Zappa: Was he For or Far from the People? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

Walton Street View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 24 2014
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 872

Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:31

I don't know about his politics but I always thought that what he chose to portray of the human condition was childish.

his smug tone and juvenile approach to anything to do with sex always turned me off .. Satirical or not - he just kept hitting that same note over and over again ... like a 14 year old boy who would joke about sex because he didn't understand it.

I know he was an intelligent man, and I also respected his abilities but I can only ever take him a tiny bit at a time .. It did sound to me like he was mocking everything and everybody whenever he opened his mouth, like he didn't care for his own audience, and only his musician buddies were in on the joke.

my personal opinion from listening to about 20 of his albums, I have no scientific proof to back any of this up.

"I know one thing: that I know nothing"

- SpongeBob Socrates

LearsFool

Prog Reviewer

Joined: November 09 2014
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 8642

Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:31

Zappa, it seems, liked to fire both barrels at everybody.

Going through We're Only In It For The Money, he hits both American political parties of the time, The Beatles, and hippies again.

Being all about free thought, he hit hippies in his worry that a lot of them were sheep following trendy things - as the name would originally imply, as well - but at the expense of honest members, who, like in most subcultures, are actually the majority.

His misfire on the album makes sense in light of how poorly he interpreted The Beatles's integrity; the title of the album is the first salvo he fired at them.

He meant well, it's just that on his early albums, amongst his all time greats as they are, he didn't yet have the best marksmanship.

SteveG

Forum Senior Member

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20604

Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:20

In Barry Miles 2003 book on the relationship between the sixtie's counter culture and rock music titled Hippie, Miles simply reproduces an ad for Mothers of Invention's 1966 debut album Freak Out! in the LA Free Press, and I quote:

"This is about the Mothers of Invention. We have watched them grow, and with their growth, we hopefully have grown. Their honesty has offended some and been provocative to many, their performances have had a real effect on their audiences.

The Mothers' music is very new, and as their music is new, so is the intention of their music. As much as the Mothers put into music, we must bring to it. The Mothers and what they represent as a group has attracted all of the outcasts, the pariahs, the people who are angry and afraid and contemptuous of existing social structure. The danger lies in the 'Freak Out' becoming an excuse instead of a reason. An excuse implies an end, a reason a beginning.

(Parenthesis is mine.) Being that the easiest way is constantly more attractive than the harder way, the essential thing that makes 'Freak Out' audiences different constitutes their sameness. a freak is not a freak if ALL are freaks. 'Freaking Out' should presuppose an active freedom, freedom meaning a liberation from the control of some other person or persons. Unfortunately, reaction seems to have taken place of reaction. We SHOULD be satisfied listening to the Mothers perform from a concert stage. If we could channel expended in 'Freaking Out' physically into 'Freaking Out' intellectually, we might possibly be able to create something concrete out of the ideological twilight of bizarre costumes and being seen being bizarre. Do we really listen? And if we really, do we really think? freedom of thought, conversely, brings an awesome responsibility. Looking and acting eccentric is NOT ENOUGH.

A mad tea party is valid only as satire, commenting ironically, and ending in its beginning, in that it is only a trick of interpretation. It is not creation and it IS NOT ENOUGH.

What we must try to do then, is not only comment satirically on what's wrong, but try to CHANGE what's wrong. The Mothers are trying."

For politically active people of my generation, Zappa's anti hippie "you are nothing but sheep" stance did not go down well. In the sixties, it would have been impossible for a single individual to protest against social atrocities such as racism and an immoral and illegal war.

If Zappa's emphasis on the individual was only concerned with art, such as pop music, then the album "Freak Out" would have been more widely received as that of Zappa himself. The result was that the album was not and he was not .

I respect and have come to appreciate Zappa as a great musician and composer, and I appreciate his musical output. I am a prog fan, after all. However, Zappa's political commentary and satires will always leave me cold. Was he laughing with us, or simply at us? Was he a man FOR the people or a man FAR from the people?

Edited by SteveG - February 19 2015 at 10:24

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Walton Street Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: November 24 2014 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 872	Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:31
	I don't know about his politics but I always thought that what he chose to portray of the human condition was childish. his smug tone and juvenile approach to anything to do with sex always turned me off .. Satirical or not - he just kept hitting that same note over and over again ... like a 14 year old boy who would joke about sex because he didn't understand it. I know he was an intelligent man, and I also respected his abilities but I can only ever take him a tiny bit at a time .. It did sound to me like he was mocking everything and everybody whenever he opened his mouth, like he didn't care for his own audience, and only his musician buddies were in on the joke. my personal opinion from listening to about 20 of his albums, I have no scientific proof to back any of this up.
	"I know one thing: that I know nothing" - SpongeBob Socrates

LearsFool Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Prog Reviewer Joined: November 09 2014 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 8642	Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:31
	Zappa, it seems, liked to fire both barrels at everybody. Going through We're Only In It For The Money, he hits both American political parties of the time, The Beatles, and hippies again. Being all about free thought, he hit hippies in his worry that a lot of them were sheep following trendy things - as the name would originally imply, as well - but at the expense of honest members, who, like in most subcultures, are actually the majority. His misfire on the album makes sense in light of how poorly he interpreted The Beatles's integrity; the title of the album is the first salvo he fired at them. He meant well, it's just that on his early albums, amongst his all time greats as they are, he didn't yet have the best marksmanship.


SteveG Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Reviewer page Forum Senior Member Joined: April 11 2014 Location: Kyiv In Spirit Status: Offline Points: 20604	Posted: February 19 2015 at 09:20
	In Barry Miles 2003 book on the relationship between the sixtie's counter culture and rock music titled Hippie, Miles simply reproduces an ad for Mothers of Invention's 1966 debut album Freak Out! in the LA Free Press, and I quote: "This is about the Mothers of Invention. We have watched them grow, and with their growth, we hopefully have grown. Their honesty has offended some and been provocative to many, their performances have had a real effect on their audiences. *The Mothers' music is very new, and as their music is new, so is the intention of their music. As much as the Mothers put into music, we must bring to it. The Mothers and what they represent* as a group has attracted all of the outcasts, the pariahs, the people who are angry and afraid and contemptuous of existing social structure. The danger lies in the 'Freak Out' becoming an excuse instead of a reason. An excuse implies an end, a reason a beginning. (Parenthesis is mine.) Being that the easiest way is constantly more attractive than the harder way, the essential thing that makes 'Freak Out' audiences different constitutes their sameness. a freak is not a freak if ALL are freaks. 'Freaking Out' should presuppose an active freedom, freedom meaning a liberation from the control of some other person or persons. Unfortunately, reaction seems to have taken place of reaction. We SHOULD be satisfied listening to the Mothers perform from a concert stage. If we could channel expended in 'Freaking Out' physically into 'Freaking Out' intellectually, we might possibly be able to create something concrete out of the ideological twilight of bizarre costumes and being seen being bizarre. Do we really listen? And if we really, do we really think? freedom of thought, conversely, brings an awesome responsibility. Looking and acting eccentric is NOT ENOUGH. *A mad tea party is valid only as satire, commenting ironically, and ending in its beginning, in that it is only a trick of interpretation. It is not creation and it IS NOT ENOUGH.* *What we must try to do then, is not only comment satirically on what's wrong, but try to CHANGE what's wrong. The Mothers are trying."* For politically active people of my generation, Zappa's anti hippie "you are nothing but sheep" stance did not go down well. In the sixties, it would have been impossible for a single individual to protest against social atrocities such as racism and an immoral and illegal war. If Zappa's emphasis on the individual was only concerned with art, such as pop music, then the album "Freak Out" would have been more widely received as that of Zappa himself. The result was that the album was not and he was not . I respect and have come to appreciate Zappa as a great musician and composer, and I appreciate his musical output. I am a prog fan, after all. However, Zappa's political commentary and satires will always leave me cold. Was he laughing with us, or simply at us? Was he a man FOR the people or a man FAR from the people? Edited by SteveG - February 19 2015 at 10:24