I am a music theory illiterate. Possibly due to my hearing disability I can’t pick up key signatures and their changes. Same with time changes. But the music in God stands out (to me) as so beautiful … different than other songs. The piano runs, the notes, the chords seem so perfect. What is it about that song that makes it work so much better than other songs?
People like different things. The music doesn’t do much for me, but I’ll take this chance to ask for explanations of the opening lyrics.
God is a concept by which we measure our pain. I’ve never been interested enough to think about it longer than 15 secs. And those 15 secs —now cumulatively amounting to 2 minutes— have produced no insights. Anyone?
I agree it’s one of his better solo efforts for that period, but I wouldn’t call it a great song personally. If you, or someone else, thinks it’s a great song that’s just fine. How great or not great a song is is somewhat subjective IMO.
I’ve never cared much for the song. That may be because I am more moved by melody and harmony than by lyrics. The chord progressions sound pretty uninteresting to me.
Lennon wrote many great songs. Some hold up even if you don’t understand the words. ‘#9 Dream’ may be my favorite one post-Beatles.
IMO ‘God’ is nowhere near up there with ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’ or ‘I Am the Walrus’. Or several others.
I must admit that the opening line is something to think about.
I don’t know. From a music theory perspective, it’s pretty cliche. There’s the “50s” progression of I-vi-IV-V in the verses (with an occasional gospel-y lick thrown in there, like a quick IV-I on the first chord occasionally thrown in) , and then the bridge or B section is just iv-IV-V. It’s doesn’t really do much out of the ordinary harmonically.
So I’m not sure what musically you’re responding to. This is the first time I’ve heard the song, and it just seems pretty paint-by-numbers to me. (This is not to say simple songs with simple progressions can’t be great – most of the music I listen to is pretty straightforward harmonically, and sometimes not more than even two chords), but I’m not unsure of what you’re hearing musically that is sticking out for you.
It’s great because it’s simple, both musically and lyrically, and the artist is laying bare his soul.
I love most of John Lennon’s musical and lyrical artistry (Day in the Life, Tomorrow Never Knows, I Am The Walrus from Beatles era, Imagine, Instant Karma, Cold Turkey, Watching The Wheels from his solo era) but, IMHO, “God” is song whose reach exceeds its grasp. But this was from the John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band, his debut solo studio album of 1970. It sounds like John is still feeling his way into NOT being in the biggest band in the world. I hear what John is aiming for though so I’ve always thought of this song as his warm-up game for “Imagine”, which would appear the following year on 1971’s album of the same name.
Ringo plays drums on the track and I always imagine hearing him utter “Say what?” after “I don’t believe in Beatles”.
I’ve always wondered how you handle that. What do you do after being the biggest band, best QB, superstart NBA player, etc.
And that song hasn’t ever done much for me.
This comes from John’s therapy sessions with psychologist Arthur Janov, who said that people experiencing severe pain or trauma tend to have a more intense belief in God.
Janov’s influence also comes through on other songs from the album John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band, like “Mother.” (And he influenced the band Tears for Fears!)
I said I’m a music theory illiterate. This is all moon-man language to me.
The detail wasn’t aimed directly at you, as you clearly stated that in the OP you know nothing about theory. It’s a cliche 50s/early 60s progression, probably the most popular one of the era. Think “Blue Moon” or “Stand by Me.” Or, appropriately today, “Monster Mash.” That part was for you. The overall point is that the song is pretty standard harmonically, and I don’t know what musically you are reacting to and what is “different” about it. (It doesn’t help that on a couple of listens now, the song doesn’t do anything for me.)
It can’t be that great. I’ve never heard of it.
I was thinking of something like that, but about McCartney. I was listening to Sgt Pepper, and I remembered the first time I heard it 55 years ago, and the sense of wonder of it. And then I was thinking, "what does Paul think when he hears it on the radio? Does he think, ‘Man I remember recording that almost 60 years ago! We were so young. Wish I could still write like that.’ " I dunno.
I’ve always felt like music is one of those “there’s no accounting for taste” sorts of things, and what speaks to one person absolutely does NOT speak to others in the same way. I mean, I knew people in high school (1987-1991) who thought Depeche Mode was the be-all, end-all of bands. Similarly in college, I knew people who were just swept up in grunge and in particular Nirvana. I never got it.
I also feel like there’s an element of something akin to wabi-sabi in music. I’m sure you can (or soon will be able to) feed a bunch of insanely popular songs into some sort of AI model, along with some musical theory, and have it generate a song that would be technically perfect, but not actually good, because it’s so average. Kind of like those “the most beautiful person in the world” things where they average a bunch of pretty people and show you the resulting face. Those faces are always attractive, but they’re never beautiful either. Same thing with music- I feel like there’s something about the idiosyncracies of the artists that make them more than the sum of their parts.
So for you, that song does it. It doesn’t do much of anything for me, honestly. Doesn’t mean it’s bad, but it’s just not my thing. I think I wouldn’t analyze it too much and just accept it for what it is.
John was my ‘favorite’ Beatle but none of them had a solo career that achieved what they did in synchrony. I remember the opening line feeling really deep when I was a teenager. Now, I’m more like, nah. And the rest of the song is just whining.
More on that, from beatlesbible.com:
Dr Arthur Janov:
“He [Lennon] rented a house in Bel Air, which is a very ritzy area here, and we talked about things. He said: ‘What about God?’ and I would go on and on about [how] people who have deep pain generally tend to believe in God with a fervency. And he said: ‘Oh, you mean God is a concept by which we measure our pain.’ Just bang. I would go all around it and he was there, just like that. And that was John. John could take very profound philosophical concepts and make it simple.”
Which reads like BS to me, with Janov sucking up to a star acolyte, and then Lennon taking a statistical correlation (Major? Slight?) and presenting it as universal truth in the lyric.
Regarding the piano The Beatles Bible link says:
On ‘God’, Preston played a Steinway grand piano, while Lennon performed on a honky tonk-style upright Steinway which offered a considerably different sound.
…and has this quote from Klaus Voorman:
“He was on Let It Be and they got on really well. Billy [Preston] loved the band and they loved Billy. John actually said, ‘Come on Billy, do a little of your gospel piano, it’s about God, you know.’ So it inspired him to something that’s his upbringing; Billy learned piano playing and organ playing in church. He really believed in God and that’s the way he played on this song. It’s beautiful.“
While the song’s chord progression didn’t feel special to me, the piano sound was interesting, and I suppose that was the blending of the two disparate instruments — plus whatever studio adjustments were added.
As @pulykamell points out it’s the standard “doowop” or 50’s chord progression. If you don’t know the songs he refers to, perhaps you’ve plinked out Heart and Soul on the piano? Or heard somebody do it? That’s the I-vi-IV-V progression.
There are probably hundreds of hit songs based on that pattern.
[nerd talk]I usually play/hear that with a ii instead of a IV, but they can be swapped for each other. Come to think of it, I play “Blue Moon” with a ii, and not a IV. “Stand by Me” and “Monster Mash” definitely get a IV.[/nerd talk]
I don’t recall ever hearing the song before. The lyrics are heartfelt and moving, IMHO, but for me the melody is just meh. Since melody is paramount to me, I don’t think it’s all that great of a song.
Solo efforts I do like from Lennon include Woman and Imagine. To a lesser extent I like Beautiful Boy because it makes me smile and think of my son when he was young, even though the melody isn’t as good as the others mentioned.
At least it was good enough to get a sequel.
Count me among those who don’t see what all the fuss is about.