Category: Song Details

  • What Krampus was before the ugly sweaters

    What Krampus was before the ugly sweaters

    In 1506, the town of Zerbst in Germany staged its Corpus Christi procession, and someone wrote down who was in it.

    The script survives. It lists Saint Nicholas, in a bishop’s cope and mitre, staff in one hand, three gold balls in the other, his hand raised in blessing. A few lines later it lists the archangel Michael, elegantly turned out, a cross at his head. And it says what Michael is to do.

    He is to lead a devil on a chain.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

    That is 1506. A saint and a chained devil, walking in the same procession, on the same day, on purpose. Nobody in Zerbst thought this was transgressive. It was the program.

    I bring this up because of the other story, the one you have almost certainly been told: that Krampus is a survival from pre-Christian paganism, a horned god the Church could not stamp out, smuggled into Christmas in disguise. Britannica says a version of it. The Smithsonian has said a version of it. The version they say usually includes the detail that Krampus is the son of Hel, the Norse goddess of the dead.

    There is no source for that. Not a weak source. None. Krampus does not appear in any Old Norse text, and Old Norse was never spoken in Austria or Bavaria, which is where Krampus is actually from. The claim gets repeated because it got repeated, and it gets repeated because it sounds like the kind of thing that ought to be true.

    You can trace where it comes from. In March 1958 a folklorist named Maurice Bruce published a short piece called “The Krampus in Styria” in the journal Folklore, in which he announced that there was little doubt as to Krampus’s true identity, because in no other form was the regalia of the Horned God of the Witches so well preserved. He cited nothing. He did not need to, in his own mind, because he was working from Margaret Murray’s witch-cult hypothesis, which held that the early modern witch trials had been the suppression of a real surviving pagan religion. Historians now regard Murray’s thesis as pseudohistory. It rests on taking confessions extracted under torture at face value when they fit and discarding them when they do not.

    So Bruce built his Krampus on a foundation that has since been removed, and the building is still standing, held up by nothing but citation.

    When scholars actually went into the records, they found something else. In the 1980s the ethnologist Hans Schuhladen worked systematically through the historical documents and found no pagan origins at all. His earliest source is 1582, in the Bavarian town of Diessen, where men who had “hunted the Percht” were paid for it. Not ancient. Early modern, and Christian, and municipal enough to have an expense line.

    And the word Krampus is later still. Al Ridenour, whose 2016 book is the best thing written on this in English, points out that Krampus barely appears in print before the mid-1800s and only becomes the standard name for the figure with the boom in Krampus greeting cards around 1900. For centuries before that, the figure was called Percht, after Perchta, and Perchta is a couple of hundred years older than he is. The devil got famous. The witch was there first.

    Which leaves the question of where he actually comes from, and the answer is sitting in the Zerbst script.

    Look at how Krampus is drawn in the oldest images we have of him, the postcards of the 1890s and 1900s. Absurdly long tongue lolling out. Long pointed horns. Claws. Cloven hooves. Black all over. A tail. Chains. A birch rod.

    Now look at how the Devil is drawn in the Codex Gigas, in the Smithfield Decretals, in a hundred manuscripts of the High and Late Middle Ages. Long tongue. Horns. Claws. Hooves. Black. Tail. And in the mystery plays, Satan is chained by the archangel Michael and dragged off, and he is played for comedy, and audiences loved it, and the plays ran for centuries until the Reformation shut most of them down, except in the Catholic Alps, where they did not.

    Krampus is not an old god. Krampus is the medieval stage Devil, still in costume, still on his chain, who never went home after the play ended.

    And Saint Nicholas is holding the other end of the chain for a reason. The earliest surviving life of Nicholas, written sometime between 814 and 842, is full of exorcisms. He drives the demons out of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus. He is called the most active banisher of demons. A saint who has beaten a devil owns that devil. So the devil walks beside him, bound, doing the ugly half of the job the saint cannot be seen to do himself.

    That is a stranger and better story than “ancient horned god.” It means Krampus is not a pagan holdout at all. He is a Catholic holdout. He is the part of Christianity that was willing to look at a child and say: there are consequences, and here is what one looks like, and it has a tongue.

    The ugly sweaters can stay. But he was somebody first.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

  • Grýla and the 1746 ban: when a king tried to outlaw a monster

    Grýla and the 1746 ban: when a king tried to outlaw a monster

    In 1746, the Crown issued a household ordinance for Iceland. It covered the ordinary business of a colonial administration deciding how its subjects ought to live: work, worship, the discipline of servants and children.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

    Buried in it is a clause about a troll.

    The ordinance instructs that the foolish custom practiced here and there about the country, of frightening children with Yule Lads or with ghosts, is to be abolished. Christian VI of Denmark, who ruled Iceland at the time, had been told that Icelandic parents were terrifying their children into obedience with a mountain ogress and her sons, and he decided this was not to continue.

    It is one of the earliest instances I know of a state trying to legislate a folk figure out of existence on the grounds that she was too frightening for children. Two hundred and eighty years later, Grýla has a statue at Keflavík airport and her sons have a museum schedule.

    The ban failed completely. That is the interesting part, and it is worth being precise about why, because the reason is not “the Icelanders were stubborn,” though they were.

    Start with who she is.

    Grýla is old, but she is not as old as the tourist copy says. Her name shows up in thirteenth-century Icelandic texts, in Íslendinga saga and in Sverris saga, where the first section of the saga is actually titled Grýla, meaning roughly bugbear or threat, because the section is about a menace. Snorri Sturluson lists her name in the Prose Edda among the names for troll-wives, and that is all he does. No description. Just a name on a list.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

    For four hundred years after that, she is not a Christmas figure at all. She is a generic ogress, available all year. The oldest poems about her show her as a beggar, going door to door, asking parents to hand over their disobedient children, and she can be turned away by giving her food or by simply chasing her off. She lived in a cottage. Only later does she get pushed out of town and into a cave.

    She does not become the mother of the Yule Lads until the seventeenth century, in the Grýlukvæði, the Poem of Grýla. And the Lads themselves are unstable for a long time after that. The number varies by region. Sometimes they are her sons, sometimes her brothers. One eastern Icelandic version has them coming out of the sea instead of down from the mountains. One nursery rhyme has two female ones who steal melted fat by stuffing it up their noses.

    By the late eighteenth century a poem settles on thirteen. In 1862, Jón Árnason, who had read the Grimms and set out to do for Iceland what they had done for Germany, publishes the first collection that gives the thirteen their names. In 1932, the poet Jóhannes úr Kötlum publishes Jólin koma, Christmas Is Coming, and the poem in it fixes the Lads in the form every Icelandic child now knows: the names, the order, the personalities, one per night from December 12.

    So the tradition the King banned in 1746 was, at that moment, less than a hundred years old as a Christmas custom and had not yet taken its final shape.

    He still could not kill it.

    Here is what I think happened. The ordinance was aimed at the wrong thing. It banned a method: do not frighten your children with the Lads. It could not touch the reason the method existed.

    The reason was that Iceland in 1746 was a place where children died. Not rarely. Cold, hunger, accident, the sea. Farms went weeks without contact. The sun cleared the horizon for a few hours and then quit. Every adult in that house knew the danger was real and knew that a small child cannot be reasoned into caution by an accurate description of hypothermia.

    Grýla could do what the accurate description could not. She made the danger a person, gave it a season, and gave the child something to do about it. Be good. Get your shoe on the sill. Do the wool work. Every one of those is an action available to a five year old, and every one of them, not coincidentally, maps onto a behavior that actually helped that child survive the winter.

    You cannot repeal that with a household ordinance. You can only replace it, and the King was not offering a replacement. He was offering “use gentler means,” from Copenhagen, to people who had buried children.

    What actually changed Grýla was not law. It was that Iceland got warmer, richer, and safer, over two centuries, until the thing she was built to do stopped needing doing. The Lads went soft in the nineteenth century, started leaving gifts instead of taking children, and now put candy in shoes. That is not the King’s victory. That is the danger receding and taking the monster’s job with it.

    She is still there, though. She did not get repealed and she did not get outgrown. She got retired, which is a different thing, and retirement can be reversed.

    Grýla cannot be killed. She can only be satisfied.

    Her chapter is one of twenty-three. The book is out in print on Wednesday.

  • The Coca-Cola red suit story is not true. Here is what is.

    The Coca-Cola red suit story is not true. Here is what is.

    In 1868, the United States Confection Company of New York ran an advertisement for a product called Sugar Plums. The ad has a Santa Claus in it. He is wearing red.

    Coca-Cola would not be invented for another eighteen years.

    That is the whole refutation, and I could stop there, but the true story is better than the false one, so let us do the true one.

    The claim you have heard is that Coca-Cola dressed Santa Claus in red in the 1930s to match the company’s branding, and that before that he wore green, or brown, or whatever the teller prefers. It is repeated every December by people who consider themselves too smart to be fooled by advertising, which is the joke, because the claim is itself the thing they are congratulating themselves for seeing through.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

    Here is the actual sequence.

    1821. New York. A small book called The Children’s Friend prints eight hand-colored lithographs of a figure called Santeclaus, driving a sleigh behind a reindeer, arriving on Christmas Eve. He is in red. These are the earliest published pictures of Santa Claus in America, and he is already the color he is now.

    1863. Thomas Nast, the German-born political cartoonist, draws Santa for Harper’s Weekly. This first one is in stars and stripes, handing out gifts at a Union army camp, because it is the middle of the Civil War and Nast is doing propaganda. He will draw Santa about thirty times over the next twenty-three years.

    1868. The Sugar Plums ad above. Red.

    1881. Nast draws “Merry Old Santa Claus.” Round, white-bearded, fur-trimmed red suit, sack of toys. This is essentially the modern Santa, finished, fifty years early.

    1880s onward. Louis Prang, another German immigrant, sometimes called the father of the American Christmas card, is printing Santa in red at scale and mailing him into houses all over the country.

    1915 to the 1920s. White Rock, a beverage company, is running Santa in its ads. In color by the early twenties. Also red. Also not Coca-Cola.

    1931. Coca-Cola’s advertising man, Archie Lee, hires an illustrator named Haddon Sundblom. Sundblom paints Santa for Coke every year until 1964. The paintings are extraordinarily good. They are also arriving at a party that has been running for a hundred and ten years.

    Pre-Save the Album today!

    The company itself does not claim otherwise. In 2008 Phil Mooney, then the director of Coca-Cola’s archives, said plainly that Coke did not come up with the idea of putting Santa in red, and noted only that it has worked out nicely for them.

    So what did Coca-Cola actually do? Something real, and worth naming precisely: they standardized him and they exported him. Sundblom’s Santa is warm, specific, and repeated identically for thirty-three years, on a distribution network that reached most of the planet. Before Sundblom, Santa was red but he was also negotiable, drifting in size and temperament from artist to artist. After Sundblom, he was fixed. Coke did not paint the suit. Coke laminated it.

    Now the part that matters for this book.

    The myth is popular because it lets us off. If Coca-Cola built our Christmas, then the flatness of our Christmas is something that was done to us by a soda company, and we are victims of it, and we can enjoy being annoyed about it.

    The truth is worse. Go back and read what that 1821 Santa does. He gives an apple, or a tart, or a wooden gun, or a book, to good children. And to the children he finds “thankless to parents, liars, swearers,” he leaves a long black birchen rod, and the poem is explicit that the rod is for the parents to use.

    The first American Santa carried a switch. He is red, he comes on Christmas Eve, he judges you, and he arms your father. Nobody at Coca-Cola took that away. It drained out slowly over a century, in a thousand small decisions by illustrators and publishers and parents, all of them choosing the softer version, none of them wrong exactly, and the accumulated result is a figure who watches everything and does nothing.

    Coke did not sand the teeth off Santa Claus. We did that ourselves, and we did most of it before Coke was born.

    If this is the kind of thing you want a whole book of, the Kindle is live now.

  • Give Me Fall Is Out and I Have So Many Feelings

    Give Me Fall Is Out and I Have So Many Feelings

    I am sitting here on the other side of release week with a cup of something warm and a whole lot of gratitude and I just need to talk to you for a minute.

    Give Me Fall is out in the world.

    Fifteen songs that I wrote through the spring and summer, dreaming about fall before it arrived, pouring everything I love about this season into lyrics and melodies and Suno prompts and Google Docs and a spreadsheet that I am genuinely proud of. And now it is out there. You can press play on it. You can add it to your fall playlist. You can listen to it on your porch with something warm in your hands and a cardigan on your shoulders and honestly that is the only review I need.

    First, I want to say thank you. If you have streamed even one song from this album, you have done something that matters to an independent artist more than you probably know. Every stream counts. Every follow on a streaming platform counts. Every share and every comment and every person who told someone else about this album, it counts. I see it and I feel it and I am so genuinely grateful.

    Release week is a strange thing when you make music independently. There is no label behind you sending out press releases and buying playlist placements and running ads. There is just you and the music and the people who care enough to share it. And the people who showed up for this album, including you reading this right now, are the reason I keep making music.

    I want to tell you a little bit about what this album means to me beyond just the songs themselves. Give Me Fall is the first album I have made that feels completely intentional from the first track to the last. It has a thesis, borrowed from F. Scott Fitzgerald, that life starts all over again when it gets crisp in the fall. It has a love thread that runs through every single song because I believe fall is always better with someone. And it holds a quiet love letter to the season itself, which is a thing I have wanted to write for years and finally did.

    The song I am most surprised by is Jump. It started as a silly idea about jumping in a leaf pile and ended up being the most emotionally true thing I have written about staying young in your spirit. And the song that felt like pure joy from start to finish was October Ready, which is my love letter to decoration day and craft show hauls and the wreath you absolutely did not need but bought anyway.

    I also want to give you a small, exciting hint about what is coming next. Fall is not the only season I have been writing about this year. I have something in the works for winter that I think is going to be something really special, something with a very different sonic world than Give Me Fall, something that leans into storytelling and tradition and the magic of the season. More on that very soon. Sign up for my email list here if you want to be the first to know when I can share more.

    For now, please go stream Give Me Fall and if you have not followed me yet on your streaming platform of choice please do that right now. Following is how the algorithm knows to tell you when I release something new, and I am planning to release something new very soon.

    You can find me on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, Deezer, and Pandora. Come hang out with me on Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube where I share behind the scenes and new music updates constantly.

    Tell me in the comments: which song from Give Me Fall has been your favorite so far? I want to know. I genuinely want to know.

    Thank you for being here. Thank you for listening. Give me fall, and give me you right here with me for all of it.

    Warmly, Melanie Grace


  • Let It Turn: The Song About Learning from the Leaves

    Let It Turn: The Song About Learning from the Leaves

    Every October I watch the leaves let go and I feel quietly convicted.

    They do not argue. They do not hold on past the right time. They do not grip the branch until spring and refuse to release. They let the colors come, they burn as brightly as they possibly can, and then they let go. And the tree does not mourn what it is losing. It trusts. It trusts that it was made for all of this. Every season, every turn, every fall. That trust is the thing I have been trying to learn my whole life.

    “Let It Turn” is Track 15 on Give Me Fall, releasing August 31st, and it is the most spiritual song I have ever written about fall, which is saying something because I think almost every song on this album has a thread of faith running through it. This one just lets that thread be the whole fabric.

    The song opens with an observation so simple it almost sounds like a children’s story. The leaves don’t hold on when it’s time to go. They don’t argue with the wind, they just let go. And I have watched them every year and wondered why I make so hard what they make look easy. That wondering is the whole song. That gap between the naturalness of the leaves’ surrender and the difficulty of my own.

    The second verse introduces a framework that has helped me think about seasons in my own life. There is a season for the holding and the growing. And a season for the releasing and the rest. This is both literal and spiritual. There are seasons of my life that have been about building and accumulating and holding. And there have been seasons that asked me to release, to trust, to rest. The tree does not mourn what it is losing. It trusts that it was made for all of this. I want that trust. I am still learning that trust.

    The pre-chorus is a prayer as much as a lyric. Teach me how to let it turn, the way the leaves do without fear. Teach me how to trust the season, that what is coming is as good as what was here. That last line is the hardest thing to believe in the middle of a letting-go. Is what is coming as good as what was here? The leaves seem to know that it is. They go gold and then they go. And in the spring what comes back is new and green and entirely itself.

    The chorus is the release. Let it turn, let it turn. Let the colors come and let the cold move in. Every ending is a place to start again. What I’m holding I can offer up. What I’m grieving I can give to grace. Let the season do the thing that seasons do. Let it turn. Let it all turn. I wrote that chorus sitting with a lot of things I was holding at the time, and I felt something genuinely loosen when I finished it. Songs are like that sometimes. They do something in the writing that they then keep doing in the singing.

    The third verse has my favorite single line on the album. The most beautiful it gets is right before the letting go. I have thought about that line a hundred times since I wrote it. It is true of fall, it is true of grief, it is true of relationships, it is true of seasons of faith. The most beautiful it gets is right before the letting go. Maybe because the beauty is the last gift before the release. Maybe because we pay attention most completely when we know something is almost over.

    The bridge is prayerful and specific. I don’t want to be the branch that won’t release. I don’t want to hold so tight I miss the beauty. There is grace in the going, grace in the turning. There is something waiting on the other side of this. Something I could not have seen unless I let this go. That is the whole testimony. Let it go. Let it turn. Something is waiting.

    I wrote this album with Claude AI and Suno AI, and this song is the most personal faith expression on the whole record. I hope it meets you exactly where you are.

    Tell me in the comments: what are you learning to let turn in your own life right now? What are you working on releasing? I ask carefully because I know it is a tender question, but I also know that sometimes naming it helps.

    Give Me Fall releases August 31st. Follow me on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, Deezer, and Pandora. Come find me on Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube, and join my email list here.

    Let it turn. Let it go gold. Let it all turn. The best is still ahead.

    Warmly, Melanie Grace