Some Have Been Victorious, Others Not So Much Interpreting National Anthem

AUSTIN, TX — Each Fourth of July brings with it not only the requisite cookouts and quality family time, but heightened stirrings of patriotism taken for granted or held dormant at other times of the year. At no time are these resurrected feelings more evident than at the playing of the National Anthem on this day especially.

We rise when it's played, placing our hand over our heart as the song is sung. Some of us mouth the words or belt them out loud for added patriotic emphasis. Such is the effect the song has on our sense of patriotism, and such is the reverence with which we hold our anthem.

With the nation at war in 1944, the song's sacrosanct status was that much more jealously guarded. It was to be played without artifice or added flourish to its musical architecture. To do so was to invite criticism and condemnation, a din of critique forcefully uttered long before the advent of the Internet that allowed such en masse messaging in real time for optimum impact.

Igor Stravinsky learned this the hard way. Following his emigration to the U.S. in 1939 when he arrived in New York City, the composer was imbued with a sense of gratitude and love for his adopted country and sought to express his own expressions of patriotism. While conducting the Boston Symphony, he thought of no better backdrop for his musical expression, as Open Culture and others have written.

He went for it in January 1944, deciding to conduct his own arrangement of "The Star-Spangled Banner" out of a "...desire to do my bit in these grievous times toward fostering and preserving the spirit of patriotism in this country," he explained at the time. The reference, naturally, was World War II in which the nation was fully steeped.

The interpretation started conventionally enough, but then came an added chord toward the climax. Perhaps born of a European sensibility accustomed to dark historical periods absent a quintessentially American optimsim, the added minor chord was not well received. It's barely perceptible, but it's there, adding an almost-ominous vibe to the rendition.

It didn't go well. Some were less offended by the tampering than they were of what they viewed as an unnecessary allowance for the avant-garde, a flourish anathema to the playing. The Boston police were more offended, reportedly issuing a warning that the anthem was not to be tampered with (although it turned out they misread the statute). In intervening years, some have reported that Stravinsky was arrested for the offense, but that story is strictly apocryphal.

Stravinsky got the message, promptly pulling his rendition from the bill. Listen to his version below and see what you think. That added chord comes at around the 1:30 mark. Some see it as expressive of ever-lurking threats to the homeland for which we must be vigilant, others viewing it as simply an uncalled-for tampering.

Of course, Stravinsky is not the first (nor will he be the last) to put his personal stamp on the national anthem. Whitney Houston's version of the song is considered one of the most stirring interpretations ever, delivered ahead of Super Bowl XXV in 1991 at the now-demolished Tampa Stadium. The interpretation was so powerfully moving, the late singer later released it as a single with proceeds going to charity. Its 2001 re-release following 9/11 would be Houston's last Top Ten hit on the US Hot 100 during her lifetime.

In the days following her performance, reports of lip syncing surfaced. But the controversy was short-lived, and the performance remains in the annals of anthem singing at the top of many best-of lists. It's a powerful, energetic performance with an imaginative arrangement that doesn't deter from its solemn virtues. To this day, it makes the little hairs on the back of your neck stand up.

A less conventional interpretation came from Marvin Gaye at the 1983 NBA All-Star Game. If you think Stravinsky strayed from the template, you ain't heard nothing yet. But it's likely you've heard his rendition as it's become the stuff of legend in intervening years.

Gaye re-crafted the song with a soulful, sexy beat that had the crowd initially stunned before clapping in rhythm to the unconventional yet infectious interpretation. Whatever your feelings might be on the version (whether or not it was disrespectful, that is), you can't deny it was a rather amazing spectacle. In comes Gaye looking like the embodiment of cool sporting sunglasses and a tailor-made blue suit, effortlessly gliding his voice along an anthem of revamped syncopation, rhythm and cadence.

Whatever you think, it was way, way cool attesting to the man's considerable musical prowess at the height of his powers. The crowd at the time seemed to like it.

It's not an easy thing to sing the National Anthem. Some have tried and failed, the simple song deceptively difficult to interpret. The infamous performance by Carl Lewis in the 1993 NBA Finals dramatically illustrates the degree of difficulty in singing the anthem.

In short, it was a disaster. His voice cracked badly during the high notes required in the "rockets' red glare" part. The crowd turned on him quickly, prompting him to say, mid-song: "Uh-oh! I'll make up for it now."

He didn't. Watch some excerpts of the abomination below as covered by ESPN. If you've never seen it, brace yourself. It's bad. He lost us at "oh."

Lewis' failure is only supplanted by the one Roseanne Barr attempted. Unlike Lewis, who sheepishly exited the stage after his disaster, the comedian grew hostile toward the booing crowd (complete with vulgar gestures), only adding to the infamy. For the top five worst performances of the National Anthem, as compiled by CBS News, click here.

Maybe it's best to just respectfully mouth the words.

>>> Image via Wikimedia Commons