Talk:Hide and Seek (Imogen Heap song)

Remixes
Would anyone object to me adding a section on official remixes? A notable example would be DJ Tiesto's In Search Of Sunrise Remix. I guess the song lends itself very well to being remixed due to the fact it's an A Capella. Davetibbs 10:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

- it's mentioned in the main Imogen Heap article so I think it should be here too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.110.25.66 (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

- on a sidenote, the Afrojack Remix length is taken from a bootleg vinyl here: https://www.discogs.com/Imogen-Heap-Hide-And-Seek/release/3458615 - which is quite literally just an mp3 cut from a radio rip pressed to vinyl (I own the thing unfortunately ...). The actual full length remix is unreleased and actually much longer (it was played in almost full length in his BBC Essential Mix), so the length should probably be removed.46.90.48.103 (talk) 22:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Interpretation of Lyrics?
I'd love to hear - even if just on the talk page - some interpretations of the lyrics... what the heck is this song about? Shubopshadangalang (talk) 08:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Pretty easy. It's about getting unexpectedly dumped from a long-term relationship that probably had been going sour for a while ("Where are we? What the hell is going on?"), but it still sucks ("mmm, whatcha say? That you only meant well — well of course you did. That it's for the best ... well, of course it is. That it's what we need (you decided this)"). Daniel Case 19:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually no. Heap wrote this after her father died, and in some news article, she said that you could interpreret the song however you want.  Most people think it's about breaking-up or divorce, some others think it's about the Holocaust, or the Trail of Tears.  It really depends on how you see it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.142.43 (talk) 20:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This song is based on the Halocaust. When it says "Where are we? What the hell is going on?" It's talking about the Jewish people who were killed, tortured and injured during that time. It explains how they lived and how hard it was.

76.168.116.84 (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The fifth line about "crop circles" suggests that even though the song is about a relationship, it is also a microcosm for something on a larger scale (sic.) So Imogen explores the personal history of this relationship with a greater history. I like the departure point of the first two lines - two questions of someone who wakes up to an unexpected reality - kind of like our society has woken up to the unexpected realities of the 21st century.

Of course the other possible explanation for expansive metaphor of crop circles is just that her personal experience is so large and sublime, that she can't describe it in mundane and regular terms.

As for the holocaust, I didn't see any references to gas chambers, starvation, crematoriums, jews, nazis or any obvious signifier of the holocaust.

The trains and sewing machines are opaque symbols. The only obvious hint to their meaning is the visual similarity of their attachments - the train track and the seam.

It was interesting to hear that this was about her father, especially in light of an analysis relating to history. Sometimes I feel like my parents should answer for their actions in society and the world. Why didn't hold their leaders to greater account? Why did they get us get into this tough situation we are in now?

70.68.11.69 (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

70.110.142.43 has it right - there is no right interpretation. Going through the wiki article about her, she likes leaving a lot of her songs open to interpretation, and doesn't like to say that any one interpretations is right - I suppose because it'd make other interpretations wrong. Adding more interpretations to the discussion is cool, just don't tell others that they're wrong.

I wonder how much "Whatcha Say" will affect peoples' interpretations of the original (DeRulo has a very specific meaning in his song which can be applied to "Hide and Seek"). Boter (talk) 00:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Imogen Heap's father is not dead. His name is Michael Heap and he is the owner of a building materials company. As for the meaning of Hide and Seek, Imogen has said in interviews that it is about the effect on her of the breakup of a relationship that was important to her. She has also said (in one of her video blogs) that all her family know what it is about. She is reluctant to go into details publicly, but it is reported by someone who claims to have worked on a video with her that it was inspired by her parents' divorce when she was a child. It is certainly nothing to do with the Holocaust, or native Americans, or any other 'historical' event. These interpretations could only be made by people who do not know anything about her other work, which is nearly always about her personal relationships and feelings.86.159.143.90 (talk) 23:42, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

SNL Short
On what basis did the text (and the intertext note) claim that it was not specifically a parody of the O.C.? Just watching it it is pretty obviously a parody of the O.C. scene - it starts at the exact same point in the song as the OC scene and parallels the slow motion, reaction to the shooting business of the OC scene. Seeing as neither the statement that it's a parody of the OC nor the statement that it's a broader parody appears to have any citation to back it up, and that every other place in Wikipedia that discusses the thing says it's from the OC, and so does virtually every other source I can find on the internet, why shouldn't we say that? john k (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, the Lonely Island's official blog says it's a parody of the O.C. scene. john k (talk) 21:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

DigiTech harmonizer vs. Vocoder?
Can it be confirmed that it's a DigiTech vocal workstation doing the harmonizing? I always understood it was her singing live, and then it being run into a vocoder/keyboard (which puts a voice sound with what's being played on a keyboard). A live performance shows it being done the latter way. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHk2lLaDzlM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.228.125.211 (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's 100% not a DigiTech. It's a harmoniser made by TC Helicon called the VoiceLive. It was recorded with a VL, but now she uses the updated version, the VoiceLive 2. I've seen her live, own a VL2 and have also seen interviews where she talks about using the VL. So yeah, 100% not a DigiTech. Especially as DT products are total garbage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.168.7 (talk) 12:45, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Sister?
The main article says that fans titled the SNL skit 'Dear Sister'. In fact, Mark Grimpe (who appears in the skit) called it the 'Dear Sister Parody', since it's a parody of the OC Episode 'Dear Sister'. As far as I know, nobody has ever referred to the SNL skit as 'Dear Sister' except perhaps rarely, in error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.162.30 (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Your knowledge doesn't go very far. All the YouTube spoofs called it that. Go there and search. Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Your personal opinion versus that of a source: guess who's going to win?
I've had to revert some rather twisted interpretations of Heap's comments in a source for the following statements in the article:
 * "In a 2005 interview, Heap stated that the song's lyrics, ultimately about having painfully lost a loved one and met with a selfish and uncaring response to her loss, employs, as metaphor, President George W. Bush's "outrageous" emotionless reaction at first hearing of the 9/11 attacks in Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 911, and wanting more than what she got.[2]"

The source employed is from Barcodezine.com:


 * "In a broad strokes way, it’s about losing something very dear to me and how much of an impact that person had on my life and about maybe how when something awful happens to somebody else, how other people react to it. It tied in with when I went to see Michael Moore’s Farenheit 911 and I remembered that image of George Bush being told and him completeley carrying on as if nothing had happened. And I just thought that was outrageous, if I was the president I would run out of their and fucking get onto the TV and say something amazing, and he wasn’t even reading his book and he had it upside down. And I was really horrified at how selfish and awful he was, and how emotionless he was and that kind of reminded me a little bit about somebody else behind this song."

As is clearly seen, this was not a neutral reaction of Heap to Bush's treatment of 9/11 in any sense of the word. We preserve the intent of the citation as closely as possible. We do not water it down or present it in a light more in keeping with our personal reactions. I welcome some discussion on tis, but am going to revert anyone who seeks to remove the citation, up to and including taking it to AN/I. Forewarning and all. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The thing is, the source doesn't say "outrageous emotionless reaction" You are taking two different parts of the quote and sythesisizing an original thought. The "wanting more than she got" doesn't make any sense whatsoever gramatically and isn't in the source. -- Terrillja talk  00:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point about the wanting more than she got; that was clearly synthesis, and on my part, to boot; it was hard to encapsulate what she felt the correct reaction was, to her reckoning. I'll remove it immediately. As for the text, as per my last edit, it accurately reflected the referenced quote,
 * "...President George W. Bush's "outrageous" emotionless reaction at first hearing of the 9/11 attacks in Michael Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 911,"
 * The point was, she was outraged by his response. Whether she was right to be outragedisn't our wheelhouse. It was her reaction, and therefore, it's in. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 01:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yet again, you are taking two different parts of a quote to create a novel thought. It may be in line with her thinking, but it's not what she said. Taking a quote of "The sky is orange when the sun comes up in the morning then turns blue" isn't the same thing as "The sky in the morning is blue". It may be in line with the intention of the quote, but removing parts to make it "better" creates a meaning that the author may not have meant, and it isn't up anyone else to interpret the meaning. Yet again, the quote is not in the source, it is a manipulated version that constitutes original thought. If the quote was used as "how emotionless he was", that would be fine. If the quote was "I thought it was outrageous", that would be fine. Cutting and pasting to create a statement that was never made is not appropriate. And I agree that she was outraged. You have the general meaning of what she is saying right, but you can't just chop up the quote to make it more appropriate for what you are trying to say.-- Terrillja talk  07:15, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, make a suggestion, T. I'm pretty certain I'm right here, but I'm willing to listen to your suggestions. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 08:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In a 2005 interview, Heap stated that the song's lyrics were ultimately about having painfully lost someone and how others react to things that happen to someone else. She then related it to when President George W. Bush was told of the September 11th attacks and she felt that he carried on as if nothing had happened, reminding her of the person behind the song.
 * Neutral, concise, it connects the two thoughts in terms of something happening and no one does anything. By adding "she felt", it gives the reader an idea of what was going through her mind and not stating that he did nothing, as it is her personal opinion that he did nothing. As for how she saw it, that isn't really relevant, the important part is what she saw, not how she saw it. If she had seen a 6pm NBC newscast, it wouldn't be relevant either. It tones down the frustration somewhat from what she felt, but the part that I'm trying to get across is that the two points are related, not how she felt about the president's actions. The relevant part of the interview is how his actions relate to the lyrics, not her views on the president, by adding the part about reminding her, it ties it all back in after the somewhat tangent on Bush.-- Terrillja talk  15:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I get what you are saying, and I understand your viewpoint a little better. That said, i still disagree with it. True, the song wasn't written about George Bush's reaction to 9/11 but someone who had been a complete tool to her. That she chose to expand on her view - in relation to this song:
 * "And I was really horrified at how selfish and awful he was, and how emotionless he was and that kind of reminded me a little bit about somebody else behind this song."

Is it related to this song? Darn tootin' it is; we have a reliable source quoting a notable person (the artist herself) commenting on an extended meaning of her song. That it happens to relate about what she felt about a former US President is fair game. In that way, her cited opinions can be used, while ours cannot. A lot of Wiki contributors mistakenly believe that the editorial limitations imposed upon us by the Five Pillars extend to those who are cited in articles. People are allowed to say and do whatever stupid, ill-advised, topically shallow thing they want' if its on point in regards to the article, it is fair game for inclusion. - 02:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait, what? I included a bit about how the song relates to feelings on the president's response. I said that how she watched that was irrelevant, but it was included my proposed version, which you didn't comment on at all. -- Terrillja talk  05:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was un clear. I like your version, and I get what you are aiming for. However, I think we are allowed to go a bit further in her description of Bush's behavior (or her perception of it, anyway):
 * "In a 2005 interview, Heap stated that the song's lyrics were ultimately about having painfully lost someone and how others react to things that happen to someone else. She then related it to when President George W. Bush was told of the September 11th attacks and she felt that his behavior was "emotionless", "awful and selfish", reminding her of the person inspiring the song."
 * That would work for me as a compromise. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 06:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Awards, Grammy Nomination
I have the Grammy Nominees 2007 CD, and this song is on it. I also read that the song was nominated for a Grammy, but I see no mention of awards in the article. Misty MH (talk) 08:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The last line of the page's main paragraph?
The line in question is "This track includes the meme "Uhmm Watcha Say, U that you only meant well"". It's not sourced and it's written incorrectly. However, I'm not clear on if this line is valid (I'm not sure of the validity of memes or running jokes for articles). It is a running joke online, and has been used in a parody skit on SNL. Laurathejedi (talk) 23:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Appearance in media
The song does appear twice in the season 2 finale. Once during Caleb's funeral procession and again during the final scene with the gunshot. I propose rephrasing the section to be:

The song was originally written to be played during the funeral scene of Caleb Nichol as well as later on in the final scene. It was eventually decided that the song would be used in the climax of the episode, wherein Marissa Cooper shoots Trey Atwood, during an altercation between Atwood and his brother, Ryan Atwood. Ornithologically-correct-bird (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

"Mmm Whatcha Say" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mmm_Whatcha_Say&redirect=no Mmm Whatcha Say] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:53, 10 October 2023 (UTC)