Broken Hearts Are For Assholes: A Zappa Experience

Crossfire Interview & Censorship

2011-04-06T20:17:00.000-07:00

Upon watching this interview today, a number of things popped into my head that I wish to discuss...

Before elaborating, I want to make it clear that I am mostly on Zappa's side concerning censorship regulations in music. I'm also aware that he is in a very hot seat with two aggressive (well, mainly John Lofton) interrogators and he did a great job of staying true to be his point.

That being said, I feel a bit perturbed by his responses.

First, I think that the continual emphasis that Zappa puts on how the board is merely censoring words is a bit of a cop-out. Obviously, the censoring of the so-called 7 naughty words can indeed be over-conservative and useless but I think that Tom Braden and Bob Novak make a valid point that it is not the mere use of these swear words. Although they bring up issues with current musicians having songs about incest and whatnot, Zappa continues to say that they are just words. Freedom of speech or not, I believe that there should be some sort of control over what is being mass produced to a large body of individuals.

I personally have no problem with Zappa's own use of crudeness primarily because it is more often then not done in a satirical or humorous fashion. Other artists depict absolutely horrific events and whatnot in a more serious manner. I can think of dozens of rap songs that include lyrics that depict horrendous violence, promote misogyny and homophobia and even glorify rape. I believe that it is not only acceptable but even necessary to include some sort of warning label on music albums with this sort of content. Young people, who generally are very influenced by the media, aren't always able to decipher satire from lyrics or let alone know what to think about serious accounts of problematic lyrics.

While I do agree that the censoring board almost always goes overboard in determining what is explicit and what isn't, and promotes the idea that this is a "national issue", I still think there is certainly some validity in what they're saying and that warning labels on music can be, at times, necessary.

Sorry, Frank.

What Could Have Been

2011-03-07T12:33:00.000-08:00

(the face of anti-drug in the 1960's)

(the face anti-drug in the 1980's)

As we have learned, Zappa was a predecessor of alot of things. For example, his first album Freak Out! came out years before many other genre-defining psychedelic rock albums that also received more recognition. In terms of speaking of his music in general over the years, he is said to be a direct influence to handfuls of successful "progressive" rock groups. Another notable thing that really set Zappa out from the rest of the famous musicians at the time, was how he very publicly stated his distaste and nonacceptance for drugs and alcohol.

I call this post "What Could Have Been" because Zappa's view towards drugs and alcohol could have affected his audience in a different, much greater way. The fact that Zappa was so out-in-the-open about not letting his musicians do drugs and how they turn humans into assholes could have been very influential to alot of people. His lyrical content often included satires about drinking and doing drugs and how it is ruining America. Quite frankly, I'm surprised that someone as influential as Zappa did not have an army of sober fans supporting him. Maybe because of the sarcastic-ness of his lyrics, the listeners did not quite realize that he was truly criticizing drug use and drinking. I'm sure that if Zappa had wanted to do so, he could have been the founding father of a "straight-edge"/sober revolution in music. But, I don't think that this was one of his priorities and we would only see a similar, prominent anti-drug musician years later in the 1980's.

Ian Mackaye, the lead singer of hardcore punk band Minor Threat, shared similar views as Zappa concerning drug use and alcohol. He too believed that these substances cause alot of harm to people individually and collectively as a community/society/country. Like Zappa, Mackaye made it public that he did not enjoy being around belligerent drunks or addicts and his music was a response to much of this abuse in the punk scene (as Zappa's work was to the freak scene). Unlike Zappa, Mackaye was extremely straight forward with his message and provided not satirical element to his music. Minor Threat released a song entitled "Straight Edge" which not only expressed their opinion towards drugs and drug users but also became the anthem for a onslaught of sober teenagers. While Zappa masked his viewpoints with lyrics like: "Stomp all night and drink your fizz, roll your car and say Gee Whiz!" arguably concerning drunk driving, Mackaye's message is straight to the point: "But I've got better things to do, than sit around and fuck my head, hang out with the living dead".

Mackaye's influence resulted in thousands of sober teens throughout America preaching the ideals of the "straight edge". I feel as though this is a kind of movement that Zappa could have accomplished decades before if he wanted to but, I don't think that trying to prevent drug use on a large scale was something that interested him.

That's all for now. Over and out.

Absolutely Free

2011-02-14T11:46:00.000-08:00

I want to preface this post by saying that I am indeed a fan of some of Zappa's albums (namely Sheik Yerbouti (1979) and Apostrophe (1974) - 70's era Zappa) and that I am capable of appreciating his music.

Absolutely Free (1967) is the second album by The Mothers of Invention and we explored each track in detail in class. Before this, we listened to Freak Out! (1966) and I found some catchy, stand out songs that I really enjoyed such as Trouble Every Day and I'm Not Satisfied. I'm not sure if I can say the same for any of the songs on Absolutely Free. This album is clearly more experimental than Freak Out! but I find much of it borderline un-listenable. Firstly, I find that much of the singing to be overly goofy or gimmicky - like, the psuedo-Dracula character singing on Duke Of Prunes. I much prefer when Zappa uses vocalists with wide singing ranges rather than the low, guttural vocal styling that is found on most of Absolutely Free.

Secondly, there are a slew of chaotic noise songs such as America Drinks, Amnesia Vivace and the 7+ minute Brown Shoes Don't Make It. I realize the amount of talent it takes to compose something like this but it really just leaves me with a headache. At about 3 or 4 minutes into Brown Shoes, I grow tired of it. I should note that there are extremely long songs that I do enjoy - such as Station To Station by David Bowie or Ramble Tamble by Creedence Clearwater Revival. But something like Brown Shoes is just too sporadic for me to listen to for that long.

I can't say that I liked this album in the slightest. Call Any Vegetable is quite fun but there isn't really any song that I enjoy listening to. On that note, I'm going to go listen to Tryin' To Grow A Chin and dance around the house.

2011-01-28T11:20:00.000-08:00

Here is a clip that we watched most of in class featuring Frank in 1963 on the Steve Allen show. In it, he is demonstrating how he plays a bicycle as a musical instrument. I found this to be particularly interesting and entertaining. There is somewhat of an awkward tension between Zappa and Allen. Zappa is more or less serious about his bicycle playing and the uniqueness of the sounds it creates. Allen on the other hand is poking fun at the idea of a bicycle being able to be used as a musical instrument. I do think that it was all in good taste though and this was an early example of Zappa's love for the unconventional which a greater audience may not necessarily appreciate or understand like he does.