Making fun of music, one song at a time. Since the year 2000.
Check out the two amIright misheard lyrics books including one book devoted to misheard lyrics of the 1980s.
(Toggle Right Side Navigation)

Song Parodies -> "Let It Be!"

Original Song Title:

"Let It Be"

Original Performer:

Beatles

Parody Song Title:

"Let It Be!"

Parody Written by:

John A. Barry

The Lyrics

So I find this line whose sign is double—
Signifies subjunctively
One thing, one else imperatively.

Now, the subjunctive mark is
One that tells of something contrary
To what might likely come:
“Let it be!”
“Let it be!”. . .

But when what’s spoken’s started
Barking a lot more like a decree
From a stern commander:
“Let it be!”
This slogan, you can parse it
Depending on your proclivity—
Hope or terse commander?
“Let it be!”
“Let it be!”. . .

In three words, a dictum or a plea.
One’s a plea, one says, “Be
Subservient to me!”
Sub- and sub-, both in ’em:
“Let it be!”

So if you cry it loudly,
What is it that you desire to see—
Touch it not, or sorrow? “Let it be!”
Or, praying that we’ve found a new shtik—
Subjunctive supplicant, me?

Either that or this one—“Let it be!”
“Let it be!”. . .
Where, then, is the answer?
“Let it be!”
“Let it be!”. . .
Whipped, I don’t know which one—
“Let it be!”

Your Vote & Comment Counts

The parody authors spend a lot of time writing parodies for the website and they appreciate feedback in the form of votes and comments. Please take some time to leave a comment below about this parody.

Place Your Vote

 LittleLots
Matches Pace of
Original Song: 
How Funny: 
Overall Score: 



In order for your vote to count, you need to hit the 'Place Your Vote' button.
 

Voting Results

 
Pacing: 4.5
How Funny: 4.2
Overall Rating: 4.3

Total Votes: 10

Voting Breakdown

The following represent how many people voted for each category.

    Pacing How Funny Overall Rating
 1   1
 1
 1
 
 2   0
 0
 0
 
 3   0
 2
 1
 
 4   1
 0
 1
 
 5   8
 7
 7
 

User Comments

Comments are subject to review, and can be removed by the administration of the site at any time and for any reason.

AFW - February 06, 2012 - Report this comment
Sounds like a good English lesson
Rob Arndt - February 06, 2012 - Report this comment
"5s x 3"... can we move on to multiplication now??? ;-D
Callmelennie - February 06, 2012 - Report this comment
Huh?
Peter Andersson - February 07, 2012 - Report this comment
Sorry, I didn't really get this one.
NorCalCoogar - February 07, 2012 - Report this comment
PirateJack, yeah, this is a lot of > ChipsAhoy, for the HMS SirSweaty.
Grammar Police, a/k/a Tommy Turtle - February 08, 2012 - Report this comment
AFW, JAB, and all else: It's a bad English "lesson". There is not the slightest bit of usage of subjunctive tense in the line quoted.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/subjunctive
"....noting or pertaining to a mood or mode of the verb that may be used for subjective, doubtful, hypothetical, or grammatically subordinate statements or questions, as the mood of be in 'if this be treason.' "

Note the word "if". Subjunctive, as the dictionary says, implies some conditionality, supposition, hypothesis, etc."
"Were we to rate this strictly, it would rate as being very poor" = "If we were to rate this strictly... "

Both uses of "Let it be" are imperative, though one is more commanding than the other.
Ordering someone not to touch this: "Let it be!" = "Leave it alone!"
As used in OS, "Let (the future, or the situation) it be (what it will be - don't sweat it)", same as Spanish (and oldie) "Qué será, será" = What will be, will be. Milder, but still a command. Nothing hypothetical about it.

Differentiate from past tense: "I was once a carpenter, and I was once a rich man." Done, in the past. Now, imagining:

"If I Were A Carpenter (And You Were A Lady)"
"If I Were A Rich Man" (Fiddler on the Roof).

In each case, the speaker/singer makes a hypothetical supposition; hence, uses "were" vs. "was". That's not what is happening here, or in TOS.

Pacing was off a bit here and there, but since the grammar was absolutely off, 4-1-1.

John, it's bad enough that you've chosen to abandon your talent in favor of cranking out quantity to stay on top of the charts. But considering that your parodies used to enlarge everyone else's vocabulary (self included), giving a failed grammar lesson adds to the disappointment. (Possibly the result of letting the real JAB intelligence rust away.) People trust you, John. If you don't care to take the time to live up to that, fine, but then stick to non-didactic subjects, please.


@ Callmelennie and Peter Andersson: I don't blame you. I kept looking for an example of it in this parody, and couldn't find one.
    Subjunctive tense is rapidly fading from the English language, at least in en-US, so perhaps either or both of you are not familiar with it, even though Peter is one of the best speakers of ESL I've ever seen.


@ Callmelennie: Confirming my reply to your kind comment at last Friday's American Pie parody:
(JAB most talented parodist) "He was. (true) He probably still is, but .... (chose quantity vs. quality). And what a loss that was to the site, and to me as a fan.


@ Rob Arndt: "can we move on to multiplication now???"
Of course!
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/jimmiejonesjamestaylor0.shtml

And when you're ready for binary and hexadecimal,
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/gilbertsullivan98.shtml

Actual grammar parodies, teaching actually-correct grammar:

There/Their/There:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/thebyrds27.shtmlb

Who/Whom: http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/thebeatles2006.shtml

Fewer/less: http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/thebeatles2007.shtml

Colons, semicolons, and parentheses:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/thebeatles1719.shtml
Grammpa - November 30, 2013 - Report this comment
TT: Your tutorial comment gratuitously offered links to grammar parodies (presumably yours) on topics not addressed in JAB's parody. Your egotism and your cattiness toward JAB come sulking through.
You might have expressed misgivings about the obfuscations engendered by the subjunctive mood (which implies conditionality). The typical politician, when asked "What is your opinion of the nuclear pact with Iran?" will reply "I would say that..." Under what condition would he say whatever it is he goes on to say? IF it is raining? He doesn't tell us, avoiding a declarative statement and accountability.

The author of the parody has authorized comments, and wants YOUR feedback.

Link To This Page

The address of this page is: http://www.amiright.com/parody/60s/beatles716.shtml For help, see the examples of how to link to this page.

This is view # 574