Ep 51: Controversial Music

In this episode, John kicks off Season Two of Gig to Live with a look at controversial music. 

Some songs were controversial when they were released. Others became controversial years later as culture changed around them. Some songs were never actually about what people thought they were about in the first place. 

John looks at the stories, misunderstandings, cultural shifts, and uncomfortable conversations surrounding the music that causes a stir and offers some options for musicians who perform the songs.

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

SPEAKER_00 0:00

You are listening to the Gig to Live Podcast. Hey there, I'm John Volt. I'm a full-time musician. This podcast surfaces the questions behind the questions, the business, psychology, relationships, decisions, the complications and the joys and the realities of performing to pay the bills. We're not here to recycle predictable advice. If you want to hear more about what this gigging business is made of, then you are in the right place. Well, well, well. You're back for season two. Thank you. I appreciate you. We have a lot of things planned for Gig to Live season two. I'm very excited. Today we're gonna kick off the season talking about controversial music. And I'll tell you, I don't have strict answers. I just want to explore some of the issues and get us thinking because I think it's important to do that. I wish today this was a two-way conversation so we could banter back and forth, but I'm just gonna throw some things out for us. Uh, not too long ago, I did a Bruce Springsteen song that I've played uh 50 to 100 times live. And when I was done, a guy came up to me, he went out of his way to make a point of letting me know how much he detested Bruce Springsteen. And his opinion was politically charged. He made that obvious by the little tirade that he went on. But then at the end of his little spout, he hilariously told me that he actually liked the song I did and that he can enjoy the song without thinking about Bruce Springsteen, the person. Hmm. Songs can be controversial for so many different reasons. So maybe people dislike the artist themselves, as is the case with the Springsteen hater who formed his opinion based on politics. All right, well, let's talk about politics. What if I were to do a song by somebody on the opposite end of the outspoken musician spectrum? And take let's take a look at a guy like Ted Nugent. Ted is a strong counterpoint here. For years he's been very outspoken about his politics on the far right. And I wonder if I would have done a song that evening by the Nug if somebody would have had something to say about it. I mean, they very well could have. Personally, I've never decided to do a song strictly because of an artist's politics. I might at some point, but I haven't yet. The political climate of the last few years uh certainly does make someone think more about it more than we possibly would have a few years ago, anyway. People dislike artists for any number of reasons. Politics. Uh, sometimes it's not their lyrics, sometimes it's sex, religion, race, violence. And sometimes an artist is just misunderstood. Sometimes the controversy that's surrounding an artist is captured in space and time, and their controversy gets viewed through different eyes when history tells the complete story a few years down the road. Take Sinead O'Connor. So Sinead tore up a photo of Pope John Paul II on Saturday Night Live in 1992. I was watching the episode live. At that time, a lot of the public story that was surrounding Sinead O'Connor and her on-air theatrics became pretty much Sinead O'Connor hates the Catholic Church or hates the Pope. And SNL and NBC banned her. It went deeper than that even for her. She tore up the actual photo that her abusive mother used to keep on her nightstand. It was very personal for her. Years later, as the scale of the abuse scandal in the church became publicly established, her act looked very different to many people. People have tried to ban songs forever because of controversial content. Some songs don't become controversial until years after their release because culture changes. Take a song like Brown Sugar by the Stones. Just a casual read through the lyrics today is a bit shocking. It talks about the slave trade, uh the sexual abuse of young women, and whoever's voice the song is supposed to be in, whatever point of view it's coming from, the person seems to be getting off on the whole thing. The song is so frickin' catchy and it sounds so fun, but if you cover it, you might be thinking, wait a second, what are these words that are coming out of my mouth right now? Now the Stones stopped doing the song live. Keith Richards says it was always supposed to be about the horrors of what was happening. It wasn't supposed to be any kind of an endorsement. Uh but that's the weird thing about doing songs that don't come out and say, Hey everyone, we don't believe this. We are using harsh language to prove a point. And the narrator of this song is a type. It's poetic device. Signed the Rolling Stones. You know, I mean, that's that doesn't happen. Uh take a song like Money for Nothing by Dire Straits. It's the same kind of thing. The narrator in that song isn't supposed to be Mark Knopfler. Knopfler said that he based the character on comments that he overheard from a worker in an appliance store. And the worker was watching MTV on those televisions that are, you know, all playing in the store, and he was complaining about rock stars getting rich while seemingly doing nothing. So Mark Knopfler hears this, he writes a song in that guy's voice. But if you aren't inquisitive enough to ask what is going on, uh uh you would think that Mark Knopfler is just throwing around homophobic slurs in a song. You you'd think that maybe we're smart enough to go, hey, wait, Knobfler is on MTV. He's not writing a song that's condemning himself. He's a hardworking musician. He's not condemning himself. Oh, I get it. This is from the point of view of someone else. He's poking fun at a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. And that guy's just bitter and angry that he's in a stuck, you know, dead end job. But you know what? I mean, that's not usually how it works. It would be different if it were just a poem, because you and I can stand outside of a poem and we can take time to analyze the poem and ask questions about the poem and maybe even learn from it. Poems work differently than songs, which are poems, but poems set to music. Poems aren't regularly recited in public with a groove that makes you want to join in. But if you crank up brown sugar or money for nothing, uh people are gonna hit the dance floor and they're gonna be screaming the lyrics back at you. So it brings up questions for me about my responsibility to the audience whenever I cover a song. Then there's the issue of uh I wonder if they think I'm endorsing this song. The other night I played a gig at a bar, and on break, we started talking about controversial songs at the bar. I was telling a guy behind the bar the story of how my in-laws were not allowed to have an Elvis song at their wedding because the Catholic Church wouldn't let them, you know, Elvis the Pelvis and all. And I really forget how we even got talking about it, but it got into other controversial songs, uh, some of them like Louis Louie. We talked about that because it became controversial because people were falsely interpreting the gibberish as something nasty. The freaking FBI did a two-year investigation into the song. And it's supposedly obscene lyrics. It was hilarious. I mean, Cardi B is laughing today. Well, it brought back a memory for me of when I sang songs for youth groups, and there was a popular silly parody of a song, of that song of Louie Louie, and it was called Pharaoh Pharaoh. And we used to do this song for, you know, middle schoolers and high school kids. Some folks in that church community got mad at me for doing it, not because it was bad, but because it sounded like a song that they thought was bad, that actually wasn't bad. I mean, the whole thing was ridiculous. The funny thing is that years later, after the controversy with that whole song started, they analyzed the song even deeper, slowed it down, took it apart, and they found that the drummer actually yells, F after he messes up. And it got on to the recording. The recording that you and I hear on the radio today. You can listen to it. 54 seconds into the song, he screams. Well, we're having this conversation, and another bartender who was overhearing the whole conversation asked me if I've ever covered the song Turning Japanese. And I I laughed. Uh no, I haven't. It's it's it's not really the kind of song that rises to the top of things, uh, you know, songs that I think I should cover, although I don't know, maybe. And then she told me, uh, the song is about masturbation. Well, she thought she was breaking the news to me. She seemed uh actually kind of excited to tell me the secret. She said she read something about it, and she was surprised to find out what it really meant. Well, I didn't tell her that the guy who wrote it, his name is David Fenton, he has repeatedly denied uh denied that particular interpretation. He says the song is about someone becoming psychologically transformed or alienated after losing a relationship with someone. But, but I have heard her interpretation many, many times through the years. Kids talked about it that way when I was in high school. Of course. I mean, that was the appeal. It seemed like a dirty song. And that brings up the question do I not do a song because of what people think it means, even if it doesn't mean that? I mean, honestly, I probably wouldn't do that song anyway, because I don't gravitate towards a song, even though it's fun. Uh, even if I did it ironically, I don't know that I would do it. Because if people think it's about what the bartender thought, and the reference is about the face that someone makes when they're engaging in that activity, then that is highly racist. And, and, and the little Americanized Hong Kong fooie pseudo-Asian intro to the song is the kind of thing that's frowned upon, right? Because of its racial caricature. Even even the name of the song makes you go, wait a minute, what what is this thing all about? Is this racist? Uh David Bowie caught flack for the same kind of thing with his song China Girl, which is another example of people thinking they know what the song means and it doesn't. Bowie says it's very anti-racial, and it's a statement against colonialism and racism, and the West wanting to make everything in its own image. You know, but when Drew Barrymore sings it in The Wedding Singer, it just sounds like a fun song. And it sounds like maybe it's racist. But there's that wicked, cool, tasty solo in it, by the way, by Stevie Ray Vaughn. It's so good. Uh and by the way, Bowie wrote that song with Iggy Pop, and Iggy Pop recorded it and released the song six years prior to Bowie, but Bowie's the one that, you know, caught the flack from it. So back to what do we do? Here's another weird one. What if the song is controversial not because of the lyrics, not because of politics, not because of some interpretation of the song, but because the artist themselves is surrounded by controversy, like Michael Jackson. Michael Jackson was accused of child sexual abuse. Now, he was never convicted, and he was acquitted in the only criminal case against him that went to trial. And that that is super important. Still, some people think the accusations are enough to reject Michael Jackson altogether. And I know people who have told me I should never cover a Michael Jackson song. Some have told me I should never cover a David Bowie song because of allegations of him being with young girls in the 70s. They've also told me that about Steven Tyler as well as Jimmy Page and Mick Jagger and Elvis. Some people believe artists should never cover songs by other artists who have those kind of allegations against them. But, you know, what if I want to cover a song by one of those artists? Uh, or the artist made the song popular and people know that version of the song, but the artist didn't write it in the first place. Does that change the song? Is it safe to do it now? Do I have to do some kind of a disclaimer before the song before I play it? Do I have to say, hey everyone? You know, this song is called She's Out of My Life. It's a beautiful song, it makes me cry. Michael Jackson made it popular, but he didn't write it. Uh two, three, and no. It's strange. I understand the personal boundaries. If people don't want to listen to an artist because of their personal convictions about how we should react to the art that was created by that person, then that's their prerogative. No judgment here. If someone tells me I shouldn't play something, then that's a moral judgment about my relationship with the art. And that's where it gets tricky. Still, it makes me ask questions. All right, let's talk about cussing. What about cussing? This fits with our theme today. Uh there are a couple of songs that I really like to play that have a very strategically placed F bomb in them. And the song isn't the same without it, honestly. I don't think so. Now, it it's a matter of wisdom, I think. In some venues, some times of day are probably not appropriate for even a beautifully theatrical and appropriate F bomb. But some venues, when it's late at night and there's no children around and the whole crowd is singing it, it might just work for you. Some venues I play are really good about telling artists when it's okay and it's not okay to cuss in songs. Music and art controversy is so interesting to me. Art is powerful throughout history. When a country is overrun by an authoritarian regime, or there's some outside occupying force, they target the intellectuals, the scientists, and the artists in order to control any new thought, any imaginative thought, or to keep people from thinking for themselves or questioning those in power. Man, we've even seen this on our own soil, in some cases, like the FBI files on John Lennon and trying to deport him because the government feared an uprising because he was such a powerful influencer. Now, even if you don't believe the conspiracy theories about the FBI and Lenin and his death, it is true that he was being watched and he was being monitored. That's very public knowledge. Beyond the internal controversy that people may have about music or taking offense to some lyrics or the artists themselves, art has always been a force that can strike fear and worry and discontent into the hearts of the powers that be. Here's a personal story for you. In 2017, I helped build an art wall on the corner of the property of the church where I worked. It wasn't a program, it wasn't a campaign, it was simply a wall. It was open, it was uncurated in that it was available to artists. I didn't, I didn't pick what was going to go on the wall. I was friends with a bunch of artists in the community. So I extended an invitation and permission to artists from the community, and they filled that wall with work that was honest, it was playful, it was deeply human, and it became a public conversation in the city that changed as different hands and voices passed through the wall. And there were themes of love and unity and inspiration and peace. I will say nothing ever went on that wall that somebody would immediately look at and say, Oh my goodness, get that thing off of this wall. There just wasn't that kind of a thing. It wasn't shocking. The art was amazing. However, what stood out wasn't the art, but the unease that it caused, because the wall unsettled some of the leadership because it couldn't be managed. They wanted to explain the art, they wanted to sanitize it, assign meaning to it. You know, they they didn't like the idea of the art just speaking for itself. That and that impulse didn't come from wisdom or discernment, I don't think. I think it came from fear. It was fear of ambiguity, fear of voices that they didn't authorize, and fear of living in tension. Now, occasionally there was a piece that that disturbed some church folk. One piece in particular caused some in the leadership to call a meeting with me where they asked me to paint over the image immediately. The image was of a woman giving birth to the world. Now, it wasn't dirty, it wasn't sexual, uh, there was no Nudity. I mean, the way it was done was amazing. It was just painted in such a way that it suggested the earth was birthed. And I remember the conversation and someone saying, what if the community thinks that that's what we believe? It's on our property. And the tension was theological, but also a fear that the church would somehow be threatened if we allowed for ambiguity rather than taking a strong stance on a belief system, rather than engaging the symbolism or allowing space for interpretation. The reaction was immediate anxiety. And I was told in that meeting that it was our job to resolve tension and to provide answers for people. And this was a rub for me. I said I disagreed. I said I thought our job was more along the lines of creating conversation with people, fostering relationship. And I never saw my job as being the question answerer. When my time there came to an end, the wall was removed almost immediately after my departure, within days. No explanation to the art community was ever offered. It simply just poof disappeared. And I had artists reach out to me, wondering what happened. And I assured them it wasn't my doing. I assured them that I love them, that their voice matters. You know, looking back on it, the wall didn't really need to be explained. It needed to be eliminated, in their opinion. And that decision explains everything. My uh favorite kind of controversial song is the one that makes people think. The one that makes people think differently. Uh they challenge conventional thought, or you know, popular thought. And I especially love the songs that um they they don't necessarily have a hidden meaning, but people often miss the message. China Girl, I think, would certainly be one of those songs. Uh, if you go read those lyrics right now, you'll understand. Oh, okay, wait, it's totally different uh than I originally thought, maybe. Uh Born in the USA is another one of those songs. Imagine by John Lennon, Fortunate Son by Credence, uh Killing in the Name by Rage Against the Machine. Uh, This is America by Childish Gambino. Man, the first time I saw that video, wow. I love it when an artist has the guts. So, how about a top 10 today? Let's wrap this up. It's it's fun to talk about these things in vague generalities, but what do we do when a song gets requested, or a song becomes popular and others are covering it, or we simply are putting together our set list and we're thinking through the songs that have potential to cause a stir. Drum roll, please. The top ten responses to covering controversial songs. Because we have choices. I mean, you know that, but let's spell them out. Uh number one, don't do it. That's a choice. If the song makes you uncomfortable, if it conflicts with your values, if it isn't worth the distraction, potential distraction, leave it out. There's plenty of songs. Number two, you can play it without apology. You may decide that the song just stands on its own and you don't owe the audience a lecture before every complicated piece of music. And that is a legit choice, you know. Let the cards fall where they may. Just be prepared for possible discussion afterwards. Number three. Give a disclaimer. Just a quick acknowledgement can, you know, give people context and a little bit of protection for you, the performer. Hey gang, uh, I know there's some baggage attached to this song or to the artist, but I have always loved this song, and this is what it means to me. You can do that. Number four, you can recast it. Maybe change the gender, pronouns, perspective, arrangement, tempo, attitude. I don't know. Sometimes putting the song in a different mouth reveals something entirely new. Now, I'm I'm going to admit I'm not a fan of changing words to a song to soften it. Unless the artist themselves does it. And I have a case in point for this. Some artists create two versions of their song, like Tyler Childers. He has a great song, Nose on the Grindstone. I love it. The safer version says his daddy messed up his back as opposed to the more raw version. The raw version is the one I prefer because it's authentic. But regardless, changing the song is a choice you can make if you want to do the song and you want to recast it in a new light. Number five, reclaim it. You know, a song can just outgrow its creator, and your performance can emphasize what you find meaningful about it rather than asking the audience to celebrate the original artists. And time helps with this. Distance, you know, from the song. That helps. Sometimes reclaiming a song can be a beautiful thing, and sure, we can do that. Number six, give it some context. Tell the story. Tell who actually wrote the song. When was it written? What was happening culturally at the time the song was written? I actually love this one, and I've done this many times because I love telling stories, and I find that giving a song some context can really help. Number seven, let the audience decide. Let the venue and the occasion be your deciding factor if you do the song or not, because the same song may work beautifully in a bar and terribly at a corporate event. It might work at the dive bar, but it's not gonna go over well at the wedding or the church fundraiser or the retirement community. Audience matters, and this is just wisdom for any song, actually. But yeah, look at your audience. Who's gonna listen to the song? Number eight, let people be uncomfortable. Not every uncomfortable reaction means that you've made a mistake. I mean, sometimes discomfort is exactly what a song is meant to do. And if you feel like picking up that mantle, then do it. Put on that robe, take on that mouthpiece, make it happen. Just be aware of the potential fallout. It doesn't mean that the fallout has to stop us, though. Number nine. Listen when someone objects, but don't automatically surrender. Hear them out. They may tell you something that you hadn't considered. Listening to an objection doesn't mean that the other person gets to veto the song. You know, they don't have veto power over your repertoire. I have someone who told me once that they would no longer support me if I didn't stop doing some songs by certain artists. Like I was Heinz Ketchup or Walmart, and I was being boycotted. And, you know, I listened to them. I understand why they felt that way, but I didn't stop because I didn't have the same convictions, and that's okay. Number 10. Just know why you're doing it. Don't necessarily play something controversial just to provoke people, and don't avoid it just because you're afraid that someone might complain. Make an artistic decision rather than a fearful one. Know the venue, know the audience, know your heart. That's it for today. Stay creative, stay after it, stay hired.