Talk:The Cat Came Back

Wikisource
Why don't we have a copy on Wikisource? If it really was written in 1893, then it should be long out of copyright, no? -- Gwern (contribs) 20:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Question: If the song was written in 1893 how is it that the last verse in the "complete lyrics" deals with the Atomic bomb? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.46.198.195 (talk) 20:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a very old song and like most old folk songs people make up new verses all the time to update them. I can sing you about 10 other verses I learned in Girl Scouts. We were even encouraged to make up our own verses99.53.168.200 (talk) 03:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Bea Bryant

General
That whole article is just confusing. The first paragraph is alright, but everying after that... Get some damn structure in there. --91.97.77.65 (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I've never heard this sung in 2/4 (duple simple time)... that would change the whole melodic structure of it. I'm not sure if the person making the musical commentary is working from a system other than the standard Western classical system (which would put his song in 6/8, or duple compound time) or is just unfamiliar with formal music theory, but someone should seriously take a second look at that section.50.153.148.147 (talk) 21:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Racial epithet
Is this really the original name for the song? The supposed source is another Wikipedia article for a music book written in 1988. I really hope this is vandalism. Promontoriumispromontorium (talk) 18:43, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have trouble believing it is the true title, because the sheet music picture on this very page does not mention anything about a "nigger absurdity". I suspect rather that someone is outraged about the dialect in the song and suspects, rightly, it was a sort of play on the speech of black Americans, so they want to highlight the racist overtones of this popular song.  So they tag on "nigger absurdity" as though it were actually part of the title.  The smell of fish is rather strong with this one.


 * Unless someone can produce a photo showing the original product, be it sheet music or the cover of a recording, with the title "nigger absurdity" on it, I move that we get rid of that part of title. Because I strongly suspect someone just wants to show the racist overtones of this work, and the milieu in which it was produced, so they are playing fast and loose with the facts... as happens so often...


 * OK so I just did some research. I was able to find a year 1900 publication of the sheet music produced in London, UK, which was titled "The Cat Came back: A nigger absurdity".  However, as we can see from this very wiki page's photograph the 1893 ORIGINAL was not titled "a nigger absurdity" anywhere.  Rather, it would appear that a later publication of music in England, several years after the original publication, added this term.  Likely, I would presume, this was because in the UK that term would have actually appeared more acceptable to the audience, ironically enough, as they didn't have a black population.  Moreover, it would have indicated to the foreign audience that the reason the words were spelled in a strange way and the grammar was odd was because of the original creator's attempt to imitate a black American's speech patterns.  So, the statement found in this wiki article currently that the original publication title included "a nigger absurdity" is patently false.  We should decide whether we want wikipedia to be a bastion of facts or a grandstand for politically motivated lies about the past.  Can someone please fix the article or at least investigate this issue more thoroughly? 37.191.57.40 (talk) 14:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

As of this writing, the initial paragraph was self-contradictory on its discussion of references to the song as a "nigger absurdity". I looked at the sheet music referenced in the article, and it appears that the original version did indeed include such a phrase on the back page. The article text referenced both this and the (contradicting) observation by 37.191.57.40 above. Being a casual editor, I moved discussion of this racial epithet out of the first paragraph, deconflicted the statements, and put them into a second paragraph. I recommend moving them out of the introduction section and putting them into a separate section below. Scouttle (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


 * And I have moved this discussion out of the main summary into the Theme section. The Theme section includes the original 'dialect' and so this information seems to me to be pertinent to that. And it is also germane to defining the broader theme/genre of the song. 198.16.159.210 (talk) 15:54, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 08:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Popularity
I know this song from growing up in Canada but I don't know anyone in Europe who is familiar with it. The article says "It is also a popular children's song." This statement probably could do with qualification.--TimSC (talk) 01:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)