Re: Thirteen Scripters Scripting
Re: Thirteen Scripters Scripting
- Subject: Re: Thirteen Scripters Scripting
- From: "Mark J. Reed" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 09:46:14 -0500
According to Wikipedia:
1. The version with "gold" instead of "golden" is older. Also, that
verse originally referred not to jewelry but to a variety of bird
whose markings include a yellow ring around the neck, possibly the
ring-necked pheasant. Thus the first seven gifts - all of the ones
that aren't people - are all birds. (Also, the four "calling birds"
were originally four "colly birds", a.k.a. blackbirds).
2. The copyright is to the tune, not the lyrics: it's not "five gold
rings", but the way the melody changes once you get that far.
Originally the pattern of the first four verses (where each of the
gifts past one has the same falling-rising intonation, sol re mi fa)
carried through; the modern melody that changes after you get to 5,
descennding through the previous gifts such that "two turtle doves" is
re do ti la sol) was written by Frederic Austin and the copyright is
still active; the current owner is Novello & Co.
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 6:27 AM, Nigel Garvey
<email@hidden> wrote:
> Paul Berkowitz wrote on Sat, 27 Dec 2008 10:26:59 -0800:
>
>>On 12/27/08 5:13 AM, "Nigel Garvey" <email@hidden>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> In
>>> England, we spread "gold" over two notes rather than singing "golden"
>>...
>>
>>> It was mentioned in a quiz show on the telly over Christmas that while
>>> most of this song is traditional, the "Five gold rings" line is
>>copyrighted!
>>
>>Hmmmm. A way around the copyright presents itself as long as you don't mind
>>too much being taken for a crass Americanizer...
>>
>>So singers of the whole song have to request permission of the
>>copyright-holders to sing the song due to the inclusion of the copyrighted
>>line? Or only people who who would choose to display, sing or trinoidally
>>chant the single line on its own? I can't imagine that too many people not
>>wishing to advertise whatever it is that the copyrighters own (a chain of
>>trashy jewellery shops?) would want to go around spouting just that one line
>>anyway. AppleScripters had better beware errors resulting in rather more
>>than the usual consequences, though. ;-)
>
> ;-)
>
> I imagine it's only a problem when the song's sung (or reproduced) for a
> fee and includes that line. If I'd been more awake when QI was on, I'd
> have made a mental note of who the copyright owner was. I was more
> interested in learning what the original line might have been, but it
> wasn't mentioned.
>
> A couple of times at our staff carol services at the RSC, we played a
> setting by one of my colleagues (for speaker and instruments) of a text
> by John Julius Norwich — the thank-you letters for the gifts. It started
> with charmed delight over the partridge and became increasingly fraught
> and hysterical as more and more stuff was delivered. The twelve drummers
> were acknowledged with a solicitor's letter instructing the sender never
> to bother the recipient again. Unfortunately, it doesn't make such an
> interesting scripting exercise. ;-)
>
>
> NG
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> AppleScript-Users mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
--
Mark J. Reed <email@hidden>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
AppleScript-Users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users
This email sent to email@hidden