![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One of the ways I keep talking to my kids is to have interests in common. With my eldest, it's music. This morning, we were discussing the "Randy Newman effect," by which I claim that no one ever covers Randy Newman properly, even though he really doesn't have a good voice. (Unlike Bob Dylan, say, who has a voice that can cut glass and whose songs frequently sound better in other people's mouths.)
He disagreed -- not about whether anyone can cover Randy Newman, but about whether Newman has a good voice. I commented that the Newman version of "Louisiana, 1927" wasn't pretty in the same way that Aaron Neville's was. "So? Beautiful music doesn't have to be pretty. I figured that our some time ago."
I think for a fifteen year old he shows a great deal of perception. He did not say beauty was unimportant, merely that beauty and prettiness were not the same thing.
I also agree about "Louisiana, 1927." Aaron Neville's prettiness loses a lot of the emotional power of the song.
He disagreed -- not about whether anyone can cover Randy Newman, but about whether Newman has a good voice. I commented that the Newman version of "Louisiana, 1927" wasn't pretty in the same way that Aaron Neville's was. "So? Beautiful music doesn't have to be pretty. I figured that our some time ago."
I think for a fifteen year old he shows a great deal of perception. He did not say beauty was unimportant, merely that beauty and prettiness were not the same thing.
I also agree about "Louisiana, 1927." Aaron Neville's prettiness loses a lot of the emotional power of the song.