This still bothers me

Posted on by

‘Cause she’s so high
High above me, she’s so lovely
She’s so high, like Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, or Aphrodite
She’s so high, high above me

She’s so high by Tal Bachman

Am I the only person who has actually listened to these lyrics? Tal Bachman is comparing a lovely woman to three people: Cleopatra, Joan of Arc and Aphrodite. What do we know about these women?

Cleopatra was widely regarded as a very beautiful woman, if not the most beautiful woman in the world.

Aphrodite was (is?) the greek goddess of love and beauty. Hard to match that, eh?

Joan of Arc was a French Peasant girl who was burned at the stake for causing an uprising at the age of 19.

I have never heard anything about Joan of Arc being beautiful. In fact, there is little if any talk about her personal appearance at all. When I think of peasants from the 1400′s I don’t imagine beauty queens.

I haven’t massively researched this topic, but I’ve done some causal searches. One would think if Joan of Arc was beautiful, people would talk about it right?

Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orléans, was neither a queen, nor a courtesan, nor a beauty, nor a mother.

The Independent

Joan of Arc was not beautiful. She probably wasn’t even remotely pretty. Why then, good people, is Joan of Arc’s name right along side Cleopatra and Aphrodite? Does Tal Bachman even know who Joan of Arc is?!

What’s even worse, at least from my standpoint, is that I have never heard anyone else questions this. Everyone is like “yeah, that’s a good song.”

Since when is it not only possible, but popularly accepted to compare Greek goddesses with French peasant girls? I mean, am I missing something here?

  • aunty diane

    The point is more that he is such a lowly smuck he can’t attain any woman of high attributes whether they be of beauty or courage

  • aunty diane

    The point is more that he is such a lowly smuck he can’t attain any woman of high attributes whether they be of beauty or courage

  • http://apatheticthursday.net/ Philip

    Well, that’s the most plausible explanation I’ve heard and I can see that argument, but the refrain is implying that beauty is one of the main issues, as seen with the use of the word “lovely” and the choice examples of two of the most lovely women in history. That said, he could have picked better examples.

  • http://apatheticthursday.net Philip

    Well, that’s the most plausible explanation I’ve heard and I can see that argument, but the refrain is implying that beauty is one of the main issues, as seen with the use of the word “lovely” and the choice examples of two of the most lovely women in history. That said, he could have picked better examples.

  • Cousin Re-Re

    I don’t think lovely necessarily means beauty.

    –adjective
    1. charmingly or exquisitely beautiful: a lovely flower.
    2. having a beauty that appeals to the heart or mind as well as to the eye, as a person or a face.
    3. delightful; highly pleasing: to have a lovely time.
    4. of a great moral or spiritual beauty: a lovely character.
    –noun
    5. Informal. a beautiful woman, esp. a show girl.
    6. any person or thing that is pleasing, highly satisfying, or the like: Every car in the new line is a lovely.
    –adverb
    7. Nonstandard. very well; splendidly.

  • Cousin Re-Re

    I don’t think lovely necessarily means beauty.

    –adjective
    1. charmingly or exquisitely beautiful: a lovely flower.
    2. having a beauty that appeals to the heart or mind as well as to the eye, as a person or a face.
    3. delightful; highly pleasing: to have a lovely time.
    4. of a great moral or spiritual beauty: a lovely character.
    –noun
    5. Informal. a beautiful woman, esp. a show girl.
    6. any person or thing that is pleasing, highly satisfying, or the like: Every car in the new line is a lovely.
    –adverb
    7. Nonstandard. very well; splendidly.

  • http://apatheticthursday.net/ Philip

    You make a good case for the word lovely not meaning “beauty” but you stop short in explaining how this actually fits into the song.

    Is he praising Joan of Arc’s character? The beauty of her heart or mind? Her ability to rise up and cause a revolution? (And then get burned at the stake?)

    If that’s the case perhaps he is talking about Aphrodite’s *beautiful* heart and mind.

    I’m not saying that each character can’t stand for something else, but typically if you use three people as examples either all three of them represent the same thing, or they each will represent something different that is equally important.

    In this case, the bookends, Cleopatra and Aphrodite are both widely (read: only) known for their beauty. (Although Aphrodite is also known for being a Greek goddess, which implies a whole different line of undesirable characteristic.)

    Joan of Arc is the only one who is not known for her beauty. Instead she is known for causing an uprising (which didn’t turn out terribly well for her.)

    I’m not convinced that telling someone they are “like Joan of Arc” is a compliment. And telling someone they are better than Joan of Arc is only marginally better.

  • http://apatheticthursday.net Philip

    You make a good case for the word lovely not meaning “beauty” but you stop short in explaining how this actually fits into the song.

    Is he praising Joan of Arc’s character? The beauty of her heart or mind? Her ability to rise up and cause a revolution? (And then get burned at the stake?)

    If that’s the case perhaps he is talking about Aphrodite’s *beautiful* heart and mind.

    I’m not saying that each character can’t stand for something else, but typically if you use three people as examples either all three of them represent the same thing, or they each will represent something different that is equally important.

    In this case, the bookends, Cleopatra and Aphrodite are both widely (read: only) known for their beauty. (Although Aphrodite is also known for being a Greek goddess, which implies a whole different line of undesirable characteristic.)

    Joan of Arc is the only one who is not known for her beauty. Instead she is known for causing an uprising (which didn’t turn out terribly well for her.)

    I’m not convinced that telling someone they are “like Joan of Arc” is a compliment. And telling someone they are better than Joan of Arc is only marginally better.

  • aunty diane

    it’s a song. Songs are known for being vague. Joan of Arc is highly revered especailly in the catholic church- I think she is even elevated to sainhood there hence the unabtainable goal of being worthy…..

  • aunty diane

    it’s a song. Songs are known for being vague. Joan of Arc is highly revered especailly in the catholic church- I think she is even elevated to sainhood there hence the unabtainable goal of being worthy…..

  • http://apatheticthursday.net/ Philip

    Okay, first off, “Song are known for being vague.” That is an unsubstantiated statement. I for one did not know songs were known for being vague. I know plenty of songs that are not vague.

    Secondly, my case is not against the character of Joan of Arc. It’s about her beauty. I’m still not convinced that he is talking about something besides beauty in the line. It doesn’t make sense to me.

    It was also pointed out to me that the majority of males equate the word lovely with beauty the majority of the time. Since this song was written/sung by a male, it seems logical that beauty was the main thought. (Plus, throwing a character reference between two highly known beauty references is bad writing.)

    Therefore, I have to thank you both for your input, but I’m not convinced that Joan of Arc can/should be put on the same plane as Cleopatra or Aphrodite.

    What’s more, I have a theory with two options:

    Option 1: Tal Bachman doesn’t have the faintest clue who Joan of Arc is, but just grabbed her name because she is well known in history and fit the syllable length for the song.

    Option 2: Tal Bachman saw a play/movie of Joan of Arc and after seeing a beautiful actress play the part, assumed that the real Joan of Arc was also very pretty.

    A few other people I have talked to think these are plausible explanations.

  • http://apatheticthursday.net Philip

    Okay, first off, “Song are known for being vague.” That is an unsubstantiated statement. I for one did not know songs were known for being vague. I know plenty of songs that are not vague.

    Secondly, my case is not against the character of Joan of Arc. It’s about her beauty. I’m still not convinced that he is talking about something besides beauty in the line. It doesn’t make sense to me.

    It was also pointed out to me that the majority of males equate the word lovely with beauty the majority of the time. Since this song was written/sung by a male, it seems logical that beauty was the main thought. (Plus, throwing a character reference between two highly known beauty references is bad writing.)

    Therefore, I have to thank you both for your input, but I’m not convinced that Joan of Arc can/should be put on the same plane as Cleopatra or Aphrodite.

    What’s more, I have a theory with two options:

    Option 1: Tal Bachman doesn’t have the faintest clue who Joan of Arc is, but just grabbed her name because she is well known in history and fit the syllable length for the song.

    Option 2: Tal Bachman saw a play/movie of Joan of Arc and after seeing a beautiful actress play the part, assumed that the real Joan of Arc was also very pretty.

    A few other people I have talked to think these are plausible explanations.