Cee Lo Green changes John Lennon's "Imagine"

starpulse.com
" Cee Lo Green got into trouble on New Year’s Eve when he changed the lyrics to John Lennon’s “Imagine,” saying, “all religion’s true.” Speaking to the Television Critics Association about the upcoming season of The Voice, Green reiterated his benign intentions.
“I will say this,” Green said on Friday. “It’s all about love. It was all about love and peace and unity and tolerance and acceptance. All of these wonderful things that sound cliché and a little bit cheesy, you may say I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one.”
Green continued to engage the issue on Twitter as fans tweeted at him after his performance and he responded. He still stands by the way he expressed himself.
“On our show, our art imitates life, not just lifestyle. Of course as a human being, we’re strange and weak and beautiful all in our own special ways. I believe speak out, be yourself and speak your mind, speak your heart. I’m for that. I’m pro choice, I’m pro expression. That’s just me. I meant no harm and no disrespect to anyone, anyone! Any religious preference"
***
People change the words to songs in minor ways fairly often. What made Cee Lo's changing the words to "Imagine" (
"Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too" to "Nothing to kill or die for, And all religion's true.")

so offensive to some atheists, agnostics, and John Lennon fans?
Have some ideas and institutions become so sacrosanct that they've crossed the line into religion ... perhaps without their adherents realizing?

 

There are just some songs you don't mess with & this is one of them. His performance was one of the worst things I ever had to witness artistically. Absolutely horrid.

 

meh. making a mountain out of a molehill.
i didn't see the performance, but whether it was good or bad is kind of irrelevant.
I'm not a rabid fan of this song, though. I mean, I like it, but I think too much is made of it.

 

Lyrically, the phrase "and no religion too" is poorly worded but that's besides the point - the point being, John Lennon's intent was that the listener imagine a world without religious conflict. As so much conflict has historically been religiously motivated, it's placement in the verse is contextually accurate. Cee Lo's version makes no contextual sense whatsoever. I find such disregard for lyrical meaning and context more offensive than his reason for changing it (whatever it may be).

 

well, 'no religion' and 'all religion is true' really don't diverge in thought that much.
--- merged: Jan 10, 2012 4:29 PM ---
I think if you look at the intent of both artists you will find that they are not vastly different.

 

This flash-in-the-pan Cee Lo took a chance. His efforts will become an underscoring or strengthening of Mr. Lennon and his legacy. I mean, the folks who seriously think that some penny ante pop artist can hop onto the shoulders of John Lennon, grab his creative course by the ears and steer it into the Path of Godliness are hopelessly hopeful self-deluders. Religion seems to be the refuge of people who have difficulty accepting or embracing the incredible reality we live in. Let them hug their blankets, mumble their litanies, and get all excited about each other's interpretations of made-up fantasy. We all want some comforting, right? I mean, when you think about it Religious Folk are seriously hobbling their lives, their dreams, and the full potential that the universe offers them (//rant Not to mention the entire train wreck of crap that they crash into anything that doesn't echo their personal fantasies //end rant).

Mr. McCartney stated the whole shebang with such simple words of wisdom. Let it be.

 

I'm not a great fan of Cee Lo and John Lennon isn't here with us physically to defend "Imagine" so I want to tread lightly ... but is it too much of a stretch to think that Cee Lo's intent could be protected under the original intent of the song? He did say (all) religions true, not religion is true, or a specific religion is true ... this could be expanded to mean, all thought systems are equal ... and if (all) are equal, none are striving for ascendancy thus creating the ideological tension that leads to violence and war.
By changing those particular words Cee Lo may have provoked a very human reaction that demonstrates that atheism is on equal footing with any other thought system / religion, whether or not the argument could or should be moved forward that atheism itself is becoming a religion.
I personally respect everyone's beliefs on an individual basis regardless of whether they can support them with evidence ... I am deeply troubled when any belief system becomes institutionalized.

 

A performer has the right to perform any way they wish. And we have the right to criticize that performance. Personally I think too much has been made over this. Lyrics get changed all the time during perfromances, sometimes to promote a position sometimes not.

 

That just about says it for me too. The very fact that this incident in particular has been so evocative in terms of raw emotion has been valuable if for no other reason than to help us learn something about ourselves.

 

don't care. this song is one of the most over-rated things i know of & people have a bizarre-o reverence for it that i don't get---well, i get it, but i don't care about that either. sometimes i think---ok well, this is like a lot of things that get killed by repetition. it's not the song's fault--it's the repetition. then i try to listen to it again. like stairway to heaven or layla, it's inaccessible. repetition killed it.

so i don't care what cee-lo did or didn't do with or two the song. in general, i don't see the point of doing covers unless you're going to really rethink them, do something different, make it new like coltrane did with my favorite things (an exception) or monk did with the duke ellington songs he recorded. changing a couple words doesn't reach the bar. it isn't even lifting yourself off the floor in the same room as the bar. or something.

as for cee-lo: i kinda liked fuck you for a couple days.

 

Good for you ... "this song is one of the most over-rated things i know of & people have a bizarre-o reverence for it" ... I like that. When I first heard "Imagine" I tried to imagine a world with no possibilities that exceed mundane materialistic creaturehood and it was boring ... then repetition made it even more boring.

 

i have no problem with the sentiments expressed. but looking to john lennon for their expression is like looking at a hallmark card to think about love. at the same time, i think the song is influenced by yoko's work, and to that extent it's successful in that it did--and does--continue to prompt people to think, even if for a second, about the possibility that we could do without the collective mental disorder of nationalism and its parent spore in religion. but i still hate listening to the song. every second of it. there's not enough going on structurally to bear up under the mountain of repetition. it's just a simple pretty song. it never stood a chance.

 

Seriously?
Pepole are genuinley upset at the fact that Cee Lo Green sang 'all religion is true' instead of ' no religion too' ?
I am a fan of Mr. Green's music...some of it.
I am also a fan of Mr. Lennon's music, some of it.

but neither of these guys were the second comming one wrote a song that suggested what if we didn't have to deal with institutionalized bullshit the other wrote on that said Fuck you

I had to go and listen to the performance to find the big deal and couldn't find it

could it be that Cee Lo wanted you to imagine something slightly different than John did?

 

TIL: Don't talk trash about "Imagine" in a room of average Americans. Half of them will like you, half of them will hate you.

 

Pretty tacky, in my opinion.

It's a pretty significant change to an iconic song by an artist that can no longer defend himself.
If Lennon were alive to defend himself, go for it. Need to remove an obscenity to clear network TV? Understandable.
Making the sentence pro-religion, when Lennon wrote it as anti-religion is inexcusable.

 

Never have been a fan of John Lennon or the Beatles in general and even less of a fan of this Cee Lo Green fellow (from the one song I have heard).
I respect the views Lennon expressed but that song has been very low on my list of things to listen to over the years. Just a shame the way he died, no one should be seeing a muzzle flash as their last sight.

 

Hippie idealist.

 

This is true.
That group in general does seem to be the more publicly outspoken/"in your face" (in some cases) types, and bigger targets for those who disagree with them.