Talk:The Merry-Go-Round Broke Down

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lyrics removed.[edit]

"The Merry-Go-Round Broke Down" is a copyrighted song. You cannot reprint the lyrics in their entirety without permission from WB Music Corp, the song's publisher. [1] --FuriousFreddy (talk) 04:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a version of that song, arranged by Sy Oliver and recorded for Decca as early as June 15, 1937, by the Jimmie Lunceford Orchestra. I am not sure, though, if that is the prima assoluta on 10", because it's such an unlikely choice of material for this group to make. It sounds as though they were parodying somebody else's version, but I can't think of anyone in particular other than Looney Tunes – it seems somewhat improbable that song and series were already connected in the public's mind at such an early point. Stanley Dance comments on the interpretation (the humor of which, I think, derives mainly from the ridiculously slow pace at which the song is taken): "The Merry-Go-Round Broke Down was a preposterous choice for what was (...) one of the hottest bands in the country. (...) This hilarious performance must have momentarily shocked them [=Lunceford's audience at the Renaissance Ballroom] because Oliver deliberately exaggerated the the number's corny character in such a way that the childlike noises emanating from the handsome, smartly uniformed musicians suddenly became very comic." --Rainer Lewalter (talk) 10:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOT "atonal"[edit]

"In 1963, a new atonal variation of the theme was arranged by William Lava ..." This is not true. It's not atonal. This myth is perpetuated by Wikipedia and other sources, but it obviously originated with someone who did not know what "atonal" means. Although Lava's version of the tune is clearly more dissonant than previous versions, it is also clearly tonal, not atonal. Atonal has a specific meaning; it's not just another way of describing dissonance. Unless someone can cite an actual reliable source, actually making a case that it's atonal, I will re-word the article. As it stands, it's incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.196.206.59 (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]