Bah f***ing humbug

I don’t put a lot of weight behind the sentimental value of holiday music and decor when November and December roll around. In part it’s family upbringing, both the way the family approached the holidays and the way the family approached everything else – distantly. In part, it is the craven way stores use holiday music as a classic dogwhistle to whet consumer appetites. That’s why I’ve been a long-time ardent supporter of my wife’s blanket ban on music, decor, books, and any other chotchkes related to the holidays until the day after Thanksgiving. It’s important.

And it’s certainly not an objection to the traditional songs – both popular (more my area) and religious/spiritual (Heather’s area) – that do put me in whatever holiday spirit might mean to my coal-black soul. It’s more that I know everyone from Al Green to N’Sync seeks an opportunity to cash in on the holidays and ends up screwing it all up for me. We hear newer versions of older songs that did not need to be recorded again. And we hear a number of newly written songs that frankly should never have seen the light of day. Like…this one.

I had no idea that the following popular Christmas tune, much more popular up here in New England than I think it was in Texas, was performed by Sir Paul McCartney. I could never understand the constant rotation this got on New England radio stations until today. And as with a number of choices he made post-Beatles, I really wonder what the thought process was behind this. What I heard before knowing this was McCartney’s work was an exceedingly painful relic. What I hear now is probably worse.

It is a nearly-four-minute excuse to play with a new synth toy. The delay effects are just confusing, and McCartney’s quite-recognizable voice gets buried. I can’t understand how this would add pleasure to anyone’s holiday. It’s a complete disaster as a recording if not as a musical composition. It’s nothing more than a Muzak accompaniment to your trip to Macy’s. No doubt I have issues with McCartney’s solo output but this is epically bad.

Why, Sir Paul, couldn’t you have come up with something earthy and original like:

It is not exactly irony I see in the fact that Low’s song isn’t necessarily about Christmas time itself, yet better captures the essence of Christmas than McCartney’s mess. No, it’s more like the aspirational nature of holidays. Because I can see why this song was written and performed.

Band goes on tour, drives through snow, gets lost, has a miserable hotel stay, yet the entire experience left them feeling youthful and exhilarated in a way they could only recall feeling during Christmas. That’s an intense experience. It’s what you want those everyday moments to be – like the feeling of togetherness and the youthful spirit you have around the holidays.

Add to that the fact that it is a low-tech production (although surprisingly cheery and high-tech by Low standards) and you have something that is original and authentic. It gives me goose bumps beyond what I’m already getting while trying to kick this stomach bug. It’s what the holidays are about for me. I can’t hear that unless I mine my own collection and really seek it out.

Instead I hear McCartney and friends. Over and over again. Holidays are shiny synth-y plastic toys for the most part; the real feeling and spirit is below that surface. So I’d just as soon not be subjected to the surface trappings of the holidays any longer than necessary. I don’t need that mess to tell me it’s the holidays.

—–

Fortunately, I now have an antidote for whenever the dreaded McCartney Carol comes on. I just turn it off and think as hard as I can about this song:

Now that’s how you use that synth effect, Paul. Got it?