Others

Payung Teduh Reveals the Reasons Why Stretchers Feel Different Music in ‘Akad’ Song

Speaking of the song “Akad“, the word “phenomenal” might be enough to describe it. Because, since it was first released in June 2017, this upbeat song belonging to the band Payung Teduh was immediately popular. In fact, even though the video was re-released, due to copyright problems, the song’s popularity remained stable. Evidently, even though the revised version was only released on September 4, 2017, until Thursday (5/10), the video of this song has been seen by 24 million pairs of eyes. So, you can imagine how many audience figures you get, if the video of this song is not revised.

The popularity of this simple but meaningful song made many people cover it. As a result, this song also exploded. Unfortunately, the irresponsible people did the “aji mumpung” move, to illegally extract rupiah, from the cover activities of this song. In that sense, the song “Akad” was covered, however, this cover version of the song was then recorded, and released to the public, for commercial purposes, without the permission of Payung Teduh, as the ‘legal owner’. This action is classified as an act of piracy of work and copyright, which violates the Law. For this reason, Mohammad Istiqomah Djamad, alias Is, as the vocalist of Payung Teduh gave a clarification

Given the many pros and cons, I will not discuss it further. Because, that will only trigger debates of useless coaches. Here, I will discuss a little something, which is actually a fundamental mistake, about the “covering” song “Akad”.

Uniquely, I found this fundamental mistake, when I was “chatting” with an old friend, some time ago. At that time, I shared my writing at Kompasiana, entitled “Akad” (aired 29/8/2017) to him. Then, in a joking tone, I commented; “I hope you don’t come along to make the cover. Too good if you make it. Hahaha”. I commented this to myself, because he did have good vocal skills (at least in my opinion that sounded like this mess), and was active in choirs. Interestingly, my friend then responded while laughing loudly: “It’s a boy’s song, so I’m not going to cover it.”

Here, I found that fundamental mistake; the song “Akad” is basically designed to be sung by men, not women. Because, the pieces of the lyrics clearly say;

When later the time comes
I want you to be ISTRIKU
Walk with you in the heat and rain
Running around and laughing

But when you split up, you arrive
Let me take care of you
Both enjoy hugs at the end of time
Let me accompany you

Let me be my friend
Let you be
ISTRIKU

So, obviously, this song cannot be sung by female singers. If the word advertising for beverage products: “How long do oranges drink oranges?” But, the cover of this woman then worked around this, by using the word MINE, to replace the word ISTRIKU. Okay, at a glance this method is effective, but it has quite a damaging side effect for this song.

Why? Because, this change of words actually damages the meaning of the main message in this song as a whole. Obviously, the word ISTRIKU is one of the main vertices in this song. This one word, is closely related to the song title (“Akad”), and this word really respects women. Because, here, women are positioned equal to men. Obviously, a husband is a wife’s spouse, and vice versa.

In addition, the context of this song is “marriage”, a relationship that is of a much more serious level, compared to dating alay children. So, if the word ISTRIK is from being replaced by MY word, it will be very condescending. Because, humans are not goods or pets. Are men and women equal? Even if replaced with MY word, obviously this is irrelevant, in the main context. Here is clearly seen, how pragmatic is the substitute mindset of the word. As long as the song is famous, and can be sung smoothly, everything is OK. The integrity of the song’s meaning? Ah, it doesn’t matter. The important thing is viral.

At this point, I was more respectful of the parody version, which indeed only “borrowed” the tone, but with lyrics, and the meaning of the song was completely different. The contents were light and very humorous. Interestingly, they still included the name of the original owner of the parody song. Here, they clearly pay close attention to the message context / the overall contents of their work. Not from talkative.

From this case of the song “Akad”, we can learn; participating in popularizing a work of art is not prohibited, as long as it does not undermine the integrity of the meaning of the work. Because, works of art that lose the integrity of their meaning are broken works of art. A broken piece of art, no longer a work of art, but a junk that is completely worthless.