Don’t forget—there isn’t a she or him. These aren’t people.

It was written very specifically as a social commentary joke for the composer, and he would play it at parties.

Since this is a caricature of a very specific, well known, rehearsed, and almost scripted conversation. We know what was meant. Any conjecture putting our words and understanding in the mouths of characters written almost a century ago is the absolute definition of an anachronism.

THAT SAID

The song IS important, it IS problematic, and not entirely for all the right reasons.

The song highlights an issue in society where women didnt have the freedom to choose. That was the point. It ended up being a powerful song, and something that was used for social change, and ultimately played some small part in helping to advance womens rights and shift public perception.

So now it’s a part of our social commentary, and our Christmas tradition. We’re close to the time when no one alive remembers what that was like. We use our lenses and social battles to understand old text. Why wouldn’t we? We aren’t to blame for misunderstanding the role and function of the piece, but it isn’t helping us now. It does make people uncomfortable.

I don’t really have an opinion on what to do with music like this. I am very content to let “Lassus Trombone” die. (A trombone”classic” that was originally a minstrel song) Society at large will not reject Michael Jackson’s music. There are a lot of really good arguments to be made for problematic material, material produced by problematic people, harmful material that has since become helpful, or material that was helpful that has since become harmful.

There is a great paper on aesthetic philosophy, that talks about whether a work is successful.

I’m gunna paraphrase, If the author correctly conveyed his message, it would need no external explanation. If you need to explain the work to communicate the author’s intent, evidently he failed in his duty as an artist. I don’t always subscribe to this philosophy, personally, but it does support Death of the Author very well, which is what we are ultimately talking about.

By this definition of a successful work, Baby it’s Cold Outside was very successful for many many years. It is not successful over the course of an unlimited amount of time. It has to be explained.

We absolutely have the right to reject the author, and the explanation. We have the right to acknowledge that it’s harmful. But you can’t use anachronistic arguments to change the author’s voice and intent.