Job Discussion Forums

johnslat

I get a kick out of using Springsteen's "Born in the USA" as a listening exercise. Every time I've played the song and then asked students to tell me what they think the song's "message" is, its "tone," I always get answers such as:

proud, patriot, loves country

which, of course, is totally misconstruing what's actually being sung:

"Born down in a dead man's town
The first kick I took was when I hit the ground
You end up like a dog that's been beat too much
'Til you spend half your life just covering up

[chorus:]
Born in the U.S.A. Born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A. Born in the U.S.A.

I got in a little hometown jam
And so they put a rifle in my hands
Sent me off to Vietnam
To go and kill the yellow man

[chorus]

Come back home to the refinery
Hiring man says "Son if it was up to me"
I go down to see the V.A. man
He said "Son don't you understand"

[chorus]

I had a buddy at Khe Sahn
Fighting off the Viet Cong
They're still there, he's all gone
He had a little girl in Saigon
I got a picture of him in her arms

Down in the shadow of the penitentiary
Out by the gas fires of the refinery
I'm ten years down the road
Nowhere to run, ain't got nowhere to go

I'm a long gone Daddy in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.
I'm a cool rocking Daddy in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.

This song is about the plight of countless Vietnam Veterans as they struggle to adjust to civilian life while coping with the psychological and physical after-effects of war. Listeners, who focus their attention primarily on the title and chorus of the song, very often misinterpret it's meaning. Springsteen addresses this very issue in his 1998 book Songs, "In order to understand the song's intent, you needed to invest a certain amount of time and effort to absorb both the music and the words. But that's not the way a lot of people use pop music.�

They hear, but they don't really listen. The title, the chorus, and the stirring lilt of the music make most think it's some kind of anthem of praise when, in fact, it's just the opposite.

I LOVE handing out the lyrics after they give me their ideas about the song.

Regards,
John

Sashadroogie · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject:

Isn't that 'hearing' but not 'listening', from the subject line, or have I missed some point or other?

johnslat · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:30 pm Post subject:

Dear Sasha,

Well, what I think is that they listen to the song (i.e. the music and the chorus,) but they don't really hear the message

However, I suppose it could go your way, as well.

Regards,
John

spiral78 · Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 11534 Location: On a Short Leash

It's all about the rhythm Cool

Sashadroogie · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 6:30 pm Post subject:

Dear Johnslat

Ah OK, now I get you. Good explication.

S

Guy Courchesne · Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 9650 Location: Mexico City

Glenski · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN

Not really a listening/hearing exercise to me. I never knew the lyrics until just now myself and assumed it was a patriotic song, too. There are plenty of songs (in any language where this is the case.

If they aren't up to reading (or having learned) the lyrics, about all they are going to "get" is the chorus.

johnslat · Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:12 pm Post subject:

Dear Glenski,

Sorry you disagree. However, I think it's a good way of getting students to recognize a couple of things:

1. that they can listen to something again and again (and most of my students were very familiar with the song) and yet not really hear the message.

2. that they can be misled by title and tone - the music, by itself, seems (to me, anyway) to convey a very different response than the lyrics do.

"In order to understand the song's intent, you needed to invest a certain amount of time and effort to absorb both the music and the words."

I think it's worthwhile getting students to realize that really listening needs to be active rather than passive.

And I know that quite a few students have been very surprised when they learned how wrong they'd been.
Regards,
John

P.S. I never thought it was a "patriotic song," but then, I listened to the lyrics.

Zero · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 1402

johnslat · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:52 am Post subject:

Dear Zero,

Do you, then, not teach listening? I do in my Transitions to College ESL course, along with reading, writing, speaking and grammar.

I have to admit being a bit dumbfounded by your question. I take it that you don't think that the two points I mentioned in my previous post have any relevance to ESL.

Personally, I do think it's worthwhile to demonstrate to students that listening needs to be active, especially in a college setting. How many times have you seen students supposedly "listening," but then, when you ask them for, say, an example of what you just talked about, you can sometimes get just a blank stare.

And tone refers not just to music but to a speaker's tone - if you're ever watched a commercial or listened to a smooth politician, perhaps you've experienced how deceptive tone can be.

Regards,
John

Perilla · Joined: 09 Jul 2010 Posts: 792 Location: Hong Kong

It's a great idea, and one I used to use (mostly Beatles songs) though perhaps not as often as I could have.

Must confess I always took the wrong message from Born in the USA - I thought it was pro-US until the wife (who has a much better ear for lyrics than I do) pointed out how wrong I was.

As you say, it's a great listening exercise for students - but it also goes beyond that in many ways. I guess this particular track would be mostly for high ability students, but the concept should still work well at the lower end of the scale.

Zero · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 1402

johnslat · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:03 pm Post subject:

Dear Zero,

""Taa-daaaa! If you don't listen closely, you can misinterpret a song!" "

Well, actually my intent is a little more general than that; I hope to help them become critical listeners. And I've found that the "shock" of realizing just how badly they've misinterpreted that song will bring along with it the awareness of how easy it is to be a "lazy listener" (and, extending it even further, a "lazy reader/writer/speaker," as well.)

I think students here in the US pick up a lot of English (and ideas) from TV, especially. And I'd say that TV tends to encourage passive listening/watching. So, by using selected parts of some TV shows (and commercials,) I hope to get them to see (hear, really) how often language is used, especially commercially, to deceive and mislead, how tone, body language, word choice, etc. can all be employed to manipulate the listener/watcher.

My students are high-level, having achieved top scores on our placement tests or having already gone through the other six ESL semesters. Admittedly, I wouldn't try this with lower-level students, at least not with the same objectives in mind.

Regards,
John

Sashadroogie · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:09 pm Post subject:

Dear Johnslat

I think that any activity that uses music of any description and which is NOT just a lyric gap-fill is to be applauded.

Ura for Johnslat!

S

Hic!

Sashadroogie · Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:19 pm Post subject:

A favourite activity I used to do years and years ago was to play this music,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCXxr44gh0U

, the first 2 mins anyway, and ask the learners what they could see in their mind's eye. Great for narrative tenses and general description etc. More complex activities were to ask them to imagine this was the soundtrack to a film - they then design the film. A sneaky way of introducing a writing task.

Ah, those were the days. Hic! Shocking how we then descend into the depths of inactivity and lose all creative force, even the will to live...

Where's my Beluga? I need a shot coz I'm going down...Mother Superior...