I had a more than pleasant lunch experience today at Krannert, not my typical lunchtime haunt. If I am out of my office at all over the noon hour it is to get a pizza with my friend Jim Owens. I believe that is all he can eat. But as usual, I digress. The Wailin' Jennies performed in the lobby, and they are as good a group of three singing and plucking women as their name is bad. They are a Canadian "folk" group, for lack of a better word, and I had heard one of their songs on the radio and knew they were likely to be good. On the other hand, they were a folk group, and Canadian. That sounded bad. In a pinch, I knew I could squeeze my eyes shut and recite "Rush is right 98 and half percent of the time" to myself when the obligatory Bush rant began, but it turns out that despite their intrumental and vocal similarities to the Dixie Chicks, they were far too smart for that. This is similar to how much smarter Emmy Lou Harris is than her good friend Linda Ronstadt. Fortunately, you don't have to be smart to be a great artist, and unfortunately, great artists are not always smart.
When Emmy Lou played Krannert she found a way to let the audience know where she stood politically without once insulting the president. I was reasonably sure where the Jenny's stood without them once mentioning Bush. They did manage to insult their own western Canada cowboy tradition, which unlike the Dixie Chicks, is insufficiently newsworthy to find its way back home.
Why do some artists crave, in addition to affirmation about their art, affirmation about their politics? Even a group as dim as the Dixie Chicks must know that no good comes from insulting George Bush in Europe. It is simply an exercise in ego, an ego already plenty well fed.
Some years ago, the Beach Boys played at the Assembly Hall. Gerri and I had never seen them so we brought our two youngest. Mike Love actually insulted the morals of our president, who at that time was one of the Clintons. It was surprising and a little gratifying to know that an entertainer from California had an opinion similar to mine, but even at the time, I wondered how Mike thought it added to the musical experience. Well of course it didn't, and like Linda, the Dixie Chicks and Larry the DJ, these kinds of political statements are better left at home.
They need a better name, but the Wailin' Jenny's are worth hearing. Young, beautiful, talented and smart.
 John
Steve Miller does that in his shows, too. Just shut up and play something.
An excellent parody from MadTV of the Dixie Chicks singing "I will never apologize".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edp7WJz7zHc&eurl=
It is unfortunate that some people who have gained fame because of a talent assume that it is their duty to use that fame to promote their own viewpoint on any variety of subjects.
Better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
(of course, I could often follow this myself...)
Well, it figures Mike Love is a Republican. If it was Brian Wilson I'd really have a quandary. :)
They bash the president to be part of the exclusive, elite, rebels who question authority. The funny part is that their exclusive group is so large and predictable, they trip over themselves to get their 15 (seconds) minutes.
It's one thing to be a well-known performer and proclaim, "Bush is a(n) @%$@#;" it's another entirely to be one who instead says something useful, to the tune of getting out the vote, spreading the word about Darfur, etc. Name-calling from either side of the political coin (and I'll admit that I've been guilty of it, and will probably be guilty again) is a bit juvenile, for lack of a better term. Regardless of what George Clooney, Barbra Streisand, the Dixie Chicks, et al have said publicly, I have yet to actually learn anything from their politicizing. Bono? He's in a band that hasn't done anything musically useful since "Under A Blood Red Sky" (okay, maybe "The Joshua Tree") and he's suddenly in the running for World Ambassador to the Universe? Sheesh...and I'm a liberal! I went through a Kerouac phase once, which ended once I found out that he died a paranoid, alcoholic, anti-Semite; I'm pretty certain that I don't want to know the political, social, or sexual leanings of a lot of the musicians that I listen to. I enjoy Les Claypool's (Bucket of Bernie Brains) "Big Eyeball In The Sky," but it's largely made up of anti-Bush rants, and I wonder, "how is this really going to hold up twenty years from now? It's pretty sad to imagine that someone's sole knowledge of political issues could be made up entirely of words which some entertainer spouted.
Next time, before the show starts, perhaps you should stand up and inform the performers that you hold their beliefs in utter contempt and that you expect them to shut up between songs and only sing lyrics that cannot in any way be construed as challenges to any of your beliefs. Then you will know that you are about to experience a true artistic experience.
Interloper, for argument's sake, let's say that I'm pro choice. I enjoy a particular instrumental band, but know that the band leader/songwriter will probably ramble on about abortion equating murder, etc. between songs. Would my attendance at their live performance be a "true artistic experience" for me simply because some schmo with a guitar and a microphone chose to air his/her political views? Obviously, people can mix politics with art; for myself it works best if done humorously (I'm a huge Frank Zappa fan, for example, but think that the relevance of many of his political lyrics is outdated). I think the point of the discussion is "how (it) add(s) to the musical experience." If I found a performer's views so offensive (and none come to mind that do) I would "inform the performers" by not attending one of their live performances or by not purchasing their products. Basically, if a pro-Bush person goes to a Dixie Chicks performance, he or she shouldn't be surprised when Natalie starts giving her opinion of the current administration or the people who voted them in. He or she should also not be surprised to find that they're in the minority of concert-goers. For roughly the same reasons, this theoretical pro-Bush person should probably not attend a DNC convention, "inform" those attending that he or she doesn't share their views, and expect anyone present to care about it.
What a waste of electrons. i like performer "A" because of the performance. I no more care or concern myself about performer "A's" politics, clothing, vehicles, or choice of cologne than I do about anyone else's.
Tiger Woods promotes Buicks. Phil Mickelson promotes Fords. Tom Hanks is liberal. Mel Gibson is conservative. So what? Do you like to watch Tiger, or Phil, or Tom, or Mel? Do they make you go buy Buicks or Fords so you can "be just like them"? Does Tom Hanks make you want to be a liberal, or does Mel Gibson make you want to be a conservative, so you can "be just like them"?
Only knuckleheads don't realize that that the performer is just a performer, and their political or marketplace or any other endorsement is meaningless.
"Only knuckleheads don't realize that that the performer is just a performer, and their political or marketplace or any other endorsement is meaningless."
Not true. Their political statements become very meaningful if they are part of the performance. Tom Hanks can be as liberal as he wants, as long as he doesn't take a 10 minute intermission if the middle of the movie to preach to me about the need for universal health care.
Thank you. You just made my point.
Mike-
I think I pretty much agree with you. If I were for some weird reason to go to a Toby Keith show, I probably wouldn't much like either the music or the politics all that much. But I wouldn't suggest that he was outside his rights to mix the two together. (I might find his song about the Statue of Liberty shakin' her fist sort of silly, but that's a separate issue). In fact, in an entertainment culture where so many people are totally oblivious to the news and current events, I think it's great that people sometimes bring their opinions into their art. Yes it can get out of hand I suppose, but I'm not sure I've ever seen an example of that, and I don't think that a few political remarks during the course of a show are terribly out of order, although I might find some of them annoying. (To G. Hulten's credit, he was also prepared to give some latitude to the WJ's in this respect).
I'm really speaking out against the view (which I sense might be floating around here, though no one's quite said it), that art and politics should never mix, or that artists should "know their place" and never presume to challenge the views of their audiences.
Whoops, OP was by John Bramfeld. Credit where credit's due.
"the view (which I sense might be floating around here, though no one's quite said it), that art and politics should never mix, or that artists should “know their place” and never presume to challenge the views of their audiences"
it is one thing to challenge, and another thing to insult the views of your audience. artists can do what they want, obviously, but they then shouldn't be shocked if some of their audience gets offended.
I am not suggesting that art and politics should not mix. I will suggest that most artists are insufficiently informed about politics to "challenge" my political views. The Dixie Chicks are a prime example. Whose political views were challenged by their statement that they were ashamed to be from Texas because George Bush comes from Texas? What kind of challenge did Linda Ronstadt issue when she worried aloud at a perfomance in Vegas that there might be some fundamentalists in the audience. These kinds of dimwitted "challenges" are not artistic, are not helpful to the cause, and will, statistically speaking, irritate and harden the views of a good part of the audience.
If you want to look at a great mix of art and politics, think of someone like Woody Guthrie. I don't know what he said at his appearances, but his surviving songs, at least the ones we know and love, are political without being pejorative. Of necessity, if this is our land it can't be the "man's land." But Woody was too smart to say it that way. Neil Young's fever dream of nuclear war will be recognized for the art that it is, long outlasting the painfully awful musical call to impeach Bush. Like I said, you don't have to be smart to be an artist.
John
what a bunch of crybabies!
Oh, the performer said something that insulted me. The performer thinks fat people shouldn't be fat, and I am fat! Oooooo. The performer doesn't like the prez, and I do, so that insults me, so the performer isn't a good performer!
See a show. Enjoy the sights and sounds. I don't give a flying dang if Terrell Owens is a jerk, can he catch a football and run? Can Andres Segovia play? Is Van Cliburn a conservative? Has he ever doe an interview? So what!
When YOU give celebrity status to a performer that is outside their field of performance, YOU are the chump. Do I like Striesand's' politics? No. Do I like Striesand's acting and singing? No. That's why I don't like Striesand. Not because she is George Soros' girlfriend, or Bill's chantuese, or whatever.
When somebody, on stage, on the radio, on the street, says something I don't like, I IGNORE IT! When Linda Ronstadt starts talking politics, I IGNORE IT! Does she sing enough songs so I get value for my ticket money? If yes, I am satisfied, if no, I am not satisfied. If she wants to rant and rave between songs, let her, I'm just here for the show. Get some freakin' perspective!
What a bunch of whiney crybabies!
'What a bunch of whiney crybabies!"
you're the one with a post full of "!" - 7 I think.
Interloper:
FYI (not jumping into this one), Toby Keith is a registered Democrat. Do a google search, see for yourself.
Dear Mr. Cramden,
We are not "whiney" crybabies, we are "whiny" crybabies. I am hopeful that you will begin to follow your own advice and try to put things on perspective on this blog, and I will try to put things in perspective at concerts.
John (feel that freakin' perspective coming on any time) Bramfeld
Who is Mr. Cramden?
Was he your high school English teacher?
Did he know this, and teach it to you?
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
whine
One entry found for whine.
Main Entry: 2 whine
Function: noun
1 a : a prolonged high-pitched cry usually expressive of distress or pain b : a sound resembling such a cry
2 : a complaint uttered with or as if with a whine
- whiny also whin·ey /'hwI-nE, 'wI-/ adjective
maybe you thought I wrote "whinny", because of all the country and all the western singers mentioned.
Anonymous,
Who is Mr. Cramden?
You oughta know.
Anonymous: “When somebody, on stage, on the radio, on the street, says something I don't like, I IGNORE IT! When Linda Ronstadt starts talking politics, I IGNORE IT!”ÂÂ
I completely understand what you're saying. When someone says something you don't like you just ignore them. I admire your brand of restraint. I wish I could relax like you.
John Bramfeld: “I am not suggesting that art and politics should not mix.”ÂÂ
I wouldn't suggest it either. A suggestion like that will bump you right up to fascist status. I do wonder about when exactly art became so utterly dependant on politics. A couple hundred years ago art started becoming “art,” which involves, in much greater quantities, the artist's ego and the viewer's reaction. The product itself has been diminished. There have been some recent “art” exhibits to this effect that can only be described as troubling.
It's a shame about the Dixie Chicks, too. After Wide Open Spaces they apparently became rich enough to afford their own pair of quotation marks. I think famous “artists” start thinking they have to be more than just good artists; they have to be intelligent too. That's where the trouble starts and acquiring political angst becomes easier than acquiring genuine intelligence.
Mike: I agree that a conservative who likes President Bush shouldn't be surprised with the reception their ideologies receive at a Dixie Chicks concert. And to be fair, should Barbra Streisand be surprised when a 5 minute derision of our president starts to wear on some of her fans?
GreenGuy: Richard Perle is a registered Democrat. I'm not sure, but I think he's called a Scoop Jackson liberal which is a lot like being a very conservative Republican (at least on many issues). So clearly, sometimes being a Democrat doesn't count for very much in the way real liberalism. I suspect that goes for most Democrats who wear cowboy hats too.
Dear Ex-Maroon,
I have a son who is an ex-Maroon, but his spelling is even worse than Ralph Cramden. I would think you were my son, but you sound very intelligent and well-informed.
John
You called?
Sumthingg abouut my speling?
Look it up for yourself, brainy boy. "Whiney" is perfectly acceptable. Or axceptubal, your choice.
Art and politics mix wonderfully - especially in the modern environment. How can a band or artist tuned in to the polarized society we live in *not* create political art? Modern art is often a reflection of the society it is created within.
Back in the day it was the punk bands who were struggling to turn rock back into a political genre. Remember Minutemen, or the Dead Kennedys? Who doesn't love listening to Jello Biafra rage against Jerry Brown in "California Uber Alles"? Who hasn't rocked out to Minutemen's "Sickles and Hammers" all these years later and loved it? Think you could have gone to one of those shows and left without getting liberal politics slammed over your head? Hell no!
The truth is that we live in a society where we think we are owed something by the performer. We arrive, sit down, and wait to be entertained. It is a reflection of all that is wrong with America - our inability to participate. True rock, true art, is a form of connection between the artist and the audience. From Beatlemania to the mosh pit, the point is to get off your ass and join the party, or go home.
Expecting to show up, hear California Girls, and not be insulted is the epitome of lame. It might as well be a Barry Manilow concert at that point.
Better to be insulted, than bored. Any day of the week.
"The truth is that we live in a society where we think we are owed something by the performer. We arrive, sit down, and wait to be entertained."
Of course we are, that is why we call them "Entertainers" - that is the whole point.
And the performance last night at Midnight Madness, by the actor, is exactly the type of stuff that get under my skin. It is a basketball event, for goodness sake, and some lame brain thinks that is the perfect time to bash Bush. I am quite glad I wasn't the only one who boo'd him. Frankly, Mr. Watt, I would have preferred if he had been boring.
The bottomline is that people pay good money to see performers entertain them and not be preached to about their politics. Unless a performer has a habit a doing that the public may not appreciate a surprise political diatribe after plunking down hard earned money. The Dixie Chicks are a case in point. Prior to their ill advised on stage political tantrum country music fans enjoyed their music and a lot still do, however, they are reaping the consequences of their actions with declining ticket sales and forcing to cancel venues. Piven is best known as an actor that frequently plays comic relief roles and would have expected him to give some funny anecdotal stories or jokes not Bush bash at a sporting event even if it was free.
When performers make their political preferences known in a very public and sometimes obnoxious way they will guarantee themselves some level of backlash as a result of that and they should not be surprised. The public has the ultimate choice with their pcketbook whether they will subject themselves to such activity or continue to support such performers through purchases. Make me laugh, cry, clap, cheer, etc, but don't insult me because of my politics. Do it on your time or if this is what I can expect in the futue then I will pass. They have the freedom to talk about what they want and I have the freedom to buy elsewhere.
Plunk down your hard earned dough and expect to be entertained? Is that the quintessential middle-aged lame-o statement, or what? Maybe you folks never made to, say, a Metallica concert circa 1987, or a Grateful Dead concert circa 1967, but those were moments of communal ecstasy, not commercial demands. To relegate music to this level of consumption and critique is to suck the life from all that is good in the world. You complain about being offended at a rock concert? What's next? Complaining about having to hear about Jesus at church?
Just get in line for the senior discount at Cracker Barrel and get it over with already.
Peace dude :-)
I love Cracker Barrel!
Dear John Bramfeld,
Thanks for the compliment. I admire your confidence that your son won't Google your name only to find that you're publishing disparaging comments about his spelling and dish-placement. He must be much smaller than you.
Ex-Maroon