Talk:Move It On Over (song)

He's forced to sleep in the doghouse; is this where the metaphor "in the doghouse" comes from, or was Williams playing on an already established metaphor? Minaker (talk) 01:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a double meaning. The metaphors were for the 'folks' listening to the record, but in real-time, he was talking to his dog at 3 in the morning, as he squeezed into his doghouse for a few hours sleep. But that is an excellent question we should always ask, what was the lyricists meaning in 1947? I think the metaphor "in the doghouse because the old lady is mad at me" was what Hank was thinking as he wrote this song. Just my personal opinion. Tillywilly17 (talk) 14:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Genre Changes

I see the genre of this song changed and reverted on a regular basis. I hate to divert my valuable time to this subject, but looks like there is no choice In this era. the term 'Country Music' was barely known; all through the 1940s. it was 'Hillbilly' music, over time it was renamed 'Country' music; I have no objection to either Hank's livelier tunes were called honky-tonk, even by himself I have seen this labeled as 'rock and roll' I will admit this song 'rocks' for 1947. but I mean that figuratively only. I don't usually post references for genre, it makes the page look bad with all those numbers, but will do if that is what is required. If you search with google, beware, many of the hits are 'user-sourced' from current times, therefore useless. I try to focus on 1947. Don't like when people revise history. In 1947, there were no 45s and 'Memorial albums', there were juke joints playing 10" platters until they wore out. Until 1948, most 'folk' record charts were based on jukebox popularity I believe. Don't want to look all this up unless I have too. Rather eat a plate of jambalaya. Tillywilly17 (talk) 13:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I personally find your genre changes a bit odd and unnecessary. Also, this is a "proto-" rock and roll song. It's even mentioned on the Origins of rock and roll article

Dpm12 (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mardi Gras riff used in this and other songs

Sources exist describing this song as having tapped into a New Orleans Mardi Gras riff, just as other songs had done earlier and afterward. Dawson 2005 says that "Rock Around the Clock" used this riff copied straight from "Move It On Over", and also lists Little Brother Montgomery's 1930 "Vicksburg Blues" and Charlie Barnet's "Victory Walk" as having the same early root. Dawson says that "Williams in turn had partially recycled [the verse of 'Move It On Over'] from an old, common New Orleans Mardi Gras riff". The Lipsitz book lists Hal Singer's signature song "Cornbread" as having the same basis. Binksternet (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dawson, Jim (2005). Rock Around the Clock: The Record that Started the Rock Revolution!. Hal Leonard. p. 82. ISBN 9780879308292.
Lipsitz, George (1997). Time Passages: Collective Memory and American Popular Culture. U of Minnesota Press. p. 113. ISBN 978-1-4529-0578-5.

Binksternet (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, here's what the passage we're discussing says:

Williams' song shares common musical roots with Charley Patton's "Going to Move to Alabama", recorded in 1929, Jim Jackson's "Kansas City Blues" from 1927, and Count Basie's "Red Wagon", first recorded in 1939.

I know exactly what the sources say, and they don't say that. I've compiled them here for easy reference. You're conflating what one critic says about the structure of the song with what another says about the melody, which is WP:OR, and you're applying what one critic says about "Rock Around The Clock" to "Move It On Over," which again is WP:OR. Tom Reedy (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can see with my own eyes, thank you. If you "know exactly what the sources say", then why are you removing everything? Why are you not summarizing these sources for the reader? You are turning out the lights on this information, and shutting the door. Binksternet (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See if my edit works for you. Tom Reedy (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also have to say that in the future I would appreciate if you would address my statements. Several times in our interactions you haven't addressed what I said; instead you try to make it about some kind of censorship. Just address the statements. Tom Reedy (talk) 19:22, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am hypersensitive to the narrative "Hank Williams wrote his own songs with no help" as we have tangled over that issue. Binksternet (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anybody who's arguing that; I've only ever argued that the claims of a person with no musical background who never played any kind of instrument in public should not be taken seriously without some kind of evidence other than his unexamined statements, but that's irrelevant on this page. I just don't think every article that mentions a song should have an in-depth look at its origins, or even a medium-depth look. On its own page, sure, but even then I think it should follow the cited source, which it did not do on this page, and it shouldn't give information that isn't clear. As far back as out interaction on the Paul Gilley talk page you were quick to ascribe nefarious motivations for my edits and comments, and you adamantly ignored my objections based on policy. The state of Wikipedia nowadays is such that I daresay the majority of editors don't have a good grounding in Wiki policy, but you've been around long enough you should be able to directly answer my comments with solid policy cites, if I'm wrong. I've never had a problem accepting when I was mistaken on policy interpretations when it was pointed out to me. Tom Reedy (talk) 06:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the justification for removing any reference or comparison to "Going to Move to Alabama." For one thing, a search for that song still redirects here, but now there is no mention anywhere on Wikipedia of Patton's song, not even in his own discography. The similarity in melody and structure are so strong, that it's at least worth preserving that observation, even if there may be no documented direct influence between the two. (Or at least remove the redirect, which would be unfortunate.) 2601:18D:400:2C20:2C1D:6EA7:99AE:AFC7 (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]