On Frank Zappa (What's in a title?)
Revisionist views of history aren't only for politics. Frank Zappa won't necessarily be understood as he was during his lifetime.
Boomers saw him as a brilliant satirist, but I thought this description in David Stubbs' book Fear of Music was telling and interesting:
"The problem with Zappa is that he didn't have a Dionysian fibre in his being. He was an artisan, a satirist, and technically very gifted -- he simply lacked a soul.. (p. 80)
He was also an autocrat (What composers aren't to some degree?) Most of music history still supports the idea of one person controlling the music, for better or worse, depending on one's views of collaborations. (Pink Floyd was at its height with Waters at the helm, attempting to control the direction of the music. Classical music wouldn't exist if one person wasn't exalted to a position of almost absolute creative control.)
But what is most interesting is that Zappa wasn't particularly Dionysian. That seems counter-intuitive, but it is true. Composition in the traditional sense is an Apollonian activity that can seem Dionysian in a pop music context, but scoring for orchestra (or rock ensemble) is largely a cerebral exercise.
Zappa was in some sense a relic of the 19th-century Dadaists The Incoherents never taking anything too seriously. In terms of revisionist views, we now can't take the serious parts of Zappa seriously because of the heavy layer of irony. He was a very competent composer that infused rock guitar soloing, and inspired a whole school of musicians that went on to be successful in their own right. But all the cheeky stuff, and the strange song titles hasn't traveled well. In 1973 young Boomers thought the Cheech and Chong "Sister Mary Elephant" routines were hilarious, and in the late 70s the Apostrophe album with "Yellow Snow" and "St Alphonso's Pancake Breakfast, so funny in its time, have become the equivalent of Jerry Lewis pratfalls, that have had a short shelf-life of being funny.
A better history of Zappa would put his musical abilities at the forefront, even though his intent was to push that to the background. I guess the lesson is to make irony less structurally important in your work, without removing it altogether--as not having it at all makes art less interesting overall.
I attended several performances of Zappa's orchestral works and I usually enjoyed them as purely musical experiences minus the satire, but was always reminded of it by titles such as "Duke of Prunes".
Boomers saw him as a brilliant satirist, but I thought this description in David Stubbs' book Fear of Music was telling and interesting:
"The problem with Zappa is that he didn't have a Dionysian fibre in his being. He was an artisan, a satirist, and technically very gifted -- he simply lacked a soul.. (p. 80)
He was also an autocrat (What composers aren't to some degree?) Most of music history still supports the idea of one person controlling the music, for better or worse, depending on one's views of collaborations. (Pink Floyd was at its height with Waters at the helm, attempting to control the direction of the music. Classical music wouldn't exist if one person wasn't exalted to a position of almost absolute creative control.)
But what is most interesting is that Zappa wasn't particularly Dionysian. That seems counter-intuitive, but it is true. Composition in the traditional sense is an Apollonian activity that can seem Dionysian in a pop music context, but scoring for orchestra (or rock ensemble) is largely a cerebral exercise.
Zappa was in some sense a relic of the 19th-century Dadaists The Incoherents never taking anything too seriously. In terms of revisionist views, we now can't take the serious parts of Zappa seriously because of the heavy layer of irony. He was a very competent composer that infused rock guitar soloing, and inspired a whole school of musicians that went on to be successful in their own right. But all the cheeky stuff, and the strange song titles hasn't traveled well. In 1973 young Boomers thought the Cheech and Chong "Sister Mary Elephant" routines were hilarious, and in the late 70s the Apostrophe album with "Yellow Snow" and "St Alphonso's Pancake Breakfast, so funny in its time, have become the equivalent of Jerry Lewis pratfalls, that have had a short shelf-life of being funny.
A better history of Zappa would put his musical abilities at the forefront, even though his intent was to push that to the background. I guess the lesson is to make irony less structurally important in your work, without removing it altogether--as not having it at all makes art less interesting overall.
I attended several performances of Zappa's orchestral works and I usually enjoyed them as purely musical experiences minus the satire, but was always reminded of it by titles such as "Duke of Prunes".
