I strongly disagree with Shamble's claim that people who write parodies "don't think they are able to go the whole hog and create a new tune as well."

Many (perhaps most) parodies are particularly written around the structure of a particular song. In which case it's pointless and counterproductive to write a new tune.

Much of the humor derives from hearing something familiar (the tune, some of the words and/or the lyrical structure) juxtaposed with something unfamiliar (the new words). Which is what makes it fun.

I've written hundreds of original songs (words and melody), and I've also written parodies. They serve different purposes, and at no time did I ever decide to write a parody because I couldn't think up a new tune. I wrote a parody because I thought up an idea or bit of lyric that fit into the "old" song just too well.

Just for the record, can anybody explain the difference between a "parody" and a "spoof"? I usually use the latter word.

Here's an example, for what it's worth.

Imagine there's no Beatles
It isn't hard at all
No John or Yoko Lennon
No Ringo, George, or Paul
Picture the Isley Brothers
Singing "Tiwst and Shout"!

Imagine Paul in college
Or selling old used cars
Ringo is waiting tables
In George's Grill and Bar
Imagine John and Yoko
Never having met!

You may say I'm a killjoy
But I'm not the only one
I wish you wouldn't get so uptight
After all I'm only having fun.

Now picture "Hard Day's Night"
Done by the Rolling Stones
Imagine Roger Daltrey
Singing "She's Leaving Home"
Imagine Art Garfunkel
Filming "Let It Be"!

(repeat chorus)

Other spoofs I've written can be seen HERE.

spoofless in Seattle,
Alex
O..O
=o=