM on February 16, 2010
posted by redsparkler at 10:57 AM on February 16, 2010
By the 1860's, the age of consent in the USA was just twelve years old, so it wasn't too late to love a child at all.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:39 PM on February 16, 2010
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:39 PM on February 16, 2010
Did someone just claim to be an authority because they wrote a research project on something? Did I hear that right? Ugh.
Are you being sarcastic, or sincere? I'm sorry, I can't actually tell -- in addition to not being an expert on American Revolutionary history (because, as I said, I've ONLY written one 70 page research paper -- it was about the same amount of research as a British masters thesis, but not as indepth as a Canadian masters would be, and since then I've changed my historical focus), I'm also not good at picking up on sarcasm.
posted by jb at 1:22 PM on February 16, 2010
Are you being sarcastic, or sincere? I'm sorry, I can't actually tell -- in addition to not being an expert on American Revolutionary history (because, as I said, I've ONLY written one 70 page research paper -- it was about the same amount of research as a British masters thesis, but not as indepth as a Canadian masters would be, and since then I've changed my historical focus), I'm also not good at picking up on sarcasm.
posted by jb at 1:22 PM on February 16, 2010
I liked it. It would have been better if I had been familiar with the original Timbaland video.
I always knew Franklin was a shredder.
posted by chairface at 1:04 PM on February 22, 2010
I always knew Franklin was a shredder.
posted by chairface at 1:04 PM on February 22, 2010
« Older The future of web publishing, part seventeen... | Whales For Sale Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by breakfast_yeti at 9:03 PM on February 15, 2010