Ian Anderson Passes into History
I've enjoyed the music of Ian Anderson and Jethro Tull for four decades. Ian was a very witty, cynical Scottish poet who was able to capture the essence of Celtic music and fuse it into modern rock and jazz. In his later years, Ian explored music from the middle east and southwest asia, which was interesting but not as entertaining as his earlier music.
I never could determine Ian's particular religious or political beliefs as he kept them well hidden from view. His lyrics suggested that he was skeptical of power in all forms and particularly cults of personality.
Recently I read Ian's comments regarding the new year on the Jethro Tull website. I was sorely disappointed by my old friend's musings. Ian said "So, now it’s the New Year, 2008 done, dusted and discarded. A new American President and a new dawn for US international relations. In the wake of Israeli adventures (or misadventures as they may well turn out to be), Mr O will have his work cut out and his supporters will have to maintain the faith, display patience and trust that some things might actually start to come good by this time next year. The economy, however, might not be one of them. Let’s hope that it is not a one-term presidency and that he gets a real shot at the Change he talks so eloquently of. "
I really didn't need to know this man's specific political opinions. Oh sure, he has every right to have them but did he really need to share them with his fans? Now that Ian has tossed these ideas out into the public arena without the benefit of prose and music I am obligated to contrast them with his previous artistic endeavors and make some decisions about the artist. Let's dissect Ian's remarks.
Ian says there will be a "new dawn for US international relations". What does that mean? Were US international relations living in a dark night? As a British subject, why would Ian care about US international relations? Was Ian troubled because America struck back at 7th century barbarians who murdered innocent civilians while practicing slavery and treating women as livestock? Gee Ian, what a guy.
Ian states "In the wake of Israeli adventures (or misadventures as they may well turn out to be), Mr O will have his work cut out ". Hmmm. Israel is surrounded by murderous islamic thugs who kidnap, murder, shell civilians and threaten Israel with nuclear annihilation. When Israel defends those civilians, Ian calls it a "misadventure". And what "work" is Mr. o supposed to accomplish? Eloquently soothe savage 7th century barbarians into behaving like sane 21st century civilized folk? Or just let the islamic barbarians kill, rape and enslave the jews as euro trash has been wont to do for centuries. Ian is clearly a very sophisticated euro-elite here.
Ian fawns over the American pretender saying "Mr O will have his work cut out and his supporters will have to maintain the faith, display patience and trust that some things might actually start to come good...". Faith? The cynical bard invokes faith? Trust? Ian lays his head and hands on the knees of a great man and swears fealty? This is just hypocritical and wrong.
The minstrel who made his fortune heaping scorn on great men gets a case of lumpen-slut jungle fever for a sweet-talking communist racist. Something might "come good" if you keep your head in Mr. o's lap long enough Ian.
Ian shows his concern for the common fellow when he says "The economy, however, might not be one of them". What? Messiah o won't heal the global economy even as he heals the world's peace? Is Ian suggesting that American communism won't improve the lot of the common man? So dwindling CD and ticket sales won't hurt the bard? Ian would never relocate to another country based upon tax policy like he did in the 1970s. Why that would just be wrong.
And finally "Let’s hope that it is not a one-term presidency and that he gets a real shot at the Change he talks so eloquently of." I'm not sure what "change" the bard speaks of here. I suspect that he wants American change. An America that is as bankrupt, weak and unprincipled as the UK. Well Ian, I don't share your hope nor do I embrace the change that rolls off the lips of the racist, communist from Chicago. And why would a subject of the Crown care if the pretender is a one-hit-wonder?
For me, Ian Anderson died in the 1980s and this hypocrite that speaks today is a zombie that snatched the minstrel's body. So, no more Ian Anderson/Jethro Tull CD purchases or concerts for me. Rest in peace Ian.
Once again, an artist speaks his opinion and destroys his career. These brilliant artists can't comprehend that once they tell us what they really think, we can't put it aside when they perform. All the world is a stage once you become an artist, and every second of every day you are working. How an artist can work so hard to create a brand just to destroy it with offhand comments is just amazing.
I won't support artists that want to destroy my culture, get my family killed and redistribute the fruits of my labor.
I never could determine Ian's particular religious or political beliefs as he kept them well hidden from view. His lyrics suggested that he was skeptical of power in all forms and particularly cults of personality.
Recently I read Ian's comments regarding the new year on the Jethro Tull website. I was sorely disappointed by my old friend's musings. Ian said "So, now it’s the New Year, 2008 done, dusted and discarded. A new American President and a new dawn for US international relations. In the wake of Israeli adventures (or misadventures as they may well turn out to be), Mr O will have his work cut out and his supporters will have to maintain the faith, display patience and trust that some things might actually start to come good by this time next year. The economy, however, might not be one of them. Let’s hope that it is not a one-term presidency and that he gets a real shot at the Change he talks so eloquently of. "
I really didn't need to know this man's specific political opinions. Oh sure, he has every right to have them but did he really need to share them with his fans? Now that Ian has tossed these ideas out into the public arena without the benefit of prose and music I am obligated to contrast them with his previous artistic endeavors and make some decisions about the artist. Let's dissect Ian's remarks.
Ian says there will be a "new dawn for US international relations". What does that mean? Were US international relations living in a dark night? As a British subject, why would Ian care about US international relations? Was Ian troubled because America struck back at 7th century barbarians who murdered innocent civilians while practicing slavery and treating women as livestock? Gee Ian, what a guy.
Ian states "In the wake of Israeli adventures (or misadventures as they may well turn out to be), Mr O will have his work cut out ". Hmmm. Israel is surrounded by murderous islamic thugs who kidnap, murder, shell civilians and threaten Israel with nuclear annihilation. When Israel defends those civilians, Ian calls it a "misadventure". And what "work" is Mr. o supposed to accomplish? Eloquently soothe savage 7th century barbarians into behaving like sane 21st century civilized folk? Or just let the islamic barbarians kill, rape and enslave the jews as euro trash has been wont to do for centuries. Ian is clearly a very sophisticated euro-elite here.
Ian fawns over the American pretender saying "Mr O will have his work cut out and his supporters will have to maintain the faith, display patience and trust that some things might actually start to come good...". Faith? The cynical bard invokes faith? Trust? Ian lays his head and hands on the knees of a great man and swears fealty? This is just hypocritical and wrong.
The minstrel who made his fortune heaping scorn on great men gets a case of lumpen-slut jungle fever for a sweet-talking communist racist. Something might "come good" if you keep your head in Mr. o's lap long enough Ian.
Ian shows his concern for the common fellow when he says "The economy, however, might not be one of them". What? Messiah o won't heal the global economy even as he heals the world's peace? Is Ian suggesting that American communism won't improve the lot of the common man? So dwindling CD and ticket sales won't hurt the bard? Ian would never relocate to another country based upon tax policy like he did in the 1970s. Why that would just be wrong.
And finally "Let’s hope that it is not a one-term presidency and that he gets a real shot at the Change he talks so eloquently of." I'm not sure what "change" the bard speaks of here. I suspect that he wants American change. An America that is as bankrupt, weak and unprincipled as the UK. Well Ian, I don't share your hope nor do I embrace the change that rolls off the lips of the racist, communist from Chicago. And why would a subject of the Crown care if the pretender is a one-hit-wonder?
For me, Ian Anderson died in the 1980s and this hypocrite that speaks today is a zombie that snatched the minstrel's body. So, no more Ian Anderson/Jethro Tull CD purchases or concerts for me. Rest in peace Ian.
Once again, an artist speaks his opinion and destroys his career. These brilliant artists can't comprehend that once they tell us what they really think, we can't put it aside when they perform. All the world is a stage once you become an artist, and every second of every day you are working. How an artist can work so hard to create a brand just to destroy it with offhand comments is just amazing.
I won't support artists that want to destroy my culture, get my family killed and redistribute the fruits of my labor.
Labels: Ian Anderson, Jethro Tull
posted by lugh lampfhota at 8:26 AM
1 Comments:
Agreed. I used to like Jane Smiley's novels ("1000 Acres") until I became aware of her foul political opinions. Now I cannot bear to read anything by her.
Post a Comment
<< Home