First Draft of An Album Review:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
[Update: I made a few minor tweaks to this review dividing the larger paragraphs into smaller ones, adding some segues, and also some new stuff to two of the songs discussed -ISM]
[This is the rough draft of an album review which I plan to revise and abridge for posting at Amazon before the end of the month. -ISM]
*****
The Band’s Magnum Opus
Perhaps no musical group exemplified an anti-counter cultural approach to music better than The Band did in various ways. They influenced many people who were influential in their own right either at the time (Eric Clapton and George Harrison’s approach to music) or would be in years to come (i.e. Roger Waters’ approach to concept album writing with Pink Floyd) not to mention being one of the begetters of 1970’s style "folk country." And while more could be said about them than that, there is plenty to say about this album and that is where the review will be focused. But the mark of a memorable musician/group/thinker/writer, etc. is not only their influence on subsequent generations but also on their contemporaries. And in this area The Band definitely succeeded…a few examples of which were given above to illustrate this assertion in brief. But that is enough ado…let us get onto the songs themselves now.
The album opens with "Across the Great Divide" and it sets the tone for the very down home Americana feel of this album full of uniformly excellent songs. The latter song contains the story of a man who tries to explain himself to his woman and recounts to some extent the recklessness of his “younger days” as he tries to persuade her to not kill herself. It is not as grim as it sounds in words I assure you.
The second song is “Rag Mama Rag” which is a fun quirky song with fiddles, an offbeat drum pattern (played by Richard Manuel who usually plays piano: the multitalented Garth Hudson played piano on this one), Levon Helm eschewing his drums for mandolin, Rick Danko playing fiddle instead of bass, and John Simon (the co-producer) playing the bass parts on tuba. The lyrics of the song were about a woman who only wants to play ragtime music…there may be a sly message in that but whatever. That brings us to one of the best songs on the album.
“The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down” is musically and lyrically a masterpiece. It is ironic a Canadian songwriter (Jaime Robbie Robertson) could write such an empathetic tune about the old South but it the power of the song cannot be denied. It was delivered with conviction by the only American in the group (the southerner Levon Helm) who was back on drums for this tune. (Levon also apparently persuaded Robbie not to mention Lincoln in the tune: Robbie more fittingly substituted in the narrative a story about Robert E. Lee instead and saved the song from being an affront to southerners unintentionally.) Garth Hudson gets some very textural sounds with a melodica overdubbed via his Lowrey organ, which sounds like a harmonica starting with the second verse of the song. It is an example of the multifaceted talents of the Band’s members –all of whom except Robbie Robertson played multiple instruments. I never get tired of hearing this song, singing it, or playing it on guitar. At this point, it seems fitting to touch on the genius of Robbie Robertson as a songwriter.
While the latter wrote only a few songs on the group’s very solid “Music From Big Pink” debut album (with band mate Richard Manuel and Bob Dylan contributing more in that area) on this album, that changed dramatically. Robertson solidified himself on this album as the chief songwriter of the group to the extent that he wrote eight of the songs by himself and has co-writing credit on the other four. One of the co-writing credits is “When You Awake” with Richard Manuel (who also sings the song) who was back behind the drum kit on this song with his frantic drumming style. Garth Hudson’s organ gives a nice backing to the song while Robertson’s lyrics are about family and remembering with grandfatherly advice being given.
From there the album moves to “Up on Cripple Creek” which is a song with a very “back porch” feel which is (I must say it) deliciously sleazy in a way. Garth Hudson is playing a clavinet through a wah wah pedal to create the sound of a jew’s harp. When mixed with Danko’s bass playing, it gives a significantly low range to the tune about a narrative of a man who wants to lookup an old girlfriend for “assistance” if you will and how in many areas she completes him. “Whispering Pines” follows, which Robertson co-wrote with Richard Manuel. The song has a completely different tempo than the one preceding it and Manuel delivers a very wrenching vocal performance vocally and on piano.
Following “Whispering Pines” is “Jemima Surrender” which has a heavier tempo with boogie-woogie piano (played not by Manuel but by Hudson), Manuel on drums, Levon Helm not on drums but rhythm guitar, and Robertson on lead guitar. (The alternate take –-half the songs on the album have an alternative take on this CD- has the members on their usual instruments for a completely different approach to the song.) The song is about the singer wanting a girl named Jemima to give in and...well...that is all I will tell you about it.
“Rocking Chair” is possibly my favourite song on the album. It is unconventional musically for the group in that there is no drums (Helm is on mandolin on this tune), Hudson plays accordion, Robertson is on acoustic guitar, and the timekeeping is done solely by Danko’s bass and that is adequate. The lyrics (Manuel on lead, Danko joining on the bridge) are about two old time sailors –one telling his first mate (and best friend) “don’t raise the sails anymore” because he has been at sea his whole life, he believes they have used up all the time they have in that endeavour and should spend the sunset years of their lives together “back in old Virginny” in rocking chairs. Having lost my oldest friend recently, this song really has an effect on me now…musically the song is quite excellent and the lyrics I find to be quite haunting for reasons already expressed and others not to be mentioned here.
“Look Out Cleveland” is a up tempo rocker sung by Danko with some aggressive lead fills by Robertson backed by Danko’s equally aggressive bass picking and is about “a storm coming through” which ends up devastating everything. (Compared to everything else on the album, this song stands out in its strident phrasing.)
From there the next song is “Jawbone” and it opens with a very slow start and alternates time signatures from verses to the pre-chorus to the chorus and back again with lyrics about a thief who is unrepentant. The album next moves into “Unfaithful Servant” which is sung by Danko and is a slow creeper about…well…exactly what the title says and the narrator tries to examine the reason for the faithlessness involved.
The album ends officially with “King Harvest” which is a frantic tune sung by Manuel. The song has an unusual sound even for an album of songs many of which are distinctive in that sense. The shifting tempos from verse to verse (a feature common to many of my favourite songwriters) gives a distinctive sound as does Robertson’s stinging lead playing which shows a pleasing restraint to it (another feature I like in lead guitar players). The lyrics show the tensions of paradoxical attachments (city and country, past and present, etc) and is a tale about a union man who is feeling the pinch ala Steinbeck's “Grapes of Wrath” and wraps up the album quite strongly. (It is also one of my favourites on the album.)
There are also alternate takes of six of the songs on the CD release as well as an outtake of a song that would appear on future albums (referring to “Get Up Jake"). They are all interesting for different approaches taken to songs in different takes…from instruments used to who played what, who sang the songs, some false starts, instructions given, etc. But the twelve songs on the album as originally released are the focus of this review and they all cohere well making this album a must have for anyone who likes good music.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
"If You Want Something Done Right, Do It Yourself" Dept.
(On Arguments Opposed to Military Involvement in the Middle East)
Due to the bankrupt nature of the "arguments" propounded by the lions share of who are opposed to the utilization of the military option in the Middle East (with regards to Iraq or otherwise), many ideas for approaching this have been pondered over by those of Us at Rerum Novarum. One of those that has seemed increasingly necessary is to insure that if critics will kvetch that at least they will use solid argumentation in the process and not the brainless ideological twaddle of the antiwar.com crowd and various and sundry idiotarians (read: moonbats) of that sort. For such things grate on your host who is and always has been generally speaking quite anti-idiotarian in his geopolitical approaches and not only because there is not enough time in the day to fact check those sorry specimens and post the biblical scroll of errors, distortions, and logical/argumentation fallacies that the screeds of such ideologues inexorably contain.
However, it is not often recognized that there are those who could be classified as anti-idiotarian who take a different view on the war situation. Such people are rare and deserve to be recognized. And as they are intellectually capable of making rational arguments, your host has thought about providing adversaries of this sort with some actual arguments with which they can use to construct a viable argument with which he and others can interact with. Or as this writer noted in a recent emailing to a friend on this subject matter (modified slightly in spots):
[T]o show what a standup guy I am, I [may] actually...post sometime [soon] some probable arguments against the war in Iraq which I will give to the antiwar crowd to develop free of charge. Basically I am tired of confuting stupid arguments on that score and am thus [contemplating giving] them some bonafide arguments which they can use...though I may offer them to [a good friend] to use against me first...[someone who] can be brutal at times in [their] argumentation. [Excerpt from Email Correspondence (circa September 9, 2005)]
Exactly when or if this is done remains to be seen but it is leaning more and more in that direction simply because your host wants there to be in the public square solid arguments on both sides rather than the common shrieking and irrational opposition by various assortments of moonbats countered by various fiskings or mistings by those of Our general outlook where only our side uses actual arguments. Anyway, that is what We are considering doing at some point in the future but it seemed appropriate to publicly note it at this time so that certain parties We have in mind for a possible future dialogue on the subject can be alerted to this free gift from your humble servant at Rerum Novarum and can ready their brickbats accordingly (if they are so inclined to).
[Last minute update: Your host has literally just been notified as of posting the above thread by one of the anti-war anti-idiotarians he had in mind that the proposed dialogue noted above is of interest to them. For that reason, it is now a question of when and not if it will take place. Stay tuned for the arguments your host will offer the opposition to develop in opposition to his own position...they need to be finetuned and sent to Our adversary first so they can start developing them. (Once they are in at least draft form, We will post the arguments in bullet form to this weblog for your perusal.)]
[Update: A continuation of this thread can be read HERE. - ISM 1/29/06 2:27pm]
(On Arguments Opposed to Military Involvement in the Middle East)
Due to the bankrupt nature of the "arguments" propounded by the lions share of who are opposed to the utilization of the military option in the Middle East (with regards to Iraq or otherwise), many ideas for approaching this have been pondered over by those of Us at Rerum Novarum. One of those that has seemed increasingly necessary is to insure that if critics will kvetch that at least they will use solid argumentation in the process and not the brainless ideological twaddle of the antiwar.com crowd and various and sundry idiotarians (read: moonbats) of that sort. For such things grate on your host who is and always has been generally speaking quite anti-idiotarian in his geopolitical approaches and not only because there is not enough time in the day to fact check those sorry specimens and post the biblical scroll of errors, distortions, and logical/argumentation fallacies that the screeds of such ideologues inexorably contain.
However, it is not often recognized that there are those who could be classified as anti-idiotarian who take a different view on the war situation. Such people are rare and deserve to be recognized. And as they are intellectually capable of making rational arguments, your host has thought about providing adversaries of this sort with some actual arguments with which they can use to construct a viable argument with which he and others can interact with. Or as this writer noted in a recent emailing to a friend on this subject matter (modified slightly in spots):
[T]o show what a standup guy I am, I [may] actually...post sometime [soon] some probable arguments against the war in Iraq which I will give to the antiwar crowd to develop free of charge. Basically I am tired of confuting stupid arguments on that score and am thus [contemplating giving] them some bonafide arguments which they can use...though I may offer them to [a good friend] to use against me first...[someone who] can be brutal at times in [their] argumentation. [Excerpt from Email Correspondence (circa September 9, 2005)]
Exactly when or if this is done remains to be seen but it is leaning more and more in that direction simply because your host wants there to be in the public square solid arguments on both sides rather than the common shrieking and irrational opposition by various assortments of moonbats countered by various fiskings or mistings by those of Our general outlook where only our side uses actual arguments. Anyway, that is what We are considering doing at some point in the future but it seemed appropriate to publicly note it at this time so that certain parties We have in mind for a possible future dialogue on the subject can be alerted to this free gift from your humble servant at Rerum Novarum and can ready their brickbats accordingly (if they are so inclined to).
[Last minute update: Your host has literally just been notified as of posting the above thread by one of the anti-war anti-idiotarians he had in mind that the proposed dialogue noted above is of interest to them. For that reason, it is now a question of when and not if it will take place. Stay tuned for the arguments your host will offer the opposition to develop in opposition to his own position...they need to be finetuned and sent to Our adversary first so they can start developing them. (Once they are in at least draft form, We will post the arguments in bullet form to this weblog for your perusal.)]
[Update: A continuation of this thread can be read HERE. - ISM 1/29/06 2:27pm]
Monday, January 02, 2006
On Miscellaneous Matters:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
They call it stormy Monday...aah but Tuesday's just as bad...
Ohhhhh they call it stormy Monday...but Tuesday's just as bad...
You know Wednesday's worse...
Aaaand Thursday's oh so sad...
It should not surprise me that it is raining in Seattle on a Monday but today I could have used better weather for my mood...normally the latter is not affected much by external environment but today it certainly is. It also does not help that it is a holiday today either but what can one do with the uncontrollable elements such as that??? The answer is nothing of course and while I am optimistic about this being a better year than last year (and even better than 2004 which was the best overall year of the new millennium for me thus far); nonetheless, it seems appropriate to jot down some notes of various subjects that I have had in mind for a while. The first is the subject of resolutions.
It has been a long time since I bought into the idea of "resolutions" for the new year...part of the reason I suppose is that they are treated as such a joke by the culture at large. I am not opposed to resolving to do better of course but there is too much making of resolutions by people which are constructed in a way that almost guarantees them failure. For example, someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes a day and has for years is not about to be likely to go cold turkey on the new year and expect to succeed. But at the same time, that does not mean that they cannot succeed at their goal within the year. Likewise with those trying to lose weight...you cannot go from eating lots of food a day to no food without some form of phased in program as well as certain kinds of supplement support. And the idea of giving anything up completely if it is something you are accustomed to needs to be dealt with carefully.
I would not hold it against someone who (for example) resolved to quit smoking on the new year who has already failed in the "cold turkey" approach. Likewise, someone who sought to give up refined sugar products completely, lose a certain amount of excess body weight, or something else of that sort. However, I do find it interesting how people if they fail once in a resolution often take an "oh well, I tried" and act as if since they failed once, they need not try again. This is akin to someone who gets a flat on the highway choosing instead of fixing the flat and moving on again towards their destination to shoot out the other three tires too. Habits of mind or of a person's general disposition take time to form and they are thus not going to change as quickly as we might like them too. But if the right approach is set down in advance and a proper strategery undertaken, the odds of success will be much greater in whatever the area of intended improvement happens to be. Just keep in mind the determination that you will succeed at whatever your goals are and do not let setbacks be anything but temporary delays.
Occasionally the subject of writing is one I ponder particularly when I see a website or weblog writer who start such an endeavour and then cease it under the pretext that they have nothing to write about. But then again, that is what happens when you start a weblog or a website with a very limited scope as your primary means of expression. That is not to say that certain projects may not at times call for their own individual site of course. But there should be a general or primary source which is not so limited if you want to insure against anything more than a temporary (at most) writers block.
I suppose some would view it as a good thing that I have more things to blog on than I have time for...but the reason for that is my refusal to limit myself for the sake of fitting a particular "niche" or whatever. As I see it, most of what we do in life has some form of stratification to it and thus one's space for musing should not be so "specialized." Obviously if you involve yourself in projects of other people which have certain limits set down then those limits should be respected. But beyond that, only limit yourself in weblog or website writing if you want to build in your own obsolescence device of sorts.{1} There are a number of different sources for insuring against permanent "writers block" for anyone who cares to search them out. But to save on time, consider what the present writer has discovered in his time blogging viz. sources you can utilize to assist in coming up with material.
The truth is, writing is like anything really and when you have a system or methodology in place to assist you in generating material, you can mitigate the problems that develop in the absence of having such a system in place. And while I did not always recognize the approaches I utilize as encompassing a "system" of sorts; nonetheless, I do not mind sharing many of the means from which I have come up with nearly 1800 posts (thus far) since this weblog debuted nearly three and a half years ago. Admittedly it is not the complete list of sources I have used (and continue to use). But what I publicly wrote on this matter nearly two and a half years ago{2} was reprised in a different context{3} and can be considered good points of reference for anyone who wants to cultivate the writing discipline to some extent either in weblog format or some other form of media communication.
Anyway, that is all I have time to muse on at the moment..."the time is gone...this post is over....thought I'd something more to say???"
Notes:
{1} Speaking only for myself, I do not feel a sense of guilt if I go for a day or two (or three or whatever length) without blogging. Initially I did but then it dawned on me (and fortunately this happened very early in the life of this blog) that the moment I worry about that is the moment any edge I have (if I even have one) is blunted...
I do not know what subjects elicit the most readership and which do not and frankly, I have no interest in finding out. For the moment I do that is the moment my impulse to blog my mind becomes to some extent compromised. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa February 3, 2003)]
{2} What originally got me sketching these ideas down as I discovered them was a test that made the rounds in mid 2003 which was a "personality quiz" of sorts seeking to identify the personalities behind various blogging collectives. My setting forth of many of the sources I have used (and continue to use to the present day) was to counter the assessment that weblogging was a "soliloquy" of sorts and that there was no feedback of sorts from other people in what was or was not blogged. In light of the conspicuous lack of comments boxes at Rerum Novarum, it seemed appropriate to note that We were not hurting for outside input in many other ways which more than compensated for not having comments boxes.
{3} The differing context of the post reprising that subject matter was a revisiting of the comments box subject earlier this year. My position on comments boxes has not wavered on this weblog since its founding yet whenever I mention this, there are inevitable people who accuse me of not wanting to interact with other people, not receiving feedback on post material, or other kinds of what can be summarized as "soliloquizing." I doubt what I wrote then will silence the comments box "true believers" but at the very least it showed (hopefully) that one can receive ideas for writing and no shortage of feedback from others in a variety of ways other than comments boxes.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
They call it stormy Monday...aah but Tuesday's just as bad...
Ohhhhh they call it stormy Monday...but Tuesday's just as bad...
You know Wednesday's worse...
Aaaand Thursday's oh so sad...
It should not surprise me that it is raining in Seattle on a Monday but today I could have used better weather for my mood...normally the latter is not affected much by external environment but today it certainly is. It also does not help that it is a holiday today either but what can one do with the uncontrollable elements such as that??? The answer is nothing of course and while I am optimistic about this being a better year than last year (and even better than 2004 which was the best overall year of the new millennium for me thus far); nonetheless, it seems appropriate to jot down some notes of various subjects that I have had in mind for a while. The first is the subject of resolutions.
It has been a long time since I bought into the idea of "resolutions" for the new year...part of the reason I suppose is that they are treated as such a joke by the culture at large. I am not opposed to resolving to do better of course but there is too much making of resolutions by people which are constructed in a way that almost guarantees them failure. For example, someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes a day and has for years is not about to be likely to go cold turkey on the new year and expect to succeed. But at the same time, that does not mean that they cannot succeed at their goal within the year. Likewise with those trying to lose weight...you cannot go from eating lots of food a day to no food without some form of phased in program as well as certain kinds of supplement support. And the idea of giving anything up completely if it is something you are accustomed to needs to be dealt with carefully.
I would not hold it against someone who (for example) resolved to quit smoking on the new year who has already failed in the "cold turkey" approach. Likewise, someone who sought to give up refined sugar products completely, lose a certain amount of excess body weight, or something else of that sort. However, I do find it interesting how people if they fail once in a resolution often take an "oh well, I tried" and act as if since they failed once, they need not try again. This is akin to someone who gets a flat on the highway choosing instead of fixing the flat and moving on again towards their destination to shoot out the other three tires too. Habits of mind or of a person's general disposition take time to form and they are thus not going to change as quickly as we might like them too. But if the right approach is set down in advance and a proper strategery undertaken, the odds of success will be much greater in whatever the area of intended improvement happens to be. Just keep in mind the determination that you will succeed at whatever your goals are and do not let setbacks be anything but temporary delays.
Occasionally the subject of writing is one I ponder particularly when I see a website or weblog writer who start such an endeavour and then cease it under the pretext that they have nothing to write about. But then again, that is what happens when you start a weblog or a website with a very limited scope as your primary means of expression. That is not to say that certain projects may not at times call for their own individual site of course. But there should be a general or primary source which is not so limited if you want to insure against anything more than a temporary (at most) writers block.
I suppose some would view it as a good thing that I have more things to blog on than I have time for...but the reason for that is my refusal to limit myself for the sake of fitting a particular "niche" or whatever. As I see it, most of what we do in life has some form of stratification to it and thus one's space for musing should not be so "specialized." Obviously if you involve yourself in projects of other people which have certain limits set down then those limits should be respected. But beyond that, only limit yourself in weblog or website writing if you want to build in your own obsolescence device of sorts.{1} There are a number of different sources for insuring against permanent "writers block" for anyone who cares to search them out. But to save on time, consider what the present writer has discovered in his time blogging viz. sources you can utilize to assist in coming up with material.
The truth is, writing is like anything really and when you have a system or methodology in place to assist you in generating material, you can mitigate the problems that develop in the absence of having such a system in place. And while I did not always recognize the approaches I utilize as encompassing a "system" of sorts; nonetheless, I do not mind sharing many of the means from which I have come up with nearly 1800 posts (thus far) since this weblog debuted nearly three and a half years ago. Admittedly it is not the complete list of sources I have used (and continue to use). But what I publicly wrote on this matter nearly two and a half years ago{2} was reprised in a different context{3} and can be considered good points of reference for anyone who wants to cultivate the writing discipline to some extent either in weblog format or some other form of media communication.
Anyway, that is all I have time to muse on at the moment..."the time is gone...this post is over....thought I'd something more to say???"
Notes:
{1} Speaking only for myself, I do not feel a sense of guilt if I go for a day or two (or three or whatever length) without blogging. Initially I did but then it dawned on me (and fortunately this happened very early in the life of this blog) that the moment I worry about that is the moment any edge I have (if I even have one) is blunted...
I do not know what subjects elicit the most readership and which do not and frankly, I have no interest in finding out. For the moment I do that is the moment my impulse to blog my mind becomes to some extent compromised. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa February 3, 2003)]
{2} What originally got me sketching these ideas down as I discovered them was a test that made the rounds in mid 2003 which was a "personality quiz" of sorts seeking to identify the personalities behind various blogging collectives. My setting forth of many of the sources I have used (and continue to use to the present day) was to counter the assessment that weblogging was a "soliloquy" of sorts and that there was no feedback of sorts from other people in what was or was not blogged. In light of the conspicuous lack of comments boxes at Rerum Novarum, it seemed appropriate to note that We were not hurting for outside input in many other ways which more than compensated for not having comments boxes.
{3} The differing context of the post reprising that subject matter was a revisiting of the comments box subject earlier this year. My position on comments boxes has not wavered on this weblog since its founding yet whenever I mention this, there are inevitable people who accuse me of not wanting to interact with other people, not receiving feedback on post material, or other kinds of what can be summarized as "soliloquizing." I doubt what I wrote then will silence the comments box "true believers" but at the very least it showed (hopefully) that one can receive ideas for writing and no shortage of feedback from others in a variety of ways other than comments boxes.
Sunday, January 01, 2006
"Auld Lang Syne" Dept.
(Aka "The Last Post of the Year")
I have tended for the past couple of years on this weblog to open the year (or close it) with the traditional song for ringing in the new year. As I did ringing in 2004, I will forward-post the present thread now (as I will not being in front of a computer when the new year rings in) yet want it to be time stamped in a contemporary way; thus it will be the last post of 2005. Here 'tis:
Should auld acquaintance be forgot
And never brought to mind?
Should auld acquaintance be forgot
And days of auld lang syne?
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne
We'll tak a cup o' kindness yet
For auld lang syne.
And surely ye'll be your pint stoop
And surely I'll be mine
And we'll tak a cup o' kindness yet
For auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
We twa hae run about the braes
And pou'd the gowans fine
But we've wander'd mony a weary foot
Sin' auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
We twa hae paidl'd i' the burn
Frae mornin' sun till dine
But seas between us braid hae roared
Sin' auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
And here's a hand, my trusty fiere
And gi'e's a hand o' thine
And we'll tak a right good willy waught
For auld lang syne. [Attr. Robert Burns]
May you all have a blessed and prosperous new year and I hope to see y'all next year...same Bat time...same Bat blog ;-)
(Aka "The Last Post of the Year")
I have tended for the past couple of years on this weblog to open the year (or close it) with the traditional song for ringing in the new year. As I did ringing in 2004, I will forward-post the present thread now (as I will not being in front of a computer when the new year rings in) yet want it to be time stamped in a contemporary way; thus it will be the last post of 2005. Here 'tis:
Should auld acquaintance be forgot
And never brought to mind?
Should auld acquaintance be forgot
And days of auld lang syne?
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne
We'll tak a cup o' kindness yet
For auld lang syne.
And surely ye'll be your pint stoop
And surely I'll be mine
And we'll tak a cup o' kindness yet
For auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
We twa hae run about the braes
And pou'd the gowans fine
But we've wander'd mony a weary foot
Sin' auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
We twa hae paidl'd i' the burn
Frae mornin' sun till dine
But seas between us braid hae roared
Sin' auld lang syne.
For auld lang syne, my dear,
For auld lang syne,
We'll tak' a cup o' kindness yet,
For auld lang syne.
And here's a hand, my trusty fiere
And gi'e's a hand o' thine
And we'll tak a right good willy waught
For auld lang syne. [Attr. Robert Burns]
May you all have a blessed and prosperous new year and I hope to see y'all next year...same Bat time...same Bat blog ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)