My first impression about DIYAT was that I wasn't wild about it personally, even though I could appreciate what David had done with the song in an objective way. But something has been disturbing me about that song, and I finally figured out what it is.

To explain my personal perspective, I grew up in a home that listened almost exclusively to classical music. When I started listening to music on my own, probably when I was about 9 or 10, I kind of just picked up on what my friends were into -- stuff on Z100 or WPLJ (that's Top 40 & HAC for the non-NYers) -- and just kind of listened to everything to make up my mind. So I obviously wasn't very discriminating. I heard a lot of music at the end of the 80's, and missed some of the songs from the beginning of that decade until I was a little older; and I hated NKOTB (yet another reason I was an outcast in JHS -- I just didn't think their music was that great and didn't see whether or not they were attractive as relevant to whether I should have to force myself to listen to it). I ended up listening to the oldies station a lot towards the end of JHS, became a big Billy Joel fan, and eventually started listening to more contemporary music in HS, but still gravitated to the pop end of things. I only started getting into rock peripherally in college and afterwards, but even then, I was focusing on other things, musically -- I founded a short-lived a cappella group in college and was always busy arranging things for it, and didn't really do much rock because that wasn't our M.O. -- so I've only kind of been easing into it over the last decade. And I think at that point my brother had gotten me into instrumental movie soundtracks (that's his musical passion) so I listened to a lot of that. And then when I had kids, I had in some ways taken a break from music, which was in many ways a mistake although I didn't process it at the time (too much sleep deprivation?). It took David to remind me what was missing, and to remind me that there was all this music that I KNEW I would like but never bothered looking into, so lately I've been backtracking into grunge and earlier rock and having a blast.

In any case, DIYAT -- that was actually one of the songs I LIKED from the 80's. Hello, BJ, ABMB -- I actually didn't really care for those songs in their original incarnations, so that's why I love their revisions, because they just transform the song. And for LL, I guess I liked it but was kind of ambivalent, and David doesn't so much transform the song as punch it up a bit, so I liked his version, but it didn't disturb me in a fundamental way. DIYAT is so transformed, on the order of the AI covers, that it does disturb me, and grab me, and intrigue me, all at once. But for various sentimental reasons, I couldn't bring myself to like it or be happy about it, even though I can appreciate what an incredible piece of work David has turned it into.

Part of the issue I have with it is the lyrical meaning of the song. Basically, the word "died" is the key. Obviously, there is the sexual connotation, and I actually think that's under the surface of both the original & DC's version, but I certainly wasn't aware of that when I was 10 or 11 and first heard the song! The difference is that in the original, I think of "died" as a word connoting an extreme emotional state, and generally, a positive one -- like "I will die if DC sings Anodyne at my next concert." It's an extremely figurative term. Whereas in DC's version, it's more literal, although in a metaphysical way -- it feels like he's saying this girl is killing his soul, with all that entails. So in some ways, the original is on par thematically with Avalanche (in terms of love taking over everything), or Lie (it's the wrong person to be with but he's still there) or even KOTN (he can't help himself even though he knows it's not a good idea) -- and the speaker in the song is subsumed by that. But DC's version basically turns the song into Porcelain. Like, "I was with you, and it killed me inside, and something personal within me is dead now, and I hate you for it, you coldhearted shrew."

And the musical delivery of both also obviously fits into their respective themes. The original is more melodic, more nostalgic. DC's version is angry and bitter. I think it was a very conscious decision to not sing the bridge -- it changes the meaning of the song and doesn't quite fit with the delivery that David brings to it thematically, although I think he could make it work if he wanted to. And that also fits into my discomfort -- because I personally have more of an affinity with more melodic songs. That's just what I prefer, and that's part of the reason, for instance, that I have issues with Mr. S, because it's very jarring in some ways, and I find a disconnect between the music & lyrics. And because of my original affinity for that song, and my original understanding of the lyrics, David's version basically created this disconnect in my head with his less melodic version that I wouldn't necessarily gravitate to immediately, and an approach that doesn't work with my understanding of the lyrics.

So that's why, on a personal level, I'm a little irritated at David Cook at the moment. Because he took a song that I liked, and was even a little sentimental about, hopeless romantic that I am, and turned it into a hard, bitter, angsting rant.

And in spite of that, in spite of my discomfort with it -- I'm starting to like that song anyway. I've just listened to it again, and my appreciation for what he's done with it -- how he's reinterpreted the lyrics, and changed the arrangement so significantly and in such concert with the new meaning he's infused into the song -- it's overtaking my irritation. So basically, I'm starting to get over myself . But I think this song is going to be a big, big deal in retrospect, because it really is as groundbreaking as some of his earlier covers and proves that, you know, he's still got it. And that talent and brilliance is why I keep listening.