Our current national anthem represents a woefully outdated national image, one that does not recognize the last 100-plus years of our cultural history, or the modern realities of our society (not that any nation's anthem really does this). "The Star-Spangled Banner" represents a vision of America as a flag. We are a nation of immigrants -- why not an anthem that acknowledges our e pluribus unum society?

In the 21st century, we are theoretically more sophisticated, and we can do better than the 19th century's wholly unrealistic and romanticized vision. Besides, our nation has produced some of the best popular music the world has ever heard -- why shouldn't we have a song that exemplifies America's rich contribution to world culture?

Curtis' "Don't Worry" is similar to "The Star-Spangled Banner" in that it comes from another time of national crisis. The tumult of the late '60s and early '70s -- Vietnam, race riots, assassinations and the general paranoia of the Nixon administration -- all went into the song. As the epithet call-out at the beginning suggests, the song acknowledges racial and ethnic disharmony, a kind of anxiety of multiculturalism. At the same time, the impact of the epithets is lessened by throwing them all out together, and the point of the lyric is that, whatever our differences, "We Will All Go Together When We Go," as Tom Lehrer once sang. (Lehrer's song, by the way, is a sort of progenitor of Mayfield's, the vaudevillian, white-Uncle-Tom grandfather to the strident funk anthem.)

The references to Nixon are outdated, and certainly all ethnic groups are not yet represented in the litany of slurs at the beginning of the song, but only a few changes would make it applicable to 2002. One could argue, of course, that Mayfield's vision of America does not represent many people's viewpoint, and of course this is true. But did Francis Scott Key's line about "land of the free and the home of the brave" resonate with Dred Scott or Karen Silkwood, or with Native Americans living on reservations, or with the multitudes of sweatshop workers, past and present (at home and overseas)?

More important, there's the music itself. One reason why most anthems sound alike is that they wheeze out from the tired horns of marching bands or military ensembles. These bands are built around the arrangements of 19th century martial music, so uniformity in the results is no surprise. And sure, the Lithuanian Coast Guard Auxiliary band is going to mangle "Don't Worry," but consider: Since the "standard" arrangement calls for horns, strings, a funk/rock band lineup and conga drums, we'd be creating jobs for unemployed musicians the world over, especially here at home.

Workers laid off by airlines or scandal-plagued energy traders could make extra cash playing second violin or cello, the trumpet or the wah-wah guitar. More creative arrangements could include parts for theremin, autoharp, accordion, turntable or even banjo. Not to mention all the percussion. It's practically a New Deal program!

Furthermore, being so radically different from other anthems, it would become an international pop hit -- nations would look forward to visits from American dignitaries, just so they could get to hear, or play, our funky anthem. Foreign bands might compete to have the best interpretation, all striving to capture that uniquely American groove.

"Don't Worry (If There's a Hell Below, We're All Going To Go)" is a driving, ultimately foreboding piece of music, but it's also funny. Darkly funny, true, but what's the harm in that? Why not have a little gallows humor in our anthem? We're the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world, surely we can afford it. America could start a trend (isn't that what we do best?) -- gallows humor and popular music in national anthems.

Think of how many other countries could argue for using the Mayfield song for themselves. Iraq, for starters -- I'm sure lots of folks in Baghdad would agree with the tone if not the specifics of the song. Afghanistan, Venezuela, Indonesia and most of the nations of sub-Saharan Africa could, no doubt, make equal claim to the "Don't Worry" message.

There is a certain defiance in gallows humor, a very human impulse to laugh in the face of doom. Why not an apocalyptic national anthem? Is singing sincerely about "rockets' red glare" and "bombs bursting in air" any less morbid than singing about ironic damnation? At least there's a chance that Hell isn't real.

Of course, there is another song whose title begins with the same words, and someone will suggest that Bobby McFerrin's tune would be a better replacement for our national anthem. No. "Don't Worry, Be Happy" is the song of a person who is unaware of the safe about to drop on his head, the Ebola virus on his spork, the proximity of his lit cigarette to the gas tank. I suspect it was playing constantly in Colin Powell's office during Gulf War I, and no doubt it is in heavy rotation at Dick "Dr. Strangelove" Cheney's undisclosed bunker location. "Don't Worry Be Happy" is one of the most potently panic-inducing pieces of music I've ever heard.

If our national anthem is going to be the soundtrack for our leaders' march to war, can't we, who will be doing the marching and paying for it (in some cases with our lives -- civilian as well as military) have a choice as to which song it'll be? As the nation that created jazz, the blues, Motown, rock and fucking roll for crying out loud, don't we deserve better than an English drinking song?

If Sept. 11 is going to be the new Prime Meridian of our nation's history, the moment when "everything changed," why not take the opportunity to change or at least examine our national self-image? Aren't we, the home of the brave, strong enough to recognize our mistakes? And if our anthem admits that we aren't perfect, might we not reconsider our self-righteous stance as global policeman? Might we not think twice before we start bombing? Is it possible that, with a more realistic self-image, the U.S. might become a better citizen of the world?

Recent Stories