Talk:God Bless America

message: I removed the MIDI credit on the guess that it is irrelevant to this entry, apologies if that's wrong (i.e. if you are linking the MIDI in later or something). Though I must say I still think the credit for someone who just MIDI'd it up is nowhere near as significant as that of the composer/lyricist, and should not look it even if it does go in. But if it's text only, then clearly the MIDI credit stays out. Nevilley (talk) 08:59, 28 November 2002 (UTC)
thread_title:  MIDI credit removed 

message: I suspect the bigger problem is that Irving Berlin died in 1989, so these lyrics are most likely under copyright until 2059.  Which probably means they can't be here. -- Someone else 09:06 Nov 28, 2002 (UTC)
:Yes, looks like you are right, see for example: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trm019.htmlMaybe the stub entry saying what it is and who wrote it could be kept, along with a link to the above site or something of that sort? Nevilley 09:41 Nov 28, 2002 (UTC)
:I have now done a revision, removed the lyrics (sorry, anonymous contributor from 66.66.x.x), and added some links. Hope this is better now. Nevilley 09:49 Nov 28, 2002 (UTC)
:Under U.S. copyright law, anything written before 1923 is public domain, regardless of the date of the author's demise.  Internationally, the Berne convention provides that the duration of copyright protection for a work does not exceed the duration provided in the country of authorship. Therefore, the original version should be OK for us to use.  UninvitedCompany 19:57, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The magic word isn't "written", but "published". It's not important when the song was written, the problem is that it was first published in the US in 1938, and that's after 1923. You should correct the sidebox entry, which also reports 1918.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.20.135.24 (talk) 02:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

text: The song's lyrics are public domain. Someone should put it on the page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.189.204.77 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lyrics under copyright protection? 

message: Sorry, but it isn't only atheists who were upset with the lyrics of "God Bless America."  I'm not an atheist and I find the lyrics extremely offensive (as I do the bumper stickers that say the same).  Why?  Because, I hate to tell you but Americans are not God's chosen people (as much as we'd like to believe it).  Woody Guthrie wrote "This Land is Your Land" as an angry response to Irving Berlin's "God Bless America."  All your page can say about it is that it was a socialists response to the song.  Wow, is that propaganda or what?  Does your encyclopedia also say that Columbus discovered America or that there were about 20 million Native Americans here when Christopher decided to "drop in?"Guthrie was thinking of everyone (including the Native people) when he wrote "This Land is Your Land," knowing that 95% of them were dead within a hundred years of Columbus' arrival. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.42.104.73 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 31 March 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not look at Christopher Columbus and see? —Nunh-huh 19:59, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Well, I am an atheist, and I'm not really annoyed by these lyrics. While I am also an American (by which I mean I am a white European-descendant who was born in the United States), I realize that America is probably not God's chosen people (whether or not God exists ;)). But what if there were a song called God Bless Brazil? Would you have been so quick to say "Brazil is not God's chosen people", or are you just upset at Americans?Moreover, I don't think the article makes a POV statement about the song. Indeed, it has little opinion at all on the matter. While on the surface adding something saying that some people in other countries do not like the song may seem NPOV, I have to question the underlying motivations. Since when is a nationalistic song (or phrase or whatever) supposed to be impartial? People in Japan say "Nippon ichi" (Japan is #1) all the time, but you don't hear people objecting "No, it's number nine." While the song itself is obviously POV, I feel the information about it is not. I wouldn't want to upset the balance.Also, an unwillingness to sign your argument doesn't exactly strengthen it. :)--Furrykef 18:59, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Signed or not the (wo)man has a point. Especially since I think it would be fair to say that this was Woody's reason for responding with 'This land is your land...' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.31.54.157 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 29 December 2004 (UTC)

text: So 95% of all the Native people were dead within 100 years of Columbus arrival. I'd say the number would be far closer to 100%, as the average lifespan of a Native American in 1492 would have been between 25-35 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy). Not only were they dead, but most of their grandchildren were as well, and would have been had Columbus sailed or not. Considering that no census would be done for another 300 years after Columbus arrival, to claim populations before that is conjecture, and to claim that anything other than disease killed these people is political revisionist history. It certainly wasn't relevant to pre-World War II America. You want to find actual measurable genocide, that's where you start finding your socialists. And that is much more relevant to the geopolitical climate that Berlin was writing about. Actual genocide committed intentionally on an industrial level. Not politically motivated revisionism. If that bothers you, take your car and drive it either A: out of America, or B: off the closest bridge you ignorant traitor.Nuwriter (talk) 21:09, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

text: First, a disclaimer: I was born in the United States and have lived here all my life. In response to the comments above, I do not believe one can infer that America is especially favored by God from these lyrics. In the phrase "God Bless America," "bless" is in the "subjunctive" mood, not the indicative mood. The indicative mood is used to state facts or things that are true, among other usages; if this mood were being used, it would be written "God Blesses America" which would imply that God Blesses America in preference to other places, which most would consider offensive. However, the subjunctive is used to present ideas that are wishes or requests, or are otherwise not true. When one says "[God] bless you," one is expressing the wish or desire that God will bless the recipient, not "God blesses you" (and no one else). Similarly, "God be with ye [you]" (nowadays, shortened to goodbye) again expresses the speaker's wish that God will be with that person. Of course, "God Save the Queen" is another example of this use of the subjunctive. I hope this makes sense and clears up the confusion.For those who are interested in this matter and wonder why the confusion arises, it is probably since English has lost much of the inflection of its parent languages; that is, many verb forms for different person or mood are identical. In English, we say "I write, you write, he writes, we write, you write, they write." In Spanish, those would all be different (escribo, escribes, escribe, escribimos, escribís, escriben). In English, the subjunctive and indicative forms often tend to be identical, so English speakers tend to be unaware of the difference. For example, "I went to class" and "I wish I went to class", versus "I was in class" but "I wish I were in class." —Knowledge Seeker দ (talk) 09:03, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow. When one says 'god bless you!' does that mean noone else can be blessed? Hardly. It makes sense that a song for America would be about America, just like something directed towards you is addressed to you. Nowhere does it say everyone else is heathens or something... It just says God bless America. I dont see why America cant be blessed, every other country can be... Rangeley 14:39, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about "God Bless the World" instead? 

message: Can anyone provide documentation for "God Bless America" being "the sole song used to represent the US at international events"?Also, if the Library of Congress page includes this notice:
:Copyright 1938, 1939 by Irving Berlin
:Copyright renewed 1965, 1966 by Irving Berlin
:Copyright assigned to Winthrop Rutherfurd, Jr., Anne Phipps Sidamon-Eristoff, and Theodore R. Jackson as Trustees of the God Bless America Fund. International copyright secured.
:All rights reserved.
It's probably still copyrighted. This page says "Used by Permission," so if anyone wants to try and get permission... Tregoweth 23:26, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)
:I removed that because it is simply false. -- Decumanus 23:41, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You bet your bippy it's still copyrighted. I just removed the lyrics. Get real: Irving Berlin founded ASCAP and was a shrewd businessman and one of the most pitbull-like defenders of copyright imaginable. The "God Bless America Fund" donates the royalties, to, I believe, the Boy Scouts. Of all the people we could crib lyrics from, the only worse one I could imagine would be Disney. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:59, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Have you never watched the Olympics??Nuwriter (talk) 21:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sole song to represent the U.S. at international events? 

message: Thru the night with a light from above.
Is that really the spelling used in the lyrics? Wmahan. 20:12, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)
:Actually I did a little bit of research on this and it seems like it actually is spelled thru, or at least that this is the commonest spelling and not a simple error.  I think this may be because abbreviated forms of words are common on sheet music lyrics for typography reasons.  Webster lists "thru" as "variant of through." —130.91.64.99 17:09, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Thru

message: On 31 March 2005, an anon re-inserted the lyrics of the Irving Berlin song, as an addendum to the lyrics of the 1834 Robert Montgomery Bird song, with the coy explanation that "a more recognizable version is sung this way." I repeat: the Berlin lyrics are very definitely still under copyright. And, not that it makes any difference, but Berlin defended his intellectual property rights vigorously, and I am sure the present copyright holders do, too. So don't re-insert them. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:07, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like someone just re-inserted them! — Homestarmy 01:30, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed lyrics again

message: The Judy Rosen comment is very interesting. I agree that she does imply that Berlin borrowed a six-note phrase from the earlier song, saying that it was an example of his "habit of interpolating bits of half-remembered songs into his own numbers."
However, even assuming this is correct, saying that Berlin copied a six-note phrase is not the same as saying that the song "inspired the melody."
I'm softening the comment and making it clear that it is only a six-note fragment that matches, and that Rosen does not say the earlier song "inspired the melody."
When you're working in a particular musical idiom, of course, it's even commoner for phrases to match.
I would add that this degree of similarity is not at all rare between songs, and there is always a tendency by those who spot them to believe it is plagiarism. I don't want to lay stress on its being six notes, but there is a popular (though false) belief among musicians that courts require more than seven notes to match before they will consider it to be plagiarism. The point is that it is very common to spot short matching phrases in different songs and it doesn't mean very much. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right you are, Dpbsmith.  "Inspired the melody" was certainly an overstatement on my part.  That said, I heard a snippet  of "When Mose With His Nose" on Fresh Air this afternoon, and there is definitely a six-note sequence that exactly mirrors the opening six of "God Bless America."  Is it a coincidence?  Who knows; in any case, I'm glad you agree it's appropriate to include in the history of the song.  All in all, your revision is spot-on.  One note: Jody Rosen is a man, incidentally, so I've changed the pronoun to reflect this.  MarritzN 05:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "When Mose with his nose" 

message: Not a place for you to rant about the desirability of the Star Spangled banner as a national anthem, or complain about gods, or to wonder about how the songs popularity might make it a new national anthem. Please stick to the facts. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.137.199 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is an encyclopedia 

message: I believe some people have taken the copyright law to the extreme.  I believe posting the lyrics of God Bless America in the article here is fair use, for that it is being use for study, comment and criticism.  Also posting of lyrics here does not result in any actual damage to the composer or to the market for the work. 74.96.165.62 02:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - you can find the lyrics on thousands of web sites.  I don't see why they should not be on Wikipedia.  There are innumerable Wiki pages that have song lyrics.  Whomever is forbidding the lyrics to be posted is over-reacting. Danflave 01:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of lyrics 

message: Why is there such a large section devoted to Celine Dion's recording? I do not think that is necessary or pertinent to the history of the song. I suggest a brief mention of her recording and the rest of the information be moved to separate page. Djp27 19:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, it looks as if Celine were a kind of landmark for the song. Nazroon 21:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Max24, this is an encyclopedia, not a Celine Dion fan site, nor is this the Celine Dion page. I have left the infobox, as that is what SHOULD be there.  I am not the first person to agree that your edits are totally unnecessary and actually damage the page. If you would like see how you are SUPPOSED to handle multiple artists doing the same song, see (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction. Vordabois 19:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who's Max24? — QuicksilverT @ 05:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree - there's too much mention of Celine Dion's version and hardly any mention of Kate Smith's version, which I believe was more popular.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.106.21.209 (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, the long section on the use of the song at sporting events is tedious and ridiculously detailed. And Kate Smith was the touchstone for the song from the war years to long after.Which reminds me, it was necessary to fudge her rendition in front of the Philadelphia Flyers,since the original article as totally unclear about when and wher she was--in quotes, yet--live.I think also it would be interesting to a reader to insert a bit more about WHAT Guthrie was objecting to.Actio (talk) 23:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celine Dion? Really? 

message: It sounds like the religiosity of the song should be mentioned in this article. The word religion does not appear once in the article despite talk of the song being a national anthem and the religious overtones of the song. Especially if there was any controversy with Woody Guthrie's dislike of the song due to the religious nature or any publics preference for "This Land" due to this.--Allen314159 22:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religiosity of the song 

message: My issue is that this statement is currently based off an Geocities website which raises the question of reliability. The Geocities site itself does not cite this claim. --BirdKr (talk) 11:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added such citation from the Library of Congress--BirdKr (talk) 12:03, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finding a better citation to "Unofficial anthem of U.S." 

message: Is there any pitcher that has gone on record as saying he actually sang or thought this as it was playing?  I read the reference as a feeble attempt at assumptive sarcasim. 71.54.234.60 (talk) 03:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "God Damn America" 

message: I think a landmark performance of this song was when members of the U.S. Congress (spontaneously) sang the song following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Perhaps this should be mentioned in the article? 203.17.70.161 (talk) 01:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Had the same thought just this evening, so I've added it. Cheers, WWB (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia isn't a bar, tavern or pub.  There's no need to write "Cheers". Your signature with four tildes is sufficient. — QuicksilverT @ 05:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood. Cheers, 173.239.232.134 (talk) 02:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 11 

message: "At Chicago's Wrigley Field, during the Vietnam War, the song was often played by the organist as part of his post-game playlist, while fans filed out of the stadium"
This is a very bizarre fact. While it being played at Chicago's Wrigley Field as part of a post-game set is fine, this makes it sound as if people are leaving the stadium because the song is being played in conjunction with anti-Vietnam War sentiment. It's just too much, and a POV. I think it should be removed, but I'll leave that up to a consensus, or at least someone else. 173.49.67.27 (talk) 02:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd trivia fact I think should be removed 

message: Footnote number 5 (supporting Woody Guthrie's dislike of "God Bless America") goes to a page that cites (wait for it) Wikipedia as its source.  So it's a circular reference.  Does anyone have an independent source for the idea that Woody Guthrie wrote "This Land is Your Land" as a response to "God Bless America"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.59.169 (talk) 20:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: There are four poorly worded, ungrammatical, and misspelled sentences (fragments?) appended to the final coherent sentence of the paragraph concerning the singing of God Bless America at the Indianapolis 500.
Henderson routinely sings the entire song, including the prologue, and in some years, sings the chorus a second time.the third time came and her was unable to remember the lyrics and completely fail. they hooted and hollered at him to get off the stage but he was undaunted and retried it again. when he resung the song, he sang it beautifully. and is now known for singing at thr indeapolice 500.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.192.167.11 (talk) 00:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird sentence at end of "Indianapolis 500" paragraph 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on God Bless America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090923042236/http://news.aol.com:80/article/new-jersey-teens-sue-over-god-bless/669467? to http://news.aol.com/article/new-jersey-teens-sue-over-god-bless/669467
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In WP:OTRS someone wrote in saying that the lyrics currently presented in God_Bless_America#Lyrics are not complete. I am unable to easily find any source to verify these lyrics and right now there is no citation. If anyone can find any 1918 publication showing the lyrics then that might prove things. Please share if you know something.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:21, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The person with the suggestion wrote in further, saying that in the October 2001 issue of Goldmine Magazine there is an article about "The History & Legacy of God Bless America" was written by Chuck Miller. That article may help develop this one.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:17, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source needed for lyrics 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on God Bless America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100106020356/http://archives.cnn.com:80/2001/US/09/11/congress.terrorism/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/congress.terrorism/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The song is featured in the final scene of Oscar winning movie The Deer Hunter too (I would add it if my English were any good, but alas)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1810:291D:3900:6CC2:7F65:2941:1E9F (talk) 13:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Deer Hunter 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:25, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:09, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I'm not sure why it is or isn't relevant to mention that Irving Berlin is originally from Belarus in the beginning of the article. If it is relevant to include this information, the syntax of the sentence that mentions it is clunky, so it should be reworded. If it's not relevant, removing "of Belarusian origin" from that sentence should suffice to eliminate the clunkiness. Churdle76 (talk) 01:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance of mentioning Berlin's origin in the opening paragraph?